or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 2014 Mac mini Wishlist
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

2014 Mac mini Wishlist - Page 24

post #921 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Ah but it is foolish to look at the GPU market and only consider the discrete units. AMD has effectively displaced many of NVidias low and mid market GPUs with its APUs. You will see a rapid collapse of income at NVidia over the next year or so if they can't come up with new products the market wants.

 

Yes but those APU's are only found in laptops and low end machines with AMD CPU's, I haven't looked recently but how well are those selling?

 

Apple has a very small portion of the high end workstation market HP is the leader for that market, especially 3D and HP uses Nvidia. We are assuming the Mac Pro will be successful, you yourself have doubts on the entry price as do I and let's face it Apple has let their Pro market lax over the last two years. I hate to say it but I believe this is Apples last throws in that market. In two to three years time the Mac Pro might be a thing of the past, I wouldn't be surprised if sooner.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #922 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I just wouldn't count on it.
I wouldn't either its just that I don't see a technical reason for it to be impossible. That based on what I've seen in the pictures.
Quote:
First it's possible that these gpus may have to be installed in pairs. Even if they're in a replaceable card form, we don't know if Apple will actually sell them as after market parts through their site as they did with the 5870 and prior models. We don't know whether connectors will change between one generation and the next. I was saying not to count on a company like Sapphire to do it this time, as they appear to be custom boards rather than the same form  factor as PC equivalents.
I guess the point I was trying to get to, is it really doesn't make sense anymore to get wrapped up in a GPU upgrades because there is no compelling justification anymore for putting new GPU cards in old chassis.

You are talking to a guy that use to do 486, Pentium and other upgrades almost compulsively. Those days are gone for the CPU and I think we are seeing the same trend with GPUs. By the time one out grows a machine GPU wise tech has moved so far forward that you might as well update the whole machine.

In other words I don't care anymore about GPU or CPU upgrades.
Quote:
 
I found it a bit silly, but I find many gpu discussions to be silly, as they often center around discrete vs integrated like the people involved are somehow unaware that at 650m is not remotely comparable in performance to a 680. There's that, and few people will shell out several hundred for a notebook dock if it only brings a 25% performance improvement. Even if they can get a solution together that works acceptably under a variety of conditions, the price barrier would be quite polarizing. Even adding a couple hundred to the price of a card will dissuade a lot of people who believe themselves to be interested.

That is all true. What is more perplexing is why people just don't buy the machine they need up front. Apple should be shipping laptops with discrete GPUs for at least another two years so there is little excuse. Three years from now I'd expect that it would be hard to justify discrete GPUs for most users in laptops. As it is now Iris pro is a bit of a beast considering its low power usage.
post #923 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Wizard is right, if it isn't on the motherboard close to the CPU it just isn't worth the enormous costs to go external, even with Thunderbolt 2. Your better off buying a new machine that fits your needs better.

This will only get more interesting in the future! AMD and Intel (reluctantly maybe) are in a race to deliver optimized heterogeneous computing solutions, so the performance of these solutions will only get better in the future. I would expect to see heavy emphasis on the GPU part of those advanced "APU" chips to the point that focus on the CPU is suppressed.

One only has to look at Intels latest Haswell chips to see how much die area gets devoted to the GPU. I would expect that trend to remain for the next couple of developmental cycles. I86 cores have been developed to the point that engineering new gains in performance is a struggle, so we likely will see more i86 cores on these chips but I don't expect radical improvements. In the end though having every thing on one IDE is such a huge gain that the days of discrete GPUs is already numbered.
post #924 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Yes but those APU's are only found in laptops and low end machines with AMD CPU's, I haven't looked recently but how well are those selling?
Well before Haswell they where selling rather well into the laptop market, especially to people interested in good GPU performance at low cost. Honestly I haven't check lately, but I think you miss the point, every AMD or Intel APU that gets sold is a potential loss of sales for NVidia. It started to impact NVidia a year or so ago, it just see it getting much worst with this new generation of APUs.

Let's face it there was good reason in the past for even a modest computer user to need something better than integrated Intel GPUs. Those days are effectively gone. The remaining discrete GPU market will rapidly shift to the high end.
Quote:
Apple has a very small portion of the high end workstation market HP is the leader for that market, especially 3D and HP uses Nvidia. We are assuming the Mac Pro will be successful, you yourself have doubts on the entry price as do I and let's face it Apple has let their Pro market lax over the last two years.
For the life of me I can't understand why Apple can't break out of this marketing nightmare that is their desktop line up. It isn't that the price on the "entry level" Mac Pro is that bad, it is the fact that they don't fill in the line up with a true desktop machine. Not a workstation with XEON and dual GPUs, but rather a machine with a top end desktop chip. If built on a Mac Pro chassis the potential is to drive volume that would assure the Mac Pros survival.
Quote:
I hate to say it but I believe this is Apples last throws in that market. In two to three years time the Mac Pro might be a thing of the past, I wouldn't be surprised if sooner.
I'm not too sure about that. In many ways I'm impressed with the machine. The problem is Apple has this extremely wide gap in performance between the Mini and Mac Pro that isn't filled with a proper desktop machine. Maybe the mini can morph into something better! I'm actually hoping that is the case! but Apples history here has been pathetic to say the least.

In many ways Apple reminds me of some of the drivers around here that get stuck in the snow and spin their wheels madly trying to get out of the snow bank. It is extremely sad that the company that once advertised "Think Different" can't seem to change its direction with the desktop hardware. Instead the have the lead foot all the way down on the accelerator going nowhere. Let's face it, we have seen over a decade of this desktop line up, they need to make changes.
post #925 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post
 

Oh gosh me too, I have never understood that. That amount of overclocked GPU options on the market has to make you wonder what idiots think that a 10% performance gain is worth such a heft pricetag, especially when you can overclock the GPU yourself.

Yeah gamers puzzle me.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
 

 

Good to know. I just remembered the speculation back when TB was announced. I know little about the tech itself.

These things get hyped often. As I recall Sonnet did test out the Quadro 4000 and a couple others. You can find a number of demos on youtube. Some of them seem to do okay, but may not be hot pluggable, and as I mentioned you will face a stiff barrier to entry. I don't think they'll take off to the point of seeing a significant market of gpus sold in breakout boxes by sapphire or evga or whatever. I can't see it becoming a good value, and non standard hacked projects aren't the kind of thing that will interest most people if the upfront costs are high. I know Marvin has linked a few good demos from youtube, but read comments by the uploaders  regarding the gotchas and what it took to get some of them to work. I think the fascination really stems from the division in what Apple does and doesn't offer compared to the broader oem market.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



Let's face it there was good reason in the past for even a modest computer user to need something better than integrated Intel GPUs. Those days are effectively gone. The remaining discrete GPU market will rapidly shift to the high end.

I haven't examined their strategy there. So far their high margin items such as Tesla cards have been better amortized by higher volume cards. There are still graphics markets where users will take advantage of all available power in the form of updated workflows. Animation comes to mind, considering the amount of instancing required to make certain things play back at 24fps without mashing playblast all the time.

Quote:
For the life of me I can't understand why Apple can't break out of this marketing nightmare that is their desktop line up. It isn't that the price on the "entry level" Mac Pro is that bad, it is the fact that they don't fill in the line up with a true desktop machine. Not a workstation with XEON and dual GPUs, but rather a machine with a top end desktop chip. If built on a Mac Pro chassis the potential is to drive volume that would assure the Mac Pros survival.

I would call the entry pricing kind of bad. It's always a matter of total cost to get to a working solution. In this case the costs are quite high even for a fairly modest configuration.

post #926 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Yeah gamers puzzle me.
They need bragging rights so they buy those rights.

At least that is what I think as I never really got into gaming.
Quote:
These things get hyped often. As I recall Sonnet did test out the Quadro 4000 and a couple others. You can find a number of demos on youtube. Some of them seem to do okay, but may not be hot pluggable, and as I mentioned you will face a stiff barrier to entry. I don't think they'll take off to the point of seeing a significant market of gpus sold in breakout boxes by sapphire or evga or whatever. I can't see it becoming a good value, and non standard hacked projects aren't the kind of thing that will interest most people if the upfront costs are high. I know Marvin has linked a few good demos from youtube, but read comments by the uploaders  regarding the gotchas and what it took to get some of them to work. I think the fascination really stems from the division in what Apple does and doesn't offer compared to the broader oem market.
The only way I can see external GPUs working is if they are built into a video monitor that also functions as a dock.
Quote:
I haven't examined their strategy there. So far their high margin items such as Tesla cards have been better amortized by higher volume cards. There are still graphics markets where users will take advantage of all available power in the form of updated workflows.
This is certainly true but I see these high performance cards getting very expensive. As revenue shrinks the only way to sustain Nvidia will be to raise prices, lay off staff or deliver new products. The will likely do all three.
Quote:
Animation comes to mind, considering the amount of instancing required to make certain things play back at 24fps without mashing playblast all the time.

I would call the entry pricing kind of bad. It's always a matter of total cost to get to a working solution. In this case the costs are quite high even for a fairly modest configuration.

It isn't extremely bad for that configuration, it is extremely bad for Mac Pro though. Having a $3000 entry point into the desktop world is crazy.
post #927 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmurchison View Post
 

Apple should be finding ways to reduce the cost of the mini. A $499 mini isn't going to cannibalize 

the iMacs.   In the future 64-bit ARM in a mini chassis connected to SSD would be an ideal platform 

for business and hi-tech consumer alike. 

 

No.  Not enough power in comparison to the i7 and not enough productivity software.

 

A $499 Core i5 mini would cannibalize the iMacs.  That's a $800 delta between the mini and the base iMac.

 

The $799 mini is dangerous…quad core i7 vs quad core i5.  I'm guessing that Apple does not put Iris Pro in the mini just for this reason.

post #928 of 1316

My 2013 Mac mini Wishlist:

 

  1. That there is a 2013 Mac Mini.
  2. That it has Iris Pro.  That strikes me as unlikely but it is a "wish" list.  I'm thinking that Tim Cook personally sending me a pony is more likely.
post #929 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Iris Pro is better obviously, though Iris would be perfectly fine for me as a nice upgrade over the Intel HD 3000.
post #930 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


They need bragging rights so they buy those rights.

At least that is what I think as I never really got into gaming.

 

 

 

I never got much into it. At one point I considered making custom items for some of the ones that provide construction kits, but that's just because designing stuff is fun. The games themselves aren't that appealing to me.

 

Quote:

The only way I can see external GPUs working is if they are built into a video monitor that also functions as a dock.

I've seen that kind of speculation too. Right now I do not think it's likely, because the gains aren't significant enough. In terms of Apple, I doubt they want to push the price of that thunderbolt display up to maintain its margins. I say that because a gpu is an expensive component. It's hard to imagine it wouldn't have any influence. You might notice that its design still parallels the older imac style. I suspect the newer process is more expensive, and they didn't like the choice between (lower) margins and a price hike.
 

Quote:

This is certainly true but I see these high performance cards getting very expensive. As revenue shrinks the only way to sustain Nvidia will be to raise prices, lay off staff or deliver new products. The will likely do all three.
It isn't extremely bad for that configuration, it is extremely bad for Mac Pro though.

 

I've read that they were already doing some of this stuff, in terms of cutting out some of the third party companies who sell and support working cards based on NVidia's chips.

 

Quote:

Having a $3000 entry point into the desktop world is crazy. It isn't extremely bad for that configuration, it is extremely bad for Mac Pro though

 

I would point out that it was still a price hike when comparing to comparable hardware. Apple tends to round  to even numbers most of the time on the mac pro line. They won't typically migrate price points more than $200 or so at a time, but I'm pretty sure $2900 would get rounded to $3000.

 

It also seems really high to me considering the other necessary items to end with a working solution. As has been mentioned they may have a lot of repurchasing to make up for the lack of direct PCIe, which does add to the cost. If a working solution ends up at $5k, it really needs performance that justifies that. I suspect this won't be the case for a lot of guys with beefed up 2009-2010 models, as performance per dollar may not scale well here in all applications.

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Iris Pro is better obviously, though Iris would be perfectly fine for me as a nice upgrade over the Intel HD 3000.


Yeah well that does equate to 2 years of significant gpu gains. I didn't realize you owned a 2011 model.

post #931 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post


Yeah well that does equate to 2 years of significant gpu gains. I didn't realize you owned a 2011 model.

That was my first Mac ever. I had wanted one since the (now classic) MacBook Pro was released in 2008. I am pretty motivated now to buy a mini and I don't know if I would be as motivated to buy one when Broadwell comes out. By that point, I would rather wait for DDR4.
post #932 of 1316

What is wrong with the Intel 3000?

post #933 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

What is wrong with the Intel 3000?

Overall my Mac mini is starting to show it's age. I am not sure how much faster overall the processor options are over my current i5-2410M are however I know a PCIe SSD would wipe out my Samsung 470 and the Iris graphics would be a huge improvement over my HD 3000. I am not sure if I want to wait another year because what if Apple doesn't update by then.
post #934 of 1316

Again what is great about Iris graphics?

post #935 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Again what is great about Iris graphics?

Normally I wouldn't reply to this but since I'm trying to get to 1,000 posts, see my quoted post below specifically the bold, italicized, and underlined part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Overall my Mac mini is starting to show it's age. I am not sure how much faster overall the processor options are over my current i5-2410M are however I know a PCIe SSD would wipe out my Samsung 470 and the Iris graphics would be a huge improvement over my HD 3000. I am not sure if I want to wait another year because what if Apple doesn't update by then.
post #936 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Normally I wouldn't reply to this but since I'm trying to get to 1,000 posts, see my quoted post below specifically the bold, italicized, and underlined part.

 

Yah, you kinda wasted your 1000 post on a troll question.  I dunno what his problem is but that doesn't seem like a question asked in anything close to good faith.

post #937 of 1316
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Yah, you kinda wasted your 1000 post on a troll question.  I dunno what his problem is but that doesn't seem like a question asked in anything close to good faith.

 

He’s concerned about his own Mac Mini and the future viability of its hardware, is all.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #938 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

He’s concerned about his own Mac Mini and the future viability of its hardware, is all.

Pretty much this. I wouldn't even be so concerned either had I not had to put in the SSD into my Mac mini myself haphazardly. The lid of my mini is still sitting on top of the computer upside down and I am dying to test the raw speed of the PCIe SSD. It isn't just Iris or even Iris Pro that is the selling point.
post #939 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

He’s concerned about his own Mac Mini and the future viability of its hardware, is all.


My own interest in the line relates to it being cost effective while allowing me to use whatever display. A new mac pro would be nice, but the total cost is going to be pretty bad. I may wait to see performance numbers and eventual refurbished pricing as my biggest bottlenecks depending on what I'm doing are OpenGL, ram, and total possible displays. It's pretty awesome to be painting in one window and have Xcode in the other, but I'm a huge nerd. I am disappointed in its pricing, but I still plan to read up on it once others have had the chance to road test early units.

post #940 of 1316
Thread Starter 
See if I could, I would buy a Mac Pro however I don't know if I would be able to push it to the limit that I absolutely could. I use my mini for very basic stuff but that doesn't mean I want the lowest available parts to use i.e. i5-4200M, HD 4600 graphics, 4 GB RAM, 750 GB HDD or 500 GB if Apple was really stingy for $599.
post #941 of 1316

Apple and stingy?

 

Yes.  Terribly so since 2008 where they have shamelessly upped the price of entry iMac with integrated crappies from £695 to...

 

£1150 is it?

 

A £450 price rise.  Plus £60 for the DVD player.  That's £500.  (The latter...is a lot of money in the UK.)

 

Apple made the entry iMac too expensive.  

 

Put Iris Pro in the top end Mini.  Would you buy a low end iMac?  No.

 

Lemon Bon Bon.

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply

You know, for a company that specializes in the video-graphics market, you'd think that they would offer top-of-the-line GPUs...

 

WITH THE NEW MAC PRO THEY FINALLY DID!  (But you bend over for it.)

Reply
post #942 of 1316
Thread Starter 
If worse comes to worse, and they do move it to next year I will be expecting a new mini as soon as possible when Broadwell comes out.
post #943 of 1316

The mini is always the last thing to be updated. You should have noticed this by now. Look at last year. They didn't hold it back as long, but they didn't release a mini until the imac was announced. Their initial supplies of any given mobile class cpu are earmarked for the 13 and 15" macbook pros with the minis being of a much lower priority. It's unfortunate, but it is consistent.

post #944 of 1316

Give the man a cigar!

post #945 of 1316
Thread Starter 
I personally feel there should at the very least be some rumors about the mini. Is it that much the red-headed stepchild of the Mac lineup? I seemingly hear everything else. An 11" MacBook, a 12", a 13", a 14", a 15", a 16", an iPad with 1/3 of a millimeter shaved off called the iPad Super Air. I mean I love that the Mac Pro is being focused on and I love that is being assembled in the USA. I'd like to see the mini go in that same direction with a unique design and also assembled in the USA. If the Mac Pro is a trash can, then the mini can be a soup can.
post #946 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

If the Mac Pro is a trash can, then the mini can be a soup can.

 

Okay I'm stealing that line, because it's excellent.

post #947 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

If the Mac Pro is a trash can, then the mini can be a soup can.

Okay I'm stealing that line, because it's excellent.
It would be even more excellent if that is what Apple delivers in the revised Mini. Well maybe something a bit bigger than a soup can. I still have the problem that if you go too small you give up too much performance. Of course with ARM and the coming Intel processors you actually might get better than Mini performance in a soup can.

One of the things about Apples A chips is that we don't know where they top out at performance wise. Considering that one of the goals of ARM 64 has been performance I could see A7 possibly going over the 3GHz mark. Right now Apple clocks the chips for low power not performance. You have to wonder what is achievable when performance is the goal.
post #948 of 1316

The Mac Mini may be dropped this is a certain rumor I heard from someone who has reliable sources.

post #949 of 1316

I think the biggest potential for making the Mini smaller would be to remove the power supply from the inside of the machine (this would also help with using it as a server, right?)

 

USB 3.1 was finalized in the summer, but Intel likely isn't adding it in for some time, and even if Apple went crazy and decided to push the TB competitor early, the Mini isn't a candidate for debuting this tech. (I do wonder when it will reach the iMac though.)

 

I think they add TB2 and the new wifi standard and ship it. They need a low end switcher machine. Unless the TB Display changes colour, I think they stick with silver.

 

We'll know in a fortnight or so. ;)

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #950 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post
 

I think the biggest potential for making the Mini smaller would be to remove the power supply from the inside of the machine (this would also help with using it as a server, right?)

The old one had a brick. They went away from that design, not toward it. Power bricks are generally not the best power supplies anyway.

post #951 of 1316
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

The Mac Mini may be dropped this is a certain rumor I heard from someone who has reliable sources.

Oh I completely believe you.

---

Anyway, it might be better for me to look ahead to next year. Again it's a matter of want vs. need. If I had bought a mini back in 2010 and was using a Core 2 Duo then the 2012 quad-core mini would be perfect. Any quad-core Haswell is a nice jump over Sandy Bridge, right? Dual-core I don't know.
post #952 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post


Oh I completely believe you.

---

Anyway, it might be better for me to look ahead to next year. Again it's a matter of want vs. need. If I had bought a mini back in 2010 and was using a Core 2 Duo then the 2012 quad-core mini would be perfect. Any quad-core Haswell is a nice jump over Sandy Bridge, right? Dual-core I don't know.

Haswell is defiantly the next CPU. I would like to see support for 64GB and a 512GB SSD option.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #953 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

I think the biggest potential for making the Mini smaller would be to remove the power supply from the inside of the machine (this would also help with using it as a server, right?)
It makes for a far more flexible machine, one that can be quickly adapted to alternative uses. This is especially the case if it supports standard voltage input to the box, say 12, 24 or 48 VDC. 24 VDC is very common in the industrial world. Even better if it uses a common and freely available connector to get power into that box. Such a box could easily be integrated into everything from a milling machine to a sail boat.
Quote:

USB 3.1 was finalized in the summer, but Intel likely isn't adding it in for some time, and even if Apple went crazy and decided to push the TB competitor early, the Mini isn't a candidate for debuting this tech. (I do wonder when it will reach the iMac though.)
We do you keep repeating the non sense about TB and USB competing with each other. The ports are so different it is like saying RS232 competed with the parallel port.
Quote:
I think they add TB2 and the new wifi standard and ship it. They need a low end switcher machine. Unless the TB Display changes colour, I think they stick with silver.
Seriously the low end switch machine is the iPad. I really think the only way to success anymore on the desktop is a higher end machine that isn't a Mac Pro but offers more performance than an iMac. The market for low end desktop hardware hardly exists anymore.
Quote:
We'll know in a fortnight or so. 1wink.gif

So how do you know that?
post #954 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

The Mac Mini may be dropped this is a certain rumor I heard from someone who has reliable sources.

I don't even need a rumor to suspect this. Apple basically ignored the machine in the same way they let the Mac Pro slip for years. Now sales are terrible and as such they are reconsidering the market position. In light of the success of the iPad the Mini has become outmoded. The majority of those still interested in desktop machines will want more performance than the Minis box can offer.
post #955 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

 
I think the biggest potential for making the Mini smaller would be to remove the power supply from the inside of the machine (this would also help with using it as a server, right?)
The old one had a brick. They went away from that design, not toward it. Power bricks are generally not the best power supplies anyway.

Power bricks are like anything else you get what you pay for. Interestingly Apples laptop power bricks suck in the sense that the power cord eventually gets damaged. This isn't a problem on a stationary machine though. Given that I've seen examples of laptop power bricks lasting far longer than some desktop power supplies out there. In the end I'm not sure why Apple discontinued the external supply for the Mini. I do see the internal supply on the Mini as a disadvantage.

All in all if they go with a more powerful machine as a replacement they would likely need an internal power supply anyways. I still see the majority of the desktop market going to bigger machines. The low end market is just dead. Now that doesn't mean Apple agrees, they could easily shrink the machine yet again. We all know Apple loves thin and small. As such I can see the Mini coming in at half its current volume, maybe even less with an external power supply. I say volume here because the shape could change dramatically.

The problem I see is how do you market a low end desktop anymore. Most people going the desktop route have well defined reasons for doing so. Often that means performance.
post #956 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Oh I completely believe you.


---


Anyway, it might be better for me to look ahead to next year. Again it's a matter of want vs. need. If I had bought a mini back in 2010 and was using a Core 2 Duo then the 2012 quad-core mini would be perfect. Any quad-core Haswell is a nice jump over Sandy Bridge, right? Dual-core I don't know.
Haswell is defiantly the next CPU. I would like to see support for 64GB and a 512GB SSD option.

The Haswell CPUs have very little on Sandy Bridge. There are some vector instructions improvements in place but for general computing Haswell is basically a wash performance wise over Sandy Bridge. Haswell wins in low power and GPU improvements. The lower power nature of Haswell "MIGHT" result in higher CPU performance if a significantly higher clock rate can be had. However in most of the chips Intel has on the market now the gains from power savings have gone to enhanced GPU performance.

In the end the only real reason to wait for a Haswell based Mini is the enhanced GPU performance. Of course we don't know what Apple has up its sleeves but the right chip in the Mini could lead to impressively good performance out of the box. Well GPU performance that is.

As for SSDs the Mini needs the same blades Apple is using in the rest of its lineup. That means compact PCI Express connected SSDs. As for 64GB of RAM in the Mini, that would currently be a tight squeeze. Honestly though I expect to see soldered in RAM in the future.
post #957 of 1316
Thread Starter 
I was being sarcastic in regards to marv's post because if he has reliable sources about the mini, I had lunch with Phil Schiller this evening.

What I mean is, suppose Apple released a quad-core mini with the i7-4702HQ or MQ with the Intel HD 4600 graphics, how much better would that be over the Intel HD 3000 in my i5-2410M (or maybe it's i5-2415M)?
post #958 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

I was being sarcastic in regards to marv's post because if he has reliable sources about the mini, I had lunch with Phil Schiller this evening.

What I mean is, suppose Apple released a quad-core mini with the i7-4702HQ or MQ with the Intel HD 4600 graphics, how much better would that be over the Intel HD 3000 in my i5-2410M (or maybe it's i5-2415M)?

Not much, really though how many here needs more power then a Core2Duo. The person with the best CPU benchmarks win.

When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
When I looked up "Ninjas" in Thesaurus.com, it said "Ninja's can't be found" Well played Ninjas, well played.
Reply
post #959 of 1316
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Power bricks are like anything else you get what you pay for. Interestingly Apples laptop power bricks suck in the sense that the power cord eventually gets damaged. This isn't a problem on a stationary machine though. Given that I've seen examples of laptop power bricks lasting far longer than some desktop power supplies out there. In the end I'm not sure why Apple discontinued the external supply for the Mini. I do see the internal supply on the Mini as a disadvantage.

All in all if they go with a more powerful machine as a replacement they would likely need an internal power supply anyways. I still see the majority of the desktop market going to bigger machines. The low end market is just dead. Now that doesn't mean Apple agrees, they could easily shrink the machine yet again. We all know Apple loves thin and small. As such I can see the Mini coming in at half its current volume, maybe even less with an external power supply. I say volume here because the shape could change dramatically.

The problem I see is how do you market a low end desktop anymore. Most people going the desktop route have well defined reasons for doing so. Often that means performance.

 

There are a lot of choices related to stationary machines that puzzle me. In terms of the mini specifically, I would be surprised if they reversed direction on some of those design choices. It certainly makes a decent Xcode machine.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Relic View Post
 

Not much, really though how many here needs more power then a Core2Duo. The person with the best CPU benchmarks win.

 

That's why I've been paying attention to ARM, much like I mentioned. I'm still not used to the style of Objective-C though. The shear amount of abstraction annoys me. I like its ability to cut some of the branching by passing back nil when necessary, but beyond that it annoys me if I'm not sure how it translates to binary or machine instructions. I'm also irritated that iOS lacks OpenCL, given that everything I'm working on at the moment could take advantage of it.

post #960 of 1316

I could be mis-remembering this, but I think the power supply was pulled into the Mini back when the Xserve and Mac Pro were server competitors.

 

Now that Xserve is toast and almost nobody buys $3000. cylindrical machines for a server room, it makes sense to push the Mini hard as a flexible server solution.

 

Sonnet's already taken the lead with this. A user-replaceable power supply would only make it better.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › 2014 Mac mini Wishlist