Will the 2014 entry-level have lower resale value than 2012?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Tough Guy, Oct 22, 2014.

  1. Tough Guy macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    #1
    I'm debating between the 2 entry-level models and the 2012 model seems like a no-brainer.

    Does the 2014 have any advantage at all for normal day-to-day use? Like... is literally anything better?

    I was thinking a newer model might have more resale value, but even there I think the 2012 has the edge.

    Apple really did **** the bed with this release.
     
  2. markusbeutel macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2014
    #2
    The new one might have a better new product smell?
     
  3. majkom macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #3
    better gpu
     
  4. Tough Guy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    #4
    For day-to-day tasks, will that make any difference? I really don't think so, even for light gaming.
     
  5. schopaia macrumors member

    schopaia

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    #5
    Why even bother?

    Much better gpu. Much better ssd performance. Better memory bandwidth. Extra thunderbolt port. Basically everything is improved except for the processor option on the high end. 2 minutes of research could have told you that.

    ----------

    New photos app (as day to day as it gets) leverages gpu extensively. 4000 to 5100 will certainly be noticable, and non-demanding games from the last generation will go from unplayable to playable (roughly 15 fps to 25 fps).
     
  6. Tough Guy thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2014
    #6
    Your first reply is way off. There is no SSD in the entry level model. And to say "basically everything has been improved" is simply laughable. Basically absolutely nothing was improved except for GPU, and that is a very slight improvement.

    Second reply is also off. The entry level does not have iris graphics (HD5100). And I HIGHLY, HIGHLY, HIGHLY doubt an OS X photo app would even come close to taxing the HD4000. If it does, Apple is in some serious trouble as far as software is concerned. It would have to be the most bloated app on the planet.
     
  7. majkom macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #7
    it does, even for light gaming... with hd5000 you can play starcraft2/diablo 3 on full hd with decent settings (well, d3 only campaign), not possible with hd4000
     
  8. Crosscreek, Oct 23, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014

    Crosscreek macrumors 68030

    Crosscreek

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2013
    Location:
    Margarittaville
    #8
    The 2012 will have a better resale value only because it can be taken apart and modified to suit the user.

    The 2011 with dedicated graphics still holds its value.

    The new one will devaluate just like the laptops.

    One other thing I want to add and recommend to all purchasing the new Mac Mini is to purchase Apple Care if you plan to hang on to your new Mini for over a year.

    It never really discussed on this site because the 2012 on back where user repairable. That is no longer the case and you basically have a sealed laptop with out the screen and keyboard. I think it's $99 now.
     
  9. philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #9
    2x thunderbolt is a big improvement. the new model has the ability to boot from a thunderbolt enclosure and the ssd in the external will run far faster then the 2012.

    My minis have been running with external ssd booters for years. via thunderbolt 1 cases
    Now if you want to sell the mini as an 1 piece unit the 2012 is better.

    the stock cpu in the new base mini is slower but it will ramp to 2.7

    the stock cpu in the 2012 ramps to 3.1.



    The 2014 hi end mini is the problem : no quad core.
     
  10. Oracle1729 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2009
    #10
    When someone tries to buy it used in a couple of years, they'll have a choice of the 2012 where the memory is cheaply upgradable to 16 gig, and there are 2 SATA ports or the 2014 where the memory is fixed (the $500 model has 4 gig), and there is only 1 SATA port.

    The only advantage the 2014 will have is slightly better integrated graphics. And by 2016, will HD 4000 vs HD 5000 graphics really matter compared to 4 vs 16 gig of ram and an extra internal drive?

    Your post full of lies has already been well refuted, but I just want to add, does anyone actually use Thunderbolt except as a hybrid plug for display port? I mean I never have. I can get a nice fast USB 3 device that's compatible with everything, or pay a lot more to get a thunderbolt version that's less compatible. I think compared to thunderbolt, firewire was hugely mainstream and inexpensive.

    ----------

    Never actually seen a thunderbolt device outside of an Apple store unless you count displays. The old version can boot from USB 3 or Thunderbolt devices both of which are more than enough to saturate the fasted SSDs on the market.

    Not to mention that the old model lets you install 2 internal drives, one or both can be SSD, and that's much more sleek than the same size computer tied to external drive boxes.
     
  11. majkom macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    #11
    but external TB SSD disk costs you more than pimping base model to fussion drive, am I right?:)
     
  12. philipma1957, Oct 23, 2014
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014

    philipma1957 macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    Location:
    Howell, New Jersey
    #12
    no because i had the external ssd/t-bolt gear since 2011.

    I have come to the conclusion that a really good thunderbolt external is more durable the the mac it attaches to!

    I have 2 of these

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/bnh/controller/home?O=&sku=824998&Q=&is=REG&A=details

    1 of these

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...s_promise_pegasus2_r_6_bay_6x3tb_t_bolt2.html

    1 of these

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/910583-REG/lacie_9000360_2big_6tb_thunderbolt_raid.html




    1 of these

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produ...gn_diskmdock4_tb2_blackmagic_multidock_2.html



    the one above is new and is 2x the speed of the others as it is thunderbolt 2.

    all of the above are bootable.

    what ends up happening is they are more important then the pc.

    Stupid yeah but true.
     
  13. dighn macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2011
    #13
    The new base model actually has a slower CPU right? Combined with the low upgrade potential it's gonna be obsolete real fast. The mid model is the real alternative to the 2012 base IMO and should hold its value much better.
     
  14. Ridley macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    #14
    For me the benefit of the 2014 mini and extra thunderbolt ports is the ability to drive 3 displays. I regularly use three and I can finally retire my triplehead2go (which the computer recognizes as 1 massive screen so window management isn't quite as good).

    As you stated, thunderbolt is display port + PCI express. My 06 MBP had a PCI express slot and I've used it to attach an external GPU and add an esata port (obviously not both at the same time). Adding an external GPU to thunderbolt still requires going to PCI express, then PCI express to thunderbolt. So really it was a step backwards. But it has a cool name and specs and potential so people think they need it. But really no one (except me?) used PCI express so why would thunderbolt be much different?

    Lastly though you are under estimating the benefits of going from an HD4000 to Iris 5100. That is huge. And you might say "well few programs take advantage of the GPU" and I think the counter argument is few programs take full advantage of a quad core processor. And for single threaded tasks the 2014 model is faster.

    In a nutshell the 2014 mac mini is better IF:
    • You want to play games or have some use case for a GPU
    • You want to use wireless AC (for network storage or something)
    • You want to use three monitors.

    Personally I hit all three of those criteria and my 2014 mac mini arrives on Monday: 2.6 GHz, Iris 5100, 16 gig ram, 1 TB fusion drive
     
  15. BJonson macrumors 6502a

    BJonson

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2010
    #15
    I saw a 2012 mac mini quad 2.3ghz upgraded with ssd and 12gb ram for $850 pop up on craigslist a few days before the announcement. I emailed him and he said after the announcement that he was going to keep it. Most mac minis on craigslist are base models. Expect every 2014 mac mini to have the base ram on the resale market. Hardly anyone ever pays apple to upgrade them so with that being the case the 2012s will always be worth more since its an easy upgrade.
     
  16. dogslobber macrumors 68020

    dogslobber

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Location:
    Apple Campus, Cupertino CA
    #16
    Please post back and tell us how the 3x monitors performs. I attached my gefen USB2DVI with Yosemite drivers to my new Mini 2012 I picked up Monday. Performs well so I wonder why you'd retire the triplehead2go given you could then have four LCDs!
     
  17. cinealta macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    #17
    Are you sure the new Mac Mini can drive 3 separate monitors? Even though it has 2 TB ports, AFAIK they're on the same buss. Wouldn't that mean that it can only drive 2 monitors across all 3 ports (2 TB & 1 HDMI)?
     
  18. rainydays macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    #18
    Since the 2012 i7 QC ship sailed for me. I am torned as to which of the base models to choose. 2012 2,5GHz i5 or 2014 1,5GHz i5.

    According to the benchmarks the CPUs will perform pretty much the same. Does that translate to the real world though? I'm not updated as to how Ivy and Haswell differs but I'm sure there has to be some difference if two CPUs perform the same at vastly different clock speeds.

    I'm guessing the Haswell will run a lot cooler since it's only 15W compared to 35W? That's certainly a plus.

    If I up both to 8GB RAM they will cost me about the same. If I up them to 16GB the 2014 model will cost me almost $200 more.

    So for me it would be

    Pro 2012
    - Cheaper 8GB+ RAM
    - Ability to add an extra HDD
    - Ability to transfer/sell the RAM

    Pro 2014
    - Better GPU
    - Two TB ports
    - In theory cooler CPU = less fan noise

    Since I will mainly be doing photo editing and music production I guess 16GB RAM will have the advantage over the better GPU.
    Am I missing something else?
     
  19. tom vilsack macrumors 68000

    tom vilsack

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2010
    Location:
    ladner cdn
    #19
    One other thing to consider is the way apple will stop a computer from updating to a new version of OSX due to (mainly older gpu)... There is a great chance that somewhere down the line the 2012 mini won't run some future version of OSX whereas the 2014 will!

    Think of this in terms of something like a older macbook early 2006 to late 2008...they can no longer run osx past lion....that makes there value take a major hit!
     
  20. cinealta macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2012
    #20
    One version difference (2012 or 2014) shouldn't make much of a difference. My 2009 MM is running Yosemite just fine. Maybe some new features (eg Continuity or Hand Off) may not work because of hardware limitations (no BT 4.0 etc) but Apple has been pretty good about encouraging owners of old hardware to upgrade to the latest OSX.
     
  21. Ridley macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2011
    #21
    Intel's site says that the chip supports three monitors, so I'm hoping/betting on it. I'll start a thread when I confirm.

    http://ark.intel.com/products/83508/Intel-Core-i5-4278U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_10-GHz

    "# of Displays Supported ‡ 3"
     
  22. BeatCrazy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    #22
    Ya, but you forgot the "‡", which states "This feature may not be available on all computing systems." And Apple specifically says "Support for up to two displays at 2560 by 1600 pixels", so don't get your hopes up! :)
     

Share This Page