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.
$450 NUC Mini outperforms 2018 i3 Mini
- Thread starter Tom80112
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I agree that it may not be an outside use case but not because people willingly choose the Mini for this work but rather a lack of options from Apple for this type of work.
LumaForge on the Mac mini:
LumaForge on its Jellyfish shared storage for video editing, US$12,000 for 32TB and $20,000 for 80TB (reference to the Mac mini in the first 30 seconds):
Last edited:
Snazzy Labs, such an irritation on Youtube...
If he installed macOS on it and had everything working correctly then it may have been interesting, but he didn't and it won't allow everything to work correctly. We know this. We all (well mostly it seems) know that beating the Mac Mini on raw power is easily doable, but then, that is not what is top of everyone's needs.
If he installed macOS on it and had everything working correctly then it may have been interesting, but he didn't and it won't allow everything to work correctly. We know this. We all (well mostly it seems) know that beating the Mac Mini on raw power is easily doable, but then, that is not what is top of everyone's needs.
Many people are using the Mini for purposes which would be better suited to other configurations. Unfortunately Apple doesn't provide any options for many so they're adapting their requirements to the Mini instead of buying the most appropriate solution for their needs.
If you knew anything about the film/video business, you would know what LumaForge is and be rather less dismissive.
That's two videos from film professionals. Would you like to see more, realising, of course, that you were in too big a hurry to make a smart aleck response to have watched either of the two that I've already linked?
thanks man, I do a bit of video editing and a lot of other related stuff in the industry...design/apps/web/video...as a well-paid pro. Thanks again. I am going to tell all my pro video editor friends to get a Mac Mini for their video editing needs, especially with that powerful GPU the mini comes with, lol
Indeed, but it comes back around to the same point, it's still not top of the list in terms of needs as you are limited to what you can get, so adapt to it or use Windows, Linux or go down to the Hackintosh route.
I am amazed at the number of people who do just this and are willing to make excuses for doing so.
In other words, you are not a video editor. Do you know what an eGPU is?
Do you know what Blackmagic Design is and why they are about to release their eGPU Pro? Have you ever heard of DaVinci Resolve?
of course I know what that extra, external thing is that cost more money to attempt to make the Mini a legit computer. How old are you?
davinci resolve
premier pro
after effects
use them all....
So you don't know why Blackmagic Design is releasing its new eGPU Pro, do you. Indeed, you don't even know what Blackmagic Design is, do you.
Where do you get the idea that Blackmagic's new eGPU is just for the Mac mini, let alone an attempt to legitimise it?
There are some that do make excuses although I suspect that many simply 'manage' to do what they need and are either happy with that or resigned to it. It way exceeds my needs as a web developer so I have no need for excuses. Those who I know bar one who does video editing are more than happy with it.
I accept though that is not enough from a general usability point in relation to mass appeal which it should have.
The Mini is a fine computer (I own two 2012 models) and the 2018 model is a great upgrade. But there are too many people who are shoehorning it into their workflow and extolling its virtues for jobs it's not the best fit for. They're settling for it because Apple doesn't offer an alternative for them.
Take the four TB3 ports. I routinely hear how great it is the Mini has four of these ports. Meanwhile the advocates ignore the need for the higher number of them is directly related to the lack of internal expansion (which would lessen the need for a higher number of them). Do I miss having TB3 ports on my Mini? No, because I can easily upgrade the internal storage. Do I miss having them on my Z440 system? Not at all, I can change / add storage per my requirements. Or I can change / add GPUs per my requirements. All done internally and without need for external solutions. The higher number of TB3 ports is a solution to an artificial "problem" Apple created.
After using a Hackintosh for a couple years, and having to fight issues like USB3 support, I finally decided to get a real mac again for my "desktop" use case. I repurposed my desktop to Windows, so didn't want to add significant desk usage I went with the Mini rather than an iMac. (Though, if the Mini had underdelivered, I would have gone with about a 21" Retina iMac).
The other way, if I wanted to buy a true Windows box for use cases where virtualization didn't suffice, the NUC route would likely have been my decision. Smaller, etc.
You can go TOO small. I have a Intel Compute stick hanging behind my TV that is dedicated to 2 usages. Interfacing with my weather station (and uploading data), and capturing photos taken by an IP camera. Place in dropbox, so it becomes visible on my phone. Unfortunately, isn't as stable as I would like, and can require remote reboots.
The other disadvantage of a Hackintosh is if you have strange crashes/reboots, it is too easy for me to blame third party drivers. I fought random reboots (after 3 hours or 3 weeks, which makes it hard to troubleshoot). Since on occasion the LAN would stop working, I blamed that at times. It turned out to be the power supply I bought when I built it. I finally started swapping parts from cheaper to more expensive..
The other way, if I wanted to buy a true Windows box for use cases where virtualization didn't suffice, the NUC route would likely have been my decision. Smaller, etc.
You can go TOO small. I have a Intel Compute stick hanging behind my TV that is dedicated to 2 usages. Interfacing with my weather station (and uploading data), and capturing photos taken by an IP camera. Place in dropbox, so it becomes visible on my phone. Unfortunately, isn't as stable as I would like, and can require remote reboots.
The other disadvantage of a Hackintosh is if you have strange crashes/reboots, it is too easy for me to blame third party drivers. I fought random reboots (after 3 hours or 3 weeks, which makes it hard to troubleshoot). Since on occasion the LAN would stop working, I blamed that at times. It turned out to be the power supply I bought when I built it. I finally started swapping parts from cheaper to more expensive..
TB3 isn't a solution to a problem Apple created. It's an option to expand an already great chassis. The base and upgraded models available from Apple are already more than enough for most users. However, if someone wants even more out of this computer, it has expansive ports to do so. I mean, to get this kind of I/O, you have to look at the iMac Pro... costing more than 6x the price.
Most people looking at a Mac mini are already not considering a PC as an option.
Sure the current Mini has no internal options for additional hard drives (m.2 or otherwise), but in that small form factor (which Apple was not going to change), how many can you fit? 1? Maybe 2? With TB3, you can add 8 or more via external boxes. Will a RX 580 fit in this chassis? Doesn't matter, cause now you can expand to a Vega 64 using an eGPU.
Some may argue that the Mini form factor should've been expanded to fit all this... but I believe that's what Apple has envisioned for the upcoming Mac Pro. All in all, most users won't need all 4 TB3 ports for expandability, but for those who wants the best CPU performance out of a current Apple product (and doesn't want to pay $5000+ for an iMac Pro), the Mac mini + it's TB3 expandability makes sense.
Most people looking at a Mac mini are already not considering a PC as an option.
Sure the current Mini has no internal options for additional hard drives (m.2 or otherwise), but in that small form factor (which Apple was not going to change), how many can you fit? 1? Maybe 2? With TB3, you can add 8 or more via external boxes. Will a RX 580 fit in this chassis? Doesn't matter, cause now you can expand to a Vega 64 using an eGPU.
Some may argue that the Mini form factor should've been expanded to fit all this... but I believe that's what Apple has envisioned for the upcoming Mac Pro. All in all, most users won't need all 4 TB3 ports for expandability, but for those who wants the best CPU performance out of a current Apple product (and doesn't want to pay $5000+ for an iMac Pro), the Mac mini + it's TB3 expandability makes sense.
There are participants in this forum who want to talk about where the 2018 Mac mini works and where it doesn't, and there are participants who don't own one and are not about to own one, but spend a good deal of time sharing their criticisms, sometimes about the mini, frequently about Apple, and rather often implicitly about the people who have purchased one.
A few days ago, a 2018 mini owner asked one of the more active posters in the latter category flat out whether he even owns one. Turns out he doesn't, but he is nevertheless on here day after day dispensing advice and criticism to, and of, people who do.
For whatever reason, these people apparently don't have better ways to spend their time.
A few days ago, a 2018 mini owner asked one of the more active posters in the latter category flat out whether he even owns one. Turns out he doesn't, but he is nevertheless on here day after day dispensing advice and criticism to, and of, people who do.
For whatever reason, these people apparently don't have better ways to spend their time.
Last edited:
Hmm let’s see I also own a 2012 Mac Pro with a Titan Xp and a custom 20 core Linux box with dual Titan Xp. I am not expecting the MacMini to compete with these. Though is does beat the Mac Pro on h264/h265 and single core tasks. But the MacMini is relatively cheap and Ican put it on my assistants desk and have them work for 8 hours day/5 days a week and make money on it.
A GPU that requires an enclosure that costs a couple/few hundred dollars and whose purpose is to make up for a poorly designed computer. A "mini" is not "mini" when you have to attach external hard drives, a GPU, etc (plus you get the bonus of having to spend twice as much as a PC).
I can get behind using an eGPU with a laptop, so you can have a decent GPU when you're at your desk, but having to use one with a desktop machine is completely insane and idiotic.
Last edited:
My issue isn't with the Mini itself but rather Apple's decision not to make something where expansion / upgrades can be done internally. The two most frequent suggested expansion / upgrades for the Mini are:
- Disk space
- GPU
These two decisions are Apple's doing, there are no technical constraints other than Apple business decisions. Therefore when someone says "There are any number of PC based NUCs" the response from Mini advocates is "But they don't have four TB3 ports". My response to that is that they don't need four TB3 ports because there are offerings (though they may not be SFF) which permit the internal expansion / upgrade of the components. Thus my position Apple has created the "problem".
Perhaps not. However this does not negate what I've written.
As mentioned above my issue with the Mini itself is the inability to upgrade / replace the internal storage. I have no issues with a single internal SSD. As for the GPU if I needed the capability of a higher end GPU I wouldn't buy a SFF computer as, IMO, it's not the right tool for the job. The fact the Mini can be expanded externally is nice but, as another thread has demonstrated, the same GPU installed internally outperformed (in several tests) the same card used in a Mini eGPU configuration. And this when used in a computer with 10 year old technology. The eGPU solution should be a fallback and not the primary way to obtain good GPU performance within the Mac product line.
I wouldn't be one of those some. I think the Mini is great as it is (feature wise). I have two 2012 models which I bought for the SFF size. I didn't connect external storage to them. I don't have external GPUs attached to them. Why? Because the purpose for which I purchased them doesn't require such expansion. However if I require more disk space it's easy to swap out the existing drives for a larger one. If I want more performance I can swap out the internal drive for an SSD variant. If I need more GPU power then they're not the right tool for the job. Something which permits internal expansion is. Unfortunately that eliminates the Macintosh from consideration.
Last edited:
I’m not making excuses and bought one. I like it. Over priced by $200-$500 but was willing to spend it on a unix based platform that does what I need and works with a 4k monitor I already had. It also works with cheap 10tb external drives that were on sale for $180 each. The mini happened to solve 3 of my problems at the same time: getting off windows/ms office, dealing with an aging 7 year old pc and old drives that need to be replaced, and needing to use filmaker pro and basic video editing without constantly switching between my pc and hubby’s mac (this is all his fault, my going to mac). It just happens to fit my needs. After a couple weeks I’ve already learned lots about the macOS, written my first shell script to rename files, put in all sorts of keyboard remaps for ctr-c/ctr-v and shft-prntmand customizations to make my mac more pc-like (like showing full file names and directory sizes). I think the mini was just the vehicle for me as it was considerably cheaper than an imac that is getting dated and has a crappy LG lcd built in. We’re done with LG.
I agree that I wish Apple would release a machine like the mini that was able to support a GPU inside the enclosure. Having said that, I do not think the eGPU solution for a mini is "insane and idiotic." For one, it offers significantly more flexibility down the line. If Apple were to include a GPU in the mini, it would surely be soldered. The eGPU allows the option of swapping cards. Even if it were a slotted GPU internally in the mini, you could run into power supply issues down the line when trying to upgrade. An eGPU takes care of that.
Is it ideal? No. However, knowing that Apple is not going to release a mid-tower with a replaceable GPU, I think the eGPU is the next best thing, and not a terrible tradeoff. It allows me to choose real desktop cards instead of Apple's gimped cards they usually use, and gives me flexibility to decide when and if I want a GPU at all, and then when I would like to upgrade it.
Love the eGPU approach, it would certainly be nice to have the option of a dGPU in the Mini.
Assume the option of a dGPU in the mini is the same as the MBP, so a Vega 20 with 4GB ram is $350 plus tax.
An eGPU is more than double but then it has so many options. With me for example, I use both the Mini and a PC. My eGPU means I can switch it between either machine, so in actual fact, I am saving money whilst being able to control what GPU I have when I want it.
Assume the option of a dGPU in the mini is the same as the MBP, so a Vega 20 with 4GB ram is $350 plus tax.
An eGPU is more than double but then it has so many options. With me for example, I use both the Mini and a PC. My eGPU means I can switch it between either machine, so in actual fact, I am saving money whilst being able to control what GPU I have when I want it.
I am not saying everyone who buys a Mini is making excuses. In fact I will go so far as to say the majority are not doing so.
As for it solving your problems all three sound like the same "problem": You did not want to use a Windows PC any longer. That appears to be more of a preference than a problem which needs resolution. I do find it odd that you're wanting to move away from Windows but are customizing the Mac to be more Windows like.