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

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by schmoofee, Oct 30, 2018.

  1. schmoofee macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2012
    #1
    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?
     
  2. MisterAndrew macrumors 65816

    MisterAndrew

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2015
    Location:
    Portland, Oregon
    #2
  3. Minxy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    #3

    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?
     
  4. Kurri macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #4
    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?
     
  5. jrko macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Location:
    Beside the seaside, beside the sea
  6. JediMac macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2009
    Location:
    Minnesota
    #6
    In any config, how would these new minis handle the Adobe CC suite? Assuming no external add-ons?
     
  7. jun180 macrumors regular

    jun180

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    #7
    I
    I highly doubt it will be able to handle big 4k video edits...will need to pair with an eGPU
     
  8. Minxy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    #8

    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.
     
  9. idark77 macrumors 6502

    idark77

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2014
    #9
    I want to see if there is Thermal Throttle in these expensive toys. Think so, I'm sure...
     
  10. Minxy macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2012
    #10
    Perhaps somebody more technical can explain. Does this mean more RAM, eg 16GB, would give the UHD more RAM so it would function better?

    https://www.techcenturion.com/intel-uhd-graphics-630


    https://www.notebookcheck.net/UHD-Graphics-630-vs-HD-Graphics-630_8126_7652.247598.0.html

    Also, Apple's own website says:
    https://support.apple.com/en-gb/HT204349
     
  11. Merode, Oct 30, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 30, 2018

    Merode macrumors 6502

    Merode

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Location:
    Warszawa, Poland
    #11
    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).
     
  12. Cape Dave macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2012
    Location:
    Northeast
    #12
    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.
     
  13. Boil macrumors regular

    Boil

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2018
    #13
    Uh, did you not watch the keynote, you need a Gen 3 iPad Pro for those Adobe apps... ;^p
    --- Post Merged, Oct 31, 2018 ---
    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...
     
  14. Merode macrumors 6502

    Merode

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Location:
    Warszawa, Poland
    #14
    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.
     
  15. StellarVixen macrumors 6502a

    StellarVixen

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Location:
    Earth
    #15
    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.
     
  16. Merode macrumors 6502

    Merode

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Location:
    Warszawa, Poland
    #16
    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.
     
  17. strawbale macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    #17
    I'd like to know whether it supports 10-bit color, i.e. 1 billion of colors rather than (16.7) millions of colors.
    --- Post Merged, Oct 31, 2018 ---
    Yes, they c/should have used the 28W i5-8259u with Iris Plus 655 in the base model.
     
  18. StellarVixen, Oct 31, 2018
    Last edited: Oct 31, 2018

    StellarVixen macrumors 6502a

    StellarVixen

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2018
    Location:
    Earth
    #18
    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.
     
  19. Merode macrumors 6502

    Merode

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2013
    Location:
    Warszawa, Poland
    #19
    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.
     
  20. D.T. macrumors G3

    D.T.

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Location:
    Vilano Beach, FL
    #20
    You also need to research where the use case / task / application is GPU vs. CPU intensive, since sometimes people equate the former to tasks that are "visual" (or video related), but not necessarily greatly impacted by the GPU (outside of just the general UI performance).
     
  21. chooyoshi macrumors member

    chooyoshi

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2018
    #21
    For iMovie video editing at 1080P would this be enough? Might consider going all the way to 4k on final cut in the future
     
  22. Mr. Retrofire macrumors 603

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl/en
    #22
    512 GB RAM? Welcome in 2030!
     
  23. Kurri macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2009
    #23
    best video I have seen as far as video editing goes. I think you should be fine with 1080p, but 4K will need an eGPU or work in proxies.
     
  24. strawbale macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2011
    #24
    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.
     
  25. techno96 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2009
    #25
    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.
     

Share This Page