[CheesePuff]

For those of you still sitting on the fence of whether to get an iMac or a Mac mini, here is a price comparison of a Mac mini that will actually out perform the iMac in some tests.

If you take the base Mac mini ($600) and then purchase the 2.16 GHz Intel Core Duo processor (currently $420) and then add 2 GB RAM ($200) and a 100 GB 7200 RPM 8 MB cache Serial hard drive ($170) it will come to $1390. Then add a ViewSonic 20” DVI widescreen LCD (with a faster pixel refresh and high contrast ratio then Apple’s LCD) for $430 it will come to $1820.

Now you say why should I do that when an iMac 20” could be had for $1700? Well for $120 more you get a 160 MHz faster processor, a hard drive with a large cache, and 1.5 GB more memory. Not to mention the better LCD.

I was just about to place my order for the 20” iMac when I figured it might be wiser to go this route.

Now that’s not to say the Mac mini upgraded route doesn’t come with its downfalls. The base Mac mini doesn’t have a SuperDrive, the hard drive is smaller, and of course the largest would be the graphics card.

[iREZ]

:/...id still get an imac.

[CheesePuff]

Originally Posted by iREZ

:/...id still get an imac.

Just wondering... how come? I'm positive it certain tests this would excel in some tests against the iMac. Also, you can use whatever monitor that you would like.

[iREZ]

i have no proof to support this, but i feel as apple releases new operating systems, the stress on the gpu will also be increased. had the mac mini core duo been implemented with the same gpu as the imac, then id certinaly agree that what you've done here is quite impressive. its still quite impressive but a crappy gpu is a crappy gpu, so although your machine would be as fast if not faster in some tasks, it still wont be able to play games and could only support one screen. also, by opening and tinkering inside your machine, you lose applecare which is a big part of my purchase decision.

dont get me wrong, what you've posted is extremely interesting and a cool way to get some raw processing power in a small box, but we dont even know if the mini could even keep the processor cool enough :/, cool idea though.

[CheesePuff]

Agree 100% on the GPU. But I won't be playing any games on my Mac mini, otherwise I would have gotten the iMac. And at least right now with Dashboard and Expose running a 1680x1050 resolution there is no chops in the smoothness.

[iREZ]

oh so you've done what your proposing?...how hard was upgrading the processor?

[MacOS-Fan]

The nice thing about the Mini is that "IF" we get to the point in the next 3-5 years that the GPU can't run the OS (and I don't see this happening), I can simply buy a brand new one for $600-$800. I guess I just don't see a real problem here.

[CheesePuff]

Not for nothing, but I'm actually surprised no one else has responded in here (and no I'm not an attention whore! ) But if you look at the big picture, you are getting a computer thats FASTER then the $2,800 MacBook Pro (except with the graphics).

[Maflynn]

Originally Posted by CheesePuff 2.0

Agree 100% on the GPU. But I won't be playing any games on my Mac mini

The GPU isn't just for games anymore. Take Aperture, it needs a powerful GPU to really spread its wings. Tiger has thrown a lot at the GPU, I expect the reliance on the GPU to continue.

I myself am on the fense of purchasing one but the GPU is the thing that is holding me back. I wouldn't upgrade it as much as you are proposing so the cost difference between the iMac and the mini would be greater.

[F*ckDell]

I'm looking to use my Mini as a HTPC, in other words, graphics matter. I'd also have to agree with Maflynn about using Aperture and such programs.

I asked on my other thread if you could swap a CPC out of a Mini, this has answered my question, but realizing about the AppleCare... I'll probably keep the original CPU.