i5 quad core iMac or i7 dual core Mac Mini?

Question

i5 quad core iMac or i7 dual core Mac Mini?

I'm thinking of buying a new Mac, but I wanted to sound out the clever folk here on a few concerns I have.

I've only ever owned two computers - a Mac LC bought in 1992 and kept for 12 years, and a 17" flat panel G4 iMac (the dome based type) bought in 2004 and been in use ever since. But the G4 is increasingly struggling with the outside world - online video is out of the question due (I believe) to no Flash updates for PPC Macs for several years (although I've done the Flash 11 hack which has helped a bit).

Keeping these machines for so long, both invariably required a certain amount of maintenance. Although I've been lucky in that I've never had a hard drive fail, I have upgraded drives and RAM, and both computers needed new power supplies at some point in their lives.

My concern is, this kind of running maintenance seems to be impossible on the new super-thin iMacs. If the power supply dies, that's it - the computer's had it. Moreover anyone who's ever opened up a computer will know that over time they get clogged with dust. With the new iMacs being so thin with so much packed in there, it seems the whole thing is just a cooked drive and motherboard waiting to happen. And talking of hard drives, the widely held view is that being mechanical, failure is inevitable - the only question being will it take two years or ten.

With all of these factors, there's a part of me that thinks that buying an unfixable computer is a potentially expensive way to compute, especially for someone like me who isn't really into computers for their own sake and wants a least a decade out of such a costly investment.

So I guess my question is, are these concerns valid? Is it really impossible to fix modern iMacs? Or are they so well built that failure is almost unheard of? Should I go for the smaller 256 flash drive (to keep moving parts out of the equation) or will a 1TB fusion drive last just as long?

In churning over all these concerns, I've started looking towards the Mac Mini, which, even allowing for the user-unfriendly Torx security screws, can still be opened up and maintained. Will the 3.0GHz i7 duel core Mac Mini be as powerful as the 21.5" 2.8GHz i5 quad core iMac? Will the quad core iMac will be more future proof in terms of software compatibility, but the dual core Mac Mini more future proof in terms of mechanical maintenance? Is that a fair interpretation?

Decisions decisions!

So I need the support community boffins to help me decide. What should I do?

My Mac will be used for the regular accounting and word pro, surfing, email, a little Photoshop and some iMovie and documents in Pages can run to 1/2 a gig or more which which my G4 really struggles with - by today's standards there's nothing super heavy, but I want it to last and not simply grind to a halt when the outside world obliges me to upgrade the OS etc.

As ever, any thoughts or advice gratefully received.

Mac OS X (10.5.8), 17" iMac PPC G4 1.25 GHz 10.5.8

Posted on Feb 8, 2016 3:57 AM

Reply

Answer 1

Feb 8, 2016 6:06 AM in response to legolas-woodelf

The first issue with either choice is that RAM is not upgradable. It is

soldered to the motherboard. So, you will need to decide whether the

base offering of RAM will be sufficient. If not, you will need to order a unit

with more RAM.

That said, the new iMacs are repairable, but with great difficulty for a normal

user. Service centers are equipped to take apart and repair (though could be costly

after warranty). The new Minis, while fairly easy to disassemble really only have

three things the user can replace: logic board, power supply, hard drive. Unlike the

previous iteration of the Mini (2012 version), a full teardown is required to replace the

hard drive. Typically, the cost of replacement logic boards for Minis are high enough

that it is usually makes more sense to just get a new Mini.

Personally, if I were to buy any new computer now, I would get it with an internal SSD.

I would have it contain the OS, apps, and user data for small space items. I would then

use external hard drives for the space hungry items: videos. movies, large photo libraries,etc.

external drives are easy to replace and these days very inexpensive.

Reply

Answer 2

Feb 9, 2016 4:13 AM in response to woodmeister50

Thanks for the response 50.

I've been doing more digging - looking through ebay, it seems that - fusion drive aside - earlier 21.5 iMacs came with a higher spec than the newer ones (apart from the optional processor upgrade option to the new Retina 4k model). For instance a mid 2011 iMac can be found for around £500 on ebay with a quad core i7 processor, as opposed to a brand new iMac which comes with the i5 processor. My understanding is that the quad core i7 supports hyperthreading which can create four more virtual cores in addition to the four real ones. As more software gets written to work with multiple cores, that surely means that a 2011 quad core i7 will be more future-proof than a brand new non-hyperthreading quad core i5. And perhaps more importantly, the older iMac is much easier to open up and fix in the event of a problem, or even to simply replace the PRAM battery (!!!!!), with easily accessible RAM that I gather can (at least unofficially) support 32GB as opposed to a new one which maxes out at 16GB.

Or is there some glaring detail that I've missed or misunderstood?

Will a fusion drive really make up the ground lost to the slightly lower clockspeed i5 versus the slightly higher clocked hyperthreading i7?

Is a five year old machine really more future-proof than a brand new one?

Reply