Mac Mini or Imac

[dhup]

Can anyone say is mac mini good for editing raw photos and working in photoshop with high resolution images or i should buy a mac mini??
Please help me out I am confused..

 

[n0ns3ns3]

they are both crap
you should compare specific models - CPUs used inside and dedicated GPU in iMac.
Mac mini from my experience is not thermal throttling under load. Some iMacs will.

 

[Solandri]

The Mac Mini uses laptop CPUs, and all the latest models are dual cores. Their 2012 lineup offered quad cores, and I suppose you could still get one of those used if you wanted (Ivy Bridge so it's not horribly outdated - maybe 10%-20% slower than Skylake per GHz).

The iMac uses both laptop and desktop CPUs so quad cores are the norm, but the problem is the computer is attached to the monitor. Granted it's a nice monitor. But in 5 years when you're thinking about upgrading the computer part, you're basically gonna have to throw away/sell the monitor along with the computer.

Both come with only a single drive bay. I really recommend a SSD + HDD for photo processing. The SSD helps because processing RAW files requires a lot of CPU for the initial decode. So what programs do instead is decode all your RAW files into previews, then allow you to do your editing on the preview, subsequently applying your edits to the RAW file when you generate your final processed images. The SSD helps for quicker access to those previews as you sort through your photos. The HDD has the capacity to store your last few months of photos before you permanently archive them. That way you're not having to constantly grab last month's photos off a network drive or archive DVD/Blu-ray. Apple tries to get around this problem on the iMac by offering a "fusion" drive which combines a SSD and HDD into a single SATA connector. But you're paying a premium for this compared to a separate SSD and HDD.

This is one of the frustrating things about Apple hardware - they set up their product lines to funnel you into paying a lot more to get incrementally better features (quad core + extra drive bay). Going for a quad core (helps speed up the initial RAW photo decodes) means you have to either get a Mac Pro (overkill), iMac (monitor glued to computer, one HDD bay), or Macbook Pro 15 (high cost because it's a laptop). A similar quad core desktop PC will only cost you about $500. There is nothing with similar capability in Apple's lineup which comes anywhere close to that price point.

If I had to pick, I would probably go for the MBP 15 since you're probably gonna want a laptop anyway. Buy an external monitor and hook it up to the MBP with displayport for when you're working at the desk. After that, pick your poison - cheap but only dual core or older quad (Mac Mini), or monitor glued to the computer (iMac) - with both only having a single drive bay. I just ended up getting a PC, nice monitor, and a colorimeter to calibrate the screen (Apple calibrates theirs out of the factory, but it's pretty simple to do it yourself). Lightroom and Photoshop run pretty much the same on both Windows and OS X.

Edit: You can do technical spec comparisons here, since Apple's website is useless for actual specs like exact CPU model:
http://www.everymac.com/

 

[jsmithepa]

Granted it's a nice monitor. But in 5 years when you're thinking about upgrading the computer part, you're basically gonna have to throw away/sell the monitor along with the computer.

For this very good reason, I think integrated computers are good as family info centers, on top of the kitchen counter etc where you don't want extraneous pieces/wirings around, but as an everyday work horse, no.

 

[g-unit1111]

Granted it's a nice monitor. But in 5 years when you're thinking about upgrading the computer part, you're basically gonna have to throw away/sell the monitor along with the computer.

For this very good reason, I think integrated computers are good as family info centers, on top of the kitchen counter etc where you don't want extraneous pieces/wirings around, but as an everyday work horse, no.

I agree. For image editing, especially high volume image editing you don't want to deal with an all in one or a Mac Mini. I would look at a Xeon E3 based system with at least 32GB of RAM and a GTX 1060 for that budget (or Fire Pro W series / Quaddro series).

 

[n0ns3ns3]

@Solandri
Actually mac mini has two drive bays and two connectors on the board.
the only thing that is missing is the proprietary cable. it is available for sale on ebay. other option is to buy the mac mini server which happens to cost a lot more and comes with two cables.
I'm a developer and we have 5 mac mini for our "lab" needs. we have taken them apart, upgrade etc.