Mac Mini / Intel NUC shock

[Padaung]

I've decided that having now used a computer with a SSD installed, I never want to buy another machine without one as its regular boot drive (external hard disk drives for extra storage/backup are a different entity).

I use Macs at home and work, and also use Windows for work and as a media server at home. Although I prefer Mac OS, Windows 10 is turning out to be really good. If I had to use a Windows machine every day then I'm OS agnostic enough to switch for personal use.

I have a Mac Mini already and love the form factor. My media server is an old Intel NUC, which whilst tiny, has a large external power brick. However, the latest NUCs have a power brick the size of a mobile phone charger - i.e. tiny! I decided to do a performance and cost comparison.

I was expecting the Mac to be more expensive (and the Apple premium is something I have happily paid many times over the years), but I was not expecting the price difference to be of this margin..!

Mac £1759
NUC £828

Difference : £931

This massive price difference did come as a shock. The NUC has a 3.1Ghz i7 processor, the Mac is a 3.0Ghz i7 processor. Both specced with the same size SSD and RAM and all other specs are much the same (inc. graphics chip) apart from the obvious (OS). As you can see from the Geekbench scrores, they perform to a relatively similar level.

I strongly feel Apple needs to look at the price it charges for the SSD and RAM. SSDs are fast becoming ubiquitous in the bracket of the market they sell too (i.e. the premium end of the market), as is a greater allocation of RAM to a new machine, and this price difference for me is too great to simply make a choice based on OS preference now.

 

[mojolicious]

It's evident when you look at the Mini and iMac ranges side by side that Apple's margins on the Mini are sky high. Their obscene RAM and SSD/flash prices simply compound the ridiculousness.

 

[Eidorian]

Intel's 5x5 announcement means you can use socketed desktop processors in a nearly identical form factor.

http://anandtech.com/show/9556/intel-launches-new-socketed-minipc-motherboards

 

[Micky Do]

Mac, without whinging……

But not a fully loaded top of the range, which would be way over the top for my humble needs.

The Mac comes with OS X, iLife and iWork. It is ready to plug in and be doing stuff, hassle free within a few minutes, and is likely to remain so for many years.

Can the same be said for the alternative, whatever the specs?

 

[Eidorian]

Can the same be said for the alternative, whatever the specs?

My current Windows desktop is a month short of being 6 years old. Outside of a bad firmware update that was my fault to begin with it has run wonderfully since I built it.

 

[richpjr]

Mac, without whinging……

But not a fully loaded top of the range, which would be way over the top for my humble needs.

The Mac comes with OS X, iLife and iWork. It is ready to plug in and be doing stuff, hassle free within a few minutes, and is likely to remain so for many years.

Can the same be said for the alternative, whatever the specs?

Depends on if you are a heavy iLife or iWork user. I switched over to Macs over a decade ago and never user either one of those apps so that would be a total non-issue for me if I was considering switching.

I do use Windows at work and agree that Windows 10 is finally good enough that I could use it at home. I have no reason to switch and likely won't but it is nice to have an alternative.

 

[Santabean2000]

I've decided that having now used a computer with a SSD installed, I never want to buy another machine without one as its regular boot drive (external hard disk drives for extra storage/backup are a different entity).

I use Macs at home and work, and also use Windows for work and as a media server at home. Although I prefer Mac OS, Windows 10 is turning out to be really good. If I had to use a Windows machine every day then I'm OS agnostic enough to switch for personal use.

I have a Mac Mini already and love the form factor. My media server is an old Intel NUC, which whilst tiny, has a large external power brick. However, the latest NUCs have a power brick the size of a mobile phone charger - i.e. tiny! I decided to do a performance and cost comparison.

I was expecting the Mac to be more expensive (and the Apple premium is something I have happily paid many times over the years), but I was not expecting the price difference to be of this margin..!

Mac £1759
NUC £828

Difference : £931

This massive price difference did come as a shock. The NUC has a 3.1Ghz i7 processor, the Mac is a 3.0Ghz i7 processor. Both specced with the same size SSD and RAM and all other specs are much the same (inc. graphics chip) apart from the obvious (OS). As you can see from the Geekbench scrores, they perform to a relatively similar level.

I strongly feel Apple needs to look at the price it charges for the SSD and RAM. SSDs are fast becoming ubiquitous in the bracket of the market they sell too (i.e. the premium end of the market), as is a greater allocation of RAM to a new machine, and this price difference for me is too great to simply make a choice based on OS preference now.

Apple's move to gluing and soldering has only made matters worse, too.

I agree Apple is becoming more and more the huge, greedy monstrosity it so famously despised...

 

[Micky Do]

Depends on if you are a heavy iLife or iWork user. I switched over to Macs over a decade ago and never user either one of those apps so that would be a total non-issue for me if I was considering switching.

I do use Windows at work and agree that Windows 10 is finally good enough that I could use it at home. I have no reason to switch and likely won't but it is nice to have an alternative.

I don't think you got my point.

With a Mac you don't just pay for a bunch of hardware. OS X and iLife / iWork are part of the deal (and I use them all the time). A new Mac can be plugged in and ready to do things within a few minutes, in my experience (of two new Minis). You also have the option of running Windows if you have the need or the desire (I don't).

Does the cheaper alternative come with an OS and apps installed, ready to go, and offer such versatility?

Why bother with a Mac at all if you don't use OS X and associated apps?

 

[richpjr]

I don't think you got my point.

With a Mac you don't just pay for a bunch of hardware. OS X and iLife / iWork are part of the deal (and I use them all the time). A new Mac can be plugged in and ready to do things within a few minutes, in my experience (of two new Minis). You also have the option of running Windows if you have the need or the desire (I don't).

Does the cheaper alternative come with an OS and apps installed, ready to go, and offer such versatility?

Why bother with a Mac at all if you don't use OS X and associated apps?

I do get the point. But in my case, and I'm sure many others, the included apps are simply not adequate for my needs. I don't care that they are included and ready to go out of the box. Why bother with a Mac if I don't use iLife and iWork? Seriously?

 

[steve123]

I don't think you got my point.

With a Mac you don't just pay for a bunch of hardware. OS X and iLife / iWork are part of the deal (and I use them all the time). A new Mac can be plugged in and ready to do things within a few minutes, in my experience (of two new Minis). You also have the option of running Windows if you have the need or the desire (I don't).

Does the cheaper alternative come with an OS and apps installed, ready to go, and offer such versatility?

Why bother with a Mac at all if you don't use OS X and associated apps?

If you look at the configuration above it looks like he configured the NUC with Windows 10. So, you get whatever comes with that.

Apple does need to address their pricing. I remember when they would regularly roll out new (lower) pricing at their media events. That seems to be absent these days.

I am quite shocked at the price difference as well. I recall when I purchased my first Mac in 2006 (MBP), it was price parity, if not actually less, than a comparable Toshiba or Thinkpad at the time.

 

[Micky Do]

Why bother with a Mac if I don't use iLife and iWork? Seriously?

If you are going to whinge about the price, yes, seriously.

Why pay a premium for an OS and apps you don't want, if all you are interested in are the specs you need / desire to run the OS and apps you want to use?

I remain happy to pay the premium for more humble Macs because they have OS X, along with the apps and grunt required for my humble needs. That they can be set up and ready to go in minutes, and remain hassle free for years does matter to an average Joe like me.

 

[CelestialToys]

If the NUC was specced with PCI-E SSD as the mini is then the price difference wouldn't be quite as extreme. Then add on the labour costs for assembly and the "Apple Tax" factor isn't quite so high.

 

[z31fanatic]

Maxed out Macs are some of the worst values in computing, so I am not shocked at the price difference.
It's criminal that you pay $2000 and still only get a dual core processor and integrated graphics.

 

[lowendlinux]

If the NUC was specced with PCI-E SSD as the mini is then the price difference wouldn't be quite as extreme. Then add on the labour costs for assembly and the "Apple Tax" factor isn't quite so high.

SM951's aren't enough more expensive (129 for 128GB -399 for 512GB) to close the gap.

 

[paulrbeers]

I feel like this very thread has been beaten to death over and over and over again.....

Yes you can buy non-Mac hardware cheaper especially if you go with the high end stuff.

But what about Mid-range? What if you are happy with i5's and 8GB of RAM and a DIY SSD....

$670 for a Mid-Mini + $100 for SSD = $770

$400 for NUC + $50 Memory + $100 SSD + $140 (windows pro OEM) = Approx $700

Now the difference is fairly minimal. Just sayin'. Maxing out a Mac from Apple has never been a financially sound decision.

 

[Johbremat]

If I had different needs I would have likely gone the white box route, but was able to nab NOS 2012 6,2 for my virtualisation lab. After dual SSD and 16GB RAM upgrades, still only cost me AUD$1400 a piece which looks a saving on the price you quoted for the NUC build.

 

[Johbremat]

PS - I voted NUC.

 

[CelestialToys]

SM951's aren't enough more expensive (129 for 128GB -399 for 512GB) to close the gap.

SM951s aren't readily available in 1TB sizes that I can find a price on, other 1TB PCIe SSDs are around the £700 upwards mark. You can't make an Apples to Oranges comparison to make a point.
I could also point out that the NUC system in the OPs post is reduced from full price.
We all know that Apple are slightly more expensive than the competition, but we must compare like for like. It's unfair to compare a prebuilt ready to run system against anything other than another prebuilt ready to run system with identical specs. This is the mistake that nearly everyone making the argument makes.

 

[throAU]

Newsflash:
If you BTO apple devices, you pay lots.

Buy a standard spec and the mini isn't priced TOO badly. I guarantee you that running OS X on a Mini will be less painful than running a NUC (I hackintoshed my PC on the weekend and broke it within a couple of days, yes i can fix it, but it's just a pain in the rear).

 

[lowendlinux]

SM951s aren't readily available in 1TB sizes that I can find a price on, other 1TB PCIe SSDs are around the £700 upwards mark. You can't make an Apples to Oranges comparison to make a point.
I could also point out that the NUC system in the OPs post is reduced from full price.
We all know that Apple are slightly more expensive than the competition, but we must compare like for like. It's unfair to compare a prebuilt ready to run system against anything other than another prebuilt ready to run system with identical specs. This is the mistake that nearly everyone making the argument makes.

I wasn't arguing for the Nuc I was just pointing out that PCIe SSD's aren't all that expensive, nothing beyond that. I'm still waiting on an NVME SM951 to show up at a seller I've heard of because I want one for myself.

 

[paulrbeers]

FYI this poll is terrible. There needs to be a third choice: I wouldn't buy a maxed out Mini

Really no one should be buying Maxed out Macs from Apple at all....

 

[steve123]

According to the OP the performance specs of the two systems were comparable. So, regardless of whether or not the mini is "maxed out", the price differential is extreme when you look at the price / performance ratio. This is what Apple needs to pay closer attention to.

 

[paulrbeers]

According to the OP the performance specs of the two systems were comparable. So, regardless of whether or not the mini is "maxed out", the price differential is extreme when you look at the price / performance ratio. This is what Apple needs to pay closer attention to.

Well if you want to talk about price to performance ratio....

https://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks

The 2.6ghz i5 and the maxed out 3.0ghz i7 is about 500 points in geekbench (6600 vs 7100). Why anyone would max out a mini when you are talking such a small increase is lost on me.

 

[solaris]

I would buy neither, and actually did just recently.

Back in February I checked out various NUC's and Mac mini's, to be used as a virtualization and home server. After weighing pros and cons I ended up with a NOS late 2012 Mac mini Server (2,3 GHz Quad core i7), in which I dropped 16GB 3rd. party RAM. It set med back about £800 in total.

 

[richpjr]

If you are going to whinge about the price, yes, seriously.

Why pay a premium for an OS and apps you don't want, if all you are interested in are the specs you need / desire to run the OS and apps you want to use?

I remain happy to pay the premium for more humble Macs because they have OS X, along with the apps and grunt required for my humble needs. That they can be set up and ready to go in minutes, and remain hassle free for years does matter to an average Joe like me.

Where did I ever whine about or even mention price? I merely said iWork and iLife are not adequate for my uses so the fact that they are included, while great for you, is useless to me.