this post was submitted on 01 Nov 2024
66 points (94.6% liked)

Selfhosted

60177 readers
1022 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:

Detailed Rules Post

  1. Be civil.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts are to be related to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or readme if you're providing a link.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require active participation, with an account that is at least 30 days old. F/LOSS without a paywall has exceptions, with requirements. See the rules link for details.

Resources:

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

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
ruud@lemmy.world
Loki@lemmy.world
CannaVet@lemmy.world
devve@lemmy.world
ayyy@sh.itjust.works
curbstickle@anarchist.nexus
curbstickle_lw@lemmy.world
66
Is Mac Mini suitable for self-hosted server? (lemy.lol)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by iso@lemy.lol to c/selfhosted@lemmy.world
47 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

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 ๐Ÿ‘

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] stuner@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I would disagree with idle power not being important for a home server. Most of the time, your system will be doing very little and wait for something to happen. I also don't think a typical server has a display attached. Wolfang explains this quite well: https://youtu.be/Ppo6C_JhDHM?t=94&si=zyjEKNX8yA51uNSf

[โ€“] just_another_person@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm not saying idle power is unimportant. I'm saying the M-Class chips can't ever go idle with a minimal set of features NOT being engaged, because they're going to be more engaged in general vs other chips that can run truly headless. macOS doesn't allow for that.

[โ€“] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Yup. My old 1st gen Ryzen desktop system isn't particularly power efficient, but it idles <50W (I think closer to 25W, but I haven't measured for a while). And that's a desktop class chip from 7 years ago with two HDDs and a discrete GPU and PCIe wifi card, so it's not winning any awards for efficiency. Even at that, it's barely a blip on my power bill.

An AMD or Intel laptop-class chip should be able to get to 10W or so idle, and not spike too much with basic tasks. And those can be had for $200-300, less if you're okay with older chips. Run Linux headless and it'll likely stay below 15W at the wall most of the time.

[โ€“] just_another_person@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Pretty much exact. Lots of reviews to back that up without me spouting about it.

[โ€“] stuner@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I don't have one (and I don't want one), but Anandtech measured the M1 version at 4.2W in idle. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16252/mac-mini-apple-m1-tested I think you can also get that from other Mini PCs (e.g. NUCs).

[โ€“] just_another_person@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Cool, so the version from many years ago related to OP's question...how?

[โ€“] stuner@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's an Apple Silicon Mac Mini. Do you have a particular reason to think the new one is less efficient?

[โ€“] just_another_person@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yes, because each one has been. Just because it's "Apple" and you think it's better every iteration is a mistake on your part.