Mac mini shootout: 2012 Quad-Core i7 versus 2014 Dual-Core i5 and i7

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by dogslobber, Dec 12, 2014.

  1. newellj macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    Boston, MA, US
    #2
    The conclusion is so unsurprising you almost wonder why the took the time to run the tests.

     
  2. dogslobber thread starter macrumors 68020

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #3
    It's all about the data. You have to show the data to prove the point. Supposition is not enough.
     
  3. wiredup72 macrumors regular

    wiredup72

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2011
    #4
    Yep. And my main uses are Logic, final cut, iternetting, and handbrake. So, pretty much proves they downgraded the top of the mini line and kept the high price.
    Here's to hoping I can find a used nMP under two grand by next fall :(
    I really don't know what I am going to do. i can't make up my mind. I can maybe hold out another 3 months.
     
  4. grandM macrumors 6502a

    grandM

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    #5
    Actually I never have felt happier about buying a computer. Upon buying my mini I could hit myself on the forehead. Knowing my luck apple would probably launch a new version a week later.

    Not only did apple really brought out a new version much much later. But my 2012 proves to be better than the new version in many areas. If it weren't for the Yosemite SSD doubts I'd really be happy!
     
  5. Tsavo macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2014
    #6
    I suppose you are correct.

    :D
     
  6. cfedu macrumors 65816

    cfedu

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto
    #7
    They did not even use the high end 2012 mini in the benchmarks, the $799 2012 stomps the $999 plus 2014 models. The 2012 mini will be known as the most future proof Mini ever.
     
  7. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #8
    I am sure for people who just do email, a bit of web browsing and such will be very happy with the 2014 offerings. For the rest of us, who do a bit more and have had previous models that were quad - well....lots of threads here and elsewhere just how disappointed (insert stronger words here) we were with the new anemic models that rubbed salt into the wound with their soldering in of RAM.

    For 2015/16, I'll be moving to another computer and perhaps (sadly) another operating system. I would prefer to move to Linux but may end up with Win plus Linux virtual based on software needs.
     
  8. psound macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #9
    Laughable. I knew the 2012 blows the 2014 away on a multi-core test but I'm surprised to see the 2012 actually hangs much closer on a single-core test than I thought too.

    The CPU downgrade plus soldered RAM and other upgrade deterrents is just a big screw you to any pro users who enjoyed the Mini as an alternative to the usual $2000+ macs they can no longer trust not to be fraught with problems/defects.

    One step forward, two steps back.


    Please Microsoft, make Windows 10 something I can actually consider ditching 20 years of Mac OS for. I'm ready now—truly.
     
  9. MRrainer macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2008
    Location:
    Zurich, Switzerland
    #10
    Unless they also change the default-shell from cmd.exe to bash or zsh, I think I'll have to give that one a pass.
    But then, I already have a QC 2012 Mini.
     
  10. dogslobber thread starter macrumors 68020

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #11
    While the 2014 Mini has problems, they're relatively minor compared to the terrors that lurk in Windows land. My favorite question to prospective Windows users is would you enter your bank financial info into Windows?
     
  11. cinealta macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    #12
    Which one, the 2.3 or 2.6?

    ----------

    Like what? I use OSX.
     
  12. scottsjack macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Location:
    Arizona
    #13
    I've got W10 running on my MBP. It has a nicer looking UI and way less Metro crap than W8.1. Since it's only in early development I can't say whether the GA will really be all that much better than W8.1.

    Two things in Windows' favor as a Mac replacement for me are native FLAC and MKV support and its longevity. I buy my HDTracks music in FLAC because it is a neutral (not Mac or Windows) codec. For BD I just buy movies and MKV them. VLC can handle both but native support might offer better solutions.

    Windows 7 has support until 2020. By that time even next year's Annual OS X Fashion Show version will be discarded with support long gone. W10 should be supported into the mid 2020s.
     
  13. cfedu macrumors 65816

    cfedu

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2009
    Location:
    Toronto
    #14
    Both
     
  14. garylovesbeer macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2011
    #15
    Do you notice much performance difference between them?
     
  15. grandM macrumors 6502a

    grandM

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2013
    #16
    probably not
    maybe in video encoding or so
    my cpu seldom goes to 100 percent but I have no SSD. With a SSD data supply is faster so the CPU is more used over a short time
     
  16. Mr. Buzzcut macrumors 65816

    Mr. Buzzcut

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Location:
    Ohio
    #17
    Decades old thinking here. What "terrors" lurk in Windows? Oh, hope you never need to use an ATM.
     
  17. dogslobber thread starter macrumors 68020

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #18
    Not really. Windows is a security nightmare. You can put lipstick on a pig, etc. No, I don't use ATMs.
     
  18. Occamsrazr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2012
    #19
    everyone always compares the high end 2012 model with the low end 2014 model and then uses that as proof that the 2012 is better than the 2014.

    how about comparing the low end 2012 with the low end 2014 and get back to me.
     
  19. magbarn macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #20
    Did you even read the review? Last time I checked a 2014 i7 3.0 is not a 'base' mini. In fact, that's the top dog cpu. To add insult to injury, the cheapest 2014 with that cpu is at least $999 without discounts.
     
  20. psound macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #21


    The 2014 3.0ghz i7 Mini ($1299US) is on every comparison chart on that page.

    And ironically, the top 2012 model isn't even on there so your point couldn't be any more wrong if you tried.

    In the future, perhaps you should open the link before kicking your two cents in to avoid embarrassing yourself.


    Sounds like someone who's completely impartial and devoid of bias on the subject then.

    :rolleyes:
     
  21. crazzapple Guest

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    #22
    The 2014 mini is the saddest "upgrade" in the history of apple. The sealed up *desktop* computer with soldered ram can't even come close to the performance of the TWO year old model it replaced. And that is comparing the *mid-tier* 2012 to the *top-tier* 2014. What a joke.

    Nice computer for the twitter/facebook crowd though.

    ----------

    I really hope they stop the annual OSX upgrade cycle. I get that it helps them sell more computers because it makes older hardware run like ****, but really, enough is enough.

    Also looking forward to Win10, finally with spaces functionality.
     
  22. Ics1974 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2014
    #23
    I find this all funning because even the most powerfull mini is very weak considering it's almost 2015 now.
     
  23. macrem macrumors 65816

    macrem

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    #24
    As a long-time fan of just about everything Apple, I can't explain it. Check out a Mac Mini vs., for example, an Intel NUC tear-down. With the NUC all you need is a phillips screwdriver & you can load it up with really cool components in two minutes. I think the Mini should have gone in that general direction (smaller, easier to service) for 2014 but instead it went the exact opposite way.
     
  24. cynics macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2012
    #25
    This.

    The 2012 Mini being more powerful then the 2014 doesn't mean much when the 2012 was due for an upgrade anyway.

    Its a shame people limit themselves to just one device or OS although I can understand why. I do feel bad for them though, stuck between a rock and a hard place.
     

Share This Page