Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Where are the in depth reviews of the Mac Mini 2014?

I think it is worth getting 16GB of ram - I am a normal user, just doing web browsing, some photoshop elements work, and normal itunes/iphoto stuff.

My activity monitor shows 12GB of memory used. So, if I only had 8GB I'd be swapping out.
 
Occamsrazr said:
I think it is worth getting 16GB of ram - I am a normal user, just doing web browsing, some photoshop elements work, and normal itunes/iphoto stuff.

My activity monitor shows 12GB of memory used. So, if I only had 8GB I'd be swapping out.
Click to expand...

Nope, that is simply not true. OS X uses as much memory as it can, if 12 GB of memory used now does not mean that it will swap with 8 gigs...
 
good point... but I guess I'm glad to see that the memory is getting used either way

By the way, I do see 1.5 MB of swap being used even though I have 16GB of RAM installed, so I am glad I opted for 16GB
 
Last edited:
mac mini 2014 lower model test

hi guys,

here a new test...it is a pity it is just the cheapest model...very curious how it works with best cpu, best ram capacity and ssd pcie!

http://youtu.be/Yrql-5rJIhY



tad
 
Last edited:
Crosscreek said:
If your asking, it's not worth it.
Click to expand...

Point taken, in the end I realized that the SSD upgrade on my Macbook Pro brought more noticeable improvements than maxing out the RAM. So I went for standard 699 model with the PCIe SSD upgrade.
 
dvdchance said:
I'm not usually a conspiracy thinking kind of guy, but the lack of any english language publications or websites reviewing the new Mini does give one reason to ponder such thoughts.

I, like probably many others, have been debating whether the new model or the 2012 Quad-core is the best option for them, and so real world pro reviews would really help in making an informed decision.
Click to expand...
The reason is simple. The Mini is a desktop machine, it doesn't have a fancy super high res screen, it doesn't have a touch sensitive interface. It s desktop machine in a small box so writing about it isn't going to generate a lot of views/magazine sales. We all love it but it's a niche product.
 
ceraz said:
Point taken, in the end I realized that the SSD upgrade on my Macbook Pro brought more noticeable improvements than maxing out the RAM. So I went for standard 699 model with the PCIe SSD upgrade.
Click to expand...

Why buying SSD update from apple? you can buy yourself own SSD and exchange it for spinner:) Thats what I will do with my new mini (middle config) - exchange 500 GB spinner for 500 GB ssd - for the same price apple wants for 256 SSD (moreover, I will get 500 GB spinner which u dont have if you buy 256 SSD config from apple)
 
majkom said:
Why buying SSD update from apple? you can buy yourself own SSD and exchange it for spinner:) Thats what I will do with my new mini (middle config) - exchange 500 GB spinner for 500 GB ssd - for the same price apple wants for 256 SSD (moreover, I will get 500 GB spinner which u dont have if you buy 256 SSD config from apple)
Click to expand...

My thinking was based on:
(a) current issue of non-TRIM support for non-Apple SSDs with Yosemite
(b) faster PCIe interface may give the box some more mileage
(c) although a racket, apple's extra charge for the PCIe is bearable
(d) reduce number of HW/SW components ie no fusion
(e) I really have enough spinners lying around (minimize waste)
 
I´ve just bought mac mini late 2014 3.0 Ghz, 16 Gb Ram

Hello guys,

I have just ordered it right now mac mini late 2014, 3.0 Ghz, 16 GB Ram, 256 SSD PCIe Harddrive, saving money for the euro-change.

I will try to post in 2 weeks a professional review with gaming-/software-tests.

Any advises what kind of practical test I could do?


Thanks.
 
tadzio said:
Hello guys,

I have just ordered it right now mac mini late 2014, 3.0 Ghz, 16 GB Ram, 256 SSD PCIe Harddrive, saving money for the euro-change.

I will try to post in 2 weeks a professional review with gaming-/software-tests.

Any advises what kind of practical test I could do?


Thanks.
Click to expand...

For me, It would be perfect if I could see a video showing the performance of the intel iris + ssd + at least 2.6Ghz with games like Skyrim, Witcher 2... etc etc.. because I want the mac mini also for casual gaming but these two I want to play it for a while.

Greetings.
 
Matrunks said:
For me, It would be perfect if I could see a video showing the performance of the intel iris + ssd + at least 2.6Ghz with games like Skyrim, Witcher 2... etc etc.. because I want the mac mini also for casual gaming but these two I want to play it for a while.

Greetings.
Click to expand...

If you absolutely must have a mac mini and still need a pc for gaming, then get both or just go for a iMac 27 with at least a GTX680/780 GPU.

As much as Intel/Apple/2014 lovers would have you believe, the Iris 5100 (The HD5000 is even worse) is barely playable on a 2012 title at a low crappy resolution.

The chart below is the HD5100 on notebookcheck website
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 3.13.14 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-11-03 at 3.13.14 PM.png
    22.3 KB · Views: 753
magbarn said:
If you absolutely must have a mac mini and still need a pc for gaming, then get both or just go for a iMac 27 with at least a GTX680/780 GPU.

As much as Intel/Apple/2014 lovers would have you believe, the Iris 5100 (The HD5000 is even worse) is barely playable on a 2012 title at a low crappy resolution.

The chart below is the HD5100 on notebookcheck website
Click to expand...

Thanks for the advise, the thing is that I live in one city meanwhile I'm working, and on weekends in another city so I need a computer that can be moved every week and should have at least that performance to play sometimes, but I'm not going to play there The witcher 3 for example.

I got also a macbook pro but I don't like at all play in laptops and anyways is from 2010 :D
 
Micky Do said:
Here's a review of the top of the range (2.8 Ghz, 8 GB RAM, 1 TB Fusion) that came to this conclusion:

"A worthy upgrade to Apple's entry level Mac model that won't please everyone, but should please many."

http://www.imore.com/mac-mini-late-2014-review
Click to expand...

Don't let it fool you. This is typical bias Apple PR from this web site. They do not represent the consumer interest. They are a mouth piece for Apple.
 
Micky Do said:
Here's a review of the top of the range (2.8 Ghz, 8 GB RAM, 1 TB Fusion) that came to this conclusion:

"A worthy upgrade to Apple's entry level Mac model that won't please everyone, but should please many."

http://www.imore.com/mac-mini-late-2014-review
Click to expand...

Horrible, biased review.

2012 mid tier: quad-core i7, upgradable ram, can hold 2 hard drives $800 ($600 refurbished)

2014 mid tier: dual-core i5, soldered ram, cannot upgrade (anti-tamper torx security screws) $700 ($1000 for dual-core i7)

Do a search for benchmarks. If you do real work the 2012 will leave the new mini in the dust. The quad-core 2012 has been available in the apple refurb store almost everyday.
 
crazzapple said:
Horrible, biased review.

2012 mid tier: quad-core i7, upgradable ram, can hold 2 hard drives $800 ($600 refurbished)

2014 mid tier: dual-core i5, soldered ram, cannot upgrade (anti-tamper torx security screws) $700 ($1000 for dual-core i7)

Do a search for benchmarks. If you do real work the 2012 will leave the new mini in the dust. The quad-core 2012 has been available in the apple refurb store almost everyday.
Click to expand...

Biased point of view ^.

Now here's a review for the base (1.4 GHz, 4 GB) model, dated 13 Nov '14. Not hugely in depth, but practical with some useful comparisons:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2472063,00.asp

Summary:

The latest Apple Mac mini has more competition to contend with than its predecessor did, but it still manages to hold its own, and then some. It is better connected than the Acer Aspire AXC-604-UR11 and much more cost effective than the Polywell i2304-i5. It's much less expensive than the gaming-oriented Maingear Spark and performs better on the multimedia benchmark tests as well. Its only true drawback is the lack of internal memory expansion, and that's something that's becoming commonplace among Macs and Windows PCs every day. For its combination of great build quality, connectivity, and sub-$500 price, we award the Apple Mac mini our Editors' Choice for consumer-oriented SFF desktops.
 
Micky Do said:
Biased point of view ^.

Now here's a review for the base (1.4 GHz, 4 GB) model, dated 13 Nov '14. Not hugely in depth, but practical with some useful comparisons:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2472063,00.asp

Summary:

The latest Apple Mac mini has more competition to contend with than its predecessor did, but it still manages to hold its own, and then some. It is better connected than the Acer Aspire AXC-604-UR11 and much more cost effective than the Polywell i2304-i5. It's much less expensive than the gaming-oriented Maingear Spark and performs better on the multimedia benchmark tests as well. Its only true drawback is the lack of internal memory expansion, and that's something that's becoming commonplace among Macs and Windows PCs every day. For its combination of great build quality, connectivity, and sub-$500 price, we award the Apple Mac mini our Editors' Choice for consumer-oriented SFF desktops.
Click to expand...

HAH! Any review summary of the 2014 icrap mini that fails to mention the mid-tier is no longer an i7 quad-core is deeply biased. Even the most devout apple iFanboy should be able to see that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back