Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

A 2011 base mac mini with 16gb of ram would be as fast as the upcoming 2012 mini?

C

Che Castro

macrumors 603
Original poster
May 21, 2009
6,013
795
I can't wait any longer :(

Im wondering if the base model mac mini from last year , if i put 16gb of ram would that be as good/fast as the upcoming rumored mac mini base model with probably 4gb of ram & ivy bridge or whatever is called ?

Im no computer expert so go easy on me , this will be my first mac

I don't play games but i do watch & convert 1080p movies, plus some net surfing


Also how fast is usb 3 compared to usb 2 , all my external drives are usb 2,what are the benefits


Reading this section people have been saying wait since June
 
Well RAMs dont make you computer faster.
Thats the thing...

The 2012 model (if coming) would probably have better CPU compared to 2011.
Which means converting 1080p would be slower.
Watching videos and internet surfing should be fine.

USB2 and 3's difference would obviously be speed.
3 is 5Gbps vs 480mbps.
If you peripherals are 2 only, I wouldnt worry but they are going to change soon.
 
USB3 is worth the wait if you can. It is significantly faster (can easily saturate drive speeds, even SSD) and affordable. Thunderbolt will eventually be an option but at this stage it is too expensive. Its main use currently is to add more displays and for extreme data throughput as in special raid arrays.

If you are going to convert a lot of movies using handbrake then it is generally recommended to get the quad core mini. That will make a difference and you can find evidence of this if you google it.
 
skipjakk said:
The 2011 midrange mac mini ($799) and the 2012 base should be about the same.
Click to expand...

If you ignore USB 3, that's just about the most correct statement someone could make. And as you get Thunderbolt - and TB storage should get cheaper very fast, USB 3 might be less of a loss than many might think. That is unless you already got tons of USB 3.0 devices waiting for your Mac.

Also don't forget that you may be able to get a Quad-Core Mini with dedicated graphics card, which would be about double as fast as the current mid range Mini in most scenarios. If you need that amount of power, you may want to wait.
 
well since you are converting movies you want a quad core version not the base mac mini.

you can get a 2011 quad core for about 900-950 .

you don't need 16gb ram.

8gb ram is good enough for most people.

even if the 2012 quad core only has 4000 graphics it would be good enough for you. Also the 2011 quad would drop in price.

If you convert a movie on a quad core it is much faster then any other mini.

say 40 minutes for a 80 minute movie vs 65 minutes with the dual core.
 
I thought the raw CPU speed would only see a small bump, maybe 10-15%.

More RAM does help some programs, I'd get at least 8Gb in any new computer and I'm hoping the Mini and iMac have 8Gb standard in the top models come October :D
 
theRAMman said:
i probably got my figures wrong, i just seem to remember reading it somewhere...:p
Click to expand...

Well, at one point I was doing some serious poking around comparing the Intel HD GPUs and the discrete GPU in the Mini. I was expecting more of a boost but 40% is apparently it, more or less...

Unfortunately, I didn't bookmark my sources so I cannot easily go back and post a link or two. But I'm happy to be proven wrong if someone comes up with something different.

I'm waiting patiently for the upgraded Mini for the Ivy Bridge CPU, USB 3.0 and a long-shot chance that the discrete GPU will be head and shoulders above the current offering. (Fat Chance... :rolleyes:)

Frankly, both the base model 2011 and upcoming Mini is all really need. But I would prefer to spend my $$$ on an upgraded Mini...
 
From Passmarks Website

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/video_lookup.php?gpu=Intel+HD+4000

Not sure how accurate, but here's Passmark 6630M and HD4000

Mobility Radeon HD 4670.........................578
FireGL V7100.........................................578
GeForce 9600 GSO................................576
GeForce GT 230.....................................573
 Radeon HD 6630M..................................572
GeForce 7800 GTX..................................571
Mobile Intel HD.......................................571
Intel HD 4000.........................................569
GeForce Go 7950 GTX............................568
RADEON X800 XL..................................564
 
Last edited:
Hope This Helps...

I quickly found a couple of pages with Mac Mini test results, including a Handbrake test. Unfortunately, the 4-core Mini isn't among the tests but it may be available. I didn't have the time to go over all the search results.

Even without a Mac Mini server test comparing a 2-core Mini to some of the 4-core Macs that were tested may be helpful...

It all comes down to how much video conversion the OP plans on doing and whether the time=$$$ equation pencils-out for him.

http://www.barefeats.com/mini11_04.html

http://www.barefeats.com/mini11_01.html

If you know someone with a 4-core Mac Mini Barefeats has a request:

WHAT ABOUT THE QUAD-CORE MINI?
Some of you are asking us about that. We don't have access to the quad mini at the moment but if you do and want to run our tests, let us know so we can send you the test procedures and test files.
 
philipma1957 said:
...so a 2012 server with a 4000 igpu would fit his needs better then any current mini.
Click to expand...

Assuming Apple does the upgrade. I hope they don't sit on their laurels like they have on some other refreshes. IMO overall Apple is better at not dropping the ball than they used to but it may happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back