If you are doing Final Cut Pro and Photoshop, go with the 2012. If you want to game, go with the 2011.

• 3

  If you are doing Final Cut Pro and Photoshop, go with the 2012. If you want to game, go with the 2011.

Right, although I need to do both. Is one machine better than the other for Final Cut, Photoshop, and gaming? Another caveat is that I won't be gaming on it constantly, as I have a PC for that. But for occasional reviews, yes.

• 4

My advice would be to go with the 2012. The AMD processor in the 2011 is a bit faster at some tasks, but the 2012 model you describe as an option is a QUAD CORE MACHINE. the performance increase in doubling the processor cores in a machine is giant compared to any gain/loss in sticking with the AMD processor. Also, i believe the 2012 can support 16GB of ram (mine has 16) but the 2011 can only support 8? Might be wrong there, but either way the 2012 is the way to go imho. I love mine, it can handle FCPX and Aperture flawlessly , and games like Civilization 5 run with little to no lag.

• 5

  My advice would be to go with the 2012. The AMD processor in the 2011 is a bit faster at some tasks, but the 2012 model you describe as an option is a QUAD CORE MACHINE. the performance increase in doubling the processor cores in a machine is giant compared to any gain/loss in sticking with the AMD processor. Also, i believe the 2012 can support 16GB of ram (mine has 16) but the 2011 can only support 8? Might be wrong there, but either way the 2012 is the way to go imho. I love mine, it can handle FCPX and Aperture flawlessly , and games like Civilization 5 run with little to no lag.

The 2011 MacMini quad-core does support 16gb of memory. Not sure about the dual-core models though but I think they do as well.

• 6

I don't know what you want to play but if you want to run it at 1920x1200 or above I don't think either one is going to do very well even on low settings unless it's a very low spec game. I've used one at that resolution to play WoW and to me it wasn't playable.

• 7

On NotebookCheck.net, the Radeon 6630M is rated

180, while the Intel HD 4000 is rated

238 (

1 being best). You can select the two of them, then click "Restrict" at the bottom and then it will isolate those two for you so you can compare.

//www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html

The Radeon 6630M only has 256 MB of VRAM, but it clearly beats the HD 4000 on every benchmark, I believe. I am very disappointed that Apple offered no upgrade option beyond the HD 4000 on the 2012 minis.

The 2011 dual Core i7 was only dual-core, but it is still a powerful chip. The 2012 quad Core i7 is a monster! But it won't help you much with graphics, which depend on your video "card". For the mini, we are really talking about a video chip.

The 2011 machine can address 16 gigs of RAM. It probably is able to address 32 gigs of RAM, but the mini (both 2012 and 2011) only has 2 RAM slots, and 16 gig sticks of RAM at the laptop size are not yet available on NewEgg, OWC, Crucial etc.

//www.everymac.com gives you pretty good specs on every mac ever.

The 2011 core i7 2.3 with Radeon 6630M was recently available on the Apple Store refurb for $589. It only had 4 gigs of RAM and a 500 gig HD. But that was fine for me cause I will upgrade to 16 gigs of RAM, so I didn't want to pay for any more pre-installed RAM than I had to. After the 1 year warranty expires, I plan to remove the 500 gig HD and put in a 500 gig SSD, if SSD prices fall a bit. (I did buy that machine off the Apple store refurb and I hit "buy" extremely quickly).

If you can wait, the lurk around the Apple Store refurb for a couple of weeks. They just had a whole bunch of good refurb deals put up last week, and they sold out of those entirely.

Edit: I just saw that you "just received an offer to write video game reviews for the Mac"... the Mini really is not a gaming machine. The 2012 21.5" iMac with the nvidia 650M is supposed to be real nice for gaming. The 650M can handle most new games. Make sure you get 16 gigs of RAM because the RAM is very tedious to upgrade- even for a tech.

Last edited: Apr 13, 2013

• 8

  I need a bit of help with some buying advice, and I figured I would turn to my favorite Mac forums. If anyone could offer some insight here, I would be very grateful.

Currently, my Mac system consists of a sole 13" MacBook Pro from late 2010. It's been a workhorse laptop for me, and I love it. However, last August I started producing a video show that runs once a week, and I've been using the laptop to edit it on, using Final Cut Pro 7. Surprisingly, it's been fairly robust, but at times it does chug through an edit.

Usually when I'm on the laptop and not editing the show, I'm writing, surfing the web, using Photoshop for simple photo edits, and editing simple audio. However, I just received an offer to write video game reviews for the Mac (I write video game reviews for console games and PCs), and that combined with the video editing has me looking at a new computer.

I had been just about set to purchase this Mac Mini through a friend with an Apple Employee discount:

2.6GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7 4GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM (I would upgrade this on my own to 8 or 16GB) 1TB Fusion Drive $1149 - before discount

However, I was reading today about the Mac Mini from 2011 with the AMD Radeon graphics card in it and was wondering if I should go that route instead:

2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i7 8GB memory 750GB hard drive AMD Radeon HD 6630M $699 - refurbished

I understand that it has better graphic performance than the newer Mac Mini, but is it enough to make a huge difference? Would I notice a sizable difference between the machines when playing games? When editing video in Final Cut? Price is somewhat of a factor, as I wanted to keep the purchase as close to $1000 as possible. Otherwise I'd buy a powerhouse Mac Pro.

Also, I know the rumor is that Haswell is possibly coming to the Mac Mini, but I really can't wait right now. Although I could possibly purchase the $699 2011 Mac Mini now and maybe upgrade to the Haswell Mac Mini later this year if it materializes by selling the 2011.

Any advice? I already have a nice display that is ready to use, and an external keyboard, which was another reason I found the Mini attractive. But I would sincerely appreciate any input here. Much thanks!

First off the AMD Radeon HD 6630M, while being better than the Intel HD 4000, isn't THAT MUCH better. Secondly, a lot of this conjecture depends on how much you are going to be using which version of Final Cut Pro. If you're using FCP 7, it kind of doesn't matter as the two will be similar enough, plus FCP 7 isn't multi-core aware, so Quad-Core Ivy Bridge i7 vs. Dual-Core Sandy Bridge i7 will only be a modest difference. A lot of this conjecture also depends on which games you will want to be playing. StarCraft II, for instance, will likely look very similar on both. If you're going to be using Boot Camp to try to play some Bioshock Infinites (or similarly, will be waiting for the Mac version to come out this summer), then the 2011 machine is probably preferable.

Ultimately, it boils down to: how important is the AMD Radeon HD 6630M to you? The Fusion Drive combined with the quad-core CPU is going to make the 2012 machine unarguably faster in all CPU/Disk-access tasks, while slightly inferior in some (but not all) GPU tasks. So, it's kind of taster's choice.

This being said, I'd suggest scrapping the idea of a Mac mini altogether if you want a machine to be both good for Final Cut Pro and for gaming as it's not a machine meant to be put through the rounds like that. Much better of a machine would be a 15" non-retina MacBook Pro or perhaps an iMac. If you are casual enough on the gaming end, a high-end 21.5" iMac (and yes, get the 16GB of RAM preloaded) or any 27" iMac will more than suffice. While that is a heftier cost, you can recover some of that extra burden by selling your Mid 2010 13" MacBook Pro.

• 9

Not sure if this matters but the HD 4000 VRAM flexes up based on how much ram is installed. See below with 16 GB installed. Jumps to 768??

Does that matter?

• image.jpg 149.3 KB · Views: 1,245

• 10

  Not sure if this matters but the HD 4000 VRAM flexes up based on how much ram is installed. See below with 16 GB installed. Jumps to 768??

Does that matter?

True about the HD 4000 Mini's VRAM, but keep in mind that the 2011 Mini with dedicated HD 6630M GPU has 256 VRAM that's GDDR5 type. That has a wider bandwidth & is much faster than the HD 4000's DDR3 VRAM.

• 11

the the 2011 it is cheaper. when the new mini comes out sell the 2011 and get the new mini. why? neither machine the 2011 or the 2012 is good enough for your needs. so if you are going to be short in power you may as well pay less. Hopefully the 2013 in the fall? will be more to your needs.

• 12

Go for the 2011 model, it's fast enough for your needs and save the rest of money for the other things. The 2012 isn;t worth that much money

• 13

  Not sure if this matters but the HD 4000 VRAM flexes up based on how much ram is installed. See below with 16 GB installed. Jumps to 768??

Does that matter?

Thanks for posting that photo!

• 14

i think the baseline imac refurbished the 21 inch one with the 650m graphics for 1269 is a better deal and better option. if you could somehow get that discount on top of the refurbished discount that would be even better.

this machine is far more suitable for game reviews than a mac mini. the best mac for 1200ish bucks anyway.

• 15

The 2011 runs the best OS ever made. The 2012 runs a lousy on eyecandy od-ing quite annoying ugly kitten and the 2011 will hold value better as it will stay a unique machine: rare and spanning a really long time of apps (from 2000 to 4-5 years in the future at least).