Why more?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by Cabbit, Apr 18, 2007.

  1. Cabbit macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #1
    What is the need for more than a mini core duo? i ask this because i have adobe creative suite design premium CS3, aperture and some games. All of them run perfectly, i use photoshop for painting and drawing so it usually is waiting on me not the other way around, with the mini you can put on a 23 inch ACD at a much lower cost than than a mac pro or a 24-inch imac. The mini is actually really really fast and bests the powermacs of yesteryear with ease. Its let down by the GMA and hard-drive options but i find the GMA manages Age of empires 3, sims 2, rollercoaster tycoon 3 just fine. And i plan to replace the hard drive with the new 200GB 7200 Samson drive for laptops witch is huge for my needs, and very fast i have heard 2.5 inch drives best 3.5 inch drives because of the platter density and less head movement. I have 1.25 GB ram witch i may upgrade to 3GB in the neer future.

    So why do i need a macpro, when the next mini is out i will have a faster GPU and a lot more space for ram, the new chipset is ment to handle 8 GB so 2x 4GB sodimms would be great. And i would just transfer my hard-drive into the new machine unless bigger and better comes i have seen dell selling a Samson 250 GB but its only 5400 rpm i would rather 7200 rpm if only loosing 50GB.

    To all that say the mini is bla bla, well i say its very fast and capable a 1.66 GHz core duo is not that different to a 2.16 Core 2 Duo, the difference is seconds and not a lot of them and in most tasks you will never know, the GMA 950 and ATi X1600 are both the lowest of the low in terms of performance. Ram is the same across the board, hard drives can be replaced, and the mac mini is silent and takes up less power than a powered down mac pro, thats a powered down mac pro verses a load mac mini.

    Why do you need more?
     
  2. emptyCup macrumors 65816

    emptyCup

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    #2
    If you use your computer professionally then time is money. For many applications a Pro saves a great deal of time over a mini. It is also more expandable and configurable which means that it will more ably keep up with future advances. Most people don't need Mac Pros which is why most people buy lesser machines. I'm glad the mini suits your needs.
     
  3. LeviG macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Location:
    Norfolk, UK
    #3

    Any gpu put in a mac mini is going to be slower than one in a mac pro, graphics play a huge part to some forms of design.

    There is a noticeable difference between 2 and 4/8 cores when used with the right programs.

    Have you seen the cost of 2GB modules recently, 4GB modules (not even available as far as I know) would take the price of the mini into mac pro price ranges.

    A mac mini takes less power than a powered down mac pro - where did you get that because that is so wrong.
     
  4. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #4
    Mac Pro in sleep takes 7 Watt, and the mac mini at load takes about 22 Watt witch is 13 Watt diffrence.
     
  5. mags631 Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    #5
    What's your point? :)

    More is more.
     
  6. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #6
    1 mac mini = 400 pounds
    4 mac minis = 1600 pounds
    1 macpro = 1700 pounds
    4 mac pro's = 5200 pounds

    For 4 Years of mini upgrades you pay less than one mac pro, so the quad 2.66 Macpro this year will be compeating with the 2.33 quad core mac mini with a new bus and faster GPU, then again a year later, and a year after than. And in the time you have 3 extra computers to make into a cluster.
     
  7. mags631 Guest

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    #7
    Sorry, I was being flippant and trying to tell you that your embedded HTML didn't come through.

    To do a fair comparison, I think it's reasonable to assume that you would sell the older computer when it was replaced. So for example, I recently sold a 2 year-old PowerMac G5 that I bought for ~$3000 for $1660. That means it cost me ~$1400 to use the computer for 2 years, or $700/year.

    I haven't done the math for Mini versus Pro, but I think you should consider resell value in your equation.
     
  8. nickel macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    #8
    The word "you" is very broad on this forum. You'll find designers (print, web, 3D, etc.), programmers, casual users, ipod users, students, businesses and plenty more.

    Now, the company you purchase your mac mini off make computers that are suited to not only your needs but the needs but the needs of all of the above mentioned. For that reason they have developed a line of computers to suit. Not only are they keeping most of these users happy, they are making money off it too.

    There are obviously plenty of people, other than yourself, who need more power than the mini.

    Also where I'm from, Australia for your information, if you purchase computers under the business you can claim depreciation over a time period and be tax exempted from the purchase value of the computer. So you can get your work done faster and not worry as much about the cost of the computer.
     
  9. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #9
    What im trying to work out, is were is the benifit for a faster computer with the programs i use, photoshop, illistrato, dreamweaver, flash, aperture, and a little final cut express and isquint. My mac mini is usualy waiting for me not the other way arround, how would a super fast mac pro do any better than than and the imac would be 1:1 to my mini anyway.
     
  10. LeviG macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Location:
    Norfolk, UK
    #10
    last time I checked that means a mac mini is using more and the 22 is a lower measure, they use more a quick google found this which shows it uses over 30watts in some circumstances.


    youre making the assumption that apple is going to upgrade the cpu's with each new version, it hasn't happened yet with the mac mini while all the other models use c2d it is still using core duo.
     
  11. nickel macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2006
    #11
    May I ask how proficient you are in the software and what size files you use? My equipment consists of a Canon 5D (12.8 Megapixels) using RAW files, a few small changes cost a few extra seconds and make me frustrated, I've been in the industry for a few years now and images of those sizes slow down my little imac's machine but run okay on my Mac Pro.

    A few other things are worth a mention too, I use Aperture with the camera and what would only take an extra maybe 30 seconds per image makes a huge difference when working with a few hundred RAW files.

    Look, if it saves me three hours of time working on a project, that'll mean I get paid for the same amount of work in less time and I can move on to other projects quickly.

    Also, I use a 30" screen. I never liked dual screening.
     
  12. rogersmj macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #12
    Here's a huge reason I didn't get a Mini: I need more than one monitor. Sadly, with the iMac, I am limited to two, but that's still better than the mini. One day, ideally, I will have a Mac Pro with 2 or 3 24" or 30" screens.
     
  13. mmcgann11 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Location:
    West Chester, PA
    #13
    Isn't the Mini supposed to be a powered -down, inexpensive computer?

    I work on RAW files, too, on my G5 2.0 Dual with 3GB of RAM and it seems to work just fine, IMO. I do page layout and design in InDesign, etc and Web design and so on.

    I don't expect to be able to do the same things on my PowerBook G4 1.5, although, it too works fine in a pinch for most of what I do.

    I expect to buy a Mini shortly, not for work, though. I plan to integrate into my home theater system so I can watch baseball, among other things on my 62-inch Mitsubishi.

    Given enough RAM, the Mini is a very compentant computer — very. Would I like to see it upgraded to Core 2 Duo? Sure. Would I like it to have better graphics handling? Sure.

    I like to future-proof my computers as long as possible — and expect my working machines to last four years before replacement (I'm mid-way through that and haven't felt the need to do my usual RAM upgrade at midterm) a strategy that has worked pretty well back to the System 6 days. Because of it's price, I can live with replacing the Mini every two years — so it doesn't need to be as future proof (although I'm betting it will last me longer than that in the roles I have envisioned).

    If we were talking about cars, it would be like complaining that the automotive Mini isn't fast enough to race at LeMans. It's a fun, competant car for normal, even enthusiast users. It's not a professional tool.
     
  14. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #14
    i work with 8MP raw files and do some drawing and animation, largest drawing i work on is 3000 x 3000px. I have dreamweaver CS3 but only really use it because it was part of the package. And encode videos files to .h264 in isquint often at the same time. To me its more important to have a big screen and lower power usage than to have a lot of CPU's and nothing to do with them, what makes me wonder is i see people recommend a Powermac over a mini and imac when the mini is often faster if it lacks expansion it dosnt really matter, If its not for video work then 3GB of ram and a dual core processor is plenty fast, a couple years ago i used to want the fastest of everything, i also used to use pirated software now i see more value in a computer that performs 80-90% as good as something 5x the price, looks cool, is easy to transport and cheep to run, i plan on building a self sefitent home, i could run a mini and a 30 inch ACD on solar panels and wind power but i would not be able to supply the 1KW the mac pro would require. And thats the main point Performance per Watt the mini rocks, 10 Mini's would be cheeper to run than one mac pro, 30 Watt max per mini vs 380 Watt idle for one macpro.
     
  15. rogersmj macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #15
    Not even your fancy solar panels and wind power in your self-sufficient home could get a 30 inch screen to work on a mini. The mini doesn't have dual-link DVI.
     
  16. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #16
    So its a given that no future mac mini revision will ever beable to run a 30 inch ACD, stay in your bubble mate.
     
  17. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #17
    A 2000 sq metres house is not a lot better than a 500 sq metres apartment too! The house only has half a dozen bedrooms more. Plus I need to spend more time and effort getting the empty bedrooms clean! Wow, I wonder what kind of moron would actually spend money to buy such a big house. Truly morons, being slaves to a small stone structure :rolleyes:

    It depends on your needs.

    Try running Aperture on your Mini and come back again.. oh no, most of us don't appreciate spending hours to edit a single photo, which will take that long when your Mini is busy trying to render your recently added collection of 10,000 photos snapped on the Alps or somewhere in Tibet...

    Comparing a Mac Pro with a Mac Mini is just....

    I have nothing to say. How is the comparison even valid? A multi core processor does not a computer make, and the only thing the Mini has going for it is the dual core processor. Previously it was even happily on a Core Solo!
     
  18. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #18
    I suppose in 100 years a budget computer like the Mac Mini will have a GPU powerful enough to drive dual link DVI.

    Very insightful comment indeed. Sure there will be a mini in the future that is able to drive a 30" ACD, but why wait potentially a million years for that? Before a Mini is capable of doing just that I am sure we'd have constructed the very first space elevator and proceed to build what'd be the first equivalent of a Battlestar...

    Given how stingy Apple is with updates.

    Keep waiting :D

    Seriously. The rest of us will happily just burn that 1-2 months of salary and get on with our lives.

    Your posts smells seriously trollish to me, what's next? "Why do people need religion?", "Nobody needs to make more than $150,000 a year!"

    They are all as ridiculous as this thread.
     
  19. Cabbit thread starter macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #19
    I use aperture and it runs great, And about a 30 inch ACD well there are some Dual link GMA950 IGP's out there its not so out there especially with the GMA X3000 so close. Some people have a lot ageist the mini for no valid reason, its a Imac without a screen and dedicated video ram. And how is one a troll if there just talking about a computer and how it compares, dare i say anything ageist the likes of you, you make it personal, i dont even read what names that are posting, no one has made a valid argument for the original question other than because the pro is faster because its faster, A core duo 1.66 or 1.83 for the higher end mini will be on par with a imac in all tasks but gaming, and the imac holds its own ageist the pro except for some video tasks but at much lower power requirements.

    And to the other comment i dont talk about religion on a tech forum, and the rest is just random. Keep things on topic.
     
  20. wildthing1994 macrumors member

    wildthing1994

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    #20
    Needs and Wants

    I drive a VW golf, I use it to drive it back and forth to school, and thats about it. My friend drives a mazda millinium, he has that for show. My other friend has a minivan you drive his 4 kids around. Another friend has a truck he drives to work and goes fishing with it. Everyone has diff needs, wants and a need to show others what they have. I'm getting a new mbp, it'll suit my needs, as I'm an engineering student. Where as other in my school have white mb, but they're aren't in engineering, they're are in other programs.
     
  21. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #21
    Define "great". I ran aperture on my Macbook Pro and it leaves heaps to be desired.

    The GMA CX3000 is not some magic solution. Reviews have found that at best it gives decent gaming performance at 800 x 600, up from 640 x 480 compared to the original IIG solution. It doesn't even support the instructions needed for DirectX 10. Big whoop. It is better, yeah... but it is nothing to lose sleep over.

    Some people have a lot against serial murderers and rapists for no reason. They are pretty much human, and no worse than even the best of us, except for a minor brain disorder that makes them feel no empathy.

    What's wrong with that last statement? Well if you do not see the value of empathy you'd agree that psychopaths are truly marginalised in society. On the other hand if you feel sorry for their victims and the value of human life, well you'd hope they rot in prison and burn in hell.

    Different priorities and perspectives. Tom-at-toe, Toe-mah-toe.

    I think the Mac Mini is a lot worse in some respects as compared to the every-day-off-the-shelf PeeCee.


    What are you trying to say?

    Take some english lessons, then come back again.

    "no one has made a valid argument for the original question other than because the pro is faster because its faster"

    The Pro is faster. Yeah....... Erm..... what's your point? That is an indisputable fact which you are arguing against, and you are trying to convince us that you are not trolling?

    A BMW is on par with a freight train except with it comes to moving 400 tons of cargo.

    Stop trying to say "something" is on par with "something else" just because of some "exceptions" that do not matter to you. A Core Duo 1.66 is on par with an iMac? Hahaha... keep believing that. I owned a 1.83 Mini and a 2.33 C2D Macbook Pro and the Macbook Pro is *much* faster in everything. Faster dashboard, faster expose, faster application launches, you name it, it is faster, bar none.

    The iMac I believe, with its desktop hard drive and better ventilation (hence lesser thermal throttling) will be even faster.

    "The Mac Mini is equivalent to the Mac Pro, except for the fact that the Mac Pro is faster, more expandable, and more future proof!" This sounds like exactly the point you are trying to drive. Even if your point is somehow true so what?

    We enjoy burning money for no gains (in your book) whatsoever. Live with it.

    I am not an environmentalist.

    Hence your statement can be reworded as "and the imac holds its own ageist the pro except for some video tasks", or better yet "and the imac loses to the Mac Pro for some video tasks", which subsequently leads to "iMac sucks in comparison to Mac Pro".

    Happy?

    You said it yourself, and just like you who conveniently choose to ignore the specific needs of others, I too choose to ignore aspects of a product that are important to you. In this case I choose power consumption.

    What topic?

    Your whole rant can be summed up as "Some humans have other needs than me".

    So what?
     
  22. wildthing1994 macrumors member

    wildthing1994

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    #22
    Iwoot you pick a lot of fights, bad day or something:mad: . Need a backrub maybe babyjenn would give you one if you're nicer. ;)
     
  23. rogersmj macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #23
    I say we stop feeding the trolls. This is just another case of someone finding what's right for them (which is great), but then thinking that everyone else's needs and expectations should be just like theirs. This seems to happen every few weeks around here, and they just want attention/emotional reinforcement that what they choose is always the best.

    And babyjen, as for your extremely dickish comment in reply to my last post about the mini not working with a 30" ACD...you obviously understand nothing about marketing and product positioning. So I'll stay in my bubble, and you can stay an ignorant troll, it's all good. Enjoy your mini, just stop trying to make everyone else be just like you. You know who does that? Really insecure people.
     
  24. iW00t macrumors 68040

    iW00t

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2006
    Location:
    Defenders of Apple Guild
    #24
    For all we know babyjenn might be a babyjohn, or not even a baby to start with!
     
  25. SkyBell macrumors 604

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #25
    While I agree in part with the OP (The Mini can do a lot more then people give it credit for; it's not just a starter computer. It IS your headless iMac; hands down; GMA 950? One of the best graphics card I've ever seen; too many people underestimate the Mini.) I do think she's gone a little overboard. 8 gigs of RAM in a Mini? I don't think so, 2.66 GHz? Maybe in 3-5 years. MAYBE.

    I believe you are right, most people don't need more then a 1.83 Mini, plus 1 GB of RAM; but I think your expectations are a little high.
     

Share This Page