CAPS 3.0 Zuma vs Mac Mini


I've narrowed my voices to one of these two. Both look like they could do a great job and sound exceptional. At this time I could not use the Mini as I'm running jRiver ( I know there is a MAC version forthcoming). I'd probably run either with 16 gig of RAM, linear PSU, solid state drive, Ethernet for bridge, top of line Intel i7 processor.

Any ideas would be welcome.
128x128sgr
Sgr, If you transfer files to DAC using Ethernet bridge then nothing that you mentioned makes any difference since they affect only timing while you transfer data (no timing). Some things might reduce overall noise but things like amount of RAM or processor speed make no difference at all. Solid State Drive might reduce ambient electrical noise but does not affect data sent. Playback program makes difference only if it does any processing. For direct transfer even Itunes will do. Again, it is for Ethernet bridge (or wirelsss) connection.
The CAPS system has the trick USB card. I bet that makes a huge difference.

I'm a Mac guy and I have a Mac Mini, but if I were solely interested in sound quality, I'd go with the CAPS.
Kijanki,
I hear you loud and clear. The computer should not make a difference via DLNA and Ethernet. But . . In my experience there are many things that can influence Ethernet sound.
Like Cat 5 vs Cat 7 cable or
Linear PSUs for Router, and Gigabyte switches or
PSUs for WHS server
Speed and amount of RAM in WHS
Speed, ram, and processor power of the main PC that runs jRiver or eLyric which transcodes Flac to WAV
The amount of Flac compression
Power cords for each computer and DAC
Using PS Audio Noise Harvesters, Ultimate Outlets, and
Quattros, and Regenerators like the P- 10 and PPP
The sound of player and transcoding software
Software jitter of the computer compiling the programs
Fidelizer 3.0

The list seems to go on and on, and yet each tweak I try just continues to improve the resolution of the digital playback system. I refuse to use the word analog any more to describe the system as it seems to have gone beyond any analog I've heard and I'm proud to own a digital system which is something I could not say without some reservations in past years.

So finding the right computer to run jRiver and can be especially important.
If you have a chance visit the PS Audio Community where many other digital pioneers have written up their findings and others have independently tried and discovered new methods of finding new notes where none were supposed to be.

If you are working with this type of a system try some of these ideas for yourself, you might be surprised.
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Steve
Some things like type of Ethernet cable might change overall ambient noise and the same goes for the computer. On the other hand faster computer can make it much worse generating more noise at higher frequencies. Amount of RAM makes no difference as long as computer can run. What is being send on Ethernet has no time base - it is data in packets. On the other side of the bridge timing is recreated. It doesn't matter if packet is early or late because it goes thru FIFO buffer with new clock. Yes people experienced improvements with faster computers, more RAM and better playback programs but not in Ethernet or Wireless connection.

As for my (wireless) system - no difference with playback program or amount of RAM (no surprise here). No difference between internal or external HD. No slightest difference when I use computer for other tasks during playback.