Mac mini (2018) Intel UHD Graphics 630 :: Pros and Cons

schmoofee

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Jan 3, 2012
28
2
Today's - Oct 2018 - Mac minis regardless of other tech specifications are all equipped with the Intel UHD Graphics 630.

What do folks think about the Intel UHD Graphics 630 Graphics card choice...
  • For basic home use?
  • For byte and pixel crunching Pro users?
 

Minxy

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2012
166
178
Not even a dGPU. I was hoping for at least Iris Plus graphics like in rMBP (which is still 10-20% slower than Intel GPU from my 500$ Intel NUC from 2016), but 630 UHD is a joke. It's over 60% slower than my Skull Canyon which I consider bare minimum.

I'm looking at the 6 core model with 512 GB RAM. It all seems a very decent spec but I know nothing about the Intel UHD 630 graphics card and I'm wondering if it's too underpowered for my needs. I'm not editing big files but simple 4k videos of 5 - 15 minutes.. I know it can output to a 4k monitor but does anyone know if will be able to edit 4k video in Final Cut or Adobe Premiere Pro?

Also, if Apple are making a computer with a reasonable processor than why put a crap graphics card in it?
 

Kurri

macrumors 6502
Mar 6, 2009
391
125
I'm looking at the 6 core model with 512 GB RAM. It all seems a very decent spec but I know nothing about the Intel UHD 630 graphics card and I'm wondering if it's too underpowered for my needs. I'm not editing big files but simple 4k videos of 5 - 15 minutes.. I know it can output to a 4k monitor but does anyone know if will be able to edit 4k video in Final Cut or Adobe Premiere Pro?

Also, if Apple are making a computer with a reasonable processor than why put a crap graphics card in it?
I'm wondering the same thing. I think you need to buy an external eGPU. Blackmagic has a new one coming out for 1200, but it is overpriced in my view. Do all eGPU's work with the mac?
 

jun180

macrumors regular
Apr 27, 2010
138
108
I
I'm looking at the 6 core model with 512 GB RAM. It all seems a very decent spec but I know nothing about the Intel UHD 630 graphics card and I'm wondering if it's too underpowered for my needs. I'm not editing big files but simple 4k videos of 5 - 15 minutes.. I know it can output to a 4k monitor but does anyone know if will be able to edit 4k video in Final Cut or Adobe Premiere Pro?

Also, if Apple are making a computer with a reasonable processor than why put a crap graphics card in it?
I highly doubt it will be able to handle big 4k video edits...will need to pair with an eGPU
 

Minxy

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2012
166
178
I highly doubt it will be able to handle big 4k video edits...will need to pair with an eGPU

I know that will be okay for some people, but for most the whole point of a Mac mini is a relatively cheap and compact all in one unit. To then spend another £600 for an extra box seems counterintuitive to its reason for being

I might get one, see how it performs and if it doesn't fulfil the promise send it back. Apple are promoting it as having 4K output then there is the implied meaning that it can handle 4k.
 

idark77

macrumors 6502
Dec 2, 2014
441
289
I want to see if there is Thermal Throttle in these expensive toys. Think so, I'm sure...
 

Minxy

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2012
166
178
Perhaps somebody more technical can explain. Does this mean more RAM, eg 16GB, would give the UHD more RAM so it would function better?

"How much is the Video Memory of UHD 630?
Being an Integrated GPU, the Intel UHD Graphics 630 doesn’t have any Video/Graphics Memory of its own. Instead, it utilizes the system’s memory (RAM) dynamically for the same purpose. You can change the maximum Video Memory from the BIOS settings."
https://www.techcenturion.com/intel-uhd-graphics-630


"Due to its lack of dedicated graphics memory or eDRAM cache, the UHD 630 has to access the main memory (2x 64-bit DDR3L-1600 / DDR4-2133)."
https://www.notebookcheck.net/UHD-Graphics-630-vs-HD-Graphics-630_8126_7652.247598.0.html

Also, Apple's own website says:
Mac computers using Intel UHD Graphics as the primary GPU dynamically allocate up to 1.5GB of system memory.
https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT204349
 

Merode

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2013
529
336
Warszawa, Poland
I'm looking at the 6 core model with 512 GB RAM. It all seems a very decent spec but I know nothing about the Intel UHD 630 graphics card and I'm wondering if it's too underpowered for my needs. I'm not editing big files but simple 4k videos of 5 - 15 minutes.. I know it can output to a 4k monitor but does anyone know if will be able to edit 4k video in Final Cut or Adobe Premiere Pro?

Also, if Apple are making a computer with a reasonable processor than why put a crap graphics card in it?
I think they still want to differentiate their line-up and Mac Mini had to suffer. If Mini was on par with rMBP it wouldn't be Apple style. They don't only put tiers for each product but each of their products is tier of its own.

UHD 630 is very weak GPU. In old line-up it would MBA tier. It's funny because this time MBA gets even worse GPU. It only sounded semi-decent in Keynote because they compared it to Mac Mini base model from 2014 which came with HD 5000. If they compared it to rMBP, it is 25% slower than current 13.3".

I really wanted to get this Mini but it would honestly be downgrade for me. My Intel NUC Skull Canyon is smaller, has 60% faster GPU, 4 core 8 threads Core i7, 16GB DDR4 RAM at 800$ (that's with Windows 10 and post 23% tax). And the best part, it was released two years ago. I can get Intel NUC Hades Canyon which has same volume as Mac Mini but packs VR ready AMD Vega M GH which is 478% faster than new Mini for only 1250$ (also with W10 and post 23% tax).

Why am I so obsessed with GPUs? I like from time to time to play SC2 which is 8 years old game that will struggle to run at FHD and medium preset on Mini from 2018. It might be silly, but I'd have to get 1100$ mini wiht 700$ eGPU (and 50$ active TB3 cable that isn't 50cm long) and then add 23% tax to it not to downgrade my current setup.

macOS isn't worth this much for me.

EDIT: If anybody looks up coputers I mentioned, both come with interchangeable covers without edgy skulls (aka. just blank black plastic).
 
Last edited:

Cape Dave

macrumors 68000
Nov 16, 2012
1,962
1,105
Northeast
I think they still want to differentiate their line-up and Mac Mini had to suffer. If Mini was on par with rMBP it wouldn't be Apple style. They don't only put tiers for each product but each of their products is tier of its own.

UHD 630 is very weak GPU. In old line-up it would MBA tier. It's funny because this time MBA gets even worse GPU. It only sounded semi-decent in Keynote because they compared it to Mac Mini base model from 2014 which came with HD 5000. If they compared it to rMBP, it is 25% slower than current 13.3".

I really wanted to get this Mini but it would honestly be downgrade for me. My Intel NUC Skull Canyon is smaller, has 60% faster GPU, 4 core 8 threads Core i7, 16GB DDR4 RAM at 800$ (that's with Windows 10 and post 23% tax). And the best part, it was released two years ago. I can get Intel NUC Hades Canyon which has same volume as Mac Mini but packs VR ready AMD Vega M GH which is 478% faster than new Mini for only 1250$ (also with W10 and post 23% tax).

Why am I so obsessed with GPUs? I like from time to time to play SC2 which is 8 years old game that will struggle to run at FHD and medium preset on Mini from 2018. It might be silly, but I'd have to get 1100$ mini wiht 700$ eGPU (and 50$ active TB3 cable that isn't 50cm long) and then add 23% tax to it not to downgrade my current setup.

macOS isn't worth this much for me.

EDIT: If anybody looks up coputers I mentioned, both come with interchangeable covers without edgy skulls (aka. just blank black plastic).
The new NUC has a fully electronically controllable "skull" that is way way cool. One click and it ceases to exist, or customize to your heart's content. MILES and MILES ahead of the first one, that was simply replaceable. A slick machine for sure. Wicked good value.
 

Boil

macrumors 6502
Oct 23, 2018
335
249
good enough for lightroom and photoshop?
Uh, did you not watch the keynote, you need a Gen 3 iPad Pro for those Adobe apps... ;^p
[doublepost=1540971615][/doublepost]I think Apple really screwed the pooch when they failed to go with the Kaby Lake G line-up for the new Mac mini...

Now what we need is the OWC miniStack, but with a choice of RX580 or Vega 56 GPUs, in the MXM format, as an eGPU to stack under the Space Grey Mac mini...

And the same thing but with their four slot M.2 NVMe RAID inside...

Those three items, SG mini (i7/32GB RAM/512GB SSD), MXM eGPU & M.2 NVMe RAID would make a nice little mini cube stack om the desk, hook up a 27" 5K LG UltraFine display, and an Apple keyboard/mouse combo & you are set...!

Apple should really make the eGPU, so they can get a better deal on the MXM cards...

But a mismatched eGPU chassis & external SSD is a deal breaker...

Guess I will think about an iPad Pro while I wait for the new modular Mac Pro...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Snappers

Merode

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2013
529
336
Warszawa, Poland
Now what we need is the OWC miniStack, but with a choice of RX580 or Vega 56 GPUs, in the MXM format, as an eGPU to stack under the Space Grey Mac mini...
That would be hot! Unfortunately it would make whole setup so expensive I'd not consider it. If only CPU with Iris Plus 640 and higher tier with i5 with Vega M (Intel has such SKUs). That's what I hoped for but I guess in the world with eGPUs Apple feels like they can put anything and play eGPU card if asked. Too bad price doesn't reflect the fact that computer comes de facto without GPU.

EDIT: I miss times when Apple could really boast their computer's performance. Today this would turn into farce.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StoneyG

Merode

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2013
529
336
Warszawa, Poland
UHD 630 is bad when compared with the dedicated graphics card. But for a integrated GPU, it is actually very good. This is gaming wise, however, I do not have experience with video editing, I do not do that.
20-25FPS with lowest settings is hardly very good in this day and age. With Vega M, Iris, Iris Plus on the market, UHD 630 is low-end iGPU. Let's put it this way: Intel offers only one slower current gen iGPU: UHD 610. Fun fact: UHD 620 is actually marginally faster than UHD 630.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NyUC and strawbale

strawbale

macrumors 6502
Mar 25, 2011
352
171
French Pyrenees
I'd like to know whether it supports 10-bit color, i.e. 1 billion of colors rather than (16.7) millions of colors.
[doublepost=1540983424][/doublepost]
20-25FPS with lowest settings is hardly very good in this day and age. With Vega M, Iris, Iris Plus on the market, UHD 630 is low-end iGPU. Let's put it this way: Intel offers only one slower current gen iGPU: UHD 610. Fun fact: UHD 620 is actually marginally faster than UHD 630.
Yes, they c/should have used the 28W i5-8259u with Iris Plus 655 in the base model.
 

StellarVixen

macrumors 68020
Mar 1, 2018
2,194
3,581
Earth
I'd like to know whether it supports 10-bit color, i.e. 1 billion of colors rather than (16.7) millions of colors.
[doublepost=1540983424][/doublepost]

Yes, they c/should have used the 28W i5-8259u with Iris Plus 655 in the base model.
They decided to go with the desktop CPUs, and desktop CPUs do not offer anything more than UHD 630. This is Intel's fault, because Intel thinks that everyone who is using their desktop CPUs will probably use dedicated GPU, so it's not a big deal.

If Apple went to use the mobile CPUs, then you would complain why don't they use desktop CPUs.

Still, this is not an excuse for not implementing dedicated mobile gpu, like on MacBook Pro.
 
Last edited:

Merode

macrumors 6502a
Nov 5, 2013
529
336
Warszawa, Poland
They decided to go with the desktop CPUs, and desktop CPUs do not offer anything more than UHD 630. This is Intel's fault, because Intel thinks that everyone who is using their desktop CPUs will probably use dedicated GPU, so it's not a big deal.

If Apple went to use the mobile CPUs, then you would complain why don't they use desktop CPUs.

Still, this is not an excuse for implementing dedicated mobile gpu, like on MacBook Pro.
From the clocks we can gather the i5 is i5-8500, 6 core/6 threads. If they went with i5-8305G (4 core, 8 threads) you'd get 291% faster GPU at the cost of 22,5% slower CPU. I think everyone would take it anyday. It could also be an option. You can't really blame it on Intel, because they have better offerings.

Also, I recall nobody asked for desktop CPUs, just for 4 cores because of 2014 downgrade.
 

chooyoshi

macrumors member
Aug 5, 2018
88
137
For iMovie video editing at 1080P would this be enough? Might consider going all the way to 4k on final cut in the future
 

strawbale

macrumors 6502
Mar 25, 2011
352
171
French Pyrenees
They decided to go with the desktop CPUs, and desktop CPUs do not offer anything more than UHD 630. This is Intel's fault, because Intel thinks that everyone who is using their desktop CPUs will probably use dedicated GPU, so it's not a big deal.

If Apple went to use the mobile CPUs, then you would complain why don't they use desktop CPUs.

Still, this is not an excuse for implementing dedicated mobile gpu, like on MacBook Pro.
The decision to go with desktop CPUs is entirely Apple's.
For an upgrade of the 2014 and even the quadcore 2012 models, I'd would have found the 28W i3 (base)/ i5 (mid)/ i7 (top) a better balance in CPU/iGPU/power consumption. With TB3 onboard that would have still left the option for an eGPU. So no, I wouldh NOT ave complained.
 

techno96

macrumors member
Sep 10, 2009
95
60
I only use my Mini for Photoshop or Premier every once in a while.

For me, I'm just happy I can do dual 4k@60hz monitors. I mainly keep all of my communication open on one monitor (email, telegram, messages, slack) and then use the other for web browsing, productivity, etc. Its interesting that this seemingly crappy card can actually handle up to 3x 4k@60hz displays, but I'll take it. If I was doing more creative work, I'd probably be a bit disappointed tho.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.