Can Mac Mini run Photoshop? With 24 inch LCD?

<p>I'm looking to buy a new computer, and need some advice:</p>

<p>I can't decide which is better for me:

<ul>

<li>Mac Mini, 1Gb RAM, DVD writer, 24" Dell monitor (total GBP 1530),

or</li>

<li>Mac Mini, 1Gb RAM, DVD writer, 20" Dell monitor (total GBP 1060),

or</li>

<li>iMac G5 20 inch, 1Gb RAM (total GBP 1280)</li></ul>

</p>

<p>I'll be using it for basic image editing of 8MP files in Photoshop

CS2, and the usual internet/email/etc... so what I don't know is

<b>can the Mac Mini run Photoshop "okay" for basic image editing</b>

(e.g. USM, cropping, minor adjustments to curves, a bit of healing

brush), and <b>can its 32MB video RAM cope with displaying a good

image on a 20" (1680x1050) or 24" (1920x1200) monitor?</b></p>

<p>The advantage of having the seperate monitor is obviously that in a

couple of years I can upgrade the main computer... but I don't want to

be frustrated with a slower G4 processor if it can't run PS well and

if it can't actually cope with displaying that many pixels on screen

comfortably.</p>

<p>Anyone have any ideas (or experience)? Thanks!</p>

<p>-Jonathan</p>

Yes, the mini will run "ok". I have a PowerBook (laptop) with similar video specs hooked up

to a 20" Cinema Display. Before the ACD, it was hooked up to the Dell 20". PS

performance is ok for on-site editing, but it's certainly not designed to be the primary

image processing machine. Don't know if it can handle a 24" display though.

There is nothing inherently wrong with a G4 processor. I have a dual 1 gig G4 processor

system that can comfortably handle a batch job processing a few hundred images for the

12MP D2x.

The iMac G5 should give you significantly better performance than the mini (although

you're tied in to the screen). Considering how much better the apple screens are compared

to the Dell screens, I would recommend going with the iMac.

I have about 5 or 6 of the Dell 20" displays at the office. They are ok for business

purposes but lousy for photography. Way to bright and cannot be properly configured

with a hardware puck (Spyder).

I have a bit of experience.

I went several times to the Apple Store and tested the Mac Mini with the 20" and 23" apple monitors and a top end iMac. I created files in the 20-50 mb range and manipulated them in photoshop cs. The mini had 512 of RAM, the iMac 1gb.

I would say that a 1.42mhz mini with 1gb of RAM is an acceptable but not fast machine for working with files from an 8mpx camera in photoshop cs2. Yes its "OK" for the tasks you mention given that ok is a pretty slippery term. I could live with it but I'm sure there are others who would be flaming me for saying that. The mini's video card had no problem with photoshop cs and a 1920x1200 monitor. It might have a problem if you wanted it for 3d work or games.

Compared to the iMac the mini is slower in everything from booting up to individual CS tasks but it's not intolerably slow (subjectively i'd guess there's a 20% speed difference, not really huge in a hobbiest work situation. For example, a 30 second task in photoshop like for example a gaussian blur on the mini might take 24 seconds on an iMac. So maybe on your workflow for one photo as outlined above the mac mini would take a minute or so longer through your whole workflow (numbers are indicative but made up). For the other tasks you mention (email, web etc) the mini is fine.

I use the 1.42ghz mini w/1gig ram. For 'basic' PS image editing on files in the 80-100mb

range it's faster than the dual 800 G4 I had. The G5 imac IS faster - about 2x judging from

playing with it in the Apple store. The real bottle neck on the mini is the slow hard drive. I

use an external firewire HD as the default PS scratch disk and it's speeded up things to a

point where it's 'liveable'. My main reason for opting for the mini at this time was price. I

was all set to buy a dual G5 tower until Apple dropped the news about their switch to intel.

Right now I see the mini as a stop gap until the mactels come out next year. When they do

the mini will make a fine dedicated itunes player. <g>

I checked speed tests at barefeats. Note that the iMac is a 1.6mhz and not the 2.0.<p>

For a basket of typical Multi Processor aware photoshop CS tasks<br>

iMac G5 1.6mhz: 64 seconds<br>

Mac Mini 1.42: 65 seconds<br>

<p>

For a basket of typical Single Processor aware photoshop CS tasks<br>

iMac G5 1.6mhz: 84 seconds<br>

Mac Mini 1.42mhz: 81 seconds<br>

<p>

iTunes convert MP3 to AAC<br>

iMac G5 1.6ghz: 109 seconds<br>

Mac Mini 1.42mhz: 134 seconds<br>

<p>

Complete tests and conclusion here:<br>

http://www.barefeats.com/mini01.html

<p>

If your rationale is based on keeping your monitor when you upgrade in several years then

you should know that we're on the verge of a monitor quality revolution. 3 years from now

there will be monitors with a larger colour gamut, close to Adobe rgb will be very

common, the first high end ones are just coming out. Also, the life of an LCD in terms of

picture quality is not much more than 3 years. If that is your sole reason for picking the

mini, I personally don't think the logic hold up. In either case, I don't personally think the

Dell is the way to go if you want a good monitor for photographic work.

if you can, get an iMac G5 with a 2ghz proc and load it with ram<br>

the displays are all nice on them, too