New Mac Mini or current 27" 5k iMac?

[ChrisB1]

I'm seriously in the mood to replace my 2011 21.5" iMac. It is still functional but barely. Probably not long for this earth.

The new Mini with the specs below caught my eye but would still have to buy a 24" 4k or 27" 5k monitor so the price is largely a push with the current 27" 5k iMac. If I go the Mini route, I'll pick up a 1TB external SSD in the near future for photo, music, video storage in the near future. If I go with the iMac, I'll just use external HDDs that I already have for backups.

What am I missing that would help me make a decision?

 

[ElectronGuru]

I have that iMac, but with pure ssd. The last thing you want is an hdd haunting your iMac when it dies so that’s the first thing you should change on the right.

The point of iMac is great value on a single configuration. The point of mini is versatility. Building the same single configuration on mini will cost more, guaranteed. If that’s all you ever want, imac makes more sense.

Now imagine your retired 2011 imac getting repurposed as a server or htpc. It would just get in the way, physically. 7 years from now, a 5k imac will be even more so (unless you literally used it as a small tv). If that kind of value/versatility is appealing, that’s the point of going mini.

 

[Cashmonee]

I was about to post the same exact question. I am looking at replacing a 2010 27" iMac with an i7 mini. I have a monitor already (a Dell 1440p IPS), so that is not a cost I have to absorb.

What entices me about the mini is that I feel like I can do more down the line to squeeze life out of it. I can easily upgrade RAM (though that is true of the 27" iMac as well I believe), add an eGPU, and with the 4 TB3 ports, add storage. The iMac you buy today is largely the iMac you will have for the life of the machine. I know upgrades have historically been possible (have not looked at the newest models), but they require removing the screen and usually a lot of internals. On top of this, this mini seems to be a lot faster at non-GPU tasks. The chips are faster and the SSD is much faster.

Having said that, I like the idea of having the dGPU in the iMac, even if it is at best mid-range, and the screen is gorgeous, much better than the Dell I would use. However, I think I would much prefer the 8th-gen 6-core chip to the 7th-gen 4. I could wait for the new iMac, but I fear the prices on those may also increase and start to look a bit steep.

Pros for the mini: Faster, more likely to be able to squeeze life out of it, cheaper (for me since I have all the peripherals I need).
Pro for the iMac: Gorgeous screen, dGPU

 

[shinji]

I considered the current iMac too, but ultimately decided on the 2018 Mini.

If a 5k monitor is very important to you, then the iMac may be your best bet. It wasn't the deciding factor for me.

The only thing is the iMac is due for an update. Exactly when is anyone's guess, but after Apple taking a million years to update the Mini, I was tired of waiting.

And I agree with @ElectronGuru. If you go with the iMac, you really want an SSD, not Fusion drive. It's also very easy to upgrade the RAM, so you can save a little there.

 

[boast]

If you had your iMac since 2011 and didn't care about using different kinds of monitors or GPUs, then I would suggest doing the iMac again.

 

[Spectrum]

I just played with an LG 5K display at an Apple Store, and the quality of text (attached to a mini2018] was not at all on par with a 5K retina iMac. Text on LG was overly dark and a bit blurry. I don't understand why there was such a difference. Both were running Mojave. So, I post this as a word of caution. I assumed all retina high DPi 4K and 5K displays were more or less identical. Try before you buy if you can.

 

[blairh]

I sold my Mini for a 5K iMac earlier this year and I am very glad I did.

 

[ChrisB1]

Thanks all the the comments. The iMac's screen is a huge plus. Plenty of threads talking about the value there.

Would a 1TB eternal Thunderbolt 3 SSD attached to the Mini be noticeably faster than the 1TB fusion drive in the iMac?

 

[wdwpsu]

I just played with an LG 5K display at an Apple Store, and the quality of text (attached to a mini2018] was not at all on par with a 5K retina iMac. Text on LG was overly dark and a bit blurry. I don't understand why there was such a difference. Both were running Mojave. So, I post this as a word of caution. I assumed all retina high DPi 4K and 5K displays were more or less identical. Try before you buy if you can.

Was the scaling setting the same on both?

 

[thirdsun]

Thanks all the the comments. The iMac's screen is a huge plus. Plenty of threads talking about the value there.

Would a 1TB eternal Thunderbolt 3 SSD attached to the Mini be noticeably faster than the 1TB fusion drive in the iMac?

Of course an SSD, even an external one, would be much faster. There are also external NVMe SSDs like the Samsung X5 available these days - they are expensive, but much more performant than traditional AHCI SSDs like the Samsung T5 (which is of course still much faster than a HDD).

However. Don’t even think about buying an iMac with a Fusion Drive. The drive has no place in a computer in 2018. It will be the slowest component of the device. You will regret it. Order an iMac with a true SSD, even if it’s smaller like 256 GB or 512 GB. Use this very fast drive for the OS and Applications, while storing your large media on something like the Samsung T5, which is affordable and can be purchased later.

 

[LiE_]

I just played with an LG 5K display at an Apple Store, and the quality of text (attached to a mini2018] was not at all on par with a 5K retina iMac. Text on LG was overly dark and a bit blurry. I don't understand why there was such a difference. Both were running Mojave. So, I post this as a word of caution. I assumed all retina high DPi 4K and 5K displays were more or less identical. Try before you buy if you can.

There must be something wrong with the monitor. It’s exactly the same as the monitor in the 5k iMac and will output the same quality retina.

 

[HenryAZ]

One of the big advantages I see of a Mini over an iMac is you get to run your own choice of monitor. I just ordered my new Mini and will be using an Eizo 32" UHD monitor, running at its full native resolution of 3840x2160 @60Hz.

 

[294307]

As others, the easiest way to make your decision is whether you want the freedom to use your own monitor and swap it out at any time, or be stuck with the iMac display (which is one of the best you'll find at that price point).

 

[F-Train]

One of the big advantages I see of a Mini over an iMac is you get to run your own choice of monitor. I just ordered my new Mini and will be using an Eizo 32" UHD monitor, running at its full native resolution of 3840x2160 @60Hz.

As a practical matter, there aren't a lot of monitors out there that are better than, or more cost-effective than, an iMac monitor.

Someone who needs an Eizo 4K monitor, which cost US$1970*, $2800 or $6,000, depending on features, is probably not considering an iMac in the first place

* with hood

 

[ChrisB1]

The decision would be a lot easier if and equivalent 27" 5K monitor (at a reasonable price) was available which is should be at some point you would think.

When you add the SSD in place of the HDD, the price difference w/o the monitor is much more extreme plus the Mini's specs for RAM and processor are still a generation better.

 

[Chancha]

RAM speed makes very little difference except for edge cases, the amount on the other hand matters. Both the iMac and mini have SO-DIMM slots, but the iMac is more easily user accessible, and it ships with 2 empty slots (unless you BTO 32GB which gives you 4x8), so it is more flexible than mini in that regard.

Coming from a long time iMac user yourself, it may be wise to stick with the form factor since you must be familiar with it, unless you have reasons to derail from that specific form factor, such as wanting to use display(s) that is not a retina 5K.

The price difference is not so significant if you can make use of everything that the iMac offers, so like I said unless you already have a mini peripheral setup in mind that the iMac either does not meet or is excessive, otherwise the iMac is of equal if not better value as the mini.

 

[Fishrrman]

OP wrote:
"Would a 1TB eternal Thunderbolt 3 SSD attached to the Mini be noticeably faster than the 1TB fusion drive in the iMac?"

Perhaps.

But you want to BOOT FROM the Mini's INTERNAL drive, in any case.
It will be the "fastest of them all".
Then use external storage for movies, music, pics, etc.

In your comparison above, the iMac should have a 256gb "straight SSD".
You DO NOT WANT a 1tb fusion drive! DO NOT BUY ONE!
(Note: iMacs with SSDs inside have to be special-ordered through the online Apple Store. A few dealers, such as B&H in NYC, keep them "pre-stocked", but again, very few dealers do this).

USB3 external storage (for either choice above) will do fine.
Or... spend extra and get a USB3.1 gen2 drive (fast, but more $$$$).

A friend bought a 2017 27" iMac not that long ago, with a 256gb SSD.
Very fast, very nice.
Great display.

You could do very well with EITHER choice above.

For the Mini, I'd pick a 4k display rather than 5k.
The LG/Apple display has received mixed reviews.
But there are plenty of great 4k 3rd-party monitors out there to choose from.

 

[harriska2]

I considered the current iMac too, but ultimately decided on the 2018 Mini.

If a 5k monitor is very important to you, then the iMac may be your best bet. It wasn't the deciding factor for me.

The only thing is the iMac is due for an update. Exactly when is anyone's guess, but after Apple taking a million years to update the Mini, I was tired of waiting.

And I agree with @ElectronGuru. If you go with the iMac, you really want an SSD, not Fusion drive. It's also very easy to upgrade the RAM, so you can save a little there.

This was my exact thought process. I have a 4k monitor already and I like the semi-flexibility of the mac mini. Plus it is replacing a 2013 imac with broken lcd due to, imo, crappy lg manufacturing and apple’s insistence on smaller with a hot spinning platter. It is also replacing a pc with 6 harddrives in the tower so I am able to share the monitor, keyboard, and mouse while I spend some quality time migrating files.
[doublepost=1542557401][/doublepost]

The decision would be a lot easier if and equivalent 27" 5K monitor (at a reasonable price) was available which is should be at some point you would think.

When you add the SSD in place of the HDD, the price difference w/o the monitor is much more extreme plus the Mini's specs for RAM and processor are still a generation better.

When I bumped up the storage to 1 tb ssd on that exact imac, the price got icky super fast, something over $2500. And this model came out in what, 2016, 2017? Normally I would wait for the new imacs but I hate the quality and resolution of the ASUS 2k external hanging off our 2013 broken lcd imac. Plus Windows is becoming a mental drag after Apple has sucked me in with their ipad, iphone, and watch - oh my!

 

[294307]

The decision would be a lot easier if and equivalent 27" 5K monitor (at a reasonable price) was available which is should be at some point you would think.

When you add the SSD in place of the HDD, the price difference w/o the monitor is much more extreme plus the Mini's specs for RAM and processor are still a generation better.

Well, if you bought the 5K LG display (which some say is as good as the iMac display, others not) it would come to roughly the same figure, if not a bit more. If the cost of an internal SSD is too much, then consider buying the iMac with the standard 1 TB Fusion Drive and use an external Thunderbolt 3 SSD as the boot drive.

If your 2011 iMac has a mechanical drive, you'll find the Fusion Drives a lot faster. The question is whether or not you want an external SSD to be used as the boot drive. Remember if that gets accidentally unplugged, bad things can happen.

You might not find a display that exactly matches the quality of the iMac display, but with a Mac mini you have the flexibility of swapping out the display for something else if you want to upgrade, or if it becomes faulty. With the iMac display, you've got an entire computer to get repaired. Not that you should expect problems, but it's just a matter of fact with an all-in-one system.

What's more important to you? That should make your decision easy.

 

[Sammy's]

But you want to BOOT FROM the Mini's INTERNAL drive, in any case.
It will be the "fastest of them all".
Then use external storage for movies, music, pics, etc.

USB3 external storage (for either choice above) will do fine.
Or... spend extra and get a USB3.1 gen2 drive (fast, but more $$$$).

Which external storage would you recommend for the above two options?

 

[Cashmonee]

This is a tough decision. Trying to spec an iMac gets pricey (as with all Apple products).

Mac mini i7/16/512: $1589 (EDU price)
27" iMac 3.4 i5/8/512/Radeon 570: $1969 (EDU Price)

About $400 more for the iMac before adding 3rd party RAM. That iMac will be slower in all but GPU tasks, but will have the gorgeous display. I could save some and go down to the 256 GB SSD. To spec the iMac close to the mini speed-wise will place it at just under $2500 on EDU plus cost of 3rd party RAM. That's right at $1000 for the monitor in that case.

I do have a 1440p monitor (Dell S2719DM) that is fine. It is not as nice as the 1440p display in my 2010 iMac, but it does ok. So I could save money now and buy a new monitor down the line if I wanted for a lot less than $1000. The mini also allows me to keep my PC and Mac at the same desk instead of having to separate them out. I see the mini as being able to be updated for a longer period of time, but that may not be as true as I initially thought the more I look into it. I can add storage and RAM to the iMac, it would be the GPU that I would be tied to.

It really comes down to how badly you want that display. It is a gorgeous display. The biggest con is that if you need any repairs or you want to sell it, it is a real pain in the neck. I have had to take my 27" iMac for repairs a few times and it was no easy task. Also, if something that affects the display fails (the display itself, GPU, etc), then you have a very large brick that will be expensive to repair. It will also be difficult to repurpose because of its size. But it is so simple and gorgeous on the desk!

I doubt I will buy an eGPU and I do not think I will want to spend big on a monitor anytime soon. So the real choice is a mini with a 1440p monitor or an iMac with the 5k. If the iMac is the way to go, then there is the decision of whether to wait or not.

I forgot. Main usage other than normal tasks is Lightroom as a hobbyist.

 

[jasnw]

I'm looking at this issue as well. The difference between a 27" iMac and a Mac Mini configured to my needs is about $900. That would buy a very nice monitor, but which one? I've been watching the various threads about what monitor "head" to put on a new Mini and the recommendations and reported experiences are all over the map. I'm not a gamer, not a photo/graphics pro, so I'm not needing a red-hot monitor. I do, however, want a monitor that will provide a crisp image for reading material as most of my time is spent in Terminal, Mail, Firefox, Word, and Excel. Buying an iMac solves the problem of which monitor to get, and solves it rather nicely as far as reviews go. I will be buying a new Mini when my 2012 Mini server goes tango-uniform, but perhaps not as a replacement for my iMac. I'm hoping, however, that my iMac holds out until we see what the Module Mac turns out to be (if it ever does).

 

[Cashmonee]

I think I am going to go with an iMac. As far as future upgradability, it seems like the iMac and Mac mini are similar in that they both have TB3 and easily upgraded RAM. The only real exception is the ability to add an eGPU, but I don't need a GPU and doubt I would ever seriously spring for an eGPU. Other than that, the question is whether I wait for the new iMac or get the current gen. I think ideally I would wait, but there are risks in waiting. The RAM may not be upgradable, the SSD likely won't be upgradable, price increases are very possible if not likely. I wonder if now is the time to pull the trigger.

 

[thirdsun]

The difference between a 27" iMac and a Mac Mini configured to my needs is about $900. That would buy a very nice monitor, but which one?

Does it really? I've been looking into this issue for a while now and it seems unless you're fine spending upwards of 1k for a hard to find, single inout LG Ultrafine 5K there really isn't a true alternative to the iMac display. If you're fine with 4k and an effective resolution of 1920x1080 at the recommended 2x scaling, sure, you could buy two good monitors or one exceptional for 900$, but I think it's too much of a compromise. If you, like me, really want that 2560x1440px screen real estate with crisp text rendering, 5K is the only option.

Therefore I'm leaning towards waiting for an upcoming iMac upgrade right now. On the other hand and since my aging iMac (non-retina) needs to be replaced yesterday while nobody can estimate when the update will happen, I might consider getting a mid-level Mac Mini now and running a QWHD or UHD setup temporarily. The Mac Mini may get relegated to media center duty later and the display can be used as second monitor for the highly anticipated iMac.

I'm somewhat torn to be honest.

 

[294307]

Does it really? I've been looking into this issue for a while now and it seems unless you're fine spending upwards of 1k for a hard to find, single inout LG Ultrafine 5K there really isn't a true alternative to the iMac display. If you're fine with 4k and an effective resolution of 1920x1080 at the recommended 2x scaling, sure, you could buy two good monitors or one exceptional for 900$, but I think it's too much of a compromise. If you, like me, really want that 2560x1440px screen real estate with crisp text rendering, 5K is the only option.

Therefore I'm leaning towards waiting for an upcoming iMac upgrade right now. On the other hand and since my aging iMac (non-retina) needs to be replaced yesterday while nobody can estimate when the update will happen, I might consider getting a mid-level Mac Mini now and running a QWHD or UHD setup temporarily. The Mac Mini may get relegated to media center duty later and the display can be used as second monitor for the highly anticipated iMac.

I'm somewhat torn to be honest.

I don't understand what the current iMac doesn't do that a future new iMac might do that's making this decision so difficult for you that you feel forced to wait. If you need an iMac now, get one now. It isn't going to suddenly stop working when the iMac line is updated.

I think I am going to go with an iMac. As far as future upgradability, it seems like the iMac and Mac mini are similar in that they both have TB3 and easily upgraded RAM. The only real exception is the ability to add an eGPU, but I don't need a GPU and doubt I would ever seriously spring for an eGPU. Other than that, the question is whether I wait for the new iMac or get the current gen. I think ideally I would wait, but there are risks in waiting. The RAM may not be upgradable, the SSD likely won't be upgradable, price increases are very possible if not likely. I wonder if now is the time to pull the trigger.

While the DIMM modules in the 2018 Mac mini are socketed, you need to pull out the entire logic board to gain access to them. The 27-inch iMac has a RAM access door, making upgrades far more trivial. The upgrade experience is far different.