Soldered RAM? Don't care. Show me the benchmarks

ZipZilla

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 7, 2003
158
28
Can we get some benchmarks on these new Minis already? They were supposedly available yesterday. Doesn't some site want a lot of traffic?
 

ZipZilla

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 7, 2003
158
28
Wishful thinking, but your hopes will soon be dashed.
I expect the $499 entry level mini to suck. But I can't imagine the $699 mid-level Mini is going to be a horrendously slow machine. Until we have benchmarks, nobody knows. It's 2 less cores, but what apps utilize those extra cores?
 

fa8362

macrumors 65816
Jul 7, 2008
1,340
54
I expect the $499 entry level mini to suck. But I can't imagine the $699 mid-level Mini is going to be a horrendously slow machine. Until we have benchmarks, nobody knows. It's 2 less cores, but what apps utilize those extra cores?
Many apps I use do.
 

ZipZilla

macrumors regular
Original poster
Dec 7, 2003
158
28
Many apps I use do.
One thing is for sure: Apple views us as pro freeloaders and has fisher priced the mini. They've decided it's time for us to pay some more Apple tax.

----------

I think the extra cores were for people who live in northern regions. They would only work in the winter to heat up the house. I think they should have just used an single core Atom CPU.
LOL! Yes. Put a 1ghz Celeron in it!
 

justin216

macrumors 6502
Mar 31, 2004
376
99
Tampa, FL
The new 2014 i7 Mac Mini should benchmark for about the same as a MacBook Air with i7, which benchmarks for around what the 2012 i7 Quad Mac Mini did. So CPU should come out about the same, even with less cores. You'll see GPU gains over the 2012 Mini for sure, Iris is a decent performer.

All in all, it's a reasonable upgrade, just not the large leap it could have been. The lack of user accessibility/replacing RAM not withstanding, naturally, as that's a deal breaker in and of itself for some.
 

Cherish

macrumors member
Sep 27, 2014
92
3
The new 2014 i7 Mac Mini should benchmark for about the same as a MacBook Air with i7, which benchmarks for around what the 2012 i7 Quad Mac Mini did. So CPU should come out about the same, even with less cores. You'll see GPU gains over the 2012 Mini for sure, Iris is a decent performer.

All in all, it's a reasonable upgrade, just not the large leap it could have been. The lack of user accessibility/replacing RAM not withstanding, naturally, as that's a deal breaker in and of itself for some.
Isn't the new Mac mini the same as the current Macbook Pro Retina 13" i5?
 

justin216

macrumors 6502
Mar 31, 2004
376
99
Tampa, FL
Isn't the new Mac mini the same as the current Macbook Pro Retina 13" i5?
The 2014 Mac Mini is more like a screen-less MacBook Air, but with the option for 2 drives and Iris graphics on the higher models. The MacBook Pros use more powerful/higher TDP CPUs, as far as I'm aware.
 

Cherish

macrumors member
Sep 27, 2014
92
3
The 2014 Mac Mini is more like a screen-less MacBook Air, but with the option for 2 drives and Iris graphics on the higher models. The MacBook Pros use more powerful/higher TDP CPUs, as far as I'm aware.
I checked Geekbench and the 2012 Mac mini i5 uses 3210m which is the same as 2012 Macbook pro i5 and the scores are similar too.
 

iamthedudeman

macrumors 65816
Jul 7, 2007
1,192
82
The new 2014 i7 Mac Mini should benchmark for about the same as a MacBook Air with i7, which benchmarks for around what the 2012 i7 Quad Mac Mini did. So CPU should come out about the same, even with less cores. You'll see GPU gains over the 2012 Mini for sure, Iris is a decent performer.

All in all, it's a reasonable upgrade, just not the large leap it could have been. The lack of user accessibility/replacing RAM not withstanding, naturally, as that's a deal breaker in and of itself for some.
The 2012 quad mini has the same cpu's as the 2012 macbook pro retina. The current mac book air do not come close to the quad i7 in those machines.

This update cpu wise is a major step backward. Apple is counting on most people not noticing as the general public do not know a thing about cpus, dual or quad core etc.
 

markusbeutel

macrumors regular
Sep 26, 2014
143
14
I don't necessarily think so.
In comparison, they will. Dig around on the forum, people have posted processor comparisons, the new models win out by a little on single-core tasks, while the 2012 models completely dominate on multi-core.

Edit: Or just scroll up :p
 

waloshin

macrumors 68040
Oct 9, 2008
3,168
66
The 2012 quad mini has the same cpu's as the 2012 macbook pro retina. The current mac book air do not come close to the quad i7 in those machines.

This update cpu wise is a major step backward. Apple is counting on most people not noticing as the general public do not know a thing about cpus, dual or quad core etc.
That is true, 90% of Apples core market know nothing about specs and usually don't care.
 

Glassed Silver

macrumors 68020
Mar 10, 2007
2,098
2,539
Kassel, Germany
I expect the $499 entry level mini to suck. But I can't imagine the $699 mid-level Mini is going to be a horrendously slow machine. Until we have benchmarks, nobody knows. It's 2 less cores, but what apps utilize those extra cores?
At this point probably all to some extend.

Enter Grand Central Dispatch (damn, the name alone is amazing, it's pretty lovely tech, too)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch

Glassed Silver:mac
 

johngwheeler

macrumors 6502
Dec 30, 2010
392
43
I come from a land down-under...
The new 2014 i7 Mac Mini should benchmark for about the same as a MacBook Air with i7, which benchmarks for around what the 2012 i7 Quad Mac Mini did. So CPU should come out about the same, even with less cores. You'll see GPU gains over the 2012 Mini for sure, Iris is a decent performer.

All in all, it's a reasonable upgrade, just not the large leap it could have been. The lack of user accessibility/replacing RAM not withstanding, naturally, as that's a deal breaker in and of itself for some.
I don't think so. I have a 2011 quad-core i7 Mini (2.0GHz) and it's about 25% faster than my 2013 MBA i7. I think the 2012 quad-core Mini would be quite a bit faster.
 

opeter

macrumors 68000
Aug 5, 2007
1,564
485
Slovenia, EU
So, the best value is the middle Mac mini ...

Is it worth to upgrade the RAM from 8 to 16 GB if you do relatively heavy image editing and DTP?

Because the price difference between 8 -> 16 GB RAM is +200 €!
 

fa8362

macrumors 65816
Jul 7, 2008
1,340
54
So, the best value is the middle Mac mini ...

Is it worth to upgrade the RAM from 8 to 16 GB if you do relatively heavy image editing and DTP?

Because the price difference between 8 -> 16 GB RAM is +200 €!
If you need CPU power, the best value is the 2012 i7. You can add RAM in less than a few minutes.
 

voyager03

macrumors member
Feb 25, 2010
47
3
Somerset, UK
That is true, 90% of Apples core market know nothing about specs and usually don't care.
I think you are completely correct. The majority of the market Apple attract with the mini mostly will not care, or need, to add to the RAM the box they get has. They will just use it - and it will work fine for them.
 

opeter

macrumors 68000
Aug 5, 2007
1,564
485
Slovenia, EU
If you need CPU power, the best value is the 2012 i7. You can add RAM in less than a few minutes.
Thanks. The problem is, the GPU in the new minis is (much) better, than in the old ones. Or is it maybe better to wait until, I don't know ... next year, until Broadwell comes out and the Mac minis get a refresh with better intel GPU?