Mac mini 2018 Reviews Roundup: Long-Awaited Update Should Impress Fans and Pro Users, But Upgrade Options Can Get Pricey

[Zdigital2015]

Where did you find the information on the TB3? I would like to read this.

The Mac mini has to have two Thunderbolt 3 controllers, because the max number of ports that the JHL7540 can handle is two. Each TB3 controller need x4 PCIe 3.0 lanes, so 2*x4=x8 PCIe 3.0 lanes, leaves x8 on the CPU, but Intel does not allow that those remaining x8 lanes to be divided further down, which means that Apple is sending the NVMe storage through there as it would be a complete waste to send storage and T1 functions to the 300-Series PCH and then through the DMI 3.0 bus along with GbE, USB 3.0 and BT 5.0. It becomes even more relevant if you opt for the 10GbE as it needs x2 of PCIe lanes off of the PCH.

Makes sense?

 

[MandiMac]

Read hoang77 and archer75's reports here. The i7 hits the 100 ceiling and throttles by as much as 800 mhz.

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/2018-mini-3-2ghz-i7-temps.2153133/

My i5 is going back after I get it.

Excuse me, but ... where did you get the 800 MHz figure? If you refer to the picture someone attached, you have to say that the utilization of the processor took a dip as well in that time period - this is Intel SpeedStep in full force in order to save electricity. So, why will your i5 be going back after you get it?

 

[theluggage]

My i5 is going back after I get it.

Excuse me, but ... where did you get the 800 MHz figure? If you refer to the picture someone attached, you have to say that the utilization of the processor took a dip as well in that time period - this is Intel SpeedStep in full force in order to save electricity. So, why will your i5 be going back after you get it?

I don't know what permutation of misconceptions is making some people expect a full-blooded desktop i7 to run silent and frosty at full whack in such a tiny box. You canna' change the laws of physics! Newer Intel chips are more efficient, but only incrementally and a lot of the "efficiency" is their ability to cut power when they're idle.

For a quiet, high powered PC you need one or all of:

• A huge heatsink (e.g. the triangular aluminium girder that the cMP was built around)
• A huge fan (moves a bigger volume of air with less noise)
• A huge air inlet/outlet (blowing air through a small hole is noisy)
• ...or some kind of water cooling
• More, but slower, CPU cores (its the faster clock speed that really pumps out the heat) and software that utilizes them.

If you want quiet/cool then the hex core/no hyperthreading i5 is probably going to be a useful improvement over the last-generation quad/hyperthreaded chips for people who want low noise - but its always going to be a compromise.

Apple could have designed a silent mini PC - but not to fit into the old Mac Mini case which was clearly a self-imposed design constraint for these models.

Frankly, now, wake me up if/when Apple make an ARM-based Mac - until then, there's only so much they can do with CPUs and GPUs primarily designed for Windows PCs.

 

[Stephen.R]

Apple could have designed a silent mini PC - but not to fit into the old Mac Mini case

I still think they should have resurrected the cube (obviously it would be aluminium) with the risers, so ports are on the bottom, etc.

 

[Mol1n]

Excuse me, but ... where did you get the 800 MHz figure? If you refer to the picture someone attached, you have to say that the utilization of the processor took a dip as well in that time period - this is Intel SpeedStep in full force in order to save electricity.

I said to read BOTH thoang and archer's posts. You do the subtraction yourself.

So, why will your i5 be going back after you get it?

I'm not walking you through the discussion that took place earlier in the thread.

 

[Sabelonada]

The Mac mini has to have two Thunderbolt 3 controllers, because the max number of ports that the JHL7540 can handle is two. Each TB3 controller need x4 PCIe 3.0 lanes, so 2*x4=x8 PCIe 3.0 lanes, leaves x8 on the CPU, but Intel does not allow that those remaining x8 lanes to be divided further down, which means that Apple is sending the NVMe storage through there as it would be a complete waste to send storage and T1 functions to the 300-Series PCH and then through the DMI 3.0 bus along with GbE, USB 3.0 and BT 5.0. It becomes even more relevant if you opt for the 10GbE as it needs x2 of PCIe lanes off of the PCH.

Makes sense?

The teardown did show two TB3 chips. I was thinking that Titan Ridge doubled the TB3 ports from 2 to 4.

 

[Zdigital2015]

The teardown did show two TB3 chips. I was thinking that Titan Ridge doubled the TB3 ports from 2 to 4.

No, the only net gain that we got from Titan Ridge is DisplayPort 1.4 - https://www.anandtech.com/show/12228/intel-titan-ridge-thunderbolt-3 - although it is an important thing.

 

[Sabelonada]

No, the only net gain that we got from Titan Ridge is DisplayPort 1.4 - https://www.anandtech.com/show/12228/intel-titan-ridge-thunderbolt-3 - although it is an important thing.

It is, but I am not certain Apple implements all of DisplayPort 1.2 anyhow. I am hoping, and probably in vain, that they support Multi-stream Transport (MST). It means I can use one cable to drive my 3 DisplayPort monitors from one cable. I can do this today with a Windows PC. I know that resolution isn't the issue, between the 3 monitors it's the same amount of pixels as one 4K monitor.

 

[MandiMac]

I said to read BOTH thoang and archer's posts. You do the subtraction yourself.

I'm not walking you through the discussion that took place earlier in the thread.

Well, I did read the posts. Nothing there. Read again.

 

[Mol1n]

Read again.

You quoted me asking for what was going on. And now you are telling me to read things for you.

If you don't like it then go away.

 

[Detnator]

Ok so why couldn't they put an extra m.2 slot for NVMe SSDs together with the soldered one? Plenty of ultrabook vendors do that with much more space constraint. So you don't have to rely on external storage when you realize you're screwed with 128GB in 2019 and can still load applications on something that can't be plugged off generating system errors.

Waiting for the apologetic answers

Because two reasons.

1. Soldered is more reliable than seated. But more the reason I think is...

2. Rightly or wrongly Apple wants to minimize the variables and unknown third party parts in their products in order to minimize support issues and maximize reliability, security, and internal compatibility.

And like I say: “Rightly or wrongly”. Yes this approach definitely has its cons. But no one in their right mind can deny that as much as Apple stuff sucks, from reliability and security points of view it all still sucks a lot less than everything else.
[doublepost=1541832357][/doublepost]

I think the concern is that 128GB sounds a bit tight even if you're planning to just use it for system/apps/temporary files and hook up an external drive for everything else. (E.g. a full Logic Pro install is ~60GB on its own, lots of other creative apps will work best if their temporary/working files directory is on the fastest drive and for good performance you don't ever want your system drive to get even close to full).

Likewise, the 8GB RAM on the i5 hex core model is a bit tight for the sort of applications that would justify choosing it over the quad core. The price difference between 8GB and 16GB in SODIMM form is about $70 consumer retail so don't pretend that charging $200 for the upgrade is anything but "money for nothing" for Apple.

So, for many customers, the realistic entry prices for both models with adequate SSD and RAM respectively are more like $1000 for quad core and $1300 for hex core unless you're really, really sure that the base specs meet your needs and you don't need any "headroom". Nobody is telling you what you can or can't buy or pay - but calling Apple's upgrades expensive and their base configurations mean is fair comment.

Its one thing to ask a premium for your products because of their perceived quality and superiority - but when your headline sticker prices turn out to be for configurations that are barely adequate without substantial upgrades, expect to be criticised for it. Also, it could backfire long term if people buy the base configuration and then find it inadequate.

Replying to you because of context, not directing the following comments at you directly necessarily...

Everyone complaining about 128GB and how it’s useless today? The perfect machine for a database (FileMaker) sever for me would be a 128GB or even 64GB MacBook. I don’t need the performance of anything greater. I don’t want a Mac mini because the MacBook has a built in screen and even better effectively it’s own built in UPS. I don’t want or need anything bigger physically or bigger than 128GB storage. And the fanless but still cool enough design of the MacBook means it takes up ridiculously small space without needing it out in the open. A piece of software that keeps it from sleeping with the lid closed and it’s hidden away in a drawer doing its job amazingly... except the minimum specced 256GB option has over 150GB of SSD sitting there empty and wasted that I don’t need but had to pay for because I DON’T have a 128GB option with the MB. To me it’s nuts that the MBA has a 128GB option and the MB doesn’t!

Seriously... quit whining about there being an OPTION for 128GB. If you want more than 128GB then there are plenty of OPTIONS for these same machines with more - so buy one of those. But some of us don’t need more so please let us have the OPTION to only have to buy that much.

Same argument with the “missing” discreet GPU which I outlined elsewhere. Some of us don’t need it so why should we have to pay for it, or in that case for them to design in the option for it when for a Mac Mini you can add one externally.

Of course you’re all going to come back with “but it’s criminal that it’s 128GB (or no dGPU, or whatever) at these prices and for these prices they should have put in a bigger SSD (or a dGPU or whatever else). Sorry no. As I’ve said elesewhere, the price is set by what the market says it’s worth. And these machines are worth a lot more than the sum of their parts because of all the engineering that’s gone into them to make them what they are. If you don’t agree with that then why do you want one (or if not that then why do you care enough to sit here and argue about it) instead of buying a PC made up of “all the same parts” for half the price?

I just wish there was a 128GB MB.
[doublepost=1541832734][/doublepost]

After seeing the teardown video - 1) There is no room, and, 2) an extra NVMe drive in there would most likely generate too much additional heat.

This exactly among other reasons too I expect.
[doublepost=1541833659][/doublepost]

...which brings up the final reason: a user-accessible M.2. slot would mean that Apple couldn't charge 3x the going rate for SSD upgrades - and since they charge a similar mark-up on bog standard RAM SODIMMs there's no reason that a non-user-accessible M.2. would lead to cheaper upgrades.

You were making a lot of sense until you made this point. I hate these kinds of comments. “Apple solders their stuff on primarily to deny us the ability to put our own third party parts in.”

Sure it’s nice for us nerds to have that option but we are not Apple’s target market. Apple doesn’t exist to serve us.

Apple has always charged an enormous premium for ram and storage upgrades and the millions of people who still bought Apple’s RAM, HD and SSD upgrades even when they had the option not to testifies to the fact that Apple have nothing to lose financially by keeping that option. Therefore their removal of that option must be for some reason other than manipulating us all financially. And I can think of a lot of good engineering reasons why they’ve gone this route.

Take off the tinfoil hat. Do you really think with all the money Apple are making off the iPhone and their services that they care about losing $100 to someone’s third party upgrade? Anyone who really think that’s Apple’s priority in designing these things has no understanding of either business or engineering.
[doublepost=1541834207][/doublepost]

Your entire argument is projection. Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I have seen many people sick and tired of Apples Price Hike. Whereas I have hardly seen anybody ask for a pro-mini, so there!
I would not regard this mini as a pro anyway. It has no discrete graphics card where mac minis of old did. These are overpriced providing LESS VALUE for what they were 6 years ago. They are ~80% the cost of a VR gaming machine. Thats ridiculous! So no I won't give it a rest.
Why get a mac mini when for a couple of hundred more you can get an iMac, which is the price you NEED to spend anyway on a third party screen and peripherals?

You can't get into the Mac ecosystem now for under $1000 AUD. Even when taking into consideration inflation, that's a joke.

Dude you seriously have no idea what you’re talking about. People have been asking for a headless iMac since the iMac first arrived 20 years ago. When the Mac mini was first rumored everyone hoped that would be it but it wasn’t. Too under powered. So since then people have still been asking for a headless iMac. This machine is exactly that. All the power of an iMac and then some in an affordable (ie significantly less than Mac Pro pricing) package. If you’re not aware of any of this you’ve been living under some kind of virtual (if not literal) rock.

 

[fat jez]

You were making a lot of sense until you made this point. I hate these kinds of comments. “Apple solders their stuff on primarily to deny us the ability to put our own third party parts in.”

Sure it’s nice for us nerds to have that option but we are not Apple’s target market. Apple doesn’t exist to serve us.

I'm sorry, but Apple doesn't exist to serve us? Any company that doesn't serve it's customers is not going to last forever. Everybody is a potential Apple customer, if the right product is available.

I got into the Apple market because at the time, I wanted a dual channel wifi router with gigabit ethernet and nobody else made one. Apple made a product that appealed to me. I'm now getting out of using Apple because they don't have a product that appeals to me.

It's simple as this. Don't serve your customers and you won't have any customers.

 

[MandiMac]

You quoted me asking for what was going on. And now you are telling me to read things for you.

If you don't like it then go away.

Dear Mol1n, I was just asking where you did get that figure because literally nowhere in that thread you posted did that 700 Mhz show up. If you‘re referring to that attached picture, I already told you that this is SpeedStep from Intel - if the processor is not under 100 % load the GHz will go down in order to use less power. So don‘t go ad hominem on me by telling me to go away, I‘m seriously curious about where you found that.

 

[theluggage]

Everyone complaining about 128GB and how it’s useless today? The perfect machine for a database (FileMaker) sever for me would be a 128GB or even 64GB MacBook. I don’t need the performance of anything greater. I don’t want a Mac mini because the MacBook has a built in screen and even better effectively it’s own built in UPS.

NB: a quick google reveals a choice of compact UPS units for ~$100 and mini-displays for ~ $100 (or a dummy display dongle for $10 which makes the Mini think its got a display, so you could use screen sharing whenever you needed to re-configure your database server) which, along with a Mac Mini, would actually cost a lot less than a MacBook. I mean, if everybody who wants a better GPU, more storage, SD cards etc. should quit whining and buy the external boxes they need (which is what many Apple-defenders here are saying, again maybe not you personally) , its a fair suggestion that you should buy a UPS and display for your particular need, right?

People here (maybe not you) have been defending the new $800 price by saying its now a powerful machine that can start to take on heavier work - your application (that could run on any old Mac that still had a pulse) is exactly the sort of thing that would have been better served by the old $500 2014 Mini (dump the hard drive and put in a $30 120GB SATA SSD) is not really a good yardstick for whether the $800 model has enough storage.

Sounds like you've actually been disadvantaged by Apple cutting the 11" Air and now the $500 Mini (and should probably grab an old-model 13" Air while stocks last). Thats the context in which people are moaning - Apple have always been expensive and offered a limited range, but they're getting more expensive and offering less choice. If you're only going to offer a handful of models, they need wide appeal.

You were making a lot of sense until you made this point. I hate these kinds of comments. “Apple solders their stuff on primarily to deny us the ability to put our own third party parts in.”

I didn't say "primarily" - I gave several possible factors and I'm sure there are others - it wasn't 'pick one'. If you don't think that one of those factors is "how do we maximise our income from selling high-margin upgrades" then I own a bridge in Brooklyn that you might want to buy (exit and entry ramps sold separately). You've said earlier that Apple charge what the market will bear - do you not think that they're also going to employ the sort of sales tactics that have been around since the invisible hand gave up wearing mittens embroidered with "L" and "R"...

Take off the tinfoil hat. Do you really think with all the money Apple are making off the iPhone and their services that they care about losing $100 to someone’s third party upgrade?

No - but they surely care about tens of thousands of people each saving $100 by getting a third-party upgrade. They surely care that so many people who should be buying a new Mac every 18 months but are still rocking 2011 MacBooks because they were easily able to slap in a SSD and get a huge leap in performance. They'll have thought very carefully about the $799 sticker price for the new i3 Mini, how high they could make that without too many people just turning away, what proportion of people, once they accept the $799 sticker, will pay another $200 to upgrade the SSD... and then what proportion of those will then say "oh, look the i5's only another $100 now and the store has those in stock..."

That's not "tinfoil hat" conspiracy theory - that's what salesmen do, and have always done. The only thing is, in the past, it hasn't been quite so important in the computer industry because (a) the market was still growing rapidly and (b) technology was advancing so rapidly that 18-month old kit was genuinely obsolete and those old 4K RAM chips were now more expensive than the new 8K ones... so there was no real need for artificial obsolescence. That age is over, now everybody who needs a computer has already got one and a truly upgradeable/repairable machine will last for 10 years so we're starting to see more of the sort of planned obsolescence/hidden extra culture.

Why do you think the new Apple Pencil doesn't come with a spare tip any more? Why does a new MacBook PSU no longer include the extension cable or charge cable? Why, if you order a keyboard and trackpad with your new iMac do you only get one charge cable? Why, if you buy a $1000 iPhone don't they supply a USB-C to A adapter? These are all trivial savings that risk annoying some people but if you're a company the size of Apple, they add up! How, in their last two quarterly reports, have Apple significantly increased revenue without significantly increasing unit sales? They're systematically driving up profit margins.

 

[Detnator]

I'm sorry, but Apple doesn't exist to serve us? Any company that doesn't serve it's customers is not going to last forever. Everybody is a potential Apple customer, if the right product is available.

I got into the Apple market because at the time, I wanted a dual channel wifi router with gigabit ethernet and nobody else made one. Apple made a product that appealed to me. I'm now getting out of using Apple because they don't have a product that appeals to me.

It's simple as this. Don't serve your customers and you won't have any customers.

And that’s the problem. “us” in my statement refers to us MR forum posters.

Too many people on this forum think their use cases are typical for Apple. For most of us here on MR our use cases are fringe for Apple.

Apple doesn’t exist to serve us few geeks and nerds on MR forums. Apple exists to serve the millions and millions of normal users out there who don’t care about all the crap we argue about and just buy this stuff because it solves some business or consumer problems better than anything else does.

Apple does serve its customers. Apple serves its target market amazingly which is why millions of people in that market keep. Buying thier products. But we (MR forum posters) is NOT it’s target market.
[doublepost=1541857975][/doublepost]

I think it is time to end thinking about mini as a cheap and slow entry computer into Mac line.
It is now simply a small and quite powerful computer which just happened to reuse old Mini case. It can now have a lot of RAM, has bluetooth, wifi, thunderbol, USB3, and can have external GPU which we dreamed for the headless Mac and, you can update that GPU at your will.
So all complaints about price are quite misdirected.

This says it all very well.

 

[Mol1n]

Dear Mol1n, I was just asking where you did get that figure because literally nowhere in that thread you posted did that 700 Mhz show up. If you‘re referring to that attached picture, I already told you that this is SpeedStep from Intel - if the processor is not under 100 % load the GHz will go down in order to use less power. So don‘t go ad hominem on me by telling me to go away, I‘m seriously curious about where you found that.

Archer in post 27 said his i7 throttled to as low as 3.5Ghz. The 8700B is rated to boost to 4.3Ghz.

Other sources have also confirmed the 99C throttling.

 

[Stephen.R]

I saw a post on one of the StackExchange sites (I think?) claiming it's purely a software issue, as the same hardware booted into Windows worked with MST fine - and that was a few years ago (they referenced macOS 10.10 I think)

Well, unless I'm missing something, even if MST is supported by macOS it'll be an imperfect solution. When I put the P2415Q into "primary" MST mode (without a second hooked to it) it drops to 30hz.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Well, unless I'm missing something, even if MST is supported by macOS it'll be an imperfect solution. When I put the P2415Q into "primary" MST mode (without a second hooked to it) it drops to 30hz.

I am sure you have this bookmarked, but here it is for your edification - https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT206587 - I found that I had the same issue with trying to do this with two Dell P2715Qs at work. For the longest time, I could not drive my P2415Q at 60Hz while connected directly to a mid 2015 15” w/Intel Iris Pro 5200 (no dGPU). At some point, during some sort of upgrade (I think High Sierra, which I despise), something got fixed, finally, and I was able to switched to SST at 60Hz and things have been golden since. I have yet to connect any 4K display to my Late 2013 27” iMac via DisplayPort and get 60Hz, despite the above Support document saying SST at 60Hz is supported.

Dells are notorious for shipping updated firmware on a display later in its life and never allowing the end user of a prior version the ability to update it on their display. They also are not interested in helping macOS users with issues as their displays are only for Windows PCs, but I have learned to live with that. Good luck!

 

[Stephen.R]

For the longest time, I could not drive my P2415Q at 60Hz while connected directly to a mid 2015 15” w/Intel Iris Pro 5200 (no dGPU).

Sorry maybe I wasn't clear. It works fine at 60hz fine when MST is turned off - presumably making it SST mode? - (MST is mentioned further down that document you linked, one of its uses is to daisy chain Display Port monitors).

It's not really essential for me - I have a TB3 > 2xDP adapter from OWC, but I was curious if it would have worked.

I just bought the display (literally arrived here via courier yesterday) so I'm assuming the firmware is the most recent, however it may be a fundamental DP limitation. The Dell only does DisplayPort1.2 I believe, which maybe can't do multiple 4K@60hz using MST.

 

[Sabelonada]

Well, unless I'm missing something, even if MST is supported by macOS it'll be an imperfect solution. When I put the P2415Q into "primary" MST mode (without a second hooked to it) it drops to 30hz.

Is this on a Mac? I am using a Windows 10 machine and I get 60Hz on all 3 monitors.

I know it's not a matter of pixel count, all told, I have a 4K monitors worth of pixels. It's just spread across 3 screens.

 

[Stephen.R]

Is this on a Mac?

2018 MBP15.

I am using a Windows 10 machine and I get 60Hz on all 3 monitors.

What model? Maybe they support a newer version of DP?
[doublepost=1541872772][/doublepost]Ah. It's the display. From https://www.dell.com/support/articl...ell-p2715q-p2415q-flat-panel-monitors?lang=en

MST Primary: (DP1.2 mode for daisy chain setup) MST function enabled for primary monitor in Daisy Chain setup. Expected resolution is 4k*2k 30Hz with MST (DP out) enabled.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Sorry maybe I wasn't clear. It works fine at 60hz fine when MST is turned off - presumably making it SST mode? - (MST is mentioned further down that document you linked, one of its uses is to daisy chain Display Port monitors).

It's not really essential for me - I have a TB3 > 2xDP adapter from OWC, but I was curious if it would have worked.

I just bought the display (literally arrived here via courier yesterday) so I'm assuming the firmware is the most recent, however it may be a fundamental DP limitation. The Dell only does DisplayPort1.2 I believe, which maybe can't do multiple 4K@60hz using MST.

I need to revisit MST with the Dells at work on something running High Sierra and Mojave to see if Apple has made any changes at the EFI level or not. I can tell you that my Dell P2415Q came with firmware A00 and I believe that A01 was shipping at the time, so it was luck of the draw. Hope it works out for you. I have no definite timetable to try my experiment, but I will report if I have any success.

 

[Stephen.R]

Hope it works out for you.

Thanks - from what I found (see the merged reply immediately before yours) Dell say multiple 4Ks via MST @ 60Hz is just not supported/possible. It isn't the end of the world - the TB3 adapter will work fine for me. It was more just about "hey this tech is cool I wonder if it works as well as its advertised".

The end result is still a single TB3 port used, so I'm fine with this solution.

 

[MandiMac]

Archer in post 27 said his i7 throttled to as low as 3.5Ghz. The 8700B is rated to boost to 4.3Ghz.

Other sources have also confirmed the 99C throttling.

Thanks, now I gotcha! It is a misunderstanding between the two of us I thought you meant the processor was actually throttled below the 3.2 GHz.

It shows the CPU is running at 3.6ghz with a temp of 97c. Temp is bouncing between 94-99. Clock speed goes from 3.5 to 3.7

So there is no actual throttling going on, the processor just does not boost as much as it could. That was what I didnˋt get in your argumentation! So the i3 will be working better for you because there is no Turbo Boost to begin with - which means it will stay at its advertised 3.6 GHz on four cores.

 

[theluggage]

Thanks - from what I found (see the merged reply immediately before yours) Dell say multiple 4Ks via MST @ 60Hz is just not supported/possible.

I believe one 4k@60Hz display uses the entire bandwidth of a 4-lane DisplayPort 1.2 link so you'd never get two of those on one cable. Displayport 1.4 has a higher data rate per lane so might do it in theory (if the OS supported it), but that means the display and the GPU and (with USB-C) the USB-C controller on the mainboard would have to support DP 1.4.