#Apple mac mini 2018 vs imac mac#
Go up to the six cores of a new Mac mini and you should see at least 22,000 and maybe as much as 28,000, but to break the 30,000 barrier you’ll need eight cores. Here an i7 quad-core and A12X are quite similar at between 18,000 and 19,000. If you want substantial boosts in performance, it’s the number of cores that count.
#Apple mac mini 2018 vs imac pro#
Interestingly, the A12X in the newest iPad Pro (iPad8,8) isn’t much faster here than in the iPhone, at around 5,020. New iPhone models such as the XS, XS Max and XR come in at around 4,800, and Macs with slower i5 CPUs are also lower. Single-core performance is more even across different Macs and iOS devices. Instead, you can pay eye-wateringly large amounts for even more cores in your iMac Pro, to attain 47,000 with a total of 18 cores, but its individual CPUs run slightly slower to yield a lower single-core result.
![apple mac mini 2018 vs imac apple mac mini 2018 vs imac](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4xi3OyCQmOE/maxresdefault.jpg)
I have seen one of the latest Mac minis which turns in 6,000 for its single-core performance, but having only six cores, is behind my 8-core when it comes to the multi-core result, which is a more modest 28,000. You can of course go higher on both, although not together. Therefore my starting point for looking at performance and cost is what that delivers.įor around £/$/€ 5000 – a similar price to that of my last 8-core Mac in 2007, and half the cost of my IIfx in 1990 – it turns in a very respectable CPU performance, with a single-core of around 5,300 (higher is faster), and a multi-core of 33,500. After a lot of soul-searching, I chose the base iMac Pro model, and am more than delighted, at least now it is fully set up and running. You may recall my own recent quandary about which Mac to buy to replace my three year-old iMac. In this article I’d like to examine some of those claims more objectively, using performance benchmarks obtained in Geekbench, and the simple concept of ‘bang per buck’: how much performance you get for your money. Then there are the new Mac minis, no longer the cheap little pizza boxes that they used to be, but apparently rivalling Apple’s high-end desktops like the iMac Pro. Of late, that seems to be the new iPad Pro, and how this heralds the switch of Macs from Intel processors to something derived from the ARM-based systems-on-a-chip which seem to be turning out such stunning performance in those new iPads.
![apple mac mini 2018 vs imac apple mac mini 2018 vs imac](https://cdn.xando.nl/media/2018-mac-mini-power-button-callout_1_2.jpg)
We’re also prone to get carried away with excitement at the latest hardware that Apple is offering.
![apple mac mini 2018 vs imac apple mac mini 2018 vs imac](https://d8fa96d6061491bec818-41a52a109fa0fefb17700938627149a6.ssl.cf1.rackcdn.com/DSC02220-1612389307065.jpg)
My 8-core Mac Pro of 2007 was less than half that price, and the current base Mac Pro still starts at £/$/€ 2999 for a five year-old design. My Mac IIfx from 1990, justifiably called ‘wicked fast’, was priced as a workstation, from $10,000-12,000. Apple has been a premium brand for much longer than you might care to remember. Recent talk of high Mac prices is therefore hardly novel. When Apple has tried to make popular home and SOHO Macs, like the LC/Performa 520, they haven’t been cheap – in that case, around £/$/€ 2000 – and most have long been forgotten. Apple’s entry-level systems have generally cost around £/$/€ 1000-1200, and its high end has often been four or five times that. You can accuse Apple of many things, but it doesn’t sell cheap computers, nor are Macs the fastest computers available.