Michal Ždanský The invitation to today's keynote carried the tagline "It's been too long," hinting at an update to a product that hasn't seen it in over a year. Several products fall into this group - Apple TV, Thunderbolt Display or Mac mini. Finally, the update happened with the third named. The Mac mini returns to prominence after two years with updated internals, but rather the bare minimum.
Apple took the same step with the Mac mini as with the basic iMac. He reduced the price and at the same time reduced the basic model by a large part of the performance. Users can choose from three configurations. The basic model, which will be released in the Czech Republic at 13 crowns ($499), includes a dual-core Intel Core i5 processor with a frequency of 1,4 Ghz, 4 GB of RAM, a 500 GB hard disk and integrated HD Graphics 5000. When you add 6 crowns, you are already reaching a more interesting configuration: a dual-core Core i000 with a frequency of 5 Ghz, 2,6 GB RAM, 8 TB hard drive and Intel Iris graphics card comes out to 19 990 $.
The highest configuration then includes a Core i5 with a frequency of 2,8 Ghz, 8 GB of RAM, Intel Iris graphics and basically offers a 1 TB Fusion Drive, i.e. a combination of a hard disk and an SSD disk. However, its price is active 27 990 $. At the same time, the basic iMac (if we do not count the low-end version) costs only 7 crowns more, which is the price for a high-quality IPS monitor, which you will probably buy for the Mac mini anyway, if you do not already own one. In terms of connectivity, the Mac mini includes two Thunderbolt 000 ports, four USB 2 ports, Wi-Fi 3.0ac and Bluetooth 802.11. The design and dimensions remained the same, the Mac mini still remains the smallest consumer computer in general, and also very economical.
Unfortunately, the Mac mini still remains a device with many compromises, especially in the area of performance. Even in 2014, Apple still sells computers with a spinning hard drive, at a time when computers are dominated by SSDs, very affordable today. 4 GB of RAM in the basic version is also a legacy. The Mac mini may be a suitable device for people new to the OS X platform in general, but on the other hand, with its performance close to the MacBook Air, it is not very suitable as a second computer next to the Apple laptop you own. So the Mac mini still remains a cute little computer that neither excites nor offends.
Well, the basic Mac mini only DualCore at 1,4GHZ, still a hard drive.... terror
It seems to me that apple is throwing a bob at people who stand for desktop models. Also, I have a mac mini 2010 with 320 graphics, which I wanted to throw under the TV... and buy something new. But when I see the selection and especially the prices, I'll get an SSD and somehow we'll beat the minimum for some time.
Faster??? Well, I wouldn't say that, since the basic 1.4GHz is from the basic macbook air and they canceled the mac mini cores. So in the end the price went up by almost 100 euros and we only have a newer generation of dual cores.
No. It costs 14 thousand. And I feel that Apple is already really making fun of us. 14 thousand for a computer with 1.4 dual core! i5 processor, 4GB memory and 500 GB 5400 rpm sic! disc, it's really a blast. A slightly better one is the hundred and twenty and it has a 5400 rpm disc. Really a blast….
what ? even the stronger configuration is only on dual-core? ... well, that makes the Mac mini not interesting for me. I will have to go to the iMac and wait for 4k
Well, the Mac Mini looks totally neglected to me! I will overlook the four GB of ram, but canceling the four cores and leaving the disk with 5400 revolutions! That's really too much. We expected more from the new mini... It's a Mac, so under the TV...
if I read and understand the illustrative image for the article correctly, then "PCIe-based flash storage" is something other than a 5400 rpm disk, or not?
if I understand it correctly, then pci flash is only as a possible extra charge, not the standard in which it really is a classic hdd.
hmm, so if for some reason one would need their own monitor and a fast modern mac to go with it, it's probably better to go with the basic version of the MacPro than trying to configure the Mini, which remains office low-end.
in the basic configuration, yes, but the medium configuration (if you pay extra for memory and SSD) is far from being an office lowend, on the contrary, it is a very solid computer. which can handle most even very demanding jobs. It is necessary to calculate approx. 27 for this configuration.
I'm looking at it on the apple store now - 500GB Serial ATA drive, 5400rpm - normal slab slow drive :(
You can pay extra for it, but the base is a 5400 rpm disc.
"PCIe-based flash storage" is only for an additional fee.
Something like the Škoda El. windows download :-)
Faster? It was a 2,3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7. The new processors are not much faster, rather more economical. Max. Graphic Design. A step back for me
what kind of CPU are they specifically? So I thought, I'm using an application that can only run on one core, will the i5-4300M or i5-4440s be faster? +/- processors in mac mini / iMac approx...
With this computer, one somehow forgets that its main use is with a TV, projector, etc.... Just a movie, music player, etc.... That's exactly what the 14k model is for. You don't need a better processor, you don't need a better disk. You need HDMI and an elegant, completely silent box.
Just because there is a turntable disc, it is definitely not a "completely silent box" :) But yes, the disc is almost inaudible. In any case, it's all about the money, and Apple tries to screw us up as often as possible in this regard.
Dalibor, I've had a Mac mini for some time now and I dare say that it's really impossible to know about it, even with the hard drive. It's quieter than many laptops. And even after 3 years of operation, I still don't know about it when I have it on in my room and go to sleep.
Oh, and the fact that via HDMI supports a 4K monitor or TV only in 30hz and not in full 60hz does not matter to you anymore. So you can see that it is no longer a helper even for TV.
Thus, one could successfully doubt the lower price and higher performance as Apple inflates. In the top line, it's a dual-core instead of a quad-core, one disk instead of two, and I doubt that the new i7 dual-core at 3GHz will beat the older quad-core at 2,6GHz, where the price was around 30 and after the new one it's 33. In addition, it seems that even the second disk cannot be added there.
Anyone who is interested knows that processor performance is determined by the number of cores, but that is just a detail. Check out the benchmarks…
Well, I wouldn't underestimate the quad core. It's true that today it's Haswell. But the last processor in the last minimum will catch up with the number of cores and especially in multithreaded applications with Hyperthreading. I believe that the tests will lead to the fact that the difference will not be as significant as one would expect from the two-year update of Agor with a new generation processor. It will be a file difference that happens between annual refreshes within the same chip generation.
The best, but finally. The RAM is fixed, it cannot be replaced. The disc is replaceable, only at the cost of losing the warranty. It's sad what happened to the most user friendly apple device. The effort to push us into an iMac or an expensive mac pro couldn't be more obvious...
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/10/17/mac-mini-soldered-ram/
That's the joke. TB supports only two monitors, even though it is in version 2.0. HDMI supports 4K only up to 30Hz, so forget about full 60Hz. So it's not a full-fledged device even for a TV in the living room. As far as I know, HDMI had a problem with HD sound, but there it was a SW problem.
Well, the performance gap between the iMAC boom and the mini boom was not as big as it is now. Even more difficult tasks could be done at the medium minimum, and one did not need to buy a more expensive machine at all. Today, you have to pump up the mini with full fire so that it can be comparably equipped. There are even bigger differences between the standard highest version and the inflated customer configuration. You just have to configure the processors to i7 3.00 because they are dual-core. I am very curious about the tests, but I have the feeling that the last 2.6 flat Ivy will give this three-hertz Hesswell a breeze in multi-fiber applications. L3 has higher and good parameters comparable according to Intel pages.
Unfortunately, today it has become a toy compared to other computers, which was not the case according to the test on, for example, barefeats.com. Just look at the tests there when the mini was trampling on the heels of all the expensive brachs. Today, when buying, a person has to at least fully configure it, which costs almost 60 thousand to make it at least somehow comparable.
I also take a Mac pro, its current version. If only I had decided for him. Will it be able to connect a 5K monitor? It won't be. Just as the standard is 2560×1600 today, it turns out that it will probably be 5120×2880 in the future. As a hobbyist, I don't buy such a machine for 2 years. The development in displays will probably be very rapid now, so buying a 5K monitor will not be such a problem in the distant future.
Well, 5K is a file of tactics. Today, filmmakers go in 4K max, and thus, in addition to the one-to-one overview, there will still be room for the tools for the composition of the shot. I see the problem of the mini file in the fact that Apple was afraid of what actually created it. Practically, it became such a Skynet that it started producing Terminators that started watching all the others from Apple. It suddenly found out that Minim can run more than regional TV. The simplest graphic studio found out that everything can be done on it. The film's producers started to try 4K or 2K, uncompressed, and it worked. It was cheap, it didn't do anything, and mobile. It didn't overheat, and even a lot of big companies started using it in a rack as a server.
that's why they cut his claws by saying that even though it's a new generation of the chip, they made it in terms of parameters so that it was compared to the previous generation. Cili's performance remains the same, while other products went up in performance.
I think whoever buys the most configurable model on ebay will win. iris is somewhat better graphics than the last one, but it is not PRO, which is only connected to a quad core, which is not in the offer.
Me, I'm kind of toying with the idea of buying the previous 4-core server, removing one disk and putting my favorite Samsung 850 Pro there.. I have a Mac mini 2010 with 320 graphics, the pod is under the TV as it should be.. So be upgreat 2010s and wait a year if something interesting doesn't appear, or here's the older thing. In the back of my mind, I looked at the Mac pro 4 core, but for me as an ordinary consumer, it would probably be useless the two graphics... Thanks to the CNB, it has become more expensive now and would he went to buy it at a cheaper price.. Or if you give such a backpack, wait for the second generation. But for the new mini, not by chance. Apple has hit me so hard here with the obstructions that it's no accident. I'd rather stick with my old GF 320.
The worst thing is that this year's minis have a different board and there is no second SATA port that was used for the burner. Instead of that, a second disk was put there. With this year's, I think it is no longer possible, so another minus. I have the last i7 2.6 with 16GB RAM and SSD disk and I am the happiest person in the world. I still have another 2 Ghz quad-core server from the past. During the previous revision, they even put a non-server version and a dedicated card in it, which was not bad at all. It probably doesn't exist on IRIS, but it probably still does on Intel HD5000 at this year's lowest minimum. So, as you can see, this year one has to go to the highest level or just go to iMAC. I wouldn't pay sixty thousand.
Please, one last thing. The i7 2,6 you have, as I have read, is the most powerful mini ever produced. Over 12 benchmark tests. The server version is 000 points lower. You write that you installed it with an SSD. did you have to throw out the old hotplate, or can you put a second SSD drive next to it? The server version, I think there is no problem there.
As I saw the performance results, exactly as you wrote, Apple was shocked at what it had actually created. Basically, it should not be a problem to achieve the performance of the most expensive imacs today using 4 cores and PCIe memory. In fact, even the 2-year-old is not doing badly even in today's competition.
No, I bought it through Apple's SSD configurator because of TRIM. Because Apple only supports TRIM on its SSDs. Otherwise, the motherboard is the same, so after unscrewing it, you put the second disk in there. This is another problem with this year's minis, because there is no second SATA port. It's a different board. So, unfortunately. The ifixit.com chef might surprise us, but he shouldn't be there. I don't have a second disk there, but if I put it there and put it in Raid 0, I will have a decent server or recorder without the need for ext. field. A few streams of the highest ProRes will do it. I say Quad core plus IRIS Pro and you have a 4K cut as high. Unfortunately, Iris Pro is actually connected to quadcore. With two cores, you will only come across IRIS, which supports 4K, but is parametrically much lower than the PRO version.