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

Mac mini (2018) Intel UHD Graphics 630 :: Pros and Cons

I see on the site that it can power two 4K displays. Is that for the i3 version? Is the Intel Graphics good enough to push 4K without lag. That's all I care about. I don't want to edit 4K videos, but I'd like to watch them without a ton of lag.
 
  • Like
Reactions: auduchinok and ElectronGuru
Robert M. said:
I see on the site that it can power two 4K displays. Is that for the i3 version? Is the Intel Graphics good enough to push 4K without lag. That's all I care about. I don't want to edit 4K videos, but I'd like to watch them without a ton of lag.
Click to expand...
Depends if you're talking about staring at wallpaper or streaming 4K@60FPS. I won't take bets.
 
I think lack of a discrete GPU in the Mac mini helps Apple achieve a price point and also has to do with the space and thermal limitations of the small case. The upcoming MacBook Pro with Vega graphics is going to have a much higher base price than the Mac mini and Apple considered what the most common uses for the Mac mini are when designing it. For music and server usage a discrete GPU makes no sense. With the addition of TB3, it also makes no sense to put a powerful GPU in the Mac mini since an eGPU can be easily added.
 
  • Like
Reactions: iAmRod, LancesUK, StoneyG and 5 others
UHD 630 is horrible.
The Iris Plus 650 is already struggling when I plug my MBP into my monitor setups.
630 has only 24 pipelines, while the 650 has 48.

eGPU is very expensive, and Apple still don't support nVidia cards. You are basically paying more to get less performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kazmac, Jimmy James and Merode
2018 Mac mini vs 2014 Mac mini (Iris) graphics. About 59% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...Iris-Pro-HD-5100-Mobile-11-GHz/m356797vsm8813

2018 Mac mini vs 2014 Mac mini (HD 5000) graphics. About 87% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...-Intel-HD-5000-Mobile-1011-GHz/m356797vsm8536

2018 Mac mini vs 2012 Mac mini (HD 4000) graphics. About 149% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...s-Intel-HD-4000-Mobile-125-GHz/m356797vsm7653

2018 Mac mini vs 2011 Mac mini (Radeon HD 6630M discrete) graphics. About 80% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...e-i5-i7-vs-AMD-Radeon-HD-6630M/m356797vsm9654

2018 Mac mini vs 2011 Mac mini (HD 3000) graphics. About 295% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...Intel-HD-3000-Mobile-V2-13-GHz/m356797vsm7647

2018 Mac mini vs 2010 Mac mini (Nvidia GeForce 320M) graphics. About 353% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...e-i5-i7-vs-Nvidia-GeForce-320M/m356797vsm9153

We can see the 2018 Mac mini has the fastest graphics ever, but a very small performance difference over the last 4 years compared to the previous 4 years. So I agree it could have been better. Perhaps one of those Intel/AMD combo chips should have been offered as an option.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Kebabselector, MandiMac, Miat and 9 others
MisterAndrew said:
2018 Mac mini vs 2014 Mac mini (Iris) graphics. About 59% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...Iris-Pro-HD-5100-Mobile-11-GHz/m356797vsm8813

2018 Mac mini vs 2014 Mac mini (HD 5000) graphics. About 87% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...-Intel-HD-5000-Mobile-1011-GHz/m356797vsm8536

2018 Mac mini vs 2012 Mac mini (HD 4000) graphics. About 149% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...s-Intel-HD-4000-Mobile-125-GHz/m356797vsm7653

2018 Mac mini vs 2011 Mac mini (Radeon HD 6630M discrete) graphics. About 80% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...e-i5-i7-vs-AMD-Radeon-HD-6630M/m356797vsm9654

2018 Mac mini vs 2011 Mac mini (HD 3000) graphics. About 295% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...Intel-HD-3000-Mobile-V2-13-GHz/m356797vsm7647

2018 Mac mini vs 2010 Mac mini (Nvidia GeForce 320M discrete) graphics. About 353% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...e-i5-i7-vs-Nvidia-GeForce-320M/m356797vsm9153

We can see the 2018 Mac mini has the fastest graphics ever, but a very small performance difference over the last 4 years compared to the previous 4 years. So I agree it should have been better. One of those Intel/AMD combo chips would have been a better choice.
Click to expand...

only 300% faster comparing to an 8 year old chip is laughable.
only ~60% faster than the 2014 one is sad.

I wasn't really expecting discrete GPU or even the Intel/AMD combos - UHD 630 is far worse than the Iris Plus 650/655 found in the Macbook Pro lineups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strawbale
Iris Plus 650 is only about 35% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...is-Plus-650-Mobile-Kaby-Lake/m356797vsm367939

The UHD 630 will probably be sufficient for what most people will use the Mac mini for. Even the HD 4000 in the 2012 model is fine for web browsing and light photo editing. For those that require more powerful graphics there are other Macs in Apple’s lineup that satisfy those needs. A refurbished base iMac Pro is a better value than a top spec Mac mini.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ConvertedToMac and Miat
MisterAndrew said:
For those that require more powerful graphics there are other Macs in Apple’s lineup that satisfy those needs. A refurbished base iMac Pro is a better value than a top spec Mac mini.
Click to expand...

I can't disagree more. There literally is not even one Mac that satisfies my needs. I have two displays, keyboard and mouse that I want to keep. It means I'll not get iMac or notebook. Mac Mini comes with poor GPU and Mac Pro is overpriced old tech. If new Mac Pro comes out, of course it will pack good GPU but it will be even more expensive. And the issue is I don't need ECC RAM, Xeon CPU etc. I just wanted Mini with half-decent GPU. If it came with Iris Plus, I'd have ordered one yesterday.

Those 35% are of extreme value considering those iGPUs are horrendously slow to start with. It's not like you're considering GTX 1060 and 1070 when 1060 already packs quite some punch. In case of these iGPUs 35% is the difference of: can I have 22 FPS in SC2 or 30 FPS.

On the other hand I just want to say that new Mini is everything I wished for except GPU. They did great job and that's why it pains me so much they didn't go extra mile to give Mini decent iGPU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Minxy and Naimfan
StellarVixen said:
UHD 630 is bad when compared with the dedicated graphics card. But for a integrated GPU, it is actually very good:
...
This is gaming wise, however, I do not have experience with video editing, I do not do that.
Click to expand...
I couldn't care less about gaming, all it has to do is pushing Photoshop and InDesign pixels.

MisterAndrew said:
2018 Mac mini vs 2011 Mac mini (Radeon HD 6630M discrete) graphics. About 80% faster.
https://gpu.userbenchmark.com/Compa...e-i5-i7-vs-AMD-Radeon-HD-6630M/m356797vsm9654
Click to expand...

Useful information, not slower than a 6xxx will do. Our youngest machine is a 2009 4,1 with Radeon HD 6850.

I'll take two of those with i5 and 512 SSD, add RAM later.
 
  • Like
Reactions: auduchinok
EGPU might be the answer

Merode said:
I can't disagree more. There literally is not even one Mac that satisfies my needs. I have two displays, keyboard and mouse that I want to keep. It means I'll not get iMac or notebook. Mac Mini comes with poor GPU and Mac Pro is overpriced old tech. If new Mac Pro comes out, of course it will pack good GPU but it will be even more expensive. And the issue is I don't need ECC RAM, Xeon CPU etc. I just wanted Mini with half-decent GPU. If it came with Iris Plus, I'd have ordered one yesterday.

Those 35% are of extreme value considering those iGPUs are horrendously slow to start with. It's not like you're considering GTX 1060 and 1070 when 1060 already packs quite some punch. In case of these iGPUs 35% is the difference of: can I have 22 FPS in SC2 or 30 FPS.

On the other hand I just want to say that new Mini is everything I wished for except GPU. They did great job and that's why it pains me so much they didn't go extra mile to give Mini decent iGPU.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: MisterAndrew
Pretty good for me.

Will be running as a iTunes/dvr server fitted with fit 4K headless display on the hdmi port.

Screen share in from Mac Pro.

The 630 more then adequate for that.

Attached drobo has media library on and can write a recording and stream iTunes at the same time so whilst not that fast is fast enough storage.

Current 2009 only has 60gb ssd so 128 in the 2018 will be big enough.
 
Merode said:
I can't disagree more. There literally is not even one Mac that satisfies my needs. I have two displays, keyboard and mouse that I want to keep. It means I'll not get iMac or notebook. Mac Mini comes with poor GPU and Mac Pro is overpriced old tech. If new Mac Pro comes out, of course it will pack good GPU but it will be even more expensive. And the issue is I don't need ECC RAM, Xeon CPU etc. I just wanted Mini with half-decent GPU. If it came with Iris Plus, I'd have ordered one yesterday.

Those 35% are of extreme value considering those iGPUs are horrendously slow to start with. It's not like you're considering GTX 1060 and 1070 when 1060 already packs quite some punch. In case of these iGPUs 35% is the difference of: can I have 22 FPS in SC2 or 30 FPS.

On the other hand I just want to say that new Mini is everything I wished for except GPU. They did great job and that's why it pains me so much they didn't go extra mile to give Mini decent iGPU.
Click to expand...

I think Mac mini + eGPU or an upgraded Mac Pro 5,1 (with RX 580 or RX Vega 56) would satisfy your needs until the Mac Pro 7,1 is available.
 
How is this new Mac mini if you compare it with a old Mac Pro with 3 GHz Quad Xeon and 32 Gb 667 Mhz RAM and Radeon HD 7979 3 GB?
 
Merode said:
time to time to play SC2 which is 8 years old game that will struggle to run at FHD and medium preset on Mini from 2018. It might be silly, but I'd have to get 1100$ mini wiht 700$ eGPU (and 50$ active TB3 cable that isn't 50cm long) and then add 23% tax to it not to downgrade my current setup.
Click to expand...
Kurri said:
best video I have seen as far as video editing goes. I think you should be fine with 1080p, but 4K will need an eGPU or work in proxies.
Click to expand...

Yep - absolutely getting one of these and a couple of eGPUs for our main 4k suite. This is a perfect machine for video / film production for us. As well as the usual Adobe stuff. Well done Apple!
 
techno96 said:
I only use my Mini for Photoshop or Premier every once in a while.

For me, I'm just happy I can do dual 4k@60hz monitors. I mainly keep all of my communication open on one monitor (email, telegram, messages, slack) and then use the other for web browsing, productivity, etc. Its interesting that this seemingly crappy card can actually handle up to 3x 4k@60hz displays, but I'll take it. If I was doing more creative work, I'd probably be a bit disappointed tho.
Click to expand...
The older mini couldn’t do 4k60 it was either 30 or 24hz
 
Craigy said:
Yep - absolutely getting one of these and a couple of eGPUs for our main 4k suite. This is a perfect machine for video / film production for us. As well as the usual Adobe stuff. Well done Apple!
Click to expand...

I'm confused how you can setup 2 eGPU's on one machine. Does the program actually use both? or can you assign a eGPU to say After Effects and an eGPU to Premier? how does dual work?
 
ElectronGuru said:
I may be misreading this, but the 630 seems to go with the larger screen:
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204349

My MPB includes the 630. I'll see if I can disable the Radeon and do some testing.
Click to expand...

I can understand putting 630 in a 15inch MBP sinceit is not going to be the main GPU - it'll only be used for very light tasks to save power.

Iris Plus 650 (found in 13inch MBPs) has 48 pipelines, and the UHD 630 has 24.
At peak performance, when doing single precision calculations, 630 can do 441.6g flops, while 650 does 883gflops. That's a huge difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElectronGuru
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