Apple's speedy new Mac mini torn down and benchmarked

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
A pair of Mac colocation companies performed teardowns and benchmark tests of Apple's newly released Mac mini, finding that the small format desktop's performance is approaching that of legacy Xserves and 2010's Mac Pro.

Mac mini Teardown
Source: Mac mini Vault


Announced on Tuesday at a special event, the new Mac mini is largely seen as an incremental update from last year's model as it doesn't feature a new design like the super thin iMac, however the internal upgrades are substantial enough to significantly boost the tiny computer's performance.

Mac mini colocation service Macminicolo noted in a blog post that the most substantial additions to the new machine are Intel's Ivy Bridge processors and the option to configure up to 16GB of 1600MHz RAM straight from Apple. The entry-level offering now comes with 4GB of memory, which was found to be a major improvement as the previous 2GB standard configuration was just barely enough to run OS X Mountain Lion.

Also of note is Apple's new Fusion Drive, a hybrid device that uses a solid state drive to maximize read/write times and an HDD to maintain high storage capacity. As Fusion is only offered on the mid-tier Mac mini, Macminicolo believes the $799 model will be the most popular out of the lineup.

The firm performed a Geekbench benchmark test of the new unit, and found its score to be expectedly superior to previous models.

Mac mini Benchmark
Source: Macminicolo


As for the unit's build, colocation services company Mac mini Vault performed a quick teardown of the new model, finding that not much has changed besides a different fan design, the move to Hitachi HDDs, and updated antenna connections.

The company also performed an identical Geekbench test, and found that its out-of-the box unit running OS X 10.8.1 (Build 12B2080) scored 7433, compared to a 2011 Mac mini updated to OS X 10.8.2, which scored 6583.

Apple's new Mac mini is already for sale and starts with a standard $599 configuration powered by an Intel 2.5GHz dual-core i5 chip, 4GB of RAM, a 500GB HDD and integrated Intel HD 4000 graphics. The most expensive Mac mini comes with OS X Mountain Lion Server, a 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor, 4GB of memory, Two 1TB HDDs and Intel HD 4000 graphics.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43


    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

    As Fusion is only offered on the mid-tier Mac mini, Macminicolo believes the $799 model will be the most popular out of the lineup.




    They've done this as long as I can remember, and I still don't like it. Make all BTO options available on all models, just make them expensive enough to make up the margins using the options themselves. I think that is what they used to do, back when we'd complain that RAM isn't $400 a gig. Maybe that's why they stopped; I dunno.

  • Reply 2 of 43
    The Geekbench image is missing as well as the rest of the story.
  • Reply 3 of 43
    kfurykfury Posts: 14member
    I think you accidentally the post.
  • Reply 4 of 43


    Originally Posted by CrashMyTstDummy View Post

    The Geekbench image is missing as well as the rest of the story.


     


    I'm sure it'll be edited and filled in. If not, in a few hours I can grab it from the main page.

  • Reply 5 of 43
    macrrmacrr Posts: 488member
    These will make perfect additions to my rendering farm.. perfectly scalable!
  • Reply 6 of 43
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    I would personally stay far away from the "Fusion Drive." The only thing it has going for it is capacity.
  • Reply 7 of 43
    ssls6ssls6 Posts: 49member


    They should have given it the same cpu/gpu options as the iMac.  

  • Reply 8 of 43
    macrrmacrr Posts: 488member


    yea.. dual SSDs are the way to go.

  • Reply 9 of 43


    Hmm these seem pretty sweet. I am considering a new Mac, I need something that will give good Photoshop performance.


     


    I am looking at the 27 inch iMac, but this might just be a much cheaper option, the added benefit though is the upgradiblity, maybe not the device itself but making it easier and cheaper to replace the unit and keeping the screen compared to the all in one nature of the iMac.

  • Reply 10 of 43
    2oh12oh1 Posts: 503member
    You might want to finish this story before posting it. Ooooooooooops.
  • Reply 11 of 43
    alexmitalexmit Posts: 112member
    The article is unfinished, but I would like to say that it
  • Reply 12 of 43


    Originally Posted by Alexmit View Post

    The article is unfinished, but I would like to say that it


     


    I was going to grab the rest from the main page, but it's not

  • Reply 13 of 43
    I've longed to run Mac Mini as a web server and with the new release, I think it's time. Fusion Drive may not be right for everyone, but it is for me. It's the perfect compromise for two of my different needs: 1) a busy database server (SSD) and 2) video files (HDD). Braiding these two together has made the Mac Mini with Fusion Drive a very tempting server!

    However mini it is, I think it can hold its weight.
  • Reply 14 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    I was going to grab the rest from the main page, but it's not



     


    I just saved a ton of money by switching to

  • Reply 15 of 43
    aaarrrggghaaarrrgggh Posts: 1,608member
    It's perfect except for
  • Reply 16 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ssls6 View Post


    They should have given it the same cpu/gpu options as the iMac.  



     


    Magic? Think about why they didn't. Or couldn't. And won't.

  • Reply 17 of 43
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,896member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post



    I would personally stay far away from the "Fusion Drive." The only thing it has going for it is capacity.


    And that Apple will be the only company able to repair it. And that it's failure will tend to hasten obsolescence.

  • Reply 18 of 43
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,035member
    gazoobee wrote: »
    I would personally stay far away from the "Fusion Drive." The only thing it has going for it is capacity.

    I disagree. That's one of the reasons to buy this.
  • Reply 19 of 43
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,035member
    macrr wrote: »
    yea.. dual SSDs are the way to go.

    And how much are you Willing to pay?
  • Reply 20 of 43
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,035member
    cpsro wrote: »
    And that Apple will be the only company able to repair it. And that it's failure will tend to hasten obsolescence.

    Not true. It uses the same interface as the previous drives. OWC has been offering upgrade drives for them for a while.
Sign In or Register to comment.