WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.800 As young PC builders, you will be tempted by sleek, shiny options, 00:00:04.800 --> 00:00:08.960 but you mustn't take the easy path. Oh, is that the Mac Mini? Awesome! 00:00:09.760 --> 00:00:16.000 Elijah, you didn't even try to resist it! It's a $600 computer. Nothing even compares to this. 00:00:17.680 --> 00:00:23.520 And while thousands took to the online streets to rip into Apple's outrageous storage pricing, 00:00:23.520 --> 00:00:28.560 it doesn't change the fact that for the base model M4 Mac Mini, he's right. 00:00:29.280 --> 00:00:34.160 If all you want to do is email and video conferencing, some light professional work, 00:00:34.160 --> 00:00:40.080 even some casual gaming, $600 seems like an outright steal for this new machine. 00:00:40.080 --> 00:00:45.200 I mean, heck, I'd probably recommend it to a friend who just needed a decent computer at a fair price. 00:00:45.840 --> 00:00:50.560 So has Apple built the best system for the 99%? 00:00:50.560 --> 00:00:55.520 To find out, we're going to drag race it against both a $600 mini-PC 00:00:55.520 --> 00:01:00.480 and a tower desktop PC while also discussing some of the pros and cons that you might 00:01:00.480 --> 00:01:03.520 gloss over if you take these devices at face value. 00:01:03.520 --> 00:01:05.760 But be sure not to gloss over our sponsor. 00:01:15.280 --> 00:01:24.720 Let's meet our three computers. For Team Malice, standing at a height of two inches and featuring 10 CPU and 10 GPU cores, 00:01:25.440 --> 00:01:31.280 the Mac Mini! Will it be held back by its lack of storage or will its unified memory 00:01:31.280 --> 00:01:37.600 deliver a knockout blow? For Team PC, standing at two inches tall, 00:01:37.600 --> 00:01:44.160 the Minus Forum Venus, and towering over the rest at 15 inches, 00:01:44.160 --> 00:01:49.520 the cobbled together desktop tower. This machine sure takes up a lot of room, 00:01:49.520 --> 00:01:55.200 but its dedicated graphics card means that when it comes to gaming, it means business. 00:01:56.560 --> 00:02:00.560 There is, of course, a lot more to know about each system, so here it is. 00:02:01.120 --> 00:02:04.880 But those are just details for now. What matters is that at the time of ordering, 00:02:04.880 --> 00:02:09.440 each of these machines came in under $600 US dollars before taxes and shipping, 00:02:09.440 --> 00:02:14.720 which brings us then, without further ado, to benchmark number one, Cinebench in both single 00:02:14.720 --> 00:02:17.840 and multi-core flavors. And go! 00:02:17.840 --> 00:02:18.320 Here we go. 00:02:21.120 --> 00:02:25.040 Oh god. This is not going to be close, dude. 00:02:25.840 --> 00:02:28.320 Wow. Wait, it might be a little close. Oh, this is spinning up. 00:02:30.000 --> 00:02:34.080 Oh, it is starting to slow down, but it's not slowing down much. 00:02:34.960 --> 00:02:38.320 Wait, wow, this passed it. 00:02:38.320 --> 00:02:40.800 Wait, what? That's very surprising. 00:02:41.440 --> 00:02:42.960 I am also surprised. 00:02:46.080 --> 00:02:50.960 What's in here? Huh, that's not even current gen Ryzen. 00:02:50.960 --> 00:02:56.400 If you remember as well, this is normally $150 over our $600 budget, but it was on sale. 00:02:57.440 --> 00:03:03.600 I like sales. So it's kind of, you know, being a little bit of a cheater here by joining the lower weight 00:03:03.600 --> 00:03:09.760 class. Anyway, while these run, let's talk about Apple's new M4 silicon. Compared to last year's 00:03:09.760 --> 00:03:14.960 M3, Apple's added two more efficiency cores, they have more than doubled the number of operations 00:03:14.960 --> 00:03:19.760 that their neural engine can complete per second, and they have increased the memory bandwidth of 00:03:19.760 --> 00:03:26.000 their already fast unified memory by 20%. Perhaps most importantly, though, compared to their most 00:03:26.000 --> 00:03:32.000 recent Mac Mini, which had an M2 processor, and even compared to their other M3 devices, 00:03:32.080 --> 00:03:37.920 Apple has doubled the memory capacity of the base configuration from just 8 gigabytes to 16. 00:03:38.640 --> 00:03:44.720 Now, I have no doubt that the most tab hungry of you could easily make use of more, but we've at 00:03:44.720 --> 00:03:50.640 least reached the point where I'm not uncomfortable recommending a base configuration. So good job, 00:03:50.640 --> 00:03:56.560 Apple. And good job on the processor itself. We'll talk about performance in a second, but first, 00:03:56.560 --> 00:04:01.600 I want to talk about energy efficiency. Look at this thing. Here's all three machines running 00:04:01.600 --> 00:04:08.880 the same load, except the M4 is using a fraction of the power of the other two. For a desktop, 00:04:08.880 --> 00:04:14.720 obviously this level of efficiency matters less than it does in a phone or a thin and light laptop, 00:04:14.720 --> 00:04:20.560 but less power consumption means less heat output and quieter operation. You can see, 00:04:20.560 --> 00:04:30.560 even when it's running a test, does it even have a fan? Oh yeah, it does. Wow, is it ever quiet, 00:04:31.120 --> 00:04:37.680 enough fawning though. Let's take a look at the performance. And wow, the desktop and the Mac mini 00:04:37.680 --> 00:04:43.200 are shockingly close in multicore. But what's really surprising to me is how far out ahead that 00:04:43.200 --> 00:04:49.120 mini's forum pulls. Two extra performance cores goes a long way for the multicore. But does that 00:04:49.120 --> 00:04:59.600 hold up for single core? Let's see. Three, two, one. And now we wait. A while. I mean, technically, 00:04:59.600 --> 00:05:06.080 we don't have the final result, but we have enough of it. Where the M4 really excels is 00:05:06.080 --> 00:05:10.480 single threaded performance, which is one of the things that contributes to Apple Silicon machines 00:05:10.480 --> 00:05:16.000 feeling so responsive and snappy. Even the first generation ones, which seems to have become a 00:05:16.000 --> 00:05:22.960 bit of a drag on Apple sales. You talk to an M1 Mac owner and they're like, upgrade? Why? Who needs 00:05:22.960 --> 00:05:37.040 to upgrade? Wait, there's one right now. Let's move on to our next test. Here we're going to target 00:05:37.040 --> 00:05:45.520 the GPU using Blender to render the classroom test scene. And go. Okay. What are we expecting? 00:05:46.240 --> 00:05:54.880 Oh, dedicated GPU turns out having one of those. That's a thing. But an outstanding integrated GPU. 00:05:55.760 --> 00:06:02.160 It's doing much better than this one. That's a thing too. Yeah, he was invited. 00:06:03.920 --> 00:06:10.640 Oh, wait, is that frozen? Oh, no, there goes a minute. Yeah. Okay. That's about 12 seconds slower 00:06:10.640 --> 00:06:18.720 than our tower PC, but a lot faster than this. Is this even done yet? No, it has quite a ways to go. 00:06:18.720 --> 00:06:26.400 Good Lord. Now, in fairness, 3050, not exactly the most impressive GPU to be 00:06:26.960 --> 00:06:33.040 almost on par with, but when we consider that this is on board, it's pretty darn impressive. 00:06:33.040 --> 00:06:38.320 However, custom form factor machines like this are giving up a lot in terms of 00:06:38.320 --> 00:06:43.200 upgrade ability in the long term, which makes them a pretty questionable value. 00:06:43.200 --> 00:06:50.240 If GPU performance is a priority, not just today, but in the future. Because this 3050, 00:06:51.440 --> 00:06:55.520 we can get rid of it, throw something else in there, and we're going to be even faster. 00:06:55.520 --> 00:07:02.800 All right, movie magic cut final score just under four minutes. Wow. The Mac mini is just a quarter 00:07:02.800 --> 00:07:09.760 the time. And you've got to give it credit. It's just so cute, which like it or not, 00:07:09.760 --> 00:07:13.120 is a significant factor for some people when they're choosing a computer. 00:07:13.680 --> 00:07:19.200 Now, before we get to gaming, let's take a look at a large language model, specifically Llama. 00:07:19.200 --> 00:07:25.520 How about we have them each write 10 haikus about our tech bro vest now available on lttstore.com. 00:07:25.520 --> 00:07:29.040 I was the medium labeled Elijah, no offense, but I don't think so. Bruh. 00:07:29.680 --> 00:07:33.680 What? You're taller than me. And wider. I don't think I'm an XL though. 00:07:36.240 --> 00:07:39.120 Wow, you really do look like budget sandbanks right now. 00:07:41.840 --> 00:07:49.680 Ready? Go. This is the same test we used back in our 50 versus $50,000 computer video. And 00:07:49.680 --> 00:07:53.040 while I don't expect as big of a difference on these three machines today, 00:07:53.600 --> 00:07:57.920 it is an opportunity for us to talk about one of Apple's biggest advantages. 00:07:57.920 --> 00:08:03.760 If there happens to be an AI workload that utilizes GPU memory, the typical wisdom has been, 00:08:03.760 --> 00:08:08.880 sure, no problem. Just slap some high capacity GPUs like our Quadro into your system. 00:08:08.880 --> 00:08:15.120 But with Apple's unified memory, the SoC is able to dynamically adjust how much RAM each section 00:08:15.120 --> 00:08:22.000 has access to, whether it's the CPU, the GPU, or in this case, Apple's neural engine. Faded glory 00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:25.840 worn. My love for tech still shines through all. Vest is my heart. 00:08:25.840 --> 00:08:31.040 Tech bro flair that won't be beat. Are you rolling on this? This is freaking ridiculous. 00:08:31.040 --> 00:08:36.000 Look, the quality is not what we're using to evaluate them here, because they're all using 00:08:36.000 --> 00:08:40.560 the same model. So theoretically, they should be about the same. What we're interested in is the 00:08:40.560 --> 00:08:45.760 speed. And if you guys were looking over my shoulder, you'll have seen that the M4 absolutely 00:08:45.760 --> 00:08:52.000 destroyed the others. So unless you're a data center and you need the absolute best in AI 00:08:52.000 --> 00:08:56.800 performance and you're willing to spend millions of dollars to get it, one of these with a little 00:08:56.800 --> 00:09:04.480 RAM upgrade might be the better choice for you. Although RAM upgrades on this are a pretty big 00:09:04.480 --> 00:09:11.600 room elephant. Yes, my friends, we saw the Reddit post that you could buy two base model Mac mini's 00:09:11.600 --> 00:09:18.000 for the price of one that has twice as much RAM and storage in it. Apple is still pricing their 00:09:18.000 --> 00:09:24.720 storage at the literal weight of gold, which is an awful value. Another source spot for some is the 00:09:24.720 --> 00:09:30.880 power button, which is not only now on the bottom of the machine, but at the back of the bottom. 00:09:31.440 --> 00:09:35.440 With those two things aside, though, there's no denying that the machine we're reviewing, 00:09:35.440 --> 00:09:42.720 which is the base model, absolutely kicks but for the price. But does it hold up in gaming? 00:09:42.720 --> 00:09:47.600 While Apple Silicon has the raw grunt to put up decent gaming performance numbers, 00:09:47.600 --> 00:09:53.120 compatibility continues to be a struggle. Now, of course, most Mac users aren't going to expect 00:09:53.120 --> 00:09:57.520 to play the latest triple A game. So we're just using Shadow of the Tomb Raider as a tool to measure 00:09:57.520 --> 00:10:04.880 the performance of the GPU in a different way and also to enjoy the onboard speaker that actually 00:10:04.880 --> 00:10:12.320 sounds a lot better than not having a speaker at all. It's not a fair... Okay, that's fair, I guess. 00:10:12.320 --> 00:10:18.320 What it is. Yeah. Oh, wow. What's also not fair is having a dedicated GPU apparently. 00:10:19.280 --> 00:10:21.280 Dude, this poor thing. Yeah. 00:10:24.160 --> 00:10:28.240 Even this one, though. It started before. Let Tim cook. 00:10:28.720 --> 00:10:32.720 Hey! 00:10:36.320 --> 00:10:41.280 Of course, the Mac couldn't hold a candle to our mid tower PC, but in fairness to it, 00:10:41.280 --> 00:10:47.200 it held up quite well against a last generation AMD onboard GPU. And I know some of you are 00:10:47.200 --> 00:10:52.720 going to say, well, AMD has newer ones, like that's nice, but we're looking at price comparables here, 00:10:52.720 --> 00:10:59.360 not generation comparables. So what's our conclusion then? Mid tower PC wins? 00:11:00.640 --> 00:11:05.040 I don't think it's that simple. No, it really isn't, is it? I mean, on the one hand, 00:11:06.000 --> 00:11:11.600 good job with the high FPS there, buddy. But on the other hand, there's a lot more to life than 00:11:11.600 --> 00:11:18.880 gaming and our M4 mini excels in areas that our custom PC falls flat in. Now, if you're the average 00:11:18.880 --> 00:11:24.960 LTT viewer, the size, relatively high noise and power consumption, and the inconvenience of digging 00:11:24.960 --> 00:11:30.000 through PC part picker for the best deals and then assembling everything, that's all part of the fun 00:11:30.000 --> 00:11:36.160 rather than a burden and totally worth it for the upgrade ability and customizability of a machine 00:11:36.160 --> 00:11:41.200 like this. But if your mom phones you up and she wants help troubleshooting this thing, wouldn't 00:11:41.200 --> 00:11:46.080 you rather just send her to Tim Apple's house for help? And I didn't even mention it has a headphone 00:11:46.080 --> 00:11:52.320 jack and Thunderbolt. This thing is sick. Now the upgraded configs suck and Apple really needs to 00:11:52.320 --> 00:11:58.880 give their collective heads a shake. But this base model for $600 is every bit as good as it seems 00:11:58.880 --> 00:12:03.680 on paper. If someone you know wants a computer on a budget, ask them what it's for. And if you 00:12:03.680 --> 00:12:10.480 don't hear gaming, I think that the mini PCs take the victory. And if that user happens to already 00:12:10.640 --> 00:12:16.640 own an iDevice, the Mac mini gets a pretty big boost. The workflow of like air dropping and using 00:12:16.640 --> 00:12:23.520 iCloud between devices really is kind of magic sometimes. Just like this magic spell to take you 00:12:24.160 --> 00:12:28.720 to our sponsor. Thanks for watching. If you guys liked this video, why don't you check out the 00:12:28.720 --> 00:12:35.520 $10,000 Mac Pro Killer that we made almost a year ago? Apple definitely doesn't perform as well 00:12:35.520 --> 00:12:38.240 when you start going up into the higher price range.