Mini 2018 as advertised

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
Just replaced good 'ole cMP 3,1 22GB/HD 7950 3GB with MM 8,1 i7/64GB, and all is good.

UHD 630 has no problem operating 2 x 3840x2160.

4K HEVC movies play with no more strain than Itunes, it's barely noticeable.

Adobe flow is snappy. Indesign effortlessly handles a large and complex 5000x2000 mm document with 900 images in HQ display. Bridge generates RAW previews fast. Photoshop filters like Alien Skin Exposure and Topaz Labs work like a charm. Never saw a more repsonsive system on Windows.

Put slow files on an 8TB LaCie, using old 3TB spinners as backup media via IcyBox.

Typical user has no need for an eGPU.

Product is solid, and as advertised.
 

StellarVixen

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2018
1,957
3,173
Earth
Excellent.

If I didn't play games from time to time, I would never get the eGPU, either. :)

It is a nice little beast, I can't wait to get mine. How much internal storage did you get?
 
  • Like
Reactions: auduchinok

Ramias

macrumors newbie
Oct 22, 2016
21
7
Do you think 64gb made the difference or would it have smoked like that with “just” 32?
 

Stephen.R

macrumors 65816
Nov 2, 2018
1,363
903
Thailand
UHD 630 has no problem operating 2 x 3840x2160.
Is that at 3840x2160 'native' (i.e. 1x) or at a scaled resolution (i.e. 'looks like AxB' in display prefs)?

Did you get the 64GB as a BTO or aftermarket? Last I heard there were no after-market 64GB kits available.
 

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
Do you think 64gb made the difference or would it have smoked like that with “just” 32?
32 GB is good for most users. 16 GB is simply not enough. My current basic usage (system, web, terminal, itunes, mail) is 13 GB + 4 GB cache, and OS X loves to fill the cache with crap and then never release it.

If you handle very big documents or data flows, just max out.
[doublepost=1542102077][/doublepost]
Is that at 3840x2160 'native' (i.e. 1x) or at a scaled resolution (i.e. 'looks like AxB' in display prefs)?

Did you get the 64GB as a BTO or aftermarket? Last I heard there were no after-market 64GB kits available.
That is native. I prefer maximum screen estate.

I bought 64 GB BTO from Apple, therefore I received it only yesterday.

Added a 512 GB SSD. 256 GB will be too small once you fill up with image cache and apps.
 

StellarVixen

macrumors 68000
Mar 1, 2018
1,957
3,173
Earth
Interesting. I can have Intellij IDEA with several classes open, SceneBuilder working on two FXML files, browser with usually 4+ tabs open, and I never got above 40 percent memory pressure with 8 GB of RAM installed.

I might get along just fine with 16, and then install more if needed. But, that seems like a waste of money, so, it might be better to go with 32 GB right away.
 

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
... I have to assume we work in different fields, but what exactly do you mean by 'image cache'?
Previews for RAW and PS in Bridge/Lightroom/Camera RAW are cached. If you have full monitor size previews (4K) and tens of thousands of images, it will fill up fast. You typically don't want to offload cache files on slower media. Add some Premiere/iMovie projects, and you will soon find yourself out of space.
 

PJivan

macrumors 6502
Aug 19, 2015
456
431
32 GB is good for most users. 16 GB is simply not enough. My current basic usage (system, web, terminal, itunes, mail) is 13 GB + 4 GB cache, and OS X loves to fill the cache with crap and then never release it.

If you handle very big documents or data flows, just max out.
[doublepost=1542102077][/doublepost]

That is native. I prefer maximum screen estate.

I bought 64 GB BTO from Apple, therefore I received it only yesterday.

Added a 512 GB SSD. 256 GB will be too small once you fill up with image cache and apps.
The more ram is available the more mac os will take, it's just the way a system is designed, as long as there is no swap used then there is no benefit in increasing RAM, so to steal a random image from the web, in this case the ram was enough to never had to use the HD, yeah bigger cache can increase speed but to be fair the SSD is super fast anyway.

 

Chancha

macrumors 6502a
Mar 19, 2014
919
790
Could you please check how much VRAM is being used by the UHD 630 even for when 64GB is equipped? I read in support docs that the macOS limits itself at 1.5GB but it sounds quite disproportional if this is the case.
 

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
Could you please check how much VRAM is being used by the UHD 630 even for when 64GB is equipped? I read in support docs that the macOS limits itself at 1.5GB but it sounds quite disproportional if this is the case.
1536 MB.
 

Chancha

macrumors 6502a
Mar 19, 2014
919
790
Thanks. "Good" to know having more RAM doesn't help at all. I am frankly rather surprised how smooth you claim your setup has been, compared to the threads outside discussing the UHD 630 and its problems with scaling interface.
 

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
Thanks. "Good" to know having more RAM doesn't help at all. I am frankly rather surprised how smooth you claim your setup has been, compared to the threads outside discussing the UHD 630 and its problems with scaling interface.
More VRAM is not gonna help that. Scaling is compute intensive.
 

Ifti

macrumors 68020
Dec 14, 2010
2,184
392
UK
This is promising.
I was considering a Mac Mini for my FCPX editing.
My BTO would be:

i7 CPU
8GB RAM (to be upgraded to 32GB min)
512GB SSD (have plenty of external TB3 storage)
10GBe

The only thing that put me off was as I don't want the added expense, or the added desk space taken by the eGPU.

I generally create small projects in FCPX of 10mins or less (for my YouTube channel) which are currently in 1080p, but Im looking to move towards 4K very soon (HEVC?).
Based on your experience so far, do you think the MM will be able to handle this with its stock GPU?
 

macdos

macrumors regular
Original poster
Oct 15, 2017
213
289
I generally create small projects in FCPX of 10mins or less (for my YouTube channel) which are currently in 1080p, but Im looking to move towards 4K very soon (HEVC?).
Based on your experience so far, do you think the MM will be able to handle this with its stock GPU?
Probably. Just tried iMovie with an old project, although only 1080p. Encoded in 1/3 times real time, no strain on system.

EDIT: Downloaded a 4K clip to play with. Added some transitions, titles and stuff. No problem at all. Still exporting faster than real time, Apple ProRes codec, high quality, 4K. Simple movies are a breeze.

Of course, if you use After Effects and have twenty layers of transitions and effects, it might be a good idea to add a rather powerful GPU.
 
Last edited:

yoak

macrumors 65816
Oct 4, 2004
1,483
41
Oslo, Norway
I'm curious to this as well Ifti. I have the same cMP as the OP, but I found myself using it less and less as i don't have the I/O to transfer my large video files to the the external disks. It just takes too long over usb2 and I don't have a FW card reader anymore. I was about tho buy the i7 mini, but the BTO option added too many days and I needed one asap for a project. So I bought a second hand MBP 15" late 2013 maxed out. Editing 4K prores on this machine worked fine until I started adding all the text graphics the project needed. It was only a 2 min film, but I started to see the beachball a lott towards the end. (I had the project on the internal 1TB ssd and it has a second graphics card of 2GB). I'm worried the Mini will struggle a lot once you add some text or graphics to a project, but I haven´t found any reviews or tests so far. Any info appreciated
 

archer75

macrumors 68030
Jan 26, 2005
2,698
1,235
Oregon
Interesting. I can have Intellij IDEA with several classes open, SceneBuilder working on two FXML files, browser with usually 4+ tabs open, and I never got above 40 percent memory pressure with 8 GB of RAM installed.

I might get along just fine with 16, and then install more if needed. But, that seems like a waste of money, so, it might be better to go with 32 GB right away.
Mine is at 13gb ram. I'm transferring files and have activity monitor open, fan control open as i'm monitoring temps and such. Safari with about 8 tabs. Plex server and sonarr running in the background(but not actually doing anything atm)
 

vidguy7

macrumors member
Nov 12, 2018
35
21
New York
Probably. Just tried iMovie with an old project, although only 1080p. Encoded in 1/3 times real time, no strain on system.

EDIT: Downloaded a 4K clip to play with. Added some transitions, titles and stuff. No problem at all. Still exporting faster than real time, Apple ProRes codec, high quality, 4K. Simple movies are a breeze.

Of course, if you use After Effects and have twenty layers of transitions and effects, it might be a good idea to add a rather powerful GPU.
I'd be curious how your times hold up while using compressor. I use that a lot.
 

F-Train

macrumors 65816
Apr 22, 2015
1,457
988
NYC & Newfoundland

MacWorld78

macrumors 6502
Jul 25, 2012
426
181
Wow, you just max out Mac Mini :D

Just wondering which version photoshop are you running?
 

Mannaerts

macrumors member
Dec 2, 2010
76
32
Belgium, Antwerp
Does the i7 provide a significant upgrade for playing HEVC? I'm now streaming HEVC, with alot of buffering on Plex, from a 2016 Macbook Pro i5. Otherwise i would get the i5 Mac Mini if it is barely noticable