My take on Linus's Mac Mini-alike challenge

[Bynari]

tl:dr: I made machines at $442.61, $551.84, and $642.60 that fulfill Linus's requirements for a Mac Mini replacement.

 

On the recent WAN show, Linus challenged Luke to make a comparable PC to the new Mac Mini at a $600 price point.

 

I'd like to share my take on this challenge, as I think you can make very comparable machines:

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Boxful/saved/8f8FXL

 

This came out to (at the time of posting) $551.84 USD.

 

This build has:

• A Ryzen 7 8700G with a 780M iGPU. This iGPU is very comparable to the M3's iGPU, according to the benchmarks I could find online.
• A mini ITX motherboard with integrated Wi-Fi 6e, 2.5G ethernet for Linus's Linux ISO sharing, and USB-C in the back IO as well as a header for the front.
• 1x16GB 6000MHz RAM, leaving room for future expansion.
• Some 256 GB NVMe SSD from Patriot. Seems fine.
• A mini ITX case, to keep with the compact Mac Mini vibes, with a front USB-C port.
• A 600W Thermaltake PSU. You can get slightly cheaper ones at lower wattage, but 600W allows for more upgrade room.

 

If you don't mind going slightly over-budget (roughly 7% at this time, or $642.60 total), you can downgrade the CPU to a 8600G and add a GPU.

The 8600G has a 760M iGPU, which is about 25% worse than the 780M. In this build, I'll be adding an RX 6600, which eclipses Apple's iGPU.

However, if you don't need much GPU power and forgo it, this build will come out to just $442.61:

 

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Boxful/saved/Cjc64D

 

 

Downsides:

• You gotta build it. No plug in and go like on a Mac.
• Larger. You'll need more desk space, or to hide it away.
• No USB 4 or thunderbolt. You can add a PCIe card for that, unless you use the slot for a GPU.
• Not a statement piece. You're not one of them.
• Doesn't include Windows. You can get a gray market key for about $20, or finally try Linux like you've been meaning to. (Try a Universal Blue image, like Bluefin or Aurora )

 

Interested to hear your feedback.

 

[CyberneticTitan]

The iGPU is only competitive with full bandwidth, so you'll need dual channel memory. Other than that you may consider some mini PCs based on something like 8945HS, but a build around the 8700G is probably the closest to an "all around" just due to having to be competitive with the iGPU.

[Bynari]

25 minutes ago, CyberneticTitan said:

The iGPU is only competitive with full bandwidth, so you'll need dual channel memory. Other than that you may consider some mini PCs based on something like 8945HS, but a build around the 8700G is probably the closest to an "all around" just due to having to be competitive with the iGPU.

You're right, thanks for pointing that out. Regarding mini-PCs, new ones with AMD's new mobile CPUs with RDNA3.5 iGPUs, like the 890M, would probably most closely rival the Mac Mini and beat it on most benchmarks, as well as competing on hardware aspects in a one to one comparison. But I wanted to try a go at Linus's PC building challenge.

[kitnoman]

For the moment, there are no desktop cpu that's a direct equivalence to the latest amd mobile AI APU that I could barely remember the full name lol. So the best way is to actually get a mini pc with those mobile chip. I believe there are those with 500-700 that has the older Radeon 780m. While while the latest APU with 890m are at around $700-800 minimum.  However at the same time, there are also some mini pc that around $500 minimum that has the dedicated 6600m gpu, while having an older ryzen 7 or 9 apu like 6000 or 7000 series. There's actually a lot.

I look at this current Mac mini, the way I look at iphone SE, a full pledge flagship processor in a mid/entry level package and price. It's not for everyone, but it works and decently prices.

[saintlouisbagels]

18 hours ago, kitnoman said:

I look at this current Mac mini, the way I look at iphone SE, a full pledge flagship processor in a mid/entry level package and price. It's not for everyone, but it works and decently prices.

Really looking forward to next year's SE. I feel like it might get the same acclaim as this year Mac Mini. Ridiculous specs at an "affordable price"... as long as you only care about base specs and nothing more lol.

[Kisai]

22 hours ago, Bynari said:

tl:dr: I made machines at $442.61, $551.84, and $642.60 that fulfill Linus's requirements for a Mac Mini replacement.

 

On the recent WAN show, Linus challenged Luke to make a comparable PC to the new Mac Mini at a $600 price point.

...

Downsides:

• No USB 4 or thunderbolt. You can add a PCIe card for that, unless you use the slot for a GPU.

 

This is why you can't build one. Because TB is a critical feature of the Mac ecosystem, and TB isn't available as standard even on $5000 PC's.

 

[Zodiark1593]

Tbh, the comparison is largely academic for a lot of us here (ironically being more relevant for less advanced/demanding users). 


For PC gamers, the M4 may as well not exist. It’s wholly irrelevant for that segment, no matter how screaming fast it is. Users that need gobs of GPU power similarly, are not likely going to be considering the M4 either. And if your use a lot of storage, you’ll have to consider how much you want to rely on external storage vs the paying up for more internal storage. For the Mini, probably not a problem, but a far harder decision for the MacBook. 
 

From a family tech support standpoint though, I have a machine I can safely recommend to friends/family, knowing I’ll never again get a call about the thing being slow. One and done, and for a fair price. 

[Sir_Alex]

Yep, Got similar results, mine comes with USB4, which is basically Thunderbolt

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Alex_leo/saved/6fVdFT

Total: $579.40 I picked a case that comes with a power supply

[Bynari]

1 hour ago, Sir_Alex said:

Yep, Got similar results, mine comes with USB4, which is basically Thunderbolt

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Alex_leo/saved/6fVdFT

Total: $579.40 I picked a case that comes with a power supply

Unfortunately, that USB-C port is just USB 3.2 Gen 2. I have not yet come across an AM5 motherboard with USB4.

[Sir_Alex]

3 hours ago, Bynari said:

Unfortunately, that USB-C port is just USB 3.2 Gen 2. I have not yet come across an AM5 motherboard with USB4.

You're right.

Threw in the USB4.0 PCIe card and changed the MB. It comes up to $600.39

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Jhv2FZ

Or with dual RAM configuration at $609.39
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/fHqwrM

 

Only Asus MB AM5 has USB4, but it's $400 https://rog.asus.com/ca-en/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi-model/spec/

 

You can also buy mini PC straight up with all of those specs, 32GB of RAM though. $699.90 but always has $140 off coupon bringing it to $559.90

https://www.amazon.com/MINISFORUM-7940HS-Radeon-Graphics-PCIe4-0/dp/B0CJM9JDNM

[atxcyclist]

Thunderbolt and 10G ethernet are going to be extremely difficult (and expensive) to get on an mITX system, also the media acceleration on the Apple Silicon chips lets them punch way above their weight-class for video work. There isn't anything in the x86 mini computer realm that has all of the features of an Apple Silicon mini, but all of those features become moot if you're trying to game on your computer. I have tried Minecraft Java with some shader mods, Runescape, and WoW on my MacBook Pro with Apple Silicon, and they work just fine, but I don't expect there will be much more ported over to these chips. The gaming market just isn't a segment Apple has put much effort into cultivating over the last few decades.

 

The mini is great if space is of an absolute premium in your setup, and now that you can spec it with up to 64GB of ram, 8TB of storage (at an eye-watering price for sure), 10G ethernet, and it has excellent Thunderbolt support, the prosumer video and photography markets are going to embrace them. In fact, I bet the mini will undercut many Mac Studio sales; The limited ram and storage in the previous minis were the main reason people jumped onto the Studio, the graphics and processing power improvements in the Studio are less important for the workflow most people have.

[tkitch]

20 hours ago, Sir_Alex said:

Yep, Got similar results, mine comes with USB4, which is basically Thunderbolt

https://pcpartpicker.com/user/Alex_leo/saved/6fVdFT

Total: $579.40 I picked a case that comes with a power supply

 

Issue 1:
you need a CPU Cooler, that chip doesn't include one

issue 2: 

8GB DDR5 performs like shit.  you need at least 16GB Sticks to run well.

 

issue 3:

The iGPU on the 8700G absolutely will not match a Mac M4 iGPU.

 

 

Linus' point about the capabilities of the 600$ Mac Mini being untouchable?  Pretty on point.  

 

You will not come close to a parity PC at that pricetag.  

 

Apple loses when you add in RAM or Storage upgrades, as apple charges (scalps) them with an enormous premium.  

[Satan_Prometheus]

I think there's a market for the Mac Mini beyond just a grandma computer. For my own particular workflow (data analysis in Python that tends to be single-thread bound, light video editing, transcoding in Handbrake), an M4 Mac Mini with 24+ GB of RAM would actually be fantastic. I don't need much local storage because I'm going to offload everything to external drives or the cloud anyway.

 

Unfortunately we have one mission critical piece of software that's Windows-only and won't be replacing it for at least another year so I'm stuck with Windows. If it weren't for that one piece of software, I'd be asking IT for an M4 Mac Mini.

 

 

[WereCat]

20 hours ago, Sir_Alex said:

You're right.

Threw in the USB4.0 PCIe card and changed the MB. It comes up to $600.39

https://pcpartpicker.com/list/Jhv2FZ

Or with dual RAM configuration at $609.39
https://pcpartpicker.com/list/fHqwrM

 

Only Asus MB AM5 has USB4, but it's $400 https://rog.asus.com/ca-en/motherboards/rog-strix/rog-strix-x670e-i-gaming-wifi-model/spec/

 

You can also buy mini PC straight up with all of those specs, 32GB of RAM though. $699.90 but always has $140 off coupon bringing it to $559.90

https://www.amazon.com/MINISFORUM-7940HS-Radeon-Graphics-PCIe4-0/dp/B0CJM9JDNM

Calm down. You're competing with $1,500 Mac Mini with that RAM and storage

[Sir_Alex]

On 11/5/2024 at 7:49 AM, tkitch said:

 

Issue 1:
you need a CPU Cooler, that chip doesn't include one

issue 2: 

8GB DDR5 performs like shit.  you need at least 16GB Sticks to run well.

 

issue 3:

The iGPU on the 8700G absolutely will not match a Mac M4 iGPU.

 

 

Linus' point about the capabilities of the 600$ Mac Mini being untouchable?  Pretty on point.  

 

You will not come close to a parity PC at that pricetag.  

 

Apple loses when you add in RAM or Storage upgrades, as apple charges (scalps) them with an enormous premium.  

The iGPU is comparable to M3 GPU. M4 is 8% faster. So I would say it's pretty close for average user.
Also comes with a cooler. Not sure on RAM, I'm using 8GB sticks with no issues in my Hypervisor but you might be right.

[tkitch]

1 hour ago, Sir_Alex said:

The iGPU is comparable to M3 GPU. M4 is 8% faster. So I would say it's pretty close for average user.
Also comes with a cooler. Not sure on RAM, I'm using 8GB sticks with no issues in my Hypervisor but you might be right.

 

Okay, I didn't realize the 8700G went back to including a cooler.  Neat.  
(Other Ryzen 7's don't anymore.)

 

As for integrated graphics, it certainly seems like the 780M loses to the M3 10 core more than "marginally" in general testing:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Radeon-780M-vs-M3-10-Core-GPU_11564_11633.247598.0.html

 

And stepping it up another 8%+ is going to be noticable here.

 

 

[Sir_Alex]

30 minutes ago, tkitch said:

 

Okay, I didn't realize the 8700G went back to including a cooler.  Neat.  
(Other Ryzen 7's don't anymore.)

 

As for integrated graphics, it certainly seems like the 780M loses to the M3 10 core more than "marginally" in general testing:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Radeon-780M-vs-M3-10-Core-GPU_11564_11633.247598.0.html

 

And stepping it up another 8%+ is going to be noticable here.

 

 

Gotcha, I did simple 3dmark lookup to compare as I couldn't find a direct comparison. Thanks.

[tkitch]

...  no.

 

I don't know what that score you're linking is, but that's closer to a 3080's performance than anything to do with the 8700G.

 

The 780M on the 8700G scores 5-6K in the test.  Not 32K.  

 

Here's a 3080 for comparison:

 

 

Here's the actual 8700G Scores.  (Yes one person who OC'd both CPU and iGPU on the chip scored higher, but that's not what we're comparing.)

 

https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=wl X&cpuId=3255&gpuId=&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock=

 

[Sir_Alex]

13 minutes ago, tkitch said:

...  no.

 

I don't know what that score you're linking is, but that's closer to a 3080's performance than anything to do with the 8700G.

 

The 780M on the 8700G scores 5-6K in the test.  Not 32K.  

 

Here's a 3080 for comparison:

 

 

Here's the actual 8700G Scores.  (Yes one person who OC'd both CPU and iGPU on the chip scored higher, but that's not what we're comparing.)

 

https://www.3dmark.com/search#advanced?test=wl X&cpuId=3255&gpuId=&gpuCount=0&gpuType=ALL&deviceType=ALL&storageModel=ALL&showRamDisks=false&memoryChannels=0&country=&scoreType=overallScore&hofMode=false&showInvalidResults=false&freeParams=&minGpuCoreClock=&maxGpuCoreClock=&minGpuMemClock=&maxGpuMemClock=&minCpuClock=&maxCpuClock=

 

Seems like I was looking at wrong benchmark "Wild Life" instead of Wild Life Extreme

[tkitch]

33 minutes ago, Sir_Alex said:

Seems like I was looking at wrong benchmark "Wild Life" instead of Wild Life Extreme

And you picked the guy who OC'd his GPU and RAM and got a +70% Score as a result.  
You also showed Wild Life Extreme for the M3.  

 

Additionally, Wild Life (non Extreme) isn't on Apple.  So you again picked wrong.

 

Here are normal scores for Wild Life:

 

 

Being realistic:
The 780m scores 5-6K on Wild Life Extreme
Apple M3 Scores 8.2K+ on the same test.

Going up another 8% for M4 (quoting you) only makes that gap bigger.  

 

They're not really all that comprable.  

[Sir_Alex]

Found a better comparison. It can break down the by M4 GPU cores. Entry level Mac Mini has 10 cores

https://nanoreview.net/en/gpu-compare/radeon-780m-vs-apple-m4-gpu

 

So depending on a benchmark 780M does better and vise versa. M4 beats it in score.