I wasn't talking about adding the GPU to the server machine, but rather offering the Quad Core i7 as an option for the high end mini. Make the price to bump up to the i7 cover the cost of any extra heatsink/fan/psu hardware that is needed to handle the load.
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.
New Mac Mini Benchmarks Show Significant Performance Gains
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wasn't talking about adding the GPU to the server machine, but rather offering the Quad Core i7 as an option for the high end mini. Make the price to bump up to the i7 cover the cost of any extra heatsink/fan/psu hardware that is needed to handle the load.
I see you put a lot of faith in Apple's tools... Too bad: Active Directory doesn't work properly, the new SMB client is having issues with our SMB server. NetRestore can't fix that, yet, if I buy new hardware I have to endure those issues.
Lucky for me I stocked up on old machines.
Wow. A processor that is the same scores the same. I am flabbergasted. Apple has crazy special power in the new upgrades
Hmmm ... I am more incline to the mini server as a real home server and not as a HTPC ... Hook with Pegasus and thunderbolt, no need for expensive raid controller cards to have a decent home server and file sharing network ... I waiting to see if it will lag when streaming blue ray rips from the server to the wireless TV or computer
I had smbd hitting 100% usage to transfer a two files over wireless in Lion. Keep in mind this is just home simple file sharing.
I am wondering the same... I am selling my 2010 mac mini for $530
tomorrow. I know the discrete graphics card is best, but where does this intell one really stand? I do not game on it, but I do not want it choking on a video or image work... I had no issues with the graphics on the 2010 model... Does the new integrated card work well or no? I will prob go to the apple store tonight... I was going to buy it tomorrow, but might come out with one tonight
I am wondering the same... I am selling my 2010 mac mini for $530
I will prob go to the apple store tonight... I was going to buy it tomorrow, but might come out with one tonight
Did you pick one up? I'm thinking of getting one for kids, but am torn on the graphics. Don't need the CPU power of the higher-end non-server, but I know they'll like some games and don't want the graphics to choke.
I have the 2010 server model w/ NVIDIA graphics I think. Is the Intel HD 3000 worse than that?
I don't give a crap what they call it, server or no server. I only want a replacement home server for my whole house audio/video setup (and don't need OSX server for that). However, I would like dual 500GB drives and a quad-core i7, so that would put me in the 'server' interest category. I'd prefer the better graphics card as well (or the graphics card model with a quad-core would be better yet; I can put the extra hard drive in myself).
The Radeon HD 6630M is a mid range chip when compared to other discrete mobile chips and is vastly superior to integrated solutions.
It would not compare favorably to the Geforce 8000 GT, however. The Radeon HD 6630M has 480 stream processors clocked at 485MHz. The Radeon 4870 is slightly faster than the Geforce 8800 GT and has 800 stream processors clocked at 750MHz. This suggests the Geforce 8800 should be significantly faster, perhaps even twice as fast as the Radeon HD 6630M**.
**I would compare the two chips directly except that the architectures are too different to use anything but actual performance numbers in comparison.
Last edited:
The First MacBook Pros since Core 2 Duo were Dual core i7's
Intel made a lot of dual core i7's. All the first generation Core-i7 MacBook Pros were dual core. Quad core i7's (or i5's) were still too hot for Apple to put in a laptop or mac mini. Apple waited for Sandy Bridge (the second generation Core i7/i5) to put quad cores in a small form factor like the new MacBook Pro's or Mini.
That's also why the Mini and 13" MBP had Core 2 Duo's for so long (over 4 years!) because Nehalem/Westmere/etc. (first gen core-i7/i5) were also a bit expensive and hot even at dual-core?
Intel made a lot of dual core i7's. All the first generation Core-i7 MacBook Pros were dual core. Quad core i7's (or i5's) were still too hot for Apple to put in a laptop or mac mini. Apple waited for Sandy Bridge (the second generation Core i7/i5) to put quad cores in a small form factor like the new MacBook Pro's or Mini.
That's also why the Mini and 13" MBP had Core 2 Duo's for so long (over 4 years!) because Nehalem/Westmere/etc. (first gen core-i7/i5) were also a bit expensive and hot even at dual-core?
Core 2 Duo isn't dead, just old.
Heh, good point. Core 2 Duo isn't dead, I just upgraded Lion on the very first Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro (2.16 GHz Merom from Fall 2006). It's still kicking! I really hate that it is still limited to 3GB of RAM though. I upgraded my iMac to Lion a long time ago with 16 GB of RAM, glad I have the big BlueTooth Trackpad for Gestures. That's for the iMac, but the old MacBook can't do more than 2 fingers either, but again Core 2 Duo still runs the latest software and Mac OS Lion.
But I'm glad that Intel finally made the new architecture for mobile first, as with Core 2; energy efficient. Nehalem just wasn't, and we had 3.5 years of MacBook Pro's with the old Core 2 Duo, and never a Core 2 Quad. Then came Sandy Bridge and never even a Duo (only quad) option in the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros!
It's interesting that there are no Core Duo Macs with more than 2 GB memory and that's the minimum for Lion however I assume that 32-bit was just too old and also Core Duo was the P-6 architecture before the new Core 2, then Nehalem, then Sandy Bridge, etc.
Finally, yes Core 2 Duo is finally no longer sold in Macs as Intel stopped making them, it is nearly 5 years old!
Heh, good point. Core 2 Duo isn't dead, I just upgraded Lion on the very first Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro (2.16 GHz Merom from Fall 2006). It's still kicking! I really hate that it is still limited to 3GB of RAM though. I upgraded my iMac to Lion a long time ago with 16 GB of RAM, glad I have the big BlueTooth Trackpad for Gestures. That's for the iMac, but the old MacBook can't do more than 2 fingers either, but again Core 2 Duo still runs the latest software and Mac OS Lion.
But I'm glad that Intel finally made the new architecture for mobile first, as with Core 2; energy efficient. Nehalem just wasn't, and we had 3.5 years of MacBook Pro's with the old Core 2 Duo, and never a Core 2 Quad. Then came Sandy Bridge and never even a Duo (only quad) option in the 15" and 17" MacBook Pros!
It's interesting that there are no Core Duo Macs with more than 2 GB memory and that's the minimum for Lion however I assume that 32-bit was just too old and also Core Duo was the P-6 architecture before the new Core 2, then Nehalem, then Sandy Bridge, etc.
Finally, yes Core 2 Duo is finally no longer sold in Macs as Intel stopped making them, it is nearly 5 years old!
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
Have the new Mac Mini and Lion looks like an app Junkies dream. OS running smoothly except for one glaring problem.
Flash player is beta for Lion an is unusable on YouTube HD content on my Intel HD 3000 graphics. Video plays too fast and is unstable.
Nothing says "HD has won" more than the empty space in the top of this Mini.
Have the new Mac Mini and Lion looks like an app Junkies dream. OS running smoothly except for one glaring problem.
Flash player is beta for Lion an is unusable on YouTube HD content on my Intel HD 3000 graphics. Video plays too fast and is unstable.
Nothing says "HD has won" more than the empty space in the top of this Mini.
Sorry, I wasn't trying to imply that any of Apple's tools would fix anything that the transition to Lion breaks in your environment, and I do feel your pain. My point was that with any big changes, you always have to test, see what's broken, and find a workaround--then wait months for Apple to acknowledge there might be an issue or possibly provide a solution. If it's possible to build a reference system running Lion with workarounds in place, it's easy enough to push that to new hardware as it arrives.
I was looking at the prices on amazon for the mini and I noticed that it suggested a memory upgrade... Here is what was often purchased with the mini...
Corsair 8 GB DDR3 Laptop Memory Kit CMSO8GX3M2A1333C9
Any one have any thoughts on this memory upgrade? I am not knowledgeable about computers, and this will also be my first Mac so please pardon my noob question.
Corsair 8 GB DDR3 Laptop Memory Kit CMSO8GX3M2A1333C9
Any one have any thoughts on this memory upgrade? I am not knowledgeable about computers, and this will also be my first Mac so please pardon my noob question.
If you run a lot of programs at the same time you won't experience your computer "paging" the hard disk for virtual memory. Basically your performance will be optimal.
If you don't run a whole lot at once you can probably go without the 8 GB of ram..
Honestly it won't hurt and if you have the money for it you probably should do it.
Hope you enjoy your new computer!
I recently upgraded my Late 2009 Mac Mini from 2GB memory to 8GB. With 2GB you can have couple applications open at the same time, or just one if it uses a lot of memory. If you have more, it'll start "paging" which slows your system down quite considerably. With 4GB or 8GB you can have a lot of programs open, no need to close them, and your system won't have "hiccups".
I would recommend at least 4GB of memory and if the price difference between 4GB and 8GB is small, go for 8GB.
more RAM please!
Apple needs to make these with 16GBs of RAM. There are a lot of audio guys using these as slaves to MacPros and 8GBs is not enough to host the app. 16GBs would just barely but it too, but it's reasonable. A 16GB (or more), with two SSDs in RAID 0 with the i7 or whatever is next would sell like hotcakes!
I would have my own little "render farm" with a MacPro and two MacMinis. Can't wait!. Love this little machine. Glad it didn't go the way of the 64 Cube!
Apple needs to make these with 16GBs of RAM. There are a lot of audio guys using these as slaves to MacPros and 8GBs is not enough to host the app. 16GBs would just barely but it too, but it's reasonable. A 16GB (or more), with two SSDs in RAID 0 with the i7 or whatever is next would sell like hotcakes!
I would have my own little "render farm" with a MacPro and two MacMinis. Can't wait!. Love this little machine. Glad it didn't go the way of the 64 Cube!
This is a pretty old thread to bump for this but the 2011 minis do support 16 GB RAM.