Mac mini benchmarks:

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by timsun, Dec 29, 2012.

  1. timsun macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #1
    Hey,
    I was looking for the geekbench benchmark scores for the latest mac mini, but i only found some on the geekbench website.
    But I didn't know if that was with 4 GB ram or more or the normal HDD or the fusion drive?
    Can somebody please post the scores here or tell me a website where i can find al the scores with the specs.
    This is the site I was talking about: http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
    But i can't seem to figure it out!
    Thanks in advance!
    Timsun:apple:
     
  2. benwiggy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2012
    #2
    The Geekbench score typically reflects CPU performance only. Speed of storage device, GPU performance, RAM, etc, is not a factor.

    What are you trying to discover, exactly?

    Benchmarks are to be taken with a grain of salt, as "real world" performance may vary significantly, depending upon the task in hand -- sometimes a machine will seem [comparatively] faster than benchmarks might indicate; sometimes slower.
     
  3. timsun thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #3
    I want to buy a new mac mini, with a fusion drive and quad core and 16 GB ram , but will it make a diferents if I take the 2,6 instead of the 2,3 GHz quad core i7?
    Will it run much faster for 100 bucks or just 0,2 % or something?
    And where can I find benchmarks for the graphics/speed of storage device etc.?
     
  4. Nate392 macrumors member

    Nate392

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    #4
    You definitely should save money and upgrade the RAM yourself, in case you were thinking of getting it straight from Apple.

    Buying the better CPU is definitely worth it. It is just a little bit more expensive, but it's a higher performing CPU, and in addition will be more future-proof.
    One really noticeable thing is that the 2.6 Turbo-Boosts to a higher speed.
    http://www.barefeats.com/imac12b.html
    Those are some benchmarks, if you'd like some more, I can do some more looking.
     
  5. tejota1911, Dec 29, 2012
    Last edited: Dec 29, 2012

    tejota1911 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #5
    It will make a small difference during processor intensive tasks(Audio encoding, Video editing). If what you are doing isn't processor intensive, you won't notice the difference. I originally planned on getting the 2.6Ghz upgrade, but opted for the 2.3Ghz with 16GB RAM and a Samsung 840 Pro SSD instead. I haven't regretted my choice. This thing is a beast.

    BTW my 32-Bit Geekbench score is 11087.
     
  6. englishman macrumors 6502a

    englishman

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    #6
    Can I ask how easy it is to install the SSD?
     
  7. dasx macrumors 65816

    dasx

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2012
    Location:
    Barcelona
    #7
  8. tejota1911 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #8
  9. Nate392 macrumors member

    Nate392

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2012
    #9
    For reference, my Geekbench (2.6, 16 GB RAM, 256 GB SSD)
    32-bit score is 12011, so it doesn't look like the OP would be loosing too much if they just went with the 2.3.
     
  10. tejota1911 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2006
    #10
    Exactly why I went with the 2.3Ghz i7. There's a significant difference going from the 2.5Ghz i5 to the 2.3Ghz i7, but not so much going from the 2.3Ghz i7 to the 2.6Ghz i7. I reached the conclusion that, for what I use it for, I'd rarely notice the difference. I also plan on upgrading as soon as the Haswell minis come out. If for some reason I decide I need more computing power, I'll opt for the faster CPU then. For right now, I'm more than impressed with the speed of this setup.
     
  11. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #11
    Voice of Reason right there!

    Regardless of whether you upgrade when the Haswell Mini's come out, the 2.3 to 2.6ghz quad core at best will be 10% increase in processor speed. IT WILL NOT FUTURE PROOF YOU (as stated by someone previously in this thread). I don't know how many ways I can state this on this forum yet people keep saying it will. When the 2.3ghz quad core becomes too old to do things you want it to, the 2.6ghz will not be any better. Generally speaking any processor of the same generation will become archaic at the same time (okay a quad core will probably outlive a dual core, but I'm comparing same core counts). Further, the 10% is only going to help you in super processor intensive tasks such as video encoding or rendering. Even then, will 10% faster really help you? I generally load up a bunch in my Handbrake queue before bed and come back in the morning. Doesn't much matter to me if the encoding finished at 4AM or 5AM....

    Go with the base Mid-Mini and buy RAM separately. This is the best advice I can give you.
     
  12. AC Rempt macrumors 6502

    AC Rempt

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2008
    #12
    I used the OWC vid, and it was a straight forward procedure. If I had smaller hands, it might have been easier, but I finished it up in about an hour.
     

Share This Page