Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Late 2014 Mac Mini Benchmarks Indicate Decreased Multi-Core Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This all makes sense to me, the Mac Mini isn't intended for heavy lifting. If you really need a quad core or a powerful machine, Apple has a lineup for that already (MBP, iMac, nMP). The majority of people buying these machines aren't people on MacRumors, they are people who browse FB and check email. Now they get a machine that will be faster for that and at a cheaper price. Only people complaining are trying to shoehorn a low tier product to do high tier functions.
"Our enemies shall talk themselves to death and we will bury them with their own confusion."
Not really... Because those of us concerned with performance and not fixated on pricing are equally disappointed. The new machine isn't even really an upgrade. Where's the upside? The flash storage maybe? Doesn't help much if its a gutless machine.
I could NOT have said it better. I have the last Core 2 Duo mac mini server. I was going to upgrade it and my Mac Mini iPad. Apple boldly declared they didn't want my money. First soldered in Ram, no server version, and no 2 or 3 TB version. Plus a reduced performance CPU? I'm supposed to take comfort in two thunderbolt connections when I run headless anyway? What ever...
Then I get to look at an iPad "upgrade" that has the same processor, amount of storage, 802.11n, but hey, LTE may be faster... The thing I use the LEAST may have a bump in capability. Yes I know the mini is now MIMO, but that is worthless too. Who is using all the bandwidth non MIMO 802.11n provided? So now I can connect to what faster? My connection at home (where I spend the MOST time) is only 40 Mbps. Non MIMO supports 40 Mbps... When I go out, I don't even get that much bandwidth connected to businesses that allow free use.
At least I got a free upgrade to OS X out of the deal. I guess I'll need to wait for next year to upgrade.
Most? No. But a lot. I do a lot of video editing on my Mac, and the video encoding definitely uses all the cores. A dual core is going to suck for that, but my quad core is perfect. Exactly the performance I need. Now I would have to buy a MBP to get that performance.
Yes, for that, you probably could have bought a much older Mini from eBay and saved some money. But some people actually use their Mini as their main Mac, not as a glorified NAS.
Apple always claims to be worrying about the environment. Then why do they want to force people with higher performance requirements to buy a Mac with a display attached to it? What a waste of resources!
As an Apple user for 20 years, this is quite annoying.
Either dump the line or improve it greatly for a few dollars more....
You don't have a mid-priced option to compete with- create a great mac mini for $799.
Instead, this sounds like a middle management decision based on $$ rather than brains.
Either dump the line or improve it greatly for a few dollars more....
You don't have a mid-priced option to compete with- create a great mac mini for $799.
Instead, this sounds like a middle management decision based on $$ rather than brains.
For more than twice the price? No thanks. The Mac pro is also more computer than a lot of professional users need. My mini isn't used in a professional capacity, but I need the quad core for transcoding with Plex and other programs. An iMac doesn't fit my needs because I don't have a desk. My computer is connected to my 55" tv. I do everything I need from the comfort of my recliner. A headless computer is the only option for my uses. I do work in the film industry and have heard many complaints from those that use minis every day. They aren't happy and won't be buying this gen of mini and the Mac pro is too big for some of their uses.
missing the point
What don't you get? I have a desktop Mac Mini quad core. I have two 24" screens hooked up to it. Now you want me to replace it with an iMac or a laptop? or a much more expensive Mac Pro??? Stop throwing around generalities about the Mac Mini being a low end machine. They had a pretty high end quad core desktop machine for $800-1200 and now that is completely gone. Apple no longer makes a quad core computer for under $3000. Believe me you can get a huge variety of quad core PC's for under $3000. In fact my friend just custom built a 6 core PC for $2500.
OSX is not worth being jerked around like this anymore.
What don't you get? I have a desktop Mac Mini quad core. I have two 24" screens hooked up to it. Now you want me to replace it with an iMac or a laptop? or a much more expensive Mac Pro??? Stop throwing around generalities about the Mac Mini being a low end machine. They had a pretty high end quad core desktop machine for $800-1200 and now that is completely gone. Apple no longer makes a quad core computer for under $3000. Believe me you can get a huge variety of quad core PC's for under $3000. In fact my friend just custom built a 6 core PC for $2500.
OSX is not worth being jerked around like this anymore.
That kind of Mac Mini, or any product really, has ever existed in Apple's lineup. They will not put a i7 with Iris Pro in a Mini. The only such thing that exists is the i7-4770R and the i7-4950HQ and they are very expensive, it would be 1/3 of the cost of the machine.
If the hardware aspect alone is enough for you to leave Apple entirely, then you are not getting the kind of experience out of it that Apple is aiming for. You can get better hardware from a PC, but you cannot get the same experience and integration....especially with Yosemite. If you need raw power at rock bottom pricing, then a PC might be a better choice for you. There is nothing wrong is using what is optimal for your needs.
But what you are expecting from Apple just doesn't seem to be practical from their perspective.
It's strange to me that Apple last year suggested using the Mac mini as a Bots server for Xcode building and testing, yet have now discontinued the OS X Server bundle, and have given us Mac minis with anemic multi-core performance. I guess not enough developers were buying them to make it worth it? Whatever the case, the flip-flopping in messaging sends confusing signals.
Yes there is a gap in mac product line for options without displays. and i haven't done any extensive research (alibi). But the mac mini has never been a 1000cc. It was a really good 250.. So you got a great product. Apples product line has changed. So if its current mac mini isn't good enough for you then you have to find another product for you. You shouldn't have to upgrade so often (assumption bc idk how long ago you have had your computer) but think about it.. if you upgrade your mac mini every two years or so. why not just get a mac pro? Might be a lot of power now but it will last a lot longer I would think.
To answer your questions, I think you are pissed bc you feel Apple didn't make its Mac Mini powerful enough? (seems like a capable computer to me for what it was meant for) OR you might be pissed bc you want to upgrade but you don't want to fork out all of the extra cash for all of the power that you don't need. So that leaves me with another question. Do you need to update or want to update? If you need to update I suggest purchasing a mac pro. Bc you probably won't need to update for several years vs 2 or 3 ya know.
at least if you are going to use a dual core desktop throw an iris pro in there and not the stripped down 5100. They should have provided three options for the Mac mini imo, with a minimum of 8gb ram.
Low end consumer: 8gb ram i5 hd5000
Mid range consumer: 8-16gb ram i5 iris pro
Server 8-16gb i7 quad hd 5000
Price accordingly 499.99, 699.99, 899.99 respectively add $60-80 for upgrade from 8 to 16gb ram
To me that would have been a win. Again, just my opinion.
Edit: just learned this, the iris pro is not offered with dual cores, so that is not and option. Ignore the post!
Low end consumer: 8gb ram i5 hd5000
Mid range consumer: 8-16gb ram i5 iris pro
Server 8-16gb i7 quad hd 5000
Price accordingly 499.99, 699.99, 899.99 respectively add $60-80 for upgrade from 8 to 16gb ram
To me that would have been a win. Again, just my opinion.
Edit: just learned this, the iris pro is not offered with dual cores, so that is not and option. Ignore the post!
Last edited:
This all makes sense to me, the Mac Mini isn't intended for heavy lifting. If you really need a quad core or a powerful machine, Apple has a lineup for that already (MBP, iMac, nMP). The majority of people buying these machines aren't people on MacRumors, they are people who browse FB and check email. Now they get a machine that will be faster for that and at a cheaper price. Only people complaining are trying to shoehorn a low tier product to do high tier functions.
How many of us need to tell you otherwise in this thread before you stop making excuses for Apple. Just admit that they've left a hole in their lineup. I understand the reasons, but there's no excuse that's going to make me like it.
In the meantime, my Mac mini (2012), quad-core 2.6GHz i7 with 1TB Fusion Drive and 16GB RAM will serve me just fine for a while. I wasn't really in the market for a new mini anyway. But in 12-24 months, I hope they have a mid-level screenless Mac for me to buy.
FWIW, I love the mini as a family computer too. We have a 2012 base model mini (i5, 16GB, DIY Fusion drive) in the living room.
I do use it as my main computer by the way, I was trying to point out that I can use the machine even while having that stuff running. I think the lowest it gets down to is about 700MB free.
This is senseless crap. The new top end, $1200+ custom build will perform half as well as the 2 yo machines. If Apple released a new Mac Pro at the same time, at least their loyal customers would consider that instead as a capable desktop machine. If this year is Apple's best product pipeline, they dropped the ball-- into a sewer.
This all makes sense to me, the Mac Mini isn't intended for heavy lifting. If you really need a quad core or a powerful machine, Apple has a lineup for that already (MBP, iMac, nMP). The majority of people buying these machines aren't people on MacRumors, they are people who browse FB and check email. Now they get a machine that will be faster for that and at a cheaper price. Only people complaining are trying to shoehorn a low tier product to do high tier functions.
Good. Then tell me please which Mac I should buy to perform those "high tier functions" that until recently could be performed by the high end Mac Mini? Next time when I upgrade, which Mac should I get? An iMac? So I will pay for a display I don't need, and I can throw out my monitor? Or a Macbook Pro? So I will pay extra for a portable Mac that will never move with a retina display that I will never use? Or a Mac Pro? So I will pay a $3000 premium over the previous Mac Mini?
Until last week, did you roll your eyes at Apple for being stupid enough to offer a "low tier product" that could perform "high tier functions". According to your logic, that was a completely dumb thing to do. It was completely pointless then, and the Apple marketing department must have been staffed with idiots in your eyes. Or did you form that opinion on the fly now in order to defend the indefensible?
Or is the truth actually, that the Mac Mini previously covered both the low tier and mid tier and was now cut down by Apple to the low tier?
"That kind of Mac Mini, or any product really, has ever existed in Apple's lineup."
What are you talking about 'westrock2000'? It exists - I own the product. It is called the 2012 quad core i7 Mac Mini!!!! I run advanced architectural 3D software on it, run the entire Adobe suite at the same time and use 4 cores every day for architectural renderings. It cost me $1300. Now it now longer exists with this update. Now I have to buy an iMac or spend $3000 for a Mac Pro.
See my above post as to why both those options are not viable.
What are you talking about 'westrock2000'? It exists - I own the product. It is called the 2012 quad core i7 Mac Mini!!!! I run advanced architectural 3D software on it, run the entire Adobe suite at the same time and use 4 cores every day for architectural renderings. It cost me $1300. Now it now longer exists with this update. Now I have to buy an iMac or spend $3000 for a Mac Pro.
See my above post as to why both those options are not viable.
I use some software that converts certain video formats. When I used a dual core processor Mac, it would take 12-16hrs to convert. On my quad core Mini, it took about 30 minutes. You have no idea what others are using their Minis for. People buy the quad core because they know it will speed up the things they need to do.
True, but it will probably come down in price, possibly by quite a lot. Already here in the UK I see discounts of about $500 on the low end version and if you are a business you can reclaim the VAT if registered, which saves another 20% too.