Mac mini (2011) with Final Cut Pro X???

I'd like to add another more specific part to jcram's question:

Will FCP X take full advantage of the 2011 Mac Mini's Radeon HD 6630M? Will FCP X offload a significant part of the processing from the i7 dual-core CPU into the 6630M?

It's not listed (yet, anyway) in the FCP X pages, here, as one of the graphics processors that will be utilized fully by Final Cut Pro X. Howsabout previous versions of FCP (I own FCP 7)?

If it's not gonna work out, then we need to look to the Mini Server and its i7 quad-core as the best FCP machine. For a moment, I'm ignoring the extra drives and the 7200 rpm speeds possible with the server model, because we can bring the regular Mini close to or equivalent on hard drives with external Thunderbolt boxes, and I'm assuming that both / either would be loaded up with 8 Gigs of RAM.

Eager-to-buy minds want to know so we can ship appropriate $$ to Apple!

I am using the Mac Mini 2011 Server (i7 2.0 Quad) with 8gb 1333 Ram to edit with FCPX, and I also have the new iMac i7 3.4 Quad with 8gb Ram and FCPX.

Some thoughts:

• the Mac Mini server is definitely slower to add effects, transitions and render in the background than the top end iMac...as you would expect.
• the Mac Mini is adequate, though, as a FCPX machine. while it seems a tiny bit "jumpy" in the video preview window when quickly moving around a video, it generally works well. i get the impression that the mini server edition would have benefited from a dedicated video card. i am surprised that apple didn't include a dedicated card with a quad core mini...i understand their market was directed towards server users, and therefore they thought a dedicated card wasn't necessary, but they had to understand that many people would want to use a quad core mini for FCPX. maybe next year?
• both machines are owned by the company i work for...after having used both of them for the past couple weeks with FCPX, i will buy my own Mac Mini Server to edit FCPX with WHEN FCPX comes out with an update supporting multiple camera angles.
• finally, here's my money breakdown.
  • you can buy a mac mini server for $1,000 + 2 28" monitors from newegg(dot)com for $300 each + 8gb ram from amazon for $55 and have a fairly monster set-up for video editing for $1,655 OR
  • you can buy an iMac 3.4 for $2,300 and have a great single screen set-up with more power for more money
  • it depends on your budget and on if you like using two screens or about a(t least a) 35% increase in power

Thanks for your post Drew. I think you helped me come to a decision. I use Lightroom and Photoshop mostly and dabble in video a bit. I just switched from PC to Mac and bought a Macbook Air. For my desktop replacement, I've been deciding between the iMac (hate the glossy screen) vs. 2011 Mac Mini server vs. waiting for new Mac Pros. I think the Mac Mini server with a nice 27" Dell or NEC display will work perfectly.

Thanks agian for your info on the FCPX speed comparisons.

Jamooche, you might want to consider an additional possibility: the optional upgrade path for the non-server i5 Mini 2011. Start with the i5 unit that has the Radeon graphics CPU, then choose the optional upgrade to the dual-core i7 plus a fast drive -- and that gives you a 2.7 GHz dual-core i7 PLUS the Radeon HD 6630M graphics CPU and a 750 GB 7200 rpm drive. Then, buy the 8 GB RAM upgrade from another source (around $80 or less). Remember, the 2011 Mini can be taken all the way to 16 GB when RAM prices drop a bit (you can do it right now, but it's nearly a grand-and-a-half!!).

Next, add that second drive! There are plenty of directions on the Web on how to do that with the single-drive Min. It's not hard - the cable you'll need to add another drive to the non-server Mini is available online. Finally, I added two fast 27-inch Samsung monitors (with 1ms refresh, at $269 each at Sam's) with excellent custom color profiles that are tweaked for the Macs (available online).

Agreed, you don't have a quad-core i7! -- but, on balance, you WILL have a tricked-out 2.7 GHz dual-core i7 with the AMD Radeon HD 6630M graphics CPU, two fast 7200 rpm drives, 8 GB RAM, and I promise you that it will hummmmmm through Photoshop and Quark, and do very well with most middle-range video projects.

For my purposes (which are much like yours) this combination actually gives me more bang thanks to the powerful graphics chip, and I've spent significantly fewer bucks when all is said and done, leaving me more $$$ for other toys like fast external drives on the Thunderbolt port. Choices, choices...

Hello

I am looking at the mac mini for Photoshop/Quark.

So I should get the tricked-out 2.7 GHz dual-core i7 with the AMD Radeon HD 6630M graphics CPU, two fast 7200 rpm drives, 8 GB RAM. I really don't want to spring for the MacPro.

So the AMD card is better to have than the 4 cores?

What about heat - fan noise?

I currently have a G5 2Ghz PowerPC (don't laugh) and it runs Photoshop/Quark well. Will the mac mini be faster?

I might try to get into some Maya and Final Cut Pro will it be OK?

Steve, could you tell me how you have your 27" dual monitors setup? Do you run at 2560-by-1600 resolution and if so, how did you pull that off on the Mac Mini? I suspect you are running them at 1920-by-1200 resolution since the mini does not support 2560-by-1600 resolution on the HDMI port.

Steve, I see now that the Samsung monitors are the lower resolution. They would be plug and play at that resolution. Nevermind. 😉

I still wish we had the new Mac Pro computers to comparison shop, but here is some more helpful information.

I have a 2011 MacBook Air with the 1.7 Ghz i5 processor and 4GB ram. I've made two movies in iMovie after transcoding with MPEG Streamclip. The only slow thing so far was waiting for it to transcode the Caonn 7D footage and to output my 720p HD movie. Output from iMovie took about 17 min for a 5:30 min video (does not include the wireless upload time to YouTube). I am not a pro, so I have no problems walking away for a few minutes while it processes the video. I haven't converted my Photoshop and Lightroom over from the PC side, but I think that would be less intensive than video editing.

So, I think the Mini will be more than enough computer for most people's needs.

I use the same machine , but with 8 Gig of Memory for FCP X, attached to a 24" ACD ..I'm not a pro, so I find the the rendering time is OK .. I cheat a bit w/ Compressor, as I have set up a cluster with this machine and my late 2009 Mac Mini w/ a Core 2 Duo and 4 Gig of memory to do the heavy transcoding ... The editing in FCP X , and my work in Aperture isn't sluggish at all .. I might get the server to replace the old mini , but would use this as my media server and as a trasncoding partner, so I could still leverage the AMD card in the I5 mini for the front end and for Aperture ..

I think you'll be OK .. some of the upgrades suggested would be even better ( The I7 Dual w/ the faster drives, for example) ..

Azdawg99, you're correct in your surmise about the resolutions, etc., on the Samsung P2770FH (a 27" monitor available in limited buy at Sam's Club for $269 each).

Running two of them side-by-side off of the Mini gives you serious -- and I mean serious! -- real estate even at the lower of those resolutions, it's fully HD of course at that rez, for video production (I'm running FCP Studio 3 -- about to try FCP X) or anything else. And, yes, Quark and Photoshop in all recent varieties run perfectly on it -- I pretty much live 24 hours a day in both of those programs. Thus my preference for the 2011 Mini model with the dual-core i7 and the Radeon card.

One pleasant surprise for me -- and why I immediately jumped to two of those monitors -- is the excellent "pro" profile for Macs main available by Samsung online for the P2770FH. It's originally from an EyeOne, I believe, or perhaps from another, even better photometric screen-adjustment tool -- but it brings the colors instantly into a very fine range that's suitable for quite good photo and video work. The change was so dramatic that I was an instant live smiley-face. Hope that info helps you.

Now, back to the core issue -- over at another thread, here -- of getting the darn 2011 Mini to run Snow Leopard and Rosetta at something approaching full speed, which lots of folks are working on, and I'll be a very happy (if appallingly "retro") Mini user.

If you're interested, it's over at "Can I Install Snow Leopard on the 2011 Mac Mini?" at

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3209335?answerId=16043698022#16043698022

Yes we can can! 😁 FREE THE SNOW LEOPARD 10,000 ! etc etc etc.

Thanx for you post Steve, I'm here with the same questions in my mind and finally I think I'll go for the mini i7 with radeon. I'll use it mostly for Photoshop + Illustrator, so a double-core should be enogh and a Radeon graphics should be better than the Intel with shared memory.

The big question here is: Why they don't make a quad-core mini with Radeon graphics? xD

I ended up buying the Mac Mini Server i7 and upgraded to 8GB OWC Ram. I haven't done any video editing thus far, but Lightroom and Photoshop CS5 are really fast. I am very happy with this setup.

I was thinking the same as you here until I heard of the Thunderbolt Expansion Chasis' comming out, so would it be a possibility to add higher res graphics via Thunderbolt ???

Yes, you will be able to add THunderbold connected graphics cards. Nothing (to my knowledge) available yet. I have found the Mac Mini i7 to be just fine with basic video editing and conversions.

So all the great things discussed so far, are do-able on the '11 mac mini's, but it sounds like there all compromises or work arounds. Which means, once Apple moves on with the newer versions of Final Cut etc.., the productivity will decrease.

My general feeling is we should keep saving to score a Mac Pro with thunderbolt for the "real" video production power. In the mean time, hopefully, other 2011 Mini users editing video will chime in with their experiences.