Best guesses for new Mac Mini specs
I think we'll continue to see the current 3 versions, 2 consumer and 1 business. Slight speed bump, possible RAM and HDD bump, and better IGP.
$600
2.53GHz c2d
4gb ram
320gb hdd
320M vcard
$800
2.8GHz c2d
4gb ram
500gb hdd
320M vcard
$1000 Server
2.8GHz c2d
4gb ram
2x 500gb hdd
320M vcard
Now, if Apple actually changes the size of the Mac Mini and makes it bigger, all bets are off
They could easily go to an i5 w/discrete graphics and the graphics switching system they are using in their notebooks (just to keep people's bills down when not being graphics intensive) if they had a bit more space to play with. The 520 or 540M i5 Arrandale chips keep the same current processor speed, but 10W higher TDP. If they were jumping to a slightly higher 35W TDP, they could consider the i7 620 @ 2.667GHz. I really don't expect to see an i7 in a Mini tho, not even if they decided to push gaming a bit harder.
With the recent adoption of Steam on the Mac side of things, we could potentially see Apple start to give a shit about graphics. The server model would still have integrated graphics, as would the low end model, but I could see the middle version gaining it. With more downloadable games coming all the time, I could actually see Apple removing the optical drive to buy them more build space for better graphics or just ignore graphics and shrink it even smaller, which seems like a worse proposition.
So what else is everyone thinking we will see for the Mini on Monday? Without a change in form factor, I don't think we will see any iX series chips.
$600
2.53GHz c2d
4gb ram
320gb hdd
320M vcard
$800
2.8GHz c2d
4gb ram
500gb hdd
320M vcard
$1000 Server
2.8GHz c2d
4gb ram
2x 500gb hdd
320M vcard
Now, if Apple actually changes the size of the Mac Mini and makes it bigger, all bets are off
They could easily go to an i5 w/discrete graphics and the graphics switching system they are using in their notebooks (just to keep people's bills down when not being graphics intensive) if they had a bit more space to play with. The 520 or 540M i5 Arrandale chips keep the same current processor speed, but 10W higher TDP. If they were jumping to a slightly higher 35W TDP, they could consider the i7 620 @ 2.667GHz. I really don't expect to see an i7 in a Mini tho, not even if they decided to push gaming a bit harder.With the recent adoption of Steam on the Mac side of things, we could potentially see Apple start to give a shit about graphics. The server model would still have integrated graphics, as would the low end model, but I could see the middle version gaining it. With more downloadable games coming all the time, I could actually see Apple removing the optical drive to buy them more build space for better graphics or just ignore graphics and shrink it even smaller, which seems like a worse proposition.
So what else is everyone thinking we will see for the Mini on Monday? Without a change in form factor, I don't think we will see any iX series chips.
Comments
I would like to see an mobile i5 cpu with he Intel graphics in the Mac Mini server. The IG doesn't matter but the faster cpu would make it a bit more compelling as a server.
I might actually upgrade my Mini though if they make a decent GPU update, this GMA 950 is so past it's usefulness, and I'm missing out on OpenCL and H.264 acceleration in Snow Kitty.
I see Apple mimicking the recent 13" MB and MBP, but I don't see why they couldn't fit at least an i3 in there, I don't think the space/thermal requirements as as critical. But I don't think it will be anything less than ordinary, to keep inventory simpler.
I might actually upgrade my Mini though if they make a decent GPU update, this GMA 950 is so past it's usefulness, and I'm missing out on OpenCL and H.264 acceleration in Snow Kitty.
OpenCL is a large part of the reason you won't see the i3 in there, if they can't squeeze a discrete GPU in there. The iX series can't have NVIDIA IGPs and the g[u (at least in the i3, not sure about the other 2) is a definite downgrade from the 9400M, let alone the 320M.
The PC I'm using was built 2 1/2 years ago and something like a top end iMac would be an excellent jump ahead from it. If they could somehow fit the 4870 gpu and an i5 in the Mac Mini, that would be a very viable upgrade and a platform switch to boot
Yeah, I haven't owned an Apple product since the Apple IIe in 1982, but I like Apple and I'll eventually switch when I can swing it heh.
OpenCL is a large part of the reason you won't see the i3 in there, if they can't squeeze a discrete GPU in there. The iX series can't have NVIDIA IGPs and the g[u (at least in the i3, not sure about the other 2) is a definite downgrade from the 9400M, let alone the 320M.
The PC I'm using was built 2 1/2 years ago and something like a top end iMac would be an excellent jump ahead from it. If they could somehow fit the 4870 gpu and an i5 in the Mac Mini, that would be a very viable upgrade and a platform switch to boot
Yeah, I haven't owned an Apple product since the Apple IIe in 1982, but I like Apple and I'll eventually switch when I can swing it heh.
I'd rather have a Radeon 5xxx GPU - supports DX11/OpenGL 4.0; granted Apple might actually have to get serious about better OpenGL support, but heck my PC has better OpenGL and OpenCL support right now (supports GL 4.0 and CL 1.0). Current PC I built in March, with a Core i5 quad-core, Radeon 5770, Bluray, HDMI out to my TV, and it's honestly left my Mini to collect dust.
But I like OSX a lot too, it's just that some of their computer specs leave a lot to be desired sometimes, like a Ferrari with a 4 cylinder engine.
However, if the current 13" MBP specs in the Mini would be a nice boost over my current one, would feel like a modern PC again. A Core 2010 CPU would be a cherry on top.
Open CL doesn't have 2.0 come out till 2012 and 1.1 was supposed to be first half of 2010, but I can't find anything showing it has been released yet. So currently anyone who supports 1.0 is current
The Mobility 5650 has a TDP of close to 19W, the 9400M is 12 W. IDK what the 320M is, but I don't imagine it to be much more than the 9400, but given that this a SFF, I think Apple could still get away the 5650.
But I still think it would just be a C2D/320M.
?
Now, if Apple actually changes the size of the Mac Mini and makes it bigger, all bets are off
I have to think it is a good possibility as long as Intels policies with regards to NVidia remain in place. There choices are stay Core2, go AMD or go to intels I series with an external GPU.
Now Apple could easily take route of least resistance and implement another Core2 board. It certainly would work and they could boost the CPU doped significantly along with a new generation GPU. That would work no doubt but I'm thinking Apple is expecting more out of the Mini thus I can see a slightly larger machine with newer intel hardware and a real GPU. In effect a 15" MBP approach. This would produce a very nice machine that could actually support more demanding users. Plus they could have support for four threads which should be a minimal requirement.
The dark horse is AMD which presents interesting possibilities. For one they can deliver better than Core2 CPU performance and at the same time have an excellent GPU lineup. Plus it would bitch slap intel for their stupid marketing tricks with Arrandale. The problem for Apple is that doing so may harm their relationship with Intel. They may have to consider doing so anyways relatively soon as AMD is on the rebound with some compelling parts. I just don't think AMD has its really compelling stuff ready yet.
They could easily go to an i5 w/discrete graphics and the graphics switching system they are using in their notebooks (just to keep people's bills down when not being graphics intensive) if they had a bit more space to play with.
Exactly. We aren't talking a lot of space either though I could see them punting and dropping the Mini altogether for an XMac platform. In any event all one has to do is look at a midrange video card in any shop to see how small the cards have become. Sticking one into the current Mini might be difficult but massive growth isn't required to do so. Apple might even be able to do it in the current Mini box with more miniaturization or deletion of the CD drive.
The 520 or 540M i5 Arrandale chips keep the same current processor speed, but 10W higher TDP.
Actual power usage might be lower. Remeber Core 2 needs an extra support chip that Arrandale doesn't need. Further if the internal GPU is used lightly or not at all the power will drop again. While the final load with Arrandale + descrete GPU might be more it doesn't have to be excessively so.
If they were jumping to a slightly higher 35W TDP, they could consider the i7 620 @ 2.667GHz. I really don't expect to see an i7 in a Mini tho, not even if they decided to push gaming a bit harder.
Apple shouldn't be shipping anything with less than four threads. How they do that I do not care. The mini is a tight box though so they will have to watch power usage closely. Which brings me back to the idea of deleteing the optical if Apple wants to keep the same enclosure. The path of least resistance though is a new enclosure.
With the recent adoption of Steam on the Mac side of things, we could potentially see Apple start to give a shit about graphics. The server model would still have integrated graphics, as would the low end model, but I could see the middle version gaining it. With more downloadable games coming all the time, I could actually see Apple removing the optical drive to buy them more build space for better graphics or just ignore graphics and shrink it even smaller, which seems like a worse proposition.
Shrinking it more is certainly wrong, I just don't believe they could continue to increase performance by doing that right now. At best we could have a family of Minis with one in the current form factor and another slightly deeper for better performance. I suppose an inch thick unit powered by an Atom could be in the cards, call it a micro.
So what else is everyone thinking we will see for the Mini on Monday? Without a change in form factor, I don't think we will see any iX series chips.
Unfortunately I think you are right about I series chips. Unfortunately this creates a self fullfilling situation where desk top sales go down and Apple sees it as a shift in buying patterns. Of course it is a shift but people are simply shift to better hardware values. I just see trying to sell Core 2 Minis for another six moths as difficult at best. If nothing changes box wise that is what we will get though. Unfortunately there is no good hardware platform to take the Mini to the next level.
Unless of course they do a deal with AMD to do an early release APU based Mini. It is an exciting thought but nothing has appeared to indicate it is being considered. If Apple could get six months exclusive use though that would make for interesting times.
Even with all this speculation I'm not to worried. The Mini could get a considerable boost in performance even with Core 2 hardware. Arrandale isn't impossible either.
Dave
In effect a 15" MBP approach. This would produce a very nice machine that could actually support more demanding users. Plus they could have support for four threads which should be a minimal requirement.
Completely agree. The i5 with a good discrete card would likely be a pretty decent desktop upgrade for me. Would be kinda cool replacing my mid-tower with a tiny box, altho I do like my NZXT Hush case a lot
The dark horse is AMD which presents interesting possibilities. They may have to consider doing so anyways relatively soon as AMD is on the rebound with some compelling parts. I just don't think AMD has its really compelling stuff ready yet.
This is the key here. The stuff that will really be fighting Intel is the next gen of AMD, which is late 2010/early 2011. The new hexa-core chips are quite nice tho.
We aren't talking a lot of space either though I could see them punting and dropping the Mini altogether for an XMac platform.
I think the Mini is the only non-integrated desktop option we will continue to see below the Mac Pro. The XMac is just a pleasant dream.
Actual power usage might be lower. Remeber Core 2 needs an extra support chip that Arrandale doesn't need. Further if the internal GPU is used lightly or not at all the power will drop again. While the final load with Arrandale + descrete GPU might be more it doesn't have to be excessively so.
Yeah I was just working on strictly the listed TDP of the cpu. I'm no sure if the i5 listed TDP covers the power used by the cpu and the graphics together or not. If it's strictly CPU then the 10w difference is still an accurate statement.
Apple shouldn't be shipping anything with less than four threads. The path of least resistance though is a new enclosure. Shrinking it more is certainly wrong, I just don't believe they could continue to increase performance by doing that right now.
Completely agree about the threads and shrinking. The path of least resistance is just speed bump on c2d, bit more ram and hdd and a new IGP. A new enclosure uses more design time certainly.
Unfortunately I think you are right about I series chips. Unfortunately this creates a self fullfilling situation where desk top sales go down and Apple sees it as a shift in buying patterns. Of course it is a shift but people are simply shift to better hardware values. I just see trying to sell Core 2 Minis for another six moths as difficult at best. If nothing changes box wise that is what we will get though. Unfortunately there is no good hardware platform to take the Mini to the next level.
Unless of course they do a deal with AMD to do an early release APU based Mini. It is an exciting thought but nothing has appeared to indicate it is being considered. If Apple could get six months exclusive use though that would make for interesting times.
Unfortunately, Steve is obsessed with shrinking anything he can shrink, so while I hope for a re-designed, larger Mini case, I'm not expecting it. Remaining on the c2d is a dead end street. I think you're right about the self-fulfilling prophecy, kind of like how people are getting iMacs instead of Mac Pros since they have such great performance. Currently the next gen AMD chips aren't set for release until 2011, first or 2nd half depending which source you read, so I really don't see Apple somehow transitioning to them here in June 2010. WWDC next year, sure, maybe.
Intel's current processors didn't really provide much in the way of viable upgrade paths for Apple to maintain things like battery life and still have competitive graphics, the MBA line for example. Apple needs to either come up with some really masterful cooling methods or re-design some of their product line. Apple has a chance here to shift their entire product lineup to i5 and i7 exclusively, completely get rid of c2d.
Considering some of the i7s were out in 2008 and most of the i3 and i5 were late 2009 or early 2010, Apple is certainly not riding the forefront on cpu tech. The top end iMacs were an excellent jump tho and showed Apple wasn't completely ignoring their desktop lineups. I just want to see the Mac Pro and Mini join the iMac in feeling like a good value again. A continued reliance on c2d for the Mini will hurt the lineup significantly, unless they do a speed, ram and hdd boost and also drop the price $100.
I was hoping mini would make it in to Jobs' keynote. Something "magical".
I take this as an indication that the Mini is just getting a minor bump and a new GPU for the Core 2. Sad in a way but I suspect Apple is waiting for all the good stuff coming in early 2011. I wouldn't be surprised if this bumped machine comes to use in the next week or two.
Frankly I was expecting more in the way of hardware at WWDC. All the talk from Jobs about great things coming this year seems to imply more than what we are seeing with iPhone 4.0.
Dave
...
Considering some of the i7s were out in 2008 and most of the i3 and i5 were late 2009 or early 2010, Apple is certainly not riding the forefront on cpu tech. The top end iMacs were an excellent jump tho and showed Apple wasn't completely ignoring their desktop lineups. I just want to see the Mac Pro and Mini join the iMac in feeling like a good value again. A continued reliance on c2d for the Mini will hurt the lineup significantly, unless they do a speed, ram and hdd boost and also drop the price $100.
I honestly don't understand the angst with respect to the Mac Pro. It never was and never will be the type of machine that Apple can afford to bump every six months. On top of that Intel doesn't have a lot to offer the platform right now.
The Min on the other hand is looking neglected again. This is why I was surprised to see nothing mentioned of the machine at WWDC. There are actually multiple opportunities for a upgrade here.
Dave
This is why I was surprised to see nothing mentioned of the machine at WWDC.
WWDC kinda moved away from the hardware side of things a while ago and the trend has become the surprise refreshes - one reason would be so that people don't create buying habits on regular events.
Media events arise to show off new products. The rumor is that the Mini updates should arrive a week on Tuesday.
I honestly don't understand the angst with respect to the Mac Pro. It never was and never will be the type of machine that Apple can afford to bump every six months. On top of that Intel doesn't have a lot to offer the platform right now.
The Min on the other hand is looking neglected again. This is why I was surprised to see nothing mentioned of the machine at WWDC. There are actually multiple opportunities for a upgrade here.
I don't think anyone is suggesting Apple upgrade the Mac Pro every 6 months, but it is certainly lagging behind. Top end iMacs, which cost less, outperform it. That is why people bitch about the Mac Pro. A Pro device being outdone by one of their consumer devices is bound to generate those kind of thoughts.
http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/
The Mini definitely needs it and I'm hoping since nothing but the iPhone and OS were talked about today that we will be getting some stealth updates soon. Apple has been moving away from keynote only updates after all
I don't think anyone is suggesting Apple upgrade the Mac Pro every 6 months, but it is certainly lagging behind. Top end iMacs, which cost less, outperform it. That is why people bitch about the Mac Pro. A Pro device being outdone by one of their consumer devices is bound to generate those kind of thoughts.
Deleted useless link.
There are a couple of issues with your position. First Apple doesn't see the iMac as simply a consummer model. Rather it is often the model selected by buisnesses and frankly has been for ages for businesses inclined to use Macs.
The other problem with your position is that Mac Pros are purchased for more features than processor performance. Focusing on bench marks would leave many rolling on the floor because in the overall picture of things processor performance is only a element considered in the machines overall value for a project.
Lastly it is the nature of the beast for machines to leap frog one and another performance wise. The industry is getting primed for another round of such improvements early next year. It wouldn't be impossible to have the Mini out perform the Pro in some tasks next year.
The Mini definitely needs it and I'm hoping since nothing but the iPhone and OS were talked about today that we will be getting some stealth updates soon. Apple has been moving away from keynote only updates after all
Yes, I'm still expecting a bump real soon now. I suspect the big update will be early next year.
Dave
The annoying thing with the mini is it made to small. Had it been 50% higher it still would be very small and it could use 3.5" harddisk and a desktop CPU and be either faster or cheaper.
My dream would to replace my second hand dual G5 with a Xmac. If I have to settle for a EOL CPU like the C2, slower and smaller HDs and only decent GPU and no uppgrade options I might as well shell out some more and buy a 13" Probook instead of a mini.
Remember Core 2 might be EOL but it's replacements aren't all that wonderful. Given that Apple can up the click rate a bit the actual single thread performance won't be all that different from Arrandale. Arrandale has significant advantage for certain instructions but the functionality those serve is being moved to the GPU.
I know it is frustrating but the simplest thing Apple can do is give the current Mini architecture a big bump and then wait for the new tech coming at the end of the year.
The annoying thing with the mini is it made to small. Had it been 50% higher it still would be very small and it could use 3.5" harddisk and a desktop CPU and be either faster or cheaper.
Yes size can be frustrating but like in all things it is how you use that size that counts. In the Minis form factor the coming tech ought to produce one impressive computer in that little box. The Mini is a good box to ride the process and feature size improvements in the electronics business. Once Fusion or Sandy Bridge gets here we should see a big capacity increase in that little box. Imagine four cores and a good GPU plus the ability to install far more RAM and still have space left over for innovation.
Such hardware would make the Mini far more attractive to me. Then it's big weakness is that issue of storage. As you note a single laptop drive in a desktop machine really doesn't cut it. The thing here is that the free space the new APUs would provide for, could be put to use for an 1.8" SSD to supplement the magnetic drive. Such drive can be very fast and large enough for the base system. Better yet they could offer up a lightpeak interface. The point is if board space is freed up more capability can go into that box.
The problem is that is next year and Arrandale would be a step back this year. It is that old adage about being caught between a rock and a hard place. So one holds off until it makes more sense to buy, no big deal!!!
Dave
Remember Core 2 might be EOL but it's replacements aren't all that wonderful. Given that Apple can up the click rate a bit the actual single thread performance won't be all that different from Arrandale. Arrandale has significant advantage for certain instructions but the functionality those serve is being moved to the GPU.
I know it is frustrating but the simplest thing Apple can do is give the current Mini architecture a big bump and then wait for the new tech coming at the end of the year.
Yes size can be frustrating but like in all things it is how you use that size that counts. In the Minis form factor the coming tech ought to produce one impressive computer in that little box. The Mini is a good box to ride the process and feature size improvements in the electronics business. Once Fusion or Sandy Bridge gets here we should see a big capacity increase in that little box. Imagine four cores and a good GPU plus the ability to install far more RAM and still have space left over for innovation.
Such hardware would make the Mini far more attractive to me. Then it's big weakness is that issue of storage. As you note a single laptop drive in a desktop machine really doesn't cut it. The thing here is that the free space the new APUs would provide for, could be put to use for an 1.8" SSD to supplement the magnetic drive. Such drive can be very fast and large enough for the base system. Better yet they could offer up a lightpeak interface. The point is if board space is freed up more capability can go into that box.
The problem is that is next year and Arrandale would be a step back this year. It is that old adage about being caught between a rock and a hard place. So one holds off until it makes more sense to buy, no big deal!!!
Dave
Core 2010 supports HT and Turbo Boost (I'm not sure if the i3 supports TB, mobile variants do support HT), and it can run cooler and more effciently that current C2D's, it's not that insignificant of an update.
The other reason I wouldn't want another C2D Mini, is that's what I already have in my current Mini...from 2007.
Even the current 9400m Mini would be faster than what I've got; but it's basically just a minor GPU bump if Apple includes the 320m. It's an improvement, but a minor one over the 9400m. Ideally, it would be a Core i5 and a Radeon 5650 IMO, but I think Apple takes the cheaper, easier route with the C2D/320m.
Although given how long it took Apple to move from the GMA 950 to the 9400m, I could see them waiting for Sandy Bridge.
Lastly it is the nature of the beast for machines to leap frog one and another performance wise. The industry is getting primed for another round of such improvements early next year. It wouldn't be impossible to have the Mini out perform the Pro in some tasks next year.
I'm sorry, but if you think it's ok for a machine that costs 4-6 times as much to be slower then I don't ever want you in charge of any of my funds
If Minis get retooled and get a major update before the MPs do to the point where they are beating them in benchmarks, those same distributed situations will buy a bunch of Minis instead. If every other desktop system is soon beating the MP, it has no reason to exist other than making you pay several times more money for an expansion slot or 2.