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

Mac Mini i7 Dual Core vs Mac mini Server i7 Quad Core

Eh I would get the server if I was sure I was going to use it like a server but the one with the superior/dedicated graphics is always going to be nicer just saying...on the other hand with thunderbolt I'm sure you will be able to hook an external graphics card up when all our Monitors are doing like 4.5k at a 16:9 ratio natively lol...
 
Poluks said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

@otacorb:
So you have the server and the base mini, what's your main utilisation ?

Wanna know if the server can handle heavy graphic work in photoshop without the descrete graphic card.

Thanks
Click to expand...

I actually had both till about 2 hours ago, but I shipped the regular Mac Mini back to Apple.

I basically purchased the standard Mac Mini 2.5 Core i5 with the AMD GPU. While I do some photo and video stuff I don't consider myself hard core. I do a lot of dvd ripping and creation. I design some web sites and create some of my own graphics. While I found the above mentioned Mini just fine for those things, I decided I really wanted the speed of the Mini Server as I had seen on the geekbench stats.

I purchased the Mini server from Amazon where I got it for less and no tax. I have added the OWC Mercury Electra 6gb/s 120GB SSD as my boot drive and for installing my software. I then installed a Seagate 750gb 7200 RPM drive as my data drive. This machine screams and the bump in speed is very noticeable especially when ripping content. An example is that with the regular Mac Mini as listed above I ripped a DVD it took 1.12 minutes and then I ripped the same DVD using the same external DVD drive and it took me 26 minutes. Now that is time savings I can certainly use and so I know for me I made the right choice.

In terms of the AMD GPU, unless you are going to play 3D games etc, you really won't see any major benefit from it. I can also tell you that I am finding the text actually more crisp using the integrated Intel HD 3000. I have done a good bit of 1080P viewing and rendering on this new Mac Server and the integrated GPU is great, so I have no complaints after giving up the AMD GPU.

This is my experience and I can't speak for the experiences of others!
 
OTACORB:Are you happy with the buy? For regular use - how loud is the computer? Tried connecting 2 computers?
 
Sibbe.85 said:
OTACORB:Are you happy with the buy? For regular use - how loud is the computer? Tried connecting 2 computers?
Click to expand...

Totally 100% satisfied with my choice of the Mini Server over the non-server version. The computer isn't audiably detectable unless the fan is running at higher than normal speeds, which will happen occasionally when doing some heavy work. But even that isn't annoying at all and you really have to be listening to hear it.

Connecting 2 computers? I don't follow you?
 
I mean connecting two screens simultaneously.

For your normal browsing/office work/watchin HD 1080p, the fans are not audible?

I dont intend to do any video rendering whatsoever.

This is the specs I ordered:

2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
4GB memory
Dual 750GB 7200-rpm hard drives1
Intel HD Graphics 3000 388MB DDR4
OS X Lion Server

Are u satisfied with the SSD drive and RAM? Do u have any homepage? SSD drive - is it easy to install?

Thanks
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

@OTACORB:
thanx, really insteresting point of view, I might finally go for the server version, quad-core has to be more relevant for the next few years.

I ain't gonna play 3D games, my PS3 is here for that but I was wondering if graphic apps will ever need that extra power given by the AMD card, zooming, applying filters, handling heavy PSD with 50+ layers etc.. Webdesign, mattepainting.. and maybe slightly After Effects.
 
Sibbe.85 said:
I mean connecting two screens simultaneously.

For your normal browsing/office work/watchin HD 1080p, the fans are not audible?

I dont intend to do any video rendering whatsoever.

This is the specs I ordered:

2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
4GB memory
Dual 750GB 7200-rpm hard drives1
Intel HD Graphics 3000 388MB DDR4
OS X Lion Server

Are u satisfied with the SSD drive and RAM? Do u have any homepage? SSD drive - is it easy to install?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I have not attempted to connect two screen, but I have two identical HP LED 2311X's I could try it on.

I think the SSD drive being the OWC Mercury Electra 6gb/s made a big difference in boot time and opening applications. I am finding thus far that 8gb of ram is sufficient for the things I do.

If you keep the upper 500gb 7200 RPM, swapping the lower drive for an SSD will be very easy to do. The server is more difficult to swap out the upper drive because Apple used screws to hold it in and of course this causes you to just about have to take the whole thing apart, which is what I had to do.

Poluks said:

@OTACORB:
thanx, really insteresting point of view, I might finally go for the server version, quad-core has to be more relevant for the next few years.

I ain't gonna play 3D games, my PS3 is here for that but I was wondering if graphic apps will ever need that extra power given by the AMD card, zooming, applying filters, handling heavy PSD with 50+ layers etc.. Webdesign, mattepainting.. and maybe slightly After Effects.
Click to expand...


Based on the fact that I've now used it to create graphics, do some web designing etc, I don't see the need for the AMD, but again I am speaking for myself. My suggestion would be to read up on the software you plan to use and see how much it needs a discreet GPU. I can tell you for the things I do that I do not. One of the biggest things that I am pleased about is the actual very crisp text that I am seeing with the Intel HD 3000. It is actually a bit better on my particular LED monitors than was the AMD.

I am pleased with my decision to send the non-server back in favor of the server version.
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

OTACORB said:
Sibbe.85 said:
I mean connecting two screens simultaneously.

For your normal browsing/office work/watchin HD 1080p, the fans are not audible?

I dont intend to do any video rendering whatsoever.

This is the specs I ordered:

2.0GHz quad-core Intel Core i7
4GB memory
Dual 750GB 7200-rpm hard drives1
Intel HD Graphics 3000 388MB DDR4
OS X Lion Server

Are u satisfied with the SSD drive and RAM? Do u have any homepage? SSD drive - is it easy to install?

Thanks
Click to expand...

I have not attempted to connect two screen, but I have two identical HP LED 2311X's I could try it on.

I think the SSD drive being the OWC Mercury Electra 6gb/s made a big difference in boot time and opening applications. I am finding thus far that 8gb of ram is sufficient for the things I do.

If you keep the upper 500gb 7200 RPM, swapping the lower drive for an SSD will be very easy to do. The server is more difficult to swap out the upper drive because Apple used screws to hold it in and of course this causes you to just about have to take the whole thing apart, which is what I had to do.

Poluks said:

@OTACORB:
thanx, really insteresting point of view, I might finally go for the server version, quad-core has to be more relevant for the next few years.

I ain't gonna play 3D games, my PS3 is here for that but I was wondering if graphic apps will ever need that extra power given by the AMD card, zooming, applying filters, handling heavy PSD with 50+ layers etc.. Webdesign, mattepainting.. and maybe slightly After Effects.
Click to expand...


Based on the fact that I've now used it to create graphics, do some web designing etc, I don't see the need for the AMD, but again I am speaking for myself. My suggestion would be to read up on the software you plan to use and see how much it needs a discreet GPU. I can tell you for the things I do that I do not. One of the biggest things that I am pleased about is the actual very crisp text that I am seeing with the Intel HD 3000. It is actually a bit better on my particular LED monitors than was the AMD.

I am pleased with my decision to send the non-server back in favor of the server version.
Click to expand...


Bought the mini server today and I'm lil disappoint about the sharpness of the fonts because, in fact I'm in the exact opposite situation as yours, on my Dell 2005FPW text are a little blurry.. Weird cause my old Windows PC with a 7600GT delivers a better définition.

What's your monitor ?
 
Poluks said:
Bought the mini server today and I'm lil disappoint about the sharpness of the fonts because, in fact I'm in the exact opposite situation as yours, on my Dell 2005FPW text are a little blurry.. Weird cause my old Windows PC with a 7600GT delivers a better définition.

What's your monitor ?
Click to expand...

HP LED 2311x Text are very crisp!
 
Poluks said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)



Bought the mini server today and I'm lil disappoint about the sharpness of the fonts because, in fact I'm in the exact opposite situation as yours, on my Dell 2005FPW text are a little blurry.. Weird cause my old Windows PC with a 7600GT delivers a better définition.

What's your monitor ?
Click to expand...

I had same issue.

You may try this under terminal. It works.

Code: 
defaults -currentHost write -globalDomain AppleFontSmoothing -int 2
Then restart your mini
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

Thanks for your help, I'll test that !
 
Poluks said:
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; fr-fr) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)



Bought the mini server today and I'm lil disappoint about the sharpness of the fonts because, in fact I'm in the exact opposite situation as yours, on my Dell 2005FPW text are a little blurry.. Weird cause my old Windows PC with a 7600GT delivers a better définition.

What's your monitor ?
Click to expand...

I just bought a Mac Mini Server last night and hooked it up to my monitor (Dell 2005FPW) and my fonts are appearing as normal....same as the Macbook Air I just returned for the server.
 
The comments in this thread about a difference in sharpness between the AMD and the Intel solution reveal a lack of understanding about the system. Perhaps I can help clear it up a little bit.

When using a digital connection to your monitor, ie. HDMI, DVI, Thunderbolt, Mini or regular Display Port, the signal is carried without loss and completely free from artifacts. In english, they all look the same. Identical.

If you use an analog connection, ie. VGA, Component or Composite, you will likely see varying display quality since there is signal loss and interference. However, your Mac Mini doesn't have any analog ports on it, and I suspect you are not using a digital to analog convertor. Certainly, there are reasons why some would such a convertor but it would have more to do with connecting to legacy displays and inputs.

There's really just one way to have a reduced quality display when you are using a digital connection. If you do not have signal from your source that is the same resolution as the display's maximum. As an example, if you run a 1080p monitor at a lower resolution it will loose a lot of sharpness.

In rare cases there maybe driver differences that would cause the computer to generate a slightly different image. Considering that the Intel and AMD graphics in question are used in the entire 2011 lineup of Macs, I think its safe to say we'd have heard a lot more about it before now.
 
@Vampire18 :
The code you gave me improve the sharpness on my display. thank you for that.

@greezychicken :
Well, you switched from a mac to another with the same display, thus you couldn't see the difference.. the problem is software I guess, but hardware could be involved in some other way.
See the difference here : http://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1009724-love-osx-hate-the-fonts/page__view__findpost__p__594124952

@DustinT :
My response above, prove that there is a difference of font smoothing between Windows & OSX and after some searches via google : http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/2011/03/improve-font-smoothing-in-mac-os-x.html
I found several threads about this in macrumor's forum.

I'm actually using the HDMI -> DVI convertor provided in the Mini package, could it be the reason of a lack of sharpness added to the fact that my Dell display is not 1920 HD like the newest product in the market.

Maybe higher density/resolution display could avoid that problem. when I tested the iMac 21,5 & 27", text was gorgeously crisp but I rather have a matte screen.

So for now, playing with the default smoothing, it seems to work fine. I'm still curious to see the display quality with the AMD CG on the high en mini.. OSX Lion could benefit from the CG & OpenGL for smoother transitions, less lagging in Photoshop or whatever, who knows ?
 
Poluks said:
@DustinT :
My response above, prove that there is a difference of font smoothing between Windows & OSX and after some searches via google : http://tonymacx86.blogspot.com/2011/03/improve-font-smoothing-in-mac-os-x.html
I found several threads about this in macrumor's forum.

I'm actually using the HDMI -> DVI convertor provided in the Mini package, could it be the reason of a lack of sharpness added to the fact that my Dell display is not 1920 HD like the newest product in the market.

Maybe higher density/resolution display could avoid that problem. when I tested the iMac 21,5 & 27", text was gorgeously crisp but I rather have a matte screen.

So for now, playing with the default smoothing, it seems to work fine. I'm still curious to see the display quality with the AMD CG on the high en mini.. OSX Lion could benefit from the CG & OpenGL for smoother transitions, less lagging in Photoshop or whatever, who knows ?
Click to expand...
A difference in font smoothing will have nothing to do with which cable or video card you are using. That's true whether you are running OS X or Windows. You are welcome to adjust it to your preference but that's a software change and shouldn't be affected by which video card and\or digital cable you are using. The HDMI-DVI adapter keeps the signal digital and therefore you should not have any difference in quality with or without it.

It is worth double-checking that you are running at your panel's native resolution. Essentially, you'd want to just choose the highest option on the list. It should be identical to the monitor's native resolution. If that term doesn't make sense to you, check google. Basically, it refers to what the panel is setup to display from the factor. It can not be adjusted in anyway.
 
I realize this thread is about the i7 Dual Core vs i7 Quad Core, but I wanted to share my findings between the 2.5 i5 and the Server.

Encoding a given video using iMovie, it took me 6m40s on the 2.5 i5 vs 3m50s on the Server, which is about 43% improvement. Both machines had 8GB of RAM for this test.

This was a pretty short video but would be a significant time savings if we think of a job taking hours, although more serious work would probably be done on a MacPro.
 
For those who are intending to game, I guess the question is, if the 6630M GPU is going to be enough. It's better than the HD3000, yes, but still pretty meager as far as GPU power goes. Only if you intend on playing old games, with low settings, or have a very low resolution monitor, will it be passable.

You can forget about playing any upcoming modern game at high settings, even Starcraft 2 won't run on it that well unless the detail is reduced. The situation is likely even worse since most people will be connecting a 1920x1080 or better monitor to the Mac Mini.

Just something to think about. For this reason, I think I am going to go with the server model too since even the dediated GPU would be insufficient to really handle any of the games I would be interested in playing.

Ruahrc
 
Ruahrc said:
For those who are intending to game, I guess the question is, if the 6630M GPU is going to be enough. It's better than the HD3000, yes, but still pretty meager as far as GPU power goes. Only if you intend on playing old games, with low settings, or have a very low resolution monitor, will it be passable.

You can forget about playing any upcoming modern game at high settings, even Starcraft 2 won't run on it that well unless the detail is reduced. The situation is likely even worse since most people will be connecting a 1920x1080 or better monitor to the Mac Mini.

Just something to think about. For this reason, I think I am going to go with the server model too since even the dediated GPU would be insufficient to really handle any of the games I would be interested in playing.

Ruahrc
Click to expand...

I think you underestimate the power of the 6630M. Sure it will struggle at ultra and even high settings on most current and upcoming games but it's just fine for medium and even high settings on certain games. For someone who wants to play graphics intensive games but on a casual basis it's just fine.

I have played Star Craft II on high settings and it's plays pretty decently. Even on medium settings it has a pretty good frame rate whilst looking good. I've played Portal 2 on the highest settings with no problems. If you play games in Windows under Bootcamp you should get better performance as the games are far better optimised and the drivers are probably more mature.

Personally for me it's a stop gap in the hope that Apple come out with a more heavy duty system in the GPU department that doesn't cost an arm and a leg like the Mac Pros or come with a redundant ( for me at least ) built in display like the iMac.
 
Ruahrc said:
For those who are intending to game, I guess the question is, if the 6630M GPU is going to be enough. It's better than the HD3000, yes, but still pretty meager as far as GPU power goes. Only if you intend on playing old games, with low settings, or have a very low resolution monitor, will it be passable.

You can forget about playing any upcoming modern game at high settings, even Starcraft 2 won't run on it that well unless the detail is reduced. The situation is likely even worse since most people will be connecting a 1920x1080 or better monitor to the Mac Mini.

Just something to think about. For this reason, I think I am going to go with the server model too since even the dediated GPU would be insufficient to really handle any of the games I would be interested in playing.

Ruahrc
Click to expand...

I didn't do any GPU benchmarks but with the i5/6630M I had, Portal 2 on medium settings at 1080 was pretty choppy. I had to drop it down to medium/720 to make it smooth.
 
Glad i found this thread. found it by googling on 'mac mini server fan speed'.
So 2300 rpm is normal fan speed for my new 2011 Mac mini with two 750 GB HDD.

hope you guy's can help me out with an annoying sleep issue.
Out of the box, this mini already refuses to sleep spontaniously.
@OTACORB and other owners of the server, how about your's?

I know there are apps like 'please sleep', but i think automatic sleep should work without extra apps.
 
bonimac said:
Glad i found this thread. found it by googling on 'mac mini server fan speed'.
So 2300 rpm is normal fan speed for my new 2011 Mac mini with two 750 GB HDD.

hope you guy's can help me out with an annoying sleep issue.
Out of the box, this mini already refuses to sleep spontaniously.
@OTACORB and other owners of the server, how about your's?

I know there are apps like 'please sleep', but i think automatic sleep should work without extra apps.
Click to expand...

The non-sleeping issue is definitely annoying. My Mini Server, even with a fresh install, rarely sleeps after the designated time. My Windows machines often do the same thing too.
 
thanks for replying.
Are you running 10.7.1 on the mini server 2011 also?

ps: please don't quote me. Just hit the 'post reply' left under. Makes threads better readable.
 
bonimac said:
Glad i found this thread. found it by googling on 'mac mini server fan speed'.
So 2300 rpm is normal fan speed for my new 2011 Mac mini with two 750 GB HDD.

hope you guy's can help me out with an annoying sleep issue.
Out of the box, this mini already refuses to sleep spontaniously.
@OTACORB and other owners of the server, how about your's?

I know there are apps like 'please sleep', but i think automatic sleep should work without extra apps.
Click to expand...

I have had so much trouble with the auto sleep function that I have actually just disabled it. I now just log-out then manually put my server to sleep. In reality most servers never sleep, but since I am using this not as a server by just a fast desktop, I would like for the auto sleep function to work. If I am working on something, I just log-out and not worry about putting it to sleep.

I also find my mini does weird things with my HP LED monitor in that it just keeps saying going to sleep then immediately wakes back up, just cycles over and over.

These are some areas that Apple really needs to give some attention and fix.
 
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