Mac mini i3 vs i5 temps

[Mol1n]

The latter quoted sentence is what we are hoping for, i.e. that Apple and Intel have this sorted such that longevity is not degraded.

It says that Intel engineered the chips to run at those clock speeds and currents without degrading much.

It has nothing to do with temps which results from the cooling system that comes this time from Apple.

The Mac mini is the concern here, not the chips themselves.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

The 'impression' comes from reading off benchmark results submitted on this forum directly.

Okay, but are you going to just run benchmarks all day? Or are you going to actually use the computer for something? The heat YOUR computer will generate, is based on the activity YOU are doing with it. Let's say you're... editing a video for example. That might peak out an i3 processor and create as much heat as it'll allow, 85c or whatever, for say 10 minutes. If you're using an i5 it might or might not peak it, at 95c or whatever that'll create - but for a shorter period of time because it's a faster processor. An i7 might run it quickly enough that it never approaches full temperature.

A faster processor, for the SAME tasks, will either generate lower levels of heat - or will take less time, so that the overall heat level is lower.

 

[Mol1n]

Let's say you're... editing a video for example. That might peak out an i3 processor and create as much heat as it'll allow, 85c or whatever, for say 10 minutes.

I'm obviously talking about the kinds of use that requires constant load and user attention.

An i7 might run it quickly enough that it never approaches full temperature.

The benchmarks show that the Mac peaks quickly. It's not a matter of a slow progression in temperature.

A faster processor, for the SAME tasks, will either generate lower levels of heat - or will take less time, so that the overall heat level is lower.

This 'overall heat level' is not what is of concern when speaking of hardware health and longevity.

 

[brentsg]

It says that Intel engineered the chips to run at those clock speeds and currents without degrading much.

It has nothing to do with temps which results from the cooling system that comes this time from Apple.

The Mac mini is the concern here, not the chips themselves.
[doublepost=1541993313][/doublepost]
You and others have derailed this thread time and again with off-topic drivel.

I ask all of you one more time to cease the snide insults in my thread.

It says that Intel engineered the chips to run at those clock speeds and currents without degrading much.

It has nothing to do with temps which results from the cooling system that comes this time from Apple.

The Mac mini is the concern here, not the chips themselves.
[doublepost=1541993313][/doublepost]
You and others have derailed this thread time and again with off-topic drivel.

I ask all of you one more time to cease the snide insults in my thread.

There was more factual information in my one drivel post than in anything you’ve posted in the entire thread. Enjoy using your i3 with your “kind of use that requires constant load and user attention”. You aren’t looking for facts. You are looking for FUD to justify a decision you have already made.

 

[FreakinEurekan]

I'm obviously talking about the kinds of use that requires constant load and user attention.

So, your use case is 100% CPU utilization 24 hours a day? Are you considering two i3 Minis versus one i7? Because that's what it would take, to get the same amount of work done.

 

[Mol1n]

So, your use case is 100% CPU utilization 24 hours a day? Are you considering two i3 Minis versus one i7? Because that's what it would take, to get the same amount of work done.

Earlier you said

Okay, but are you going to just run benchmarks all day?

Benchmarks themselves are general reliability/performance tests and are used as a metric for assessing products even though they aren't carbon copies of any particular case.

I'm not going to chase after and respond to every scenario you design and project onto me.

 

[Cashmonee]

Earlier you said



Benchmarks themselves are general reliability/performance tests and are used as a metric for assessing products even though they aren't carbon copies of any particular case.

I'm not going to chase after and respond to every scenario you design and project onto me.

Most benchmarks are synthetic and by their nature, not real world. If you need 100% CPU 24/7, then don't buy a Mac mini. There is no rational argument that an i3 is better than the i5 or i7 other than you don't need the power of an i5 or i7 and therefore the cost is not worth it (perfectly valid argument by the way). I am not really sure what you are chasing here. The i5 and i7 perform as expected. What is it that you are trying to say?

 

[Mol1n]

There is no rational argument that an i3 is better than the i5 or i7 other than you don't need the power of an i5 or i7 and therefore the cost is not worth it (perfectly valid argument by the way).

That's another generic claim that I have not made. The OP of this thread asks for the temperature data on the i3 and i5 running cinebench or something similar.

I am not really sure what you are chasing here. The i5 and i7 perform as expected. What is it that you are trying to say?

You and others here decided to extend this thread beyond the first page. In fact, you were the one who made post 26 saying you were 'curious' of more than the data in post 22. And now you are asking what I'm "chasing".

 

[Eithanius]

I‘ll be using BOINC tomorrow where I can steer how many CPU % are being used. Thrilled to see what Intels Power Gagdet will tell us there

Gosh...! I haven't been BOINC-ing for years...

Ain't BOINC on GPUs more efficient than CPUs nowadays...?

 

[PJivan]

It says that Intel engineered the chips to run at those clock speeds and currents without degrading much.

It has nothing to do with temps which results from the cooling system that comes this time from Apple.

The Mac mini is the concern here, not the chips themselves.
[doublepost=1541993313][/doublepost]
You and others have derailed this thread time and again with off-topic drivel.

I ask all of you one more time to cease the snide insults in my thread.

And why those temps are a concern if established by intel? Intel runs at similar temperature with stock coolers on many case from different brands, not to talk about data center, what exactly are you bringing to the discussion except paranoia?

 

[Mol1n]

what exactly are you bringing to the discussion except paranoia?

It's rich that you are calling my responses to posts targeted directly at me my 'bringing' things to a 'discussion'.
The only 'discussion' here is the incoherent one several of you have created that has completely derailed the thread (and mostly aimed at me directly). It's now become ludicrous that we're getting pages of phantom and off-topic accusations that I have repeatedly said I wasn't interested in addressing.

 

[PJivan]

It's rich that you are calling my responses to posts targeted directly at me my 'bringing' things to a 'discussion'.
The only 'discussion' here is the incoherent one several of you have created that has completely derailed the thread (and mostly aimed at me directly). It's now become ludicrous that we're getting pages of phantom and off-topic accusations that I have repeatedly said I wasn't interested in addressing.

Well you are stating that temps are somehow dangerous/concerning while within intel spec, so I'm asking you, is there any reason behind this statement? I'm not accusing you of anything really, I'm just addressing your "Mac Mini is the concern" statement as I think it sucks for lot of people who bought it to start having unjustified paranoia about their temps, so let's stop with this mantra unless we can prove it.

 

[Mol1n]

I'm not accusing you of anything really, I'm just addressing your "Mac Mini is the concern" statement

That was a response to zandorf who seemed to conflate Intel and Apple. The temperatures the OP was created to seek are of those chips sitting in the Mac mini. If those chips were instead placed in tower cases (like the Mac Pro) and cooled much more aggressively that would be a whole different story. He was quoting Anandtech which actually only says that Intel designed those chips to boost to those clocks and consume such and such an amount of power, something which is off-tangent to the topic of the thread. In other words, this thread only 'concerns' the Mac mini's processor temps under simulated load.

as I think it suck for lot of people who bought it to start having unjustified paranoia about their temps, so let's stop stop with this mantra unless we can prove it.

This thread was not created to discuss the benefits/disadvantages of the i5/i7 mini over the i3. MarkosXT already posted what the OP asked for.

 

[MandiMac]

Gosh...! I haven't been BOINC-ing for years...

Ain't BOINC on GPUs more efficient than CPUs nowadays...?

Yeah, you‘re right - GPUs are far better for this kind of work. But: Not every task is created for GPUs, so we still need CPUs in the mix as well. I‘ll post pics of 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% later
[doublepost=1542023434][/doublepost]

Now we have a few pics of the i5:

100 % load
66 % load
50 % load
33 % load
1 % load
Bonus: my BOINC setting that uses all six cores, but only 50 % of the time (makes the Mini really quiet )

 

[Dr. Dr. Evil]

100 % load
66 % load
50 % load
33 % load
1 % load
Bonus: my BOINC setting that uses all six cores, but only 50 % of the time (makes the Mini really quiet )

Great, thank you!!
Would now love to see an i7 as a competitor

 

[kaibob]

I thought I would summarize MandiMac's test results:

Utilization - Temperature - Frequency
99.00 - 95.50 - 3.60
66.70 - 92.90 - 3.90
50.00 - 89.60 - 3.90
33.30 - 88.90 - 3.96
1.00 - 44.00 - 1.46
39.80 - 83.20 - 2.68

 

[Eithanius]

Bonus: my BOINC setting that uses all six cores, but only 50 % of the time (makes the Mini really quiet )

If I get you right, the processing speed per core fluctuates between 50% and 100% right...?

If that's the case, why not set BOINC to just use only 3 out of 6 cores at constant 100%...?

 

[Cashmonee]

That's another generic claim that I have not made. The OP of this thread asks for the temperature data on the i3 and i5 running cinebench or something similar.


You and others here decided to extend this thread beyond the first page. In fact, you were the one who made post 26 saying you were 'curious' of more than the data in post 22. And now you are asking what I'm "chasing".

I was simply asking why you were returning the i5 for the i3. I was curious if you had a rational reason or not. You have answered that now, so thank you.

 

[doboy]

Just wondering, with the tight casing of the Mini, anyone concerned about the heat causing damage to other components like SSD, RAM, wireless card, etc?

 

[Cashmonee]

Just wondering, with the tight casing of the Mini, anyone concerned about the heat causing damage to other components like SSD, RAM, wireless card, etc?

No. Apple are not going to design something that would cause more warranty repairs. Obviously they are not infallible, but they get it right a lot more than they get it wrong. Honestly, everything people have posted in search of issues with temperature seem to show that everything is working exactly as intended. Buy the mini you like and be at peace.

 

[MandiMac]

I thought I would summarize MandiMac's test results:

Utilization - Temperature - Frequency
99.00 - 95.50 - 3.60
66.70 - 92.90 - 3.90
50.00 - 89.60 - 3.90
33.30 - 88.90 - 3.96
1.00 - 44.00 - 1.46
39.80 - 83.20 - 2.68

Thank you! Seems like Intels chips like to run at around 90c at almost full boost capacity. I think Apples and Intels engineer know way more about this stuff than me, an armchair geek. But hey, it works for a long period of time, so I‘m happy
[doublepost=1542041193][/doublepost]

If I get you right, the processing speed per core fluctuates between 50% and 100% right...?

If that's the case, why not set BOINC to just use only 3 out of 6 cores at constant 100%...?

Almost - the cores are fully used for half a second and then 0 for half a second (or something like that). This is enough to keep the temps in check and the fans do not spin up. If I try to 100% three cores, the fans do spin up.

 

[Spectrum]

This may be just a little bit off topic but very related....

If anyone is interested in seeing the maximum heat, cpu speed (MHz), and Fan noise that you will ever see with your new Mini you can run this simple test. (Free)

Download Intel Power Gadget here: Intel Power Gadget

Download Temperature Gauge Pro here: Temperature Gauge Pro

Start both apps then run these commands in Terminal: (This is a MAX CPU Stress Test)

To start a 4-core test Cut and Paste in Terminal: yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &

To start a 6-core test Cut and Paste in Terminal: yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null & yes > /dev/null &

To end the test Cut and Paste in Terminal: killall yes

This test will push your CPU to the highest level it will ever achieve, and the max temps you will ever see, and the max noise your fan will ever make. The CPU will throttle at 100c and decrease in speed to stay below 100c, as designed. So no worry about damaging anything. It's actually very interesting to see just how well the Mini protects itself, and can give you some piece of mind.

The Fan will be pegged at 4,400 RPM which is maxed out. For those concerned about noise.


View attachment 803410

Don't you need to initialise 12 instances for the i7? It seems that you only have 50% CPU utilisation going on in that test you posted. With speeds stable at 4Ghz (still well above the 3.2 base clock rating for this processor).

I suspect that with 12 threads, the frequency will drop.

 

[StellarVixen]

Yeah, you‘re right - GPUs are far better for this kind of work. But: Not every task is created for GPUs, so we still need CPUs in the mix as well. I‘ll post pics of 100%, 75%, 50% and 25% later
[doublepost=1542023434][/doublepost]View attachment 803485
View attachment 803486
View attachment 803487
View attachment 803488
View attachment 803489
View attachment 803490


Now we have a few pics of the i5:

100 % load
66 % load
50 % load
33 % load
1 % load
Bonus: my BOINC setting that uses all six cores, but only 50 % of the time (makes the Mini really quiet )

Learn how to take a screenshot, pls.

Other than that, thank you very much.

 

[ilikewhey]

waiting for a indie company to come out with a aio bracket for the mac mini. than i can run a 280mm rad through the fan slots

 

[rigbricker]

I suspect that with 12 threads, the frequency will drop.

Probably. But what I find most interesting about that screenshot is the "Last Shutdown: Automatic Sleep - Temperatures were too high" diagnostic.