Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MAC MINI (NEW) UNDERWHELMING
- Thread starter HappyDude20
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why not use 5th, 6th, and 7th generation chips in the mean time? What was so special about the 8th generation chips that made them worth waiting for while ignoring previous generation chips? Same question for the T2: What is so special about it that Apple couldn't have updated the Mini without it (as they have previously done)?
A couple points:
- Your screenshot shows 288-pin desktop DDR4, which is 100% incompatible with the Mac mini. The 2018 Mac mini takes 260-pin mobile SODIMMs.
- 4x16 GB is twice as many sticks as the Mac mini has slots, so that is also incompatible.
This is not unique to Apple. The same can be said about any major company such as IBM and HP.
pcpartpicker
Thanks for mentioning that. I can only assume a similar result would be found searching that too.
Why would you want to disable the T2? If you don't want something encrypted, use external storage.
Please send me a free Mac Pro as I would like that
I get what you are saying, I just love the mini form factor. I had the 27 5K iMac and loved that screen. But at the end of the day, I like a separate computer. Just the way I am wired.Yea video cards (I think Apples hates them) but that's where modular kicks in or eGPU I guess.
Modular - When I hear the term Modular, I never think of internal components as being modular, so it's a question of what your base line is for modular.
When I first outlined this idea someone linked to the HP Eltie Slice and rightly so. I wasn't aware of it but it demonstrated the simple concept. I mean it was even suggested by Apple designs of the past like the time capsule same format taking it's lead from the mac mini, they could have expanded on this more agreesivley, a white plastic mac mini modular concept for semi-pro's. Then provide a Pro aluminium version.
Apple established as far as I am aware, this form ahead of the industry which then followed, but Apple didn't follow through on it's natural evolution. The HP elite slice demonstrates the potential evolution of the MM today. I think Apple might consider this approach to a point and only have to reference their previous designs for acknowledgement without having to admit paying homage to the more recent competition.
What I outlined and envisioned was the CPU as a base unit direct from the Mac Mini from, as it presented the ideal existing design, increase the height a couple inches or centimetres taller and you have a base Mac Mini Pro unit in a familiar and estbalished format - from this you can addition case modules i.e. Stacked!
Right now the MM looks like it's a bit closer to going in a base unit direction or role. Apple have put desktop CPU's in there if I'm not mistaken instead of mobile. That's a real change.
What's to stop a 8/12 core or higher core CPU or dual CPU going in there? Well ,maybe space. A few inches on that wouldn't bother too many pro's, nor destroy the aesthetic, especially if it allowed user accessible drive bays, even two might suffice in a base. A few more inches and we're into NEXT Cube computing territory again!
Maybe PRO users who really need GFX power might be able to pick a CPU MMP base and spend the money on GFX stack, for single or multi GFX card array. That housing might even have it's own independent cooling architecture putting no strain on the base unit.
Then there are those who might favour more storage, buy a decent base that fits and then addition a storage array expansion, a passive cooling architecture might work here again, putting no strain on the base unit. Integrated GFX is fine here because this is a headless machine that's for Data so why waste money here.
Of course none of this might fit into Apple bold new T2 world and so the point is moot.
Example pricing.
A BASE Unit MMP 6 Core/256 SSD/16GB €999
- There could be many base units configs, 8/12/16 core CPU's, x2 drive array (max)
Modular Case options (empty & guesstimate prices for illustrative purposes only)
B1 GFX ARRAY x2 Cards $499
B2 GFX ARRAY x4 Cards $699
C1 Storage Array x4 $399
C2 Storage Array x8 $499
D1 Memory Array x 24 modules $299
D2 Memory Array x 48 modules $399
Say you want 16 drives on a headless, you buy x2 C2
A + C1x2 = $1997 - you have a function base computer ready to take 16 SSD's of your choosing.
If you want apple to fill those slots maybe $50,000!!!
That's my take on modular. I can see Mac Pro users exercising bragging rights as to who MMP is bigger/taller without falling over!
I can also see a fine after market trade in modular units. I can see nice margins for Apple on modular units.
Let the Pro user decided the hardware and components configuration they desire rather than having to buy stuff that isn't utilised in a one box fits all applications, yea different spec ordered is the OLD modular way but this is case modular.
It might cost the usual Apple price, at least in this scenario your money is actually better spent and specifically builds the machine you want with future expansion baked in or always available at fixed cost, not simply install the component in the one-size fits all box.
Instead of settling for compromises. Peopel might buy more than one MMP in alternative fongisue for different work, they might buy top spec base unit for sheer CPU farming. Who knows.
Extra note: The HP elite Slice uses USB-C connectivity to connect the modular stacks, I had imagined TB when I was thinking about it so the idea is proven in simple terms.
/Or/
Apple will just give you a refined chess grater traditional desktop BOX with better use of materials and layout to maximise components and airflow for cutting edge stacks.
I like the module approach however unless the new Mac Pro has 6 'separate' TH3/4 buses it will always be in trouble. Sharing ports across bus architecture is a pro issue.
Actually, I haven't been able to find 2x32 GB 2666 MHz 260-pin DDR4 for sale anywhere, only 4x16 GB kits. Feel free to look for yourself.
Good call. So how about a Pots and Bus modular slice expansion?
Perhaps specter and meltdown type CPU issues have been more fundamentally addressed by Intel after pressure from Apple who was able to wait, also demonstrating their seriousness?
Unlikely as these vulnerabilities weren't well known during the period of time Apple let the Mini get stale.
Fair point. In part it may have prolonged it, would they want their T2 chip in bed with compromised intel chips?
Or Maybe they delayed it for that very reason, so as until the T2 chip viability was there and not before, with finally the campus move as a distraction to the detriment of the Mac line up.
Last edited:
Yeah, on the CPU side it certainly seems like this is one really serious upgrade.
Venturebeat had an article on the new Mac mini yesterday:
"Equipped with an optional six-core 3.2GHz Intel Core i7 processor, a $1,099 Mac mini could go toe-to-toe on CPU performance with Apple’s latest eight-core Mac Pro, a machine that sells for $3,799 and up."
First Mac mini 2018 benchmarks suggest Mac Pro speeds, unlike MacBook Air
Last edited:
No, the Mac Pro does not sell. It's five years old. No one is buying a Mac Pro.
That's the thing! FOUR Thunderbolt 3 ports. Try to find a motherboard with that...
(This is very important for pro users. But perhaps the Mac Mini is not a "home computer", as used to be).
The RAM is in sockets - but it is not yet clear whether it will be easy to get at those sockets and whether DIY upgrades will void warranty/Applecare.
Well, the entry-level is actually the same price as the 2012 quad core - they've basically dropped the cheap dual-core option. Of course, the 2012 quad was an i7, while the 2018 entry-level is an i3 but then Intel's i3/i5/i7/i9 branding is information-free by design, so its really a case of waiting for the benchmarks (preferably real-wold ones).
The i5/256GB model at $1099 looks like the "sweet spot" provided the RAM turns out to be user-upgradeable - loading more super-expensive SSDs to make a $4000+ mini seems silly.
For comparison just had a quick look on a site that does custom-build SFF PCs and, for the price:
Intel 8th Gen NUC Core i7-8705G 3.1-4.1 GHz (4 cores, 8 threads), Radeon RX Vega M GX graphics
16GB RAM
256GB NVMe M.2 SSD
Win 10 Pro
Built: £1093
(c.f. UK price of the i5/256GB/6 core Mac Mini = £1099 - UK prices include 20% sales tax).
16GB RAM
256GB NVMe M.2 SSD
Win 10 Pro
Built: £1093
(c.f. UK price of the i5/256GB/6 core Mac Mini = £1099 - UK prices include 20% sales tax).
That's a NUC Mini-PC, 2xTB3 ports, 2x1GB Ethernet, 1xUSB C, 4xUSB-A 3, 1xUSB-A 3.1g2, 1xUSB-A power, 2xHDMI, 2xMini Displayport, SDXC, 3.5mm + TOSLINK (YMMV but I think that beats the Mini on connectivity unless you really need more than 2 thunderbolt ports).
If you need good-but-not-pro graphics then that's going to thrash the Mac Mini - but I bet its going to be far noisier (the builder's website warns as much) and the NUCs have an external PSU as big as the computer. The Mini's i5/6 core is probably the better CPU to have in a mini-PC - I don't see any hex-core i5 NUC options yet.
So I'm not going to call a winner on that one - seems like swings and roundabouts to me - the NUC is probably a bit more powerful, but noisier, uglier and, of course, doesn't run MacOS.
However the stinger comes as soon as you start to expand it - because for £1806 you can have the same NUC but with 32GB RAM, and an internal 2TB NVMe SSD in addition to the original 256GB system drive (c.f. over £3000 for a 32GB/2TB Mini). Ouch. And, of course, you can add that extra RAM and M.2. drive yourself at a later date or if you can find a cheaper source. How much do you really hate Windows? I rest my case - its the stupidly expensive BTO options that are the problem for the Mac Mini.
(NB: sorry - I think I forgot to add £35 for Windows Pro on one or both of those prices)
Well, its not pointless if you don't need a powerful GPU. It could be great for a development machine, and the 6-core processor would be good for music.
The problem at the moment is that eGPUs are silly expensive (understandable - they're complicated and currently small-volume) - which may be good if you need a really high-end GPU for pro work, but the Mini seems to create a gap in the market for an affordable "better than Intel UHD" prosumer eGPU - maybe a good mobile one that doesn't need a heatsink the size of Wales - in a matching box that stacks with the Mini.
...if you actually need a cluster of *Macs* at a time when Apple are running down MacOS Server and have switched mainly to standards like SMB. Personally, I don't see any appeal to using MacOS as a server OS when you can have Linux or BSD for free or Windows Server if you need it without paying a premium for Apple hardware. Once you get to the command line, Linux/BSD isn't that different from macOS and you'll probably be running the same server software anyway. Plus, increasingly, you'll want to run a bare-metal hypervisor on the server, making MacOS even less relevant.
I think there's a very narrow niche where a couple of Mac Minis are nice as "informal" servers, but these days that's really coming down to the fact that they don't need a power brick - which is now spoiled by the lack of any bulk internal storage option apart from super-expensive Apple SSDs. The Mini is not server class hardware - lacking things like redundant PSUs and lights-out management & requiring a mains cable for every CPU. Above a certain scale, proper rackmount equipment and blade servers will be the way to go.
[doublepost=1541253597][/doublepost]
Why do you need four thunderbolt 3 ports? There's PC options with two TB3 ports plus a shedload of other ports that leave those 2 TB3 ports free for actual TB3 devices - see my NUC example above.
Yeah, here's the correct RAM for a 32GB upgrade at Amazon, Crucial (good solid product), for $271:
https://www.amazon.com/Crucial-Single-PC4-21300-SODIMM-260-Pin/dp/B071H38422?th=1
(Just an FYI for anyone shopping
)
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
TB (any generation really, but particularly 3) gives you ridiculous flexibility.
My previous laptop is a 2011 17". No USB3, but it had TB1. That allowed me to get an TB 'dock' which gave me USB3 and eSATA, making a multi-bay drive array actually usable.
Fast forward to today, USB 3.1G2 gives up to 10gbps. Great. It's better than USB2 or 3.0. But that's what my already-obsolete MBP had 7 years ago via it's TB1 port.
Meanwhile, my 2018 MBP (and soon to order 2018 Mac Mini) has 4 TB3 ports. Any one of the four will run 2x 4K monitors. Another might run a multi-bay TB3 drive array.
When companies start making say, 6K or 8K displays and require multiple DP streams, it's likely TB3 has the bandwidth capacity to carry that already.
[doublepost=1541254892][/doublepost]
64GB kits are still basically unavailable, right?
Last edited:
My Coffee Lake i7 hackintosh (6 cores, 3.2 gHz), which only has the UHD630 gpu, comes in with Geekbench scores of 5770 (single core) and 25012 (multicore). The mini should have similar score, perhaps a bit higher (I'm using a SATA SSD instead of an m.2). Not too shabby.
Yeah, that seems to be the case, I mean, I found the right spec at a few places, but they were "special order" (and didn't really have legit part numbers yet).
[doublepost=1541255295][/doublepost]
Yeah, 9-5 Mac posted this:
https://9to5mac.com/2018/11/02/mac-mini-base-2018-geekbench/
But no "end user hands on" scores as of yet (so take it for what it's worth
) Original source:
https://venturebeat.com/2018/11/02/...ks-suggest-mac-pro-speeds-unlike-macbook-air/
I agree with you that the BTO options sink the mini. But the initial starting price is also an issue. An i3/128GB/8GB machine for $800 is just too much. I realize that's pice competitive spec-for-spec with a 2012 machine, but if you don't see the problem with that, I'm just at a lack for words.
For very small form factor workstation $800 is price competitive, but how many people a in the market for mini-workstations? Those mini-workstations from HP have a heck of a lot of user expandability the Mac doesn't have too, so at the least that $800 could get you in the door, then you upgrade as you go yourself. With the stupid high BTO prices combined with the high entry point, it really limits the price competitiveness of the mini. Essentially, you could have one of those, but not both.
I also agree the i5/256 is the "sweet spot" but geez, that's still a $1000+ for a headless computer that doesn't even include the keyboard/mouse. Adding in the Apple mouse/key board is $180 (at minimum you kind of need the mouse to get all the gestures to really justify the macOS tax, but you could save a bit on any old $15 keyboard), and a good 24 inch monitor is $200-300 or so. This is $1400-1500 computer in total (maybe some have those things, but from a total configuration cost it doesn't matter, at some point you did spend that money and you have to replace those things about as frequently as computers anyway). And we're still on 8GB of RAM!
The base price for this thing should have been $100-200 cheaper, and some of the first upgrades should also be about $100 cheaper (128 -> 256 SSD and 8 -> 16 RAM, I'm looking at you).