New mac mini vs older

[Nate32]

Hi

I have a specific question.

I will use it mostly for Photoshop (panorama from 10-20, 22 megapixel raw pictures) and for Premiere Pro.

Now what is the difference between the mac mini 2014 2.6ghz base model and the 2.3ghz quad core model from 2012.
How much does it help the iris pro in what I want to do?
Is the older version faster because of the quad core?

In second case if I will choose the current 2.6 mini, is it worth the 200 USD (in my country the upgrade is 300USD) upgrade for 16 gb of ram? Will the PS and PP be twice as fast?

And also is it possible to make the curent model a server?

Thank you!

Nate

 

[maflynn]

I think the biggest difference that you get 4 cores vs 2. Basically more cores provide more processing power, but that may very get offset by the performance improvements by the newer CPU. The consensus appears that the 2012 model is a better all around computer.

 

[OldITGeek]

I bought a refurb 2012 mac Mini last month, replaced the disk with SSD and it is flying for Lightroom.

 

[newellj]

2.3gHz vs. 2.6gHz isn't a lot (10%...). I'd go for the quad cores. The biggest difference is actually that the 2014 machine is really an appliance - no flexibility, in the real world, to swap RAM, drives, etc.

 

[phrehdd]

For Photoshop - the quad is a better way to go. Two things that in addition to the 4 cores makes it a better machine - easy to upgrade RAM which cuts costs and adding internal drives (such as SSD).

When it comes to single core apps, technically the 2014 dual core might be faster but to the typical user, they will see zero difference. This again tips the scales in favour of the 2012 quad considering all the other advantages for a Photoshop user.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Hi

I have a specific question.

I will use it mostly for Photoshop (panorama from 10-20, 22 megapixel raw pictures) and for Premiere Pro.

Now what is the difference between the mac mini 2014 2.6ghz base model and the 2.3ghz quad core model from 2012.
How much does it help the iris pro in what I want to do?
Is the older version faster because of the quad core?

In second case if I will choose the current 2.6 mini, is it worth the 200 USD (in my country the upgrade is 300USD) upgrade for 16 gb of ram? Will the PS and PP be twice as fast?

And also is it possible to make the curent model a server?

Thank you!

Nate

1. Intel Iris (only the 15" Retinas and the mid-range 21.5" iMacs have Intel Iris Pro) will definitely be better in Premiere Pro and will probably make using Photoshop for those tasks not suck as much as it would've been with the Intel HD 4000. That said, the Quad-Core CPU from the 2014 will help a ton with Premiere and as such you're sort of having to choose between better graphics or better processor.

It sounds like the most optimal thing to do (though I understand it'd cost a considerable amount more) is to consider the high-end 21.5" iMac as you get the best of both worlds (and then some as the CPUs in those are faster than what you'd get in the 2012 mini and still quad-core and the graphics would be discrete and thereby better than what you'd get in the 2014 mini).

The mid-range model 21.5" iMac would also work as Iris Pro is still faster than Iris and that machine still packs a quad-core Haswell processor; but you might get better mileage with Premiere and Photoshop with discrete graphics.


2. Don't buy the RAM from Apple unless you're buying a 2014 Mac mini, any late 2012 or newer 21.5" iMac, any retina MacBook Pro, any MacBook Air, as you can usually get it cheaper aftermarket. Otherwise, max it out when you buy it as you won't be able to later.


3. Any Mac model can be converted into a Server. OS X Server versions for Mountain Lion or newer are just apps that you run on a target machine that otherwise is running the client version of the OS. When running the app you have the option of either (a) setting up that Mac as a server or (b) using the app to remotely administer another Mac that you set up as a server.


Hope that all helps.