Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
benefit to a home user who doesn't do photo or video editing but occasionally performs video transcoding (example, transcoding a video obtained only to be playable on the Apple TV)?

Sounds like you don't need an i5/i7. The i3 is no slouch and something like Plex doesn't require a whole lot of power at all. I'd consider the cheap model and test it out. If it doesn't work, return it and get something better.

Keep in mind that going up to the i5 version doubles your storage. 128GB is really small even for average consumers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mr. Retrofire
Just trying to decide whether to opt for the $799 model vs. the $1099 model.

Of course, there are differences in terms of the SSD size and the processor. For the processor specifically, when would the processor in the $1099 model be of benefit to a home user who doesn't do photo or video editing but occasionally performs video transcoding (example, transcoding a video obtained only to be playable on the Apple TV)?

Thanks

Possibly for gaming.
 
Sounds like you don't need an i5/i7. The i3 is no slouch and something like Plex doesn't require a whole lot of power at all. I'd consider the cheap model and test it out. If it doesn't work, return it and get something better.

Keep in mind that going up to the i5 version doubles your storage. 128GB is really small even for average consumers.
This is what i don't get.
I'm looking to buy a Mac Mini to browse the internet, read mails etc but most of all it should transcode 4K plex to an android tv (i could buy a ATV4K if i need to)

I'm doing it right now off an Macbook Pro 2016 13" dual core with no buffering or pausing issues to my Sony A1 Android tv but the fact that i tend to keep my Mini, for like 7 years, is holding me back from the i3. I bought an external Samsung T5 so i would upgrade to the i7 but is this the ideal solution?
 
This is what i don't get.
I'm looking to buy a Mac Mini to browse the internet, read mails etc but most of all it should transcode 4K plex to an android tv (i could buy a ATV4K if i need to)

I'm doing it right now off an Macbook Pro 2016 13" dual core with no buffering or pausing issues to my Sony A1 Android tv but the fact that i tend to keep my Mini, for like 7 years, is holding me back from the i3. I bought an external Samsung T5 so i would upgrade to the i7 but is this the ideal solution?
It could be it's not actually transcoding. Your sony may support the formats used natively. In that case not much power is required. If it were transcoding 4k your macbook would get loud and hot. Just look at the now playing section of PMS on your macbook as the movie is playing on your tv and it will tell you.
 
For most people, I think either the i3 4 core or the BTO 6 core i7 is the way to go.
The 8th gen i3 is no slouch, and practically the i5 in the current iMacs. The i7 has 12mb cache and higher 4.6 turbo boost would help give causal tasks a bit of extra pep. The i5 default config should be passed on. The i3 is cheaper for most people who would not any perceive any benefit, and the i7 is better suited for people who want max performance for any reason.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Machspeed007
That's interesting, everything I've been hearing is that the base i5 is the mini to buy
 
That's interesting, everything I've been hearing is that the base i5 is the mini to buy
It’s not interesting, it’s bad advice. i5 is the sweet spot for performance value.

It’s a real challenge for less knowledgeable users to know who to “trust “. A lot of posters throw around the tech lingo and sound knowledgeable when they’re not.
 
It’s not interesting, it’s bad advice. i5 is the sweet spot for performance value.

It’s a real challenge for less knowledgeable users to know who to “trust “. A lot of posters throw around the tech lingo and sound knowledgeable when they’re not.

"bad advice" is just your opinion. Ironic that you don't even mention any rationale, tech lingo or not with that slander. More then happy to de-tech my explanation: i3 cheaper and suited for people who won't do gaming or heavy processing. Why get a i5 for 1099, when a bto i7 also cost 1099. i7 has better specs that are tangible.
 
I picked up an i5 for $999 over the Black Friday holiday. My reason is to future proof the machine as I use it more thoroughly than my MBA that only has 128GB of SSD.

More thoroughly means VMs.
[doublepost=1543678580][/doublepost]
I'm glad nobody brought up the argument that "most applications can't make use of multiple cores". That hasn't been true for at least 10 years, and probably 20. When I was writing desktop code (for Windows) 20 years ago, we were extensively using multiple threads. (And now that I write - sometimes - server code in Ruby - it is SO easy to create a thread - one line of code - that... why not?)
Mac OS has only been effective with GCD which is SL so less than ten years. Why not? Because multithreaded programming is hard to write, hard to explain and hard to debug.
Plus, the OS itself uses multiple threads to satisfy user code requests - such as any kind of I/O.
These are generally worker threads that are in a wait state for the duration of the IO to complete. These generally are not cpu bound.
There are almost NO desktop apps or background tasks today that do not use multiple threads, which can take advantage of multiple cores.
Unless a threaded job is cpu bound then you won’t get much utility from more cores. Even on single core systems you generally found GUI apps running the GUI on their own thread to be very responsive with other cpu bound jobs due to time slicing by the OS.
Right now, Activity Monitor shows 1464 threads and 407 processes...

More cores will always help responsiveness when there is some "batch" type of task going on. So, e.g. if you want to do video rendering AND browse the web at the same time.
Activity Monitor is meaningless without context of job scheduler state for threads.

Your responsiveness comment is debunked above.
 
Just trying to decide whether to opt for the $799 model vs. the $1099 model.

[...] but occasionally performs video transcoding (example, transcoding a video obtained only to be playable on the Apple TV)?

Are you sure that the CPU is doing the transcoding and not the T2 chip?
If the T2 chip is doing the transcoding, the CPU does not really matter.
 
Just trying to decide whether to opt for the $799 model vs. the $1099 model.

Of course, there are differences in terms of the SSD size and the processor. For the processor specifically, when would the processor in the $1099 model be of benefit to a home user who doesn't do photo or video editing but occasionally performs video transcoding (example, transcoding a video obtained only to be playable on the Apple TV)?

Thanks
Doesn't the ATV4K direct play Plex? So the i3 should suffice irc
 
I don't know anything about Plex - how does it work? Is it an app that I'm supposed to have on both my Mac and on the Apple TV 4K?

Right now, if I d/l a torrent or something like that, I use SmartConverter to convert it play on Apple TV (I don't even try to play it first through the Apple TV - I just go ahead and convert it). It then adds the converted copy to my iTunes library at which time I can stream it to the Apple TV 4K.
 
I don't know anything about Plex - how does it work? Is it an app that I'm supposed to have on both my Mac and on the Apple TV 4K?

Right now, if I d/l a torrent or something like that, I use SmartConverter to convert it play on Apple TV (I don't even try to play it first through the Apple TV - I just go ahead and convert it). It then adds the converted copy to my iTunes library at which time I can stream it to the Apple TV 4K.
Plex is an app for streaming content over your home network (internet is also possible but lets remain onto the home network) from your server (Mac, PC, NAS) to a client (TV, ATV4K, iPad).

It has it's own library where you can setup folders (movies, tv-series, music, photos) and with their own coverart.

https://www.plex.tv/#

If you buy an ATV4K and buy the Infuse app on it you can stream anything to it with a rather low processor.

I'm streaming 4K HEVC from my Macbook Pro 2016 i5 to a Sony A1 Android TV without transcoding (aka Direct Play) as my client, the TV, supports HEVC and it's audio stream, in this case 7.1.

So maybe you can buy a MM2018 i3 and an Apple TV 4K for the same price of an MM2018 i5 or i7
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElectronGuru
Thanks for that explanation - so using Plex would be in lieu of using iTunes to serve media to the ATV, or Plex would be used in conjunction with iTunes to serve the media?

Would Plex have access to iTunes purchased content that is in iCloud too?
 
Last edited:
Thanks for that explanation - so using Plex would be in lieu of using iTunes to serve media to the ATV, Plex would be used in conjunction with iTunes to serve the media?

Would Plex have access to iTunes purchased content that is in iCloud too?
Plex and iTunes are just different libraries. I don't use iTunes for movies though so i'm no expert on that but indeed Plex should replace iTunes and streams directly to the ATV4K Plex app
 
  • Like
Reactions: pinkoos
Thanks for that explanation - so using Plex would be in lieu of using iTunes to serve media to the ATV, or Plex would be used in conjunction with iTunes to serve the media?

Would Plex have access to iTunes purchased content that is in iCloud too?
Plex is for all your local content. Give it a shot, it's free so why not? I don't bother with iTunes.
[doublepost=1543768399][/doublepost]
I don't know anything about Plex - how does it work? Is it an app that I'm supposed to have on both my Mac and on the Apple TV 4K?

Right now, if I d/l a torrent or something like that, I use SmartConverter to convert it play on Apple TV (I don't even try to play it first through the Apple TV - I just go ahead and convert it). It then adds the converted copy to my iTunes library at which time I can stream it to the Apple TV 4K.
You don't bother with conversions with Plex. It can play anything as it can transcode whatever is not supported natively by the client. This is where a powerful CPU comes in. If transcoding is needed. This allows you to play content on any platform anywhere and it will work. I primarily use Plex on the ATV4k. Sometimes I use infuse. And sometimes I stream to my shield or oppo.
Coupled with Sonarr it will auto download your shows and drop them in to Plex media server, automatically. You sit down to watch tv and it's like you have your own personal DVR. It's free, go set it up!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ElectronGuru
It’s not interesting, it’s bad advice. i5 is the sweet spot for performance value.

It’s a real challenge for less knowledgeable users to know who to “trust “. A lot of posters throw around the tech lingo and sound knowledgeable when they’re not.
it is horsepower, why corner yourself to only look at going after your min requirements? Getting an i7 over the i5 will cost you 2 months of a cable bill. i7 future proofs your machine and offers you better resale, don't be cheap with the CPU - if we were talking about a huge spike in cost, like RAM, that was upgradeable, sure - be conservative. Like getting a 4 cylinder Mustang, why bother. The i7 was the easiest decision for this Mac. if you are looking for a low end web browser, look somewhere else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Machspeed007
Past resale value was more to do with scarcity than anything else at the high end. That advantage is gone now so the i7 is a premium cost without a resale value, IMO. Hence, the i5 model offers most bang for the dollar.
 
it is horsepower, why corner yourself to only look at going after your min requirements? Getting an i7 over the i5 will cost you 2 months of a cable bill. i7 future proofs your machine and offers you better resale, don't be cheap with the CPU - if we were talking about a huge spike in cost, like RAM, that was upgradeable, sure - be conservative. Like getting a 4 cylinder Mustang, why bother. The i7 was the easiest decision for this Mac. if you are looking for a low end web browser, look somewhere else.
Really, what are you talking about? Anything less than an i7 is stooping to "minimum requirements"? The i5 is a 6 core that is one of the fastest CPU's Apple currently offers in their entire lineup. For a lot of people here, $200 is a lot of money. And so your conclusion is that if you just want a computer for general home use, but aren't willing to spend the money on the top-of-the-line i7, you shouldn't buy a Mac. Yeah, got it. :rolleyes:

BTW, just a little advice for everyone else - one of the dumbest ways to spend your money is buying computer upgrades you don't need for the sake of "future proofing" and "resale value".
 
Really, what are you talking about? Anything less than an i7 is stooping to "minimum requirements"? The i5 is a 6 core that is one of the fastest CPU's Apple currently offers in their entire lineup. For a lot of people here, $200 is a lot of money. And so your conclusion is that if you just want a computer for general home use, but aren't willing to spend the money on the top-of-the-line i7, you shouldn't buy a Mac. Yeah, got it. :rolleyes:

BTW, just a little advice for everyone else - one of the dumbest ways to spend your money is buying computer upgrades you don't need for the sake of "future proofing" and "resale value".
My iMac lasted 9 years - these machines are built to last unlike PC's. Future proofing a computer is the dumbest way to spend money? Says who? That advice is ridiculous. If you buy a computer and don't consider the future of computing power, especially on machines that can get you 5-9 years, well - that makes zero sense.

"I have too much power in this computer, I wish I didn't spend the extra $200 bucks to get the fastest option"
Said no now ever.

The one regret I can guarantee I will not have, is upgrading to the i7.

The same people saying $200 is too much are buying $1000 iPhones. Get the i7 - change my mind.
 
My iMac lasted 9 years - these machines are built to last unlike PC's. Future proofing a computer is the dumbest way to spend money? Says who? That advice is ridiculous. If you buy a computer and don't consider the future of computing power, especially on machines that can get you 5-9 years, well - that makes zero sense.
Oh please! I have an 11 year old PC which is still going strong. There's nothing special about Macs that make them more reliable than PCs.
 
Oh please! I have an 11 year old PC which is still going strong. There's nothing special about Macs that make them more reliable than PCs.

Mac hardware tends toward being more tightly integrated. This means fewer options --- which can stink for the user -- but its easier to support a limited number of hardware configurations.

I had an 11 year old Hewlett Packard PC. BIOS updates for the motherboard were nowhere to be found. The HP website offered no driver support and tried to sell me another PC.

A Windows 10 update broke compatibility with the sound drivers.

My 2012 mini keeps running without any problems.
 
Oh please! I have an 11 year old PC which is still going strong. There's nothing special about Macs that make them more reliable than PCs.
That is just wrong - PC’s get so buggy and loaded down with crappy “free” software and invaded by every bug - and that doesn’t include bad Microsoft OS upgrades - I use PC’s as well - I have both. You are an anomaly at 11 years, not the norm.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.