When I was running with the base model about 7 months ago, I noted that RAM usage was about 3gb typically with my patterns of use and not a bad computer for how I was using it (light use, coding, no video / photo editing). Very quiet little machine. I ran a virtual machine sometimes and at that point I felt I had insufficient RAM. I personally would pass on repurchasing the base model even at $429.
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.
The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming
- Thread starter GabrieleR
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mac mini new mac mini
- Sort by reaction score
When I was running with the base model about 7 months ago, I noted that RAM usage was about 3gb typically with my patterns of use and not a bad computer for how I was using it (light use, coding, no video / photo editing). Very quiet little machine. I ran a virtual machine sometimes and at that point I felt I had insufficient RAM. I personally would pass on repurchasing the base model even at $429.
Thanks for the reply. I appreciate it. I will be doing some video rendering and uploading. I agree, I think I might need more than the base.
Spinners belong on the back of a dinosaur. Period.
Hmm. Just took a look at the prices of 2 TB drives on Amazon. Solid state drives: lowest I could find was $500, most were upwards of $800. Spinners: averaged around $80.
For my needs, the back of the dinosaur still looks really, really nice, at 1/10 the price.
The 1TB spinner on a mini makes a nice place to save your music library and TM backup.
At $100 for 4TB, spinners still make economic sense over SSD for a lot of purposes.
Most of us don't move that many GB/H, except for initial disk creation, and spindisks are perfectly fine for differential BU purposes, or just moving a few hundred files around.
At $100 for 4TB, spinners still make economic sense over SSD for a lot of purposes.
Most of us don't move that many GB/H, except for initial disk creation, and spindisks are perfectly fine for differential BU purposes, or just moving a few hundred files around.
I have a base 2012 and base 2014, each with 4gb and the 500gb hard drive. I just continue to be amazed at how much slower the 2014 model feels. The hard drives on both machines clock the same - about 100MB/sec. The 2014 has a somewhat lower geekbench rating, but not a lot. But everything just "feels" slow on the 2014, especially the time it takes to open an app. And this is seen with basic things like system preferences.
Kind of hard to understand, I wonder if some of it is the difference between El Capitan on the 2014 and Mavericks on the 2012? At any rate, I just use the 2014 for an iTunes server and it is more than adequate for that. I would really recommend against the base 2014 for general computing use, unless you're a very patient person.
Since I have "one Mini too many", have decided to give one to my daughter's family to replace their dog-slow 2008 iMac. Will be giving them the 2012 (which I've upgraded to 16gb for $65). Just wouldn't feel right to give them the 2014, will continue using it as my iTunes server.
Yes, several who own one, and have posted their satisfaction in these forums. But it does depend on your needs, desires and expectations.
Hmm. Just took a look at the prices of 2 TB drives on Amazon. Solid state drives: lowest I could find was $500, most were upwards of $800. Spinners: averaged around $80.
For my needs, the back of the dinosaur still looks really, really nice, at 1/10 the price.
Well said, 'nuff said.
The spinner in the Mini is a 5400RPM 500GB. Prices on Amazon for those spinners start around $30, and 500GB SSDs start around $110.
The cost of switching to SSDs will incur a maximum price rise of $80 (for the same size drive), and with a big leap in performance, easily the single biggest value-for-dollar improvement they could make to the Mini, and obviously Apple will be able to reduce that extra cost substantially with bulk buys.
Did I mention that the spinner in the Mini is 5400 RPM? And this is 2016. Are Apple seriously arguing that they can't afford to even upgrade to 7200RPM spinners?
It's pathetic. On this issue Apple totally deserve the kicking they are getting over their crippling and gouging. It is almost like they don't want us to buy Minis.
Bingo! You win the prize. Apple gets a decent amount of profit from each Mini sale, but they get a whole lot more from each iMac sale. So yes, they'd prefer you to not buy Minis.
It's like a real estate agent showing you a lousy first house/apartment, before taking you to the house they want to sell you. At which point I like to show them the business cards of all the other agents I have contacted.
I have an entertainment PC (Windows 10) and I am learning to like just working on the machine I have - wearing noise cancelling headphones while working (6 fans, loud). Moving on, Apple.
Yes. Yosemite and later need an SSD to perform optimally. The problem is cased by the memory compression feature, and is compounded with slow 2.5-inch laptop drives.
False, and on several levels! Yosemite and later work excellently on HD-only machines, and in fact, the memory compression feature is one reason for that -- it avoids swapping RAM out to disk, which provides a bigger benefit the slower your drives are. (Therefore, memory compression shows a smaller benefit when using an SSD.)
The biggest problem with more recent versions of OS X is that they simply take up more RAM than earlier versions did. (Which is likely one reason memory compression was introduced.) And so, users whose machines had sufficient RAM when running earlier versions end up discovering just how much of a problem it is when you have to page memory out to the drive. This issue is less bad when you have a fast drive (like an SSD), but it is still bad.
In any case, if you have a machine with sufficient RAM, Yosemite and later run perfectly fast. (Even on my old 2010 Mini!)
Except I won't buy an iMac, or a Mac Pro for that matter. I will buy a Linux box instead. Nothing in Apple's desktop range does what I need at a workable price. So they will have lost me as a customer (for desktops, I will almost certainly remain a laptop customer).
I don't want to switch a Linux box. I prefer not to have to operate two OS environments for my personal computing. But Apple are not leaving me much option.
You're right about how memory compression is supposed to work and usually does work. Nevertheless, on some systems with mechanical hard disks it can cause severe performance problems, and installing an SSD solves them.
This issue has been discussed extensively on Macintouch.com, I myself experienced it even though my 2012 Mini has 16 GB of RAM, and installing an SSD was the solution.
Actually, take a closer look at those articles! I've just browsed through the first few, and so far, there is zero correlation between SSD usage and memory compression issues. Some people were complaining about memory compression not working properly on older Macs, regardless of what drives they were using...
If you were suffering from swapping on your 16 GB Mini before you added an SSD, my guess is that you were still suffering from swapping afterwards, but the pain was lessened.
When it comes right down to it, if your machine is swapping, you have insufficient RAM for what you are trying to do. Replacing the HD with an SSD does not change the fact that you still have insufficient RAM.
You are absolutly right. Just speeds swap because SSD speed
No. You didn't read those threads. It's not a swapping issue, and it's not an insufficient RAM issue. You're not going to help by giving advice rooted in ignorance.
[doublepost=1479992879][/doublepost]
That's not even a sentence.
Personally, I am close to wanting to marry this guy based on his responses
What a smart dude.
Give me a new mini, dammit. But I can live without. Web apps.
Shaun.
Do you guys hang out together in the same boys-only spa or something?
Last edited:
...almost certainly! It's always almost certainly!
(I'm almost sure this is a Monty Python sketch.)
