59
submitted 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) by iso@lemy.lol to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world

The price seems pretty good. I don't really know much about mini PCs. Do you think there is a better alternative?

Update: ok, not price efficient. Noted 👍

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] babybus@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago

What’s great about Mac minis is that they’re extremely power efficient since they’re ARM machines, so if you live somewhere like in Europe where power is expensive, it can save you a lot of money.

I want to see numbers. How much is "a lot of money"?

[-] stuner@lemmy.world 4 points 20 hours ago

I don't have a Mac Mini, but for always-on systems, the idle power consumption can become quite significant.

  • Gaming PCs can consume up to 100W (876 kWh / year).
  • My AMD B650 NAS consumes about 17W in idle (150 kWh / year).
  • A NUC / Mac Mini can idle as low as 5W (44 kWh / year).

If you pay 0.30$/kWh, running your old 100W gaming PC all the time would cost you 263$ per year. My NAS is 45$ per year...

It also depends on what you need/want from the machine. The Mac Mini doesn't have any HDDs and can't run a regular Linux distro, for example.

[-] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 19 hours ago

Would the Mac Mini actually idle at that wattage if it's open for connections? I doubt it, it's probably more like 10W, which is generally the range for those smaller AMD MiniPCs or NUCs.

If it's 10W, that's a $20 savings from your NAS w/ a desktop CPU (and probably a discrete GPU, unless it's running an APU). I can get 4% easily on savings, so I'd only need a $500 savings vs the Mac Mini to recoup that difference every year ($500 * 4% = $20). So if you already have an old PC, use that instead of buying a Mac Mini, and you also won't have to fight macOS to do what you want.

[-] stuner@lemmy.world 4 points 18 hours ago

I do think it can achieve that while waiting for network packets (see e.g. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested).

But in terms of money savings it would rarely make sense, as you need to make it back during the time you run the system. If we assume 6 years lifetime then it would only make sense to pay $120 more. But yes, I'd also go for a system that runs regular Linux :)

[-] suction@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago)

Cheap in Germany for example nowadays is 0,20 EUR / KWh + 15 EUR / month base fee. Most people have more expensive contracts though, 0,30 EUR / KWh and more

[-] tahoe@lemmy.world 2 points 22 hours ago

I’m no lab scientist but when I switched from a hackintosh to an M1 Mac mini a few years ago, my total electricity consumption went down by around 15-20%. This can mean a lot on the long run if you’re tight on budget.

this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
59 points (95.4% liked)

Selfhosted

39677 readers
460 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam posting.

  3. Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it's not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).

  6. No trolling.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS