Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Mac Pro 1.1 vs 2012 Mac Mini
- Thread starter waloshin
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I just switched from a 2011 Mac Mini server (2 GHz, i7 quadcore, SSD) to a 4 core, 3.7 Ghz, D300, Vader Mac. Obviously the Mac Pro is faster, but not incredibly so. The big difference is how it handles playback of clips with effects. The Mac Mini would stutter or hang in places, but the Mac Pro is very smooth. Motion also runs much smoother. This speeds up the workflow and makes editing more pleasurable. I found a used one on eBay for $2400. I put 32 GB of RAM in it, but it rarely uses more than 16. Go for the Pro if you can swing it, but I would have a hard time paying full price for what is essentially a three year old machine.
I agree. I have a Mac mini 2012 and recently bought a Mac Pro 2013 6-core. The Mac Pro does wonders over the mini in Final Cut Pro X, but sometimes it seems the mini does better for the basic stuff. Sometimes faster on general everyday use stuff. I heard that was the case, but noticed it when I finally bought and compared. Not much difference, but you will notice (not a game changer).
I've been trying out an 8core Mac Pro with D700s. FCP effects, compressor and handbrake all run faster/quicker than my rMBP 2.6 i7 quad core, or my basic 2012 mini 2.3GHz i7. I haven't noticed an app where it didn't feel quicker/snappier. Rendering is agonizingly slow to me on the mini. My MacPro 3.1 (2 x 2.8Ghz) performs about the same as my rMBP in apps that use most if not all 8 cores, otherwise a tad slower (and noisier). Dunno how a 1.1 would compare. The 3.1 performs much better than the mini, but there are many task for which there is little difference (reading email, surfing the web). Pretty much can say that about any of them, however.
Last edited: