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.
Replace Mac Pro 2010 2.66 12 core with Mac Mini?
- Thread starter henchman
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mojave doesn't support Nvidia yet, if you do then pick Vega series 56 or 64.
I have Mac Pro 2009 (flashed 5,1) 12 cores and gaming performance differences are very noticeable, the new CPU, RAM, TB3 in New Mac Mini makes a big impact.
Haven't try gaming under windows via Bootcamp but on MacOS games definitely better with new Mac mini.
Resolve makes great use of both all the CPU cores and GPU. The 6-core i7 Mac mini won't have as many threads as the Mac Pro, but they will be much, much faster.
For the eGPU, you will be stuck without your GTX 1080 until Apple and Nvidia offer up support in Mojave. Otherwise, a Vega 64 eGPU will be a pretty good alternative.
Have you thought about upgrading your current Mac Pro? Upgrading your CPUs to dual 3.46GHz Xeon X5690s will net you a sizable improvement for a fairly small investment, but the 6-core i7 Mac mini will still be faster.
For the eGPU, you will be stuck without your GTX 1080 until Apple and Nvidia offer up support in Mojave. Otherwise, a Vega 64 eGPU will be a pretty good alternative.
Have you thought about upgrading your current Mac Pro? Upgrading your CPUs to dual 3.46GHz Xeon X5690s will net you a sizable improvement for a fairly small investment, but the 6-core i7 Mac mini will still be faster.
I have the same processors in my 5,1 Mac Pro. In Cinebench the pair of X5650s scored over 1200. I believe this is faster than the i7 in the new Mini.
When I had a pair of X5690s in the 5,1, the Cinebench scored over 1600. The single-core scores of the Mini will be faster, but for multi-threaded workloads, the Mac Pro pulls ahead handily. Not to mention the Mac Pro will be able to handle temps better due to better cooling, case size (airflow), and multiple fans.
I realize benchmarks don't mean much, but at least it gives you an idea of what to expect.
Also, if you purchase a Mini and want to have performance similar to your current graphics card, you will need to buy an eGPU enclosure ($300+), and a Vega 64 card ($400+) in addition to the cost of the Mini. Something to think about.
When I had a pair of X5690s in the 5,1, the Cinebench scored over 1600. The single-core scores of the Mini will be faster, but for multi-threaded workloads, the Mac Pro pulls ahead handily. Not to mention the Mac Pro will be able to handle temps better due to better cooling, case size (airflow), and multiple fans.
I realize benchmarks don't mean much, but at least it gives you an idea of what to expect.
Also, if you purchase a Mini and want to have performance similar to your current graphics card, you will need to buy an eGPU enclosure ($300+), and a Vega 64 card ($400+) in addition to the cost of the Mini. Something to think about.
Yeah, I'm thinking I'll stick with the 12 core 2010 mac pro for now. I checked the specs, it's actually a 2.96.
Doing the research, I'm just not seeing a massive increase of power vs dollars.
I don't even thinks it's work upgrading to 2 x5690's.
Barefeats has a similar write up about this: https://barefeats.com/mac-mini-versus-pro-macs.html
Of course, they test AMD cards.
Of course, they test AMD cards.
I have been total move to my new Mac mini i7 here my personal test between Mac mini vs cMP dual CPU 12cores
My cMP upgraded from 8cores/16Threads x5677 to 12cores/24threads x5680 and using RX Vega64 XFX reference card (Blower fan)
So for the sake of newest hardware CPU, RAM, TB3 etc and of course better performance, I choose using Mac mini + eGPU Sapphire Nitro+ Vega64 (triple fans)
My cMP upgraded from 8cores/16Threads x5677 to 12cores/24threads x5680 and using RX Vega64 XFX reference card (Blower fan)
So for the sake of newest hardware CPU, RAM, TB3 etc and of course better performance, I choose using Mac mini + eGPU Sapphire Nitro+ Vega64 (triple fans)
me? if yes, then I have i7 with 16Gb RAM, thinking about upgrading to 32Gb but so far I have checked my system activity and there are no signs that I need more than 16Gb (this for my own need, others may differ), No lag, no slow down whatsoever for my workflow (and gaming too)
Yes, you. Thanks for the info.
I was actually considering getting a cMP but glad I didn’t. Instead I’m picking up an i5/8/256 tomorrow and will eventually upgrade RAM and get an eGPU.
The heaviest work it will be doing right now is photo editing on a 4K 10bit display, so it should be more than enough.
Any reason why you went with the Akito Node and not some other enclosure?
I was actually considering getting a cMP but glad I didn’t. Instead I’m picking up an i5/8/256 tomorrow and will eventually upgrade RAM and get an eGPU.
The heaviest work it will be doing right now is photo editing on a 4K 10bit display, so it should be more than enough.
Any reason why you went with the Akito Node and not some other enclosure?
well first of all I got this node very cheap lol 
, at my local online store here in Indonesia someone sell this around $100 (it used) and then I realized that node PSU doesn't enough to power up an RX VEGA64 (node PSU only has 400w) so I bought Enermax an SFX PSU that has 650watt Gold rated, this new PSU cost me $130. So Node and PSU I have to pay $230. I think it is very nice price.
it has been 2 weeks now since I bought the Mac mini and Akitio Node, the result is perfect for everything I need.
, at my local online store here in Indonesia someone sell this around $100 (it used) and then I realized that node PSU doesn't enough to power up an RX VEGA64 (node PSU only has 400w) so I bought Enermax an SFX PSU that has 650watt Gold rated, this new PSU cost me $130. So Node and PSU I have to pay $230. I think it is very nice price. it has been 2 weeks now since I bought the Mac mini and Akitio Node, the result is perfect for everything I need.
Why are you all quoting Cinebench scores, like we all are editing videos here? In my 15 years of using computers, I have to yet edit a single video.
CPU in that Mac Pro has absolutely horrible single core score. Therefore, it will be much slower in most of the day to day applications. Also, Mac Mini can have up to 64 GB of the 2666 MHz DDR4 RAM memory, while the best Mac Pro can do is DDR3 RAM with speed of 1333 MHz, max. That is huge difference. When it comes to GPU via Thunderbolt, yes, Mac Mini has about 10 percent performance decrease, but you are all forgetting that Mac Pro has PCIe 2.0, which is slower than PCIe 3.0, so the performance is not gonna differ much.
The only area where the Mac Pro can compete with the Mac Mini is multi core score, but even that is close call.
All around, Mac Mini is more powerful machine. Mac Pro is a budget option, whose time has almost passed...who knows if it is gonna even be supported in the next Mac OS release.
CPU in that Mac Pro has absolutely horrible single core score. Therefore, it will be much slower in most of the day to day applications. Also, Mac Mini can have up to 64 GB of the 2666 MHz DDR4 RAM memory, while the best Mac Pro can do is DDR3 RAM with speed of 1333 MHz, max. That is huge difference. When it comes to GPU via Thunderbolt, yes, Mac Mini has about 10 percent performance decrease, but you are all forgetting that Mac Pro has PCIe 2.0, which is slower than PCIe 3.0, so the performance is not gonna differ much.
The only area where the Mac Pro can compete with the Mac Mini is multi core score, but even that is close call.
All around, Mac Mini is more powerful machine. Mac Pro is a budget option, whose time has almost passed...who knows if it is gonna even be supported in the next Mac OS release.
Last edited:
I used a Mac Pro 5.1 for 8 years and the motherboard broke down just when the new Minis arrived. So i made the choice to switch for a Mini. Without the breakdown i would have continued working with the Mac Pro because they're so close (with an eGPU).
I'm gearing up to finally update my 2008 MacPro 2.8/8core with something this year. I work mostly in Photoshop dealing with photo retouching and collages (lots of layers) and have been doing research on what PS uses core-wise, video etc. My latest thought is a Mini could work with enough RAM (32) to make up for the video offload along with some Thunderbolt drives. The Macbench on my unit is 1854 and the i7/3.6 comes in at 5643 so I should see some difference overall! I really would like to see what the new MacPros might offer but I have this feeling the price point is going to be in the iMacPro sort of range even before adding drives etc.
I'm amazed how well this MacPro has aged.
I'm amazed how well this MacPro has aged.
I saw you’re using ProTools.
Of course, even if the performance isn’t much of an improvement (you should still see some improvement), you’ll also have an 8-year newer computer with modern ports and the latest OS. Faster RAM and way faster SSD. All within an incredibly small form factor that is much quieter than the 2010 Mac Pro’s.
There’s pros and cons to both options! But that’s my two cents. I LOVE my mini for ProTools work. I often use a 2010 Mac Pro at the studio and I am constantly fighting the sluggishness and issues with using older OS.
I recently did what you did. I think you will find that the mini is some 2.5 to 3 times faster than the old pro in most respects. PS doesn't use the GPU a lot, it is way faster (including Topaz, Nik, Exposure and other plugins).
The new mac pro will be insanely expensive.
That's good to hear. I use Exposure as well. I'm also looking forward to faster read/writes/opens/saves from hard drives.
Did you get the 64 with your unit or install yourself?