Real world comparison of 2012 vs 2014

[magbarn]

I am Graphic designer, and Adobe master collection was my first installation. This new mini starting for 7sec. and shut down for 2sec. For me this is amazing. My Smart TV starting for more time. Mission control, notification center and other animations are much more smoother from the 2012's mini.
..and iPhone is with dual core processor, but is much better from every 4 cores smartphones. This is my answer for the question 4cores old machine or 2cores new mini.

.. and the last.. old mini is with fusion

Then your comparison isn't fair unless you had less than 128gb on your fusion drive. Put a Samsung 850 Pro 256gb SSD in your 2012 quad and get back to us.

I've got a 2013 Haswell rMBP 13 with Iris and a 2012 rMBP 13 with HD4000 in the same household and while the 2013 is a little bit smoother in Yosemite animations, it's not a huge difference.

Your 4 core vs 2 core smartphone comparison is bunk as the majority of Android quad core smartphones have 4 crappy cores, while Apple chooses to use 2 really good ones instead. An Ivy Bridge core is not even 10% slower than a Haswell core.

 

[cfedu]

Then your comparison isn't fair unless you had less than 128gb on your fusion drive. Put a Samsung 850 Pro 256gb SSD in your 2012 quad and get back to us.

I've got a 2013 Haswell rMBP 13 with Iris and a 2012 rMBP 13 with HD4000 in the same household and while the 2013 is a little bit smoother in Yosemite animations, it's not a huge difference.

Your 4 core vs 2 core smartphone comparison is bunk as the majority of Android quad core smartphones have 4 crappy cores, while Apple chooses to use 2 really good ones instead. An Ivy Bridge core is not even 10% slower than a Haswell core.

^^^ this

 

[cynics]

I am Graphic designer, and Adobe master collection was my first installation. This new mini starting for 7sec. and shut down for 2sec. For me this is amazing. My Smart TV starting for more time. Mission control, notification center and other animations are much more smoother from the 2012's mini.
..and iPhone is with dual core processor, but is much better from every 4 cores smartphones. This is my answer for the question 4cores old machine or 2cores new mini.

.. and the last.. old mini is with fusion

Your analogy is broken. You are saying that 2 core iPhone > 4 core Android. The analogy would dictate 2 core Mini > 4 core Mini.

Real world usage that relies heavily on the processor shows the opposite. The first post benchmark is a clear example.

I'd rework your "answer for the question" because its incorrect and technically isn't an actual answer.

There are plenty of benefits of the 2014 Mac. However processing power is certainly not one of them.

 

[benx1111]

Most people, who choose apple computer, don't want to put anything in their computers, because don't have time, wish or notion. I am not 18 years old. If you want to do upgrades, build hackintosh.
I was very scared before I received the mini, because of the many comments here, "benchmarks, numbers, dual core omg.."
The facts: really great computer, really fast of course do not expect miracles, but for work with photoshop, browser, mail, or for programmer is perfect.
And is better from the old one. Perfectly for home too.
Advice:
If you don't have mac, the mac mini is a great first mac, take high end 2014.
If you have old mac mini (more than 3-4 years) take high end 2014

 

[gugy]

I am Graphic designer, and Adobe master collection was my first installation. This new mini starting for 7sec. and shut down for 2sec. For me this is amazing. My Smart TV starting for more time. Mission control, notification center and other animations are much more smoother from the 2012's mini.
..and iPhone is with dual core processor, but is much better from every 4 cores smartphones. This is my answer for the question 4cores old machine or 2cores new mini.

.. and the last.. old mini is with fusion

Good to know you are a designer. I am too.
I am considering get a Mini because I need it to travel and where I go to work there is a TB display available. I am looking on the Mini because i want a cheap option than a Macbook and wondering what model 2012 or 2014 would fit my needs better.
Because this is a secondary machine for me I am looking for a fair performance on Photoshop. I do work with large files like 500mb to 1gb. So I am very curious to see if the Mini can hold well under these circumstances.

I am looking into the 2014 i5/16GB RAM/SSD or 2012 i7/16GB RAM/SSD.

 

[Micky Do]

Sorely disappointed when I clicked on this thread and saw a comparison for just one application. That hardly represents real world performance between the 2012 and 2014 mini's.

From arstechnica...

Image

Obviously, since the i7 is quad core....

Again, for the millionth time, this system is not meant for movie studios or professional photographers. Do you think the general user will care if their Handbrake takes a couple minutes longer?

Again, the 2014 mini has nearly half the performance of the mid-tier 2012, for real world work applications (stuff that can't be done on a tablet/smartphone). It's a sealed throwaway design from a company that purports to be "green", even though technically a "desktop" computer.

As suggested by others, the real world is more than just one parameter. Sure the 2014 Mini performs poorly compared to the top end 2012 Mini in the Handbrake comparison referred to above. For many other benchmarks it performed as well, or a little better. In the end the "real world" is the 2014 Mini in the world of real users. Thanks to Benx1111 for the comments:

Before 2 weeks I received my new mac mini 2014 with all high components (i7,16gb,256 ssd) I work and with 2012 mac mini with same hardware. I want to tell of all, all comments, benchmarks or something of this topic are totally ********. The new mini is much, much more faster. I make compare every day and actually all here is only numbers, cores, and comments. I advice you don't buy the old mac mini, the new everytime is a better. In this case much, much better. Thank you!

Most people, who choose apple computer, don't want to put anything in their computers, because don't have time, wish or notion. I am not 18 years old. If you want to do upgrades, build hackintosh.
I was very scared before I received the mini, because of the many comments here, "benchmarks, numbers, dual core omg.."
The facts: really great computer, really fast of course do not expect miracles, but for work with photoshop, browser, mail, or for programmer is perfect.
And is better from the old one. Perfectly for home too.

Benchmarks be damned. From now on, I follow benx1111's infallible mac buying advice.

I know you are being facetious, but in truth tests and benchmarks are just a guideline to the maximum performance of a product, albeit beloved by geeks.

1. Wow... three nationalities. Who knew there was someone so worldly (and pretentious) on macrumors?

You are new around here, aren't you?

Although somewhat 'murika centric, Macrumors and Mac Mini users are a board church.

 

[magbarn]

Good to know you are a designer. I am too.
I am considering get a Mini because I need it to travel and where I go to work there is a TB display available. I am looking on the Mini because i want a cheap option than a Macbook and wondering what model 2012 or 2014 would fit my needs better.
Because this is a secondary machine for me I am looking for a fair performance on Photoshop. I do work with large files like 500mb to 1gb. So I am very curious to see if the Mini can hold well under these circumstances.

I am looking into the 2014 i5/16GB RAM/SSD or 2012 i7/16GB RAM/SSD.

Well let's see

2014 i5 dual core 16gb ram 1tb ssd = $2000
2012 i7 quad core refurb 16gb ram upgrade crucial 1 tb ssd + 1tb hdd = $1140

Why aren't you signed up on refurb.me yet?

----------

As suggested by others, the real world is more than just one parameter. Sure the 2014 Mini performs poorly compared to the top end 2012 Mini in the Handbrake comparison referred to above. For many other benchmarks it performed as well, or a little better. In the end the "real world" is the 2014 Mini in the world of real users. Thanks to Benx1111 for the comments:







I know you are being facetious, but in truth tests and benchmarks are just a guideline to the maximum performance of a product, albeit beloved by geeks.



You are new around here, aren't you?

Although somewhat 'murika centric, Macrumors and Mac Mini users are a board church.

Why are you accepting one misinformed opinion as gospel? A $2000 brand new 27 iMac will feel SLOWER than a $900 MacBook air 11 using Benx's "Benchmarks"

 

[gugy]

Well let's see

2014 i5 dual core 16gb ram 1tb ssd = $2000
2012 i7 quad core refurb 16gb ram upgrade crucial 1 tb ssd + 1tb hdd = $1140

Why aren't you signed up on refurb.me yet?

----------



Why are you accepting one misinformed opinion as gospel? A $2000 brand new 27 iMac will feel SLOWER than a $900 MacBook air 11 using Benx's "Benchmarks"

Yeah, I am on refurb.me. I am going the 256SSD and have edu discount. So the gap is not as large. for the 2014 would be $1,040.
The 2012 with same specs should be around $879.

 

[Micky Do]

Why are you accepting one misinformed opinion as gospel? A $2000 brand new 27 iMac will feel SLOWER than a $900 MacBook air 11 using Benx's "Benchmarks"

Not "one misinformed opinion".

It is one real world opinion of 2014 Mac Mini in use…… There will of course be others, some of which will be favourable, and others less so, depending on the setup and the needs / desires of different people.

Why are you accepting of benchmarks as gospel?

They are guidelines that may or may not reflect use in the real world. The OP's comparison, based on one parameter, may be valid for some, but it does not represent the real world as a whole.

 

[magbarn]

Not "one misinformed opinion".

It is one real world opinion of 2014 Mac Mini in use…… There will of course be others, some of which will be favourable, and others less so, depending on the setup and the needs / desires of different people.

Why are you accepting of benchmarks as gospel?

They are guidelines that may or may not reflect use in the real world. The OP's comparison, based on one parameter, may be valid for some, but it does not represent the real world as a whole.

I don't know if there's a language barrier here, but what I was alluding to was that benx is comparing a 2012 machine hobbled with a fusion drive which will always be slower than a pure SSD setup. That's why I'm not agreeing with his findings. Likewise a iMac 27 which will blow the socks off a MacBook Air in everything else will take longer to load apps as it's hobbled with a hdd.

 

[Micky Do]

I don't know if there's a language barrier here, but what I was alluding to was that benx is comparing a 2012 machine hobbled with a fusion drive which will always be slower than a pure SSD setup. That's why I'm not agreeing with his findings. Likewise a iMac 27 which will blow the socks off a MacBook Air in everything else will take longer to load apps as it's hobbled with a hdd.

Benx1111 comparison is based on experience in real world use.

You and the OP are basing your comments / opinion on benchmarks that a maxed out machine can achieve…. which may be applicable to the real life of a few, but by no means all.

Bear in mind that the usefulness of a computer is the sum of the parts, hardware and software. It is not about the grunt of any one component, or its performance based on a single parameter.

 

[crazzapple]

You are new around here, aren't you?

Although somewhat 'murika centric, Macrumors and Mac Mini users are a board church.

Another one over your head.

Just out of morbid curiosity, what is it about apple that you love so much to defend a product that performs half as good as the 2 year old version? What other multinational corporations do you defend on the internet?

 

[benx1111]

Good to know you are a designer. I am too.
I am considering get a Mini because I need it to travel and where I go to work there is a TB display available. I am looking on the Mini because i want a cheap option than a Macbook and wondering what model 2012 or 2014 would fit my needs better.
Because this is a secondary machine for me I am looking for a fair performance on Photoshop. I do work with large files like 500mb to 1gb. So I am very curious to see if the Mini can hold well under these circumstances.

I am looking into the 2014 i5/16GB RAM/SSD or 2012 i7/16GB RAM/SSD.

In this case mini is not your machine. Nevermind 2012 or 2014. This are a very large files.

And thanks all for the comments, I published my impressions for this machine and I doing this for the people who searching some decision. If you don't like, don't buy. That's it! Most people here only speaking and nothing in final. I tell you the truth many people confuse this.

And another answer.. Fusion drive and clear ssd is exactly the same maybe 1-2% slower, you can watch benchmarks and videos in youtube. I know everyone love benchmarks.
Cheers!

 

[macrem]

I use an old MBP (pre-rMBP) connected to external monitor, keyboard, trackpad as my home desktop machine & was waiting for the new Mini to be my new home desktop machine, but what a disappointment it is! I may pick up a 2012 quad core Mini or just stick with using my old laptop as a desktop.

 

[cfedu]

In this case mini is not your machine. Nevermind 2012 or 2014. This are a very large files.

And thanks all for the comments, I published my impressions for this machine and I doing this for the people who searching some decision. If you don't like, don't buy. That's it! Most people here only speaking and nothing in final. I tell you the truth many people confuse this.

And another answer.. Fusion drive and clear ssd is exactly the same maybe 1-2% slower, you can watch benchmarks and videos in youtube. I know everyone love benchmarks.
Cheers!

If this computer is not for GUGY than I don't think this is the computer for you as well, since nothing you do will work much better than it did on you 2012 quad core mac mini.

Your only real requirement looks like it is to be able to boot in 7 seconds and are really impressed by this. WOW that longer than a 2013 Mac pro!! The thing is most people keep there computers on all the time and do not care.

To tell a first time mac user to buy a 1400$ 2014 high end mac mini when they only need to surf the web and check email is a disservice to this forum.


My 2009 mac mini with an ssd will boot faster than a 2014 mini (base model) and will also be snappier for many IO tasks. It will even bette a 2012 Quad core with a hard drive. How Can this be? An Apple dual core A8 is faster than a quad core Snap dragon, so therefore a core 2 duo with an SSD must be faster than a quad core i7.


The 2014 Mac mini is a better buy for certain people for certain tasks, but all your justifications seem like BS is you don't provide real world examples where it is truly advantages.

 

[reco2011]

Benx1111 comparison is based on experience in real world use.

You and the OP are basing your comments / opinion on benchmarks that a maxed out machine can achieve…. which may be applicable to the real life of a few, but by no means all.

Bear in mind that the usefulness of a computer is the sum of the parts, hardware and software. It is not about the grunt of any one component, or its performance based on a single parameter.

I'm sorry but am I supposed to measure the usefulness of a computer based on the needs of everyone? Or should I measure them on my needs? People who are complaining about the lack of quad core aren't doing so because of the needs of the majority but rather their needs. The previous Mac Mini was better for their needs. It is their needs they're concerned with. Whether Apple chooses to make a system to meet their needs is entirely up to Apple. Apple has chosen to forgo that market. That doesn't change the fact Apple did used to make a Mini that meet their needs.

Today I just bought a Mini...a 2012 i5 model (entry level). It comes with 4GB of RAM. I choose it because it meets my needs today. However I can see a time when I may want to add more memory. The 2014 was out as I did not want to pay the premium for > 4GB when the 2012 could easily be upgraded in the future as my needs require.

 

[Thunderchicken]

The new 2014 Mac mini with its duel core only processor and it's soldered on memory has some people all in a tizzy. Yes we all get there is a community that likes to MOD and be a DIY'r, however I feel your in the minority just like the people that MOD there cars. Most people just want to plug it up and go and when things no longer work or the new software won't run on there system they sell it or repurpose it. Apple didn't say let's force people to buy our memory upgrade so let's use soldered on memory, no... I'm pretty sure they looked at all options and the LPDDR3 memory gave them the biggest gains for the iGPU and CPU due to having a higher bandwidth. Probably on the advice of Intel.

The only people being cheated are the rMBP "15 inchers because the CPU is able to recognize up to 32GB but Apple has set a max of 16GB with on other options.

Apple didn't take away anything, this new system can still run the same programs as it did before they maybe a bit slower when it comes to transcoding video using Handbrake.

And yes we all understand that the base model is almost the same as the MBA and the mid and top models are rMBP "13's.

If you feel that your going to need the processing power of a quad core then you'll have to look at "15 rMBP, iMAC, or MP. If you don't get over it cause it's not going to change like everyone wanting Apple to make a more PC like computer that they can upgrade themselves.

If you want to MOD and customize then build yourself a PC it's not hard.

 

[cinealta]

If you feel that your going to need the processing power of a quad core then you'll have to look at "15 rMBP, iMAC, or MP.

You need to factor in marginal cost. A refurb 2012 i7 quad Mini is $589 but a rMBP is $2,500! Even a quad i7 iMac is at least $1,700.

 

[cfedu]

The new 2014 Mac mini with its duel core only processor and it's soldered on memory has some people all in a tizzy. Yes we all get there is a community that likes to MOD and be a DIY'r, however I feel your in the minority just like the people that MOD there cars. Most people just want to plug it up and go and when things no longer work or the new software won't run on there system they sell it or repurpose it. Apple didn't say let's force people to buy our memory upgrade so let's use soldered on memory, no... I'm pretty sure they looked at all options and the LPDDR3 memory gave them the biggest gains for the iGPU and CPU due to having a higher bandwidth. Probably on the advice of Intel.

The only people being cheated are the rMBP "15 inchers because the CPU is able to recognize up to 32GB but Apple has set a max of 16GB with on other options.

Apple didn't take away anything, this new system can still run the same programs as it did before they maybe a bit slower when it comes to transcoding video using Handbrake.

And yes we all understand that the base model is almost the same as the MBA and the mid and top models are rMBP "13's.

If you feel that your going to need the processing power of a quad core then you'll have to look at "15 rMBP, iMAC, or MP. If you don't get over it cause it's not going to change like everyone wanting Apple to make a more PC like computer that they can upgrade themselves.

If you want to MOD and customize then build yourself a PC it's not hard.

If that were true, Apple would not make the Mac mini since by your standard is way to complicated.

"Most people just want to plug it up and go and when things no longer work or the new software won't run on there system they sell it or repurpose it."

Think about it, you need to get the following to make MAC mini work

Monitor
Display adapter
keyboard
mouse
speakers
webcam


The IMac is the true plus and go MAC but not the 27" as it has upgradeable ram, because of this the the 27" is really targeted towards modders.

 

[gugy]

In this case mini is not your machine. Nevermind 2012 or 2014. This are a very large files.

And thanks all for the comments, I published my impressions for this machine and I doing this for the people who searching some decision. If you don't like, don't buy. That's it! Most people here only speaking and nothing in final. I tell you the truth many people confuse this.

And another answer.. Fusion drive and clear ssd is exactly the same maybe 1-2% slower, you can watch benchmarks and videos in youtube. I know everyone love benchmarks.
Cheers!

Well I think the Mini will be OK with lots of RAM and SSD.
Like I said this is a secondary computer for travel. I have MacPro for heavy work.
I am considering the Quad if I can snatch one at reasonable price.

 

[macrem]

The new 2014 Mac mini with its duel core only processor and it's soldered on memory has some people all in a tizzy. Yes we all get there is a community that likes to MOD and be a DIY'r, however I feel your in the minority just like the people that MOD there cars. Most people just want to plug it up and go and when things no longer work or the new software won't run on there system they sell it or repurpose it. Apple didn't say let's force people to buy our memory upgrade so let's use soldered on memory, no... I'm pretty sure they looked at all options and the LPDDR3 memory gave them the biggest gains for the iGPU and CPU due to having a higher bandwidth. Probably on the advice of Intel.

The only people being cheated are the rMBP "15 inchers because the CPU is able to recognize up to 32GB but Apple has set a max of 16GB with on other options.

Apple didn't take away anything, this new system can still run the same programs as it did before they maybe a bit slower when it comes to transcoding video using Handbrake.

And yes we all understand that the base model is almost the same as the MBA and the mid and top models are rMBP "13's.

If you feel that your going to need the processing power of a quad core then you'll have to look at "15 rMBP, iMAC, or MP. If you don't get over it cause it's not going to change like everyone wanting Apple to make a more PC like computer that they can upgrade themselves.

If you want to MOD and customize then build yourself a PC it's not hard.

I don't mind it being non modifiable if I could future proof it a bit by getting quad-core (impossible), a decent sized SSD & RAM without the price of the thing getting way out of hand, but the upgrades are way too expensive. Once I increase RAM and get an SSD it's already the price of a Macbook Air, but it has no screen, no keyboard, etc. Strange.

 

[theSeb]

^ But who wants to pay more money for less performance?

That really depends on which part of performance you're referring to.

I love how the OP chose one specific benchmark to support his point. Most users will not notice the lack of the extra 2 cores, unless they are doing CPU intensive stuff all the time, like encoding movies every day.

----------

Sorely disappointed when I clicked on this thread and saw a comparison for just one application. That hardly represents real world performance between the 2012 and 2014 mini's. Do everyone a favor an re-label this thread "Handbrake Comparison" or something similar. Or maybe provide some more application performance metrics and make it more comprehensive.


Thanks.

Why present a balanced view when you can find a single graph to support your agenda? /sarcasm

I fully agree with you.

----------

What Apple did would be analogous to Nikon putting the D7100 sensor in the D750's successor 2 years from now and charging the same price.

No, that analogy is completely incorrect.


--------------

Some of the design choices in the 2014 Mini are inexcusable, like removing the upgradeability and soldering the RAM, but some of you need to get a grip. Just out of interest, how much did the 2012 Mini with a quad core CPU cost? I can't remember.

Edit: US$799 for the base level quad core - Quad Core "Ivy Bridge" 2.3 GHz Intel "Core i7" (3615QM)

 

[cynics]

That really depends on which part of performance you're referring to.

Image

Image

Image


I love how the OP chose one specific benchmark to support his point. Most users will not notice the lack of the extra 2 cores, unless they are doing CPU intensive stuff all the time, like encoding movies every day.

He picked it because its a real world program. Hence the title "Real world comparison".

You posted benchmarks of Geekbench and quickbench.

Handbrake encodes videos, easily takes them from DVD and puts them in iTunes. Its designed for a novice to use.

What real world purpose does Geekbench and Quickbench serve?

 

[cfedu]

That really depends on which part of performance you're referring to.

Image

Image

Image


I love how the OP chose one specific benchmark to support his point. Most users will not notice the lack of the extra 2 cores, unless they are doing CPU intensive stuff all the time, like encoding movies every day.

----------



Why present a balanced view when you can find a single graph to support your agenda? /sarcasm

I fully agree with you.

----------



No, that analogy is completely incorrect.


--------------

Some of the design choices in the 2014 Mini are inexcusable, like removing the upgradeability and soldering the RAM, but some of you need to get a grip. Just out of interest, how much did the 2012 Mini with a quad core CPU cost? I can't remember.

Edit: US$799 for the base level quad core - Quad Core "Ivy Bridge" 2.3 GHz Intel "Core i7" (3615QM)

A 2012 mini with raid SSD's will have higher IO speeds than a 2014, the only place where the 2012 will really benefit is in GPU related tasks a slightly in single threaded apps.

If GPU performance is critical for you would not want a MAC mini, the mini would probably not be the Mac for you.

If you needed CPU performance, the 2012 quad core mini was a good alternative with near Mac pro performance at times. There is no mac mini will provide high end performance when GPU performance is required.

Is there a value with the 2014 mini? yes, but it has decreased from the previous model for certain people.

----------

He picked it because its a real world program. Hence the title "Real world comparison".

You posted benchmarks of Geekbench and quickbench.

Handbrake encodes videos, easily takes them from DVD and puts them in iTunes. Its designed for a novice to use.

What real world purpose does Geekbench and Quickbench serve?

Ya put the other guy booted his mini in 7 seconds thats real world performance! I want to spend 1400$ to upgrade my top of the line 2012 mini so I also save 5 seconds on startup. I restart my mini around once a month so I will save 60 seconds, that is way more important than any handbrake increase.

 

[psound]

Well, in real world music production, the more cores the better—by a wide margin.

As has been said, it does come down to the individual's needs; the 2014 might satisfy some users. But no-one can deny this has been one of the weakest, long-term "upgrades" of all time.

It seems to be an obvious strategy of forcing professional users into purchasing computer models at a higher price bracket, which after my recent spate of unreliable, heat prone, manufacturing-quality-diminished, defective "Pro" machines, I refuse to pay $2500+ for a mac anymore.

How I wish I could just stomach using Windows.