VR-Zone obtained the roadmap, which shows Intel's H (all-in-one), U (Ultrabook) and Y (tablet) chips receiving a refresh to Broadwell in 2H 2014. Regular M-series mobile parts will stay using the Haswell microarchitecture during the same period, and desktop parts will see a Haswell refresh (Haswell-E) but no Broadwell. Intel is also expected to launch Ivy Bridge-E processors in September of this year, with a number of new Haswell parts also seen on the roadmap.
So again if Iris Pro doesn't go with the mini, I'd like to see the $799 version have the 37W quad core which I believe is the i7-4702HQ or what is in the 14" Razer Blade.
If you are talking about Iris Pro it is a huge advancement for Intel and should be a very credible GPU. More importantly the Iris chips are OpenCL powerhouses for some codes. The big deal is vastly better all around performance out of the Mini.
Well no, no one has to buy Apples products. Admittedly I enjoy my Apple products but I can use Linux based machines for some tasks. As it is I'm fairly confident tht Apple will do the right thing here. They actually have two options, put an Iris based Gaswell in the upsell Mini or completely refactor the machine to develop some synergy with the new Mac Pro release.
I'm actually hopeful that this discussion wupill be over in a couple of days.
Anyway, if I am not happy with Apple's offerings I can always wait until Broadwell or until my current mini stops working. As I have said in the past, I am not in desperate need of new hardware but I always am in anticipation for it.
Thanks dad. You're the bestest. Can you buy me one of the new Mac minis when it comes out for Christmas?
Anyway, Tallest and wizard... i3 for $499 as I said earlier. Is that possible?
Anything is possible but really an i3 in a Mini would be a step backwards even on the entry level machine. I'd rather see them use desktop parts than to go with i3 mobile.
I'd rather see them use desktop parts than to go with i3 mobile.
I'll agree wholeheartedly here. The Mac Mini doesn't really seem slated for any sort of redesign any time soon, but if one is needed to jam a desktop chip in there, I'd lead the charge for that to happen.
Not sure I see it happening, though. And hey, maybe better GPU if they keep it laptop.
I'll agree wholeheartedly here. The Mac Mini doesn't really seem slated for any sort of redesign any time soon, but if one is needed to jam a desktop chip in there, I'd lead the charge for that to happen.
Not sure I see it happening, though. And hey, maybe better GPU if they keep it laptop.
Desktop class cpus in a similar tdp range can be more cost effective. It might be logical if they wanted to leverage the use of quad cpus down to the base model. Those "low power" desktop cpus tend to have hyperthreading disabled. One thing that occurs to me is that they would need enough options to fill the "good, better, best" lineup style unless they intended to fold things into cto options. I mention that as important, because otherwise you've split the line into different socket types with different logic boards and internal designs, different repair manuals, parts lists, etc. That would be an unlikely direction. It's the same reason I said we wouldn't see a 6 core imac in the near future. I said that a while ago, as nothing available in the socket type used by the imac supported a 6 core cpu. I didn't see Apple forking the line just to add one additional option, where I could see them doing such a thing if it could exist as cto. Notebooks get the best APU solutions as integrated graphics are still very much of a low budget solution on desktops. The gap is also much wider there when comparing to discrete graphics. On notebooks I think of discrete graphics as something like a 650m, as it was a popular choice in 15" notebooks.
I'll agree wholeheartedly here. The Mac Mini doesn't really seem slated for any sort of redesign any time soon, but if one is needed to jam a desktop chip in there, I'd lead the charge for that to happen.
It would be nice and could either lower the cost or up performance at the same price point. The interesting thing here is that some of the Haswell desktop chips would fit in a Mini today. I believe they go as low as 35 watts. I'd rather see the Minis heat capacity bumped up to 65 watts which would give use a decent desktop processor.
The only bad thing here is that apparently Iris isn't making it into desktop chips this year. I'm not really sure about this as Intel has made the line up so confusing you have to dedicate half a day to figure out what is available. I really want to see Iris in the Mini but in the end if they went desktop chips I think more people would benefit.
Not sure I see it happening, though. And hey, maybe better GPU if they keep it laptop.
This is the thing, Iris will remake the Mini into a far more interesting platform for a wider array of users. It is not however a cheap solution with Intel charring a premium for the feature. i don't blame Intel, but in this economy Apples entry level machine can not become more expensive, they really need to knock a hundred or so of that entry level price.
So it basically comes down to Iris vs. Iris Pro I would think.
Only in the up sell model. I would expect that the entry level machine would come with 4600 graphics and a lower performance CPU in general. Remember mini is also Apples entry level machine, they need to keep the price as low as possible on the low end unit. Iris would be saved for the middle of the road model.
The interesting thing here is what do they do with the server model. It is hard to justify Iris in what is supposedly a "server" but I'm not sure what Haswell chip would best fit that sort of usage. Ideally you would get four cores and lots of cache. Which makes me wonder if Mac OS can use the Iris Pros cache chip as system cache.
They've updated the price list with the new models ( http://intc.com/priceList.cfm ). Turns out the 12-core E5-2697v2 is $2614 so that's not going to be much cheaper than the old top-end Mac Pro, which had dual $1440 CPUs. The dual-core alternative at the same price point would have been dual E5-2660v2, which would be 20-core. It is clocked lower so best-case it would be 35% faster than the single CPU and maybe not that much. Having a single-socket motherboard will probably lower costs a bit but we'll see. I was expecting the 12-core to be around $2000, which would have dropped the price significantly but as usual, Intel spoils it all by jacking up the price.
Thunderbolt 2 is already in motherboards so unless they want to show it off with a 4K display in October, they should be able to ship the Mac Pro pretty soon.
The Intel keynote video had a few interesting things but they are going all out with this mobile stuff too. They had a Quark processor 1/5 the size of the Atom and 1/10th the power draw. They had a fanless 4.5W Haswell laptop on show and they have 14nm Broadwell in production.
Processors like the i7-4850HQ are supposed to be launched:
The processor I'd like to see in the current Mini is i5-4670T, it would push the current design wattage wise but might be doable with improvements elsewhere. By the way that wold be an up sell model not the entry. The only quad core chips with 5200 graphics seem to start at 65 watts, too much for the Mini. At least the current design Mini. I still have this fantasy of a Mini Mac Pro with such a chip in it, maybe even a 85 watt chip.
They've updated the price list with the new models ( http://intc.com/priceList.cfm ). Turns out the 12-core E5-2697v2 is $2614 so that's not going to be much cheaper than the old top-end Mac Pro, which had dual $1440 CPUs. The dual-core alternative at the same price point would have been dual E5-2660v2, which would be 20-core. It is clocked lower so best-case it would be 35% faster than the single CPU and maybe not that much. Having a single-socket motherboard will probably lower costs a bit but we'll see. I was expecting the 12-core to be around $2000, which would have dropped the price significantly but as usual, Intel spoils it all by jacking up the price.
Is this the twelve core chip that was to be made out of two six core chips in the same package? That might explain some of the cost.
Thunderbolt 2 is already in motherboards so unless they want to show it off with a 4K display in October, they should be able to ship the Mac Pro pretty soon.
Really, shipping motherboards?
The Intel keynote video had a few interesting things but they are going all out with this mobile stuff too. They had a Quark processor 1/5 the size of the Atom and 1/10th the power draw. They had a fanless 4.5W Haswell laptop on show and they have 14nm Broadwell in production.
Intel is at risk of loosing all, they don't have much of a choice. Unfortunately the industry moved to ARM and Intel has nothing that really competes.
Processors like the i7-4850HQ are supposed to be launched:
Comments
According to the Intel roadmap, the MQ mobile line will stay at 22 nm Haswell and the HQ line will go to 14 nm Broadwell.
http://www.techspot.com/news/53393-leaked-intel-roadmap-pegs-broadwell-for-2h-2014.html
VR-Zone obtained the roadmap, which shows Intel's H (all-in-one), U (Ultrabook) and Y (tablet) chips receiving a refresh to Broadwell in 2H 2014. Regular M-series mobile parts will stay using the Haswell microarchitecture during the same period, and desktop parts will see a Haswell refresh (Haswell-E) but no Broadwell. Intel is also expected to launch Ivy Bridge-E processors in September of this year, with a number of new Haswell parts also seen on the roadmap.
What if they do. So what is the big deal.
If you are talking about Iris Pro it is a huge advancement for Intel and should be a very credible GPU. More importantly the Iris chips are OpenCL powerhouses for some codes. The big deal is vastly better all around performance out of the Mini.
What wizard said and I want a cooler quad core chip should they not use the Iris Pro.
You get what Apple makes and that is it.
Well no, no one has to buy Apples products. Admittedly I enjoy my Apple products but I can use Linux based machines for some tasks. As it is I'm fairly confident tht Apple will do the right thing here. They actually have two options, put an Iris based Gaswell in the upsell Mini or completely refactor the machine to develop some synergy with the new Mac Pro release.
I'm actually hopeful that this discussion wupill be over in a couple of days.
Yes sir dad!
Anyway, if I am not happy with Apple's offerings I can always wait until Broadwell or until my current mini stops working. As I have said in the past, I am not in desperate need of new hardware but I always am in anticipation for it.
Good thinking ability on your part.
Thanks dad. You're the bestest. Can you buy me one of the new Mac minis when it comes out for Christmas?
Anyway, Tallest and wizard... i3 for $499 as I said earlier. Is that possible?
Anything is possible but really an i3 in a Mini would be a step backwards even on the entry level machine. I'd rather see them use desktop parts than to go with i3 mobile.
I'll agree wholeheartedly here. The Mac Mini doesn't really seem slated for any sort of redesign any time soon, but if one is needed to jam a desktop chip in there, I'd lead the charge for that to happen.
Not sure I see it happening, though. And hey, maybe better GPU if they keep it laptop.
I'll agree wholeheartedly here. The Mac Mini doesn't really seem slated for any sort of redesign any time soon, but if one is needed to jam a desktop chip in there, I'd lead the charge for that to happen.
Not sure I see it happening, though. And hey, maybe better GPU if they keep it laptop.
Desktop class cpus in a similar tdp range can be more cost effective. It might be logical if they wanted to leverage the use of quad cpus down to the base model. Those "low power" desktop cpus tend to have hyperthreading disabled. One thing that occurs to me is that they would need enough options to fill the "good, better, best" lineup style unless they intended to fold things into cto options. I mention that as important, because otherwise you've split the line into different socket types with different logic boards and internal designs, different repair manuals, parts lists, etc. That would be an unlikely direction. It's the same reason I said we wouldn't see a 6 core imac in the near future. I said that a while ago, as nothing available in the socket type used by the imac supported a 6 core cpu. I didn't see Apple forking the line just to add one additional option, where I could see them doing such a thing if it could exist as cto. Notebooks get the best APU solutions as integrated graphics are still very much of a low budget solution on desktops. The gap is also much wider there when comparing to discrete graphics. On notebooks I think of discrete graphics as something like a 650m, as it was a popular choice in 15" notebooks.
The only bad thing here is that apparently Iris isn't making it into desktop chips this year. I'm not really sure about this as Intel has made the line up so confusing you have to dedicate half a day to figure out what is available. I really want to see Iris in the Mini but in the end if they went desktop chips I think more people would benefit.
This is the thing, Iris will remake the Mini into a far more interesting platform for a wider array of users. It is not however a cheap solution with Intel charring a premium for the feature. i don't blame Intel, but in this economy Apples entry level machine can not become more expensive, they really need to knock a hundred or so of that entry level price.
Only in the up sell model. I would expect that the entry level machine would come with 4600 graphics and a lower performance CPU in general. Remember mini is also Apples entry level machine, they need to keep the price as low as possible on the low end unit. Iris would be saved for the middle of the road model.
The interesting thing here is what do they do with the server model. It is hard to justify Iris in what is supposedly a "server" but I'm not sure what Haswell chip would best fit that sort of usage. Ideally you would get four cores and lots of cache. Which makes me wonder if Mac OS can use the Iris Pros cache chip as system cache.
October, I'd bet. Makes sense. Or the last week in September, doing all remaining Haswell Macs at once.
http://newsroom.intel.com/docs/DOC-4181
They've updated the price list with the new models ( http://intc.com/priceList.cfm ). Turns out the 12-core E5-2697v2 is $2614 so that's not going to be much cheaper than the old top-end Mac Pro, which had dual $1440 CPUs. The dual-core alternative at the same price point would have been dual E5-2660v2, which would be 20-core. It is clocked lower so best-case it would be 35% faster than the single CPU and maybe not that much. Having a single-socket motherboard will probably lower costs a bit but we'll see. I was expecting the 12-core to be around $2000, which would have dropped the price significantly but as usual, Intel spoils it all by jacking up the price.
Thunderbolt 2 is already in motherboards so unless they want to show it off with a 4K display in October, they should be able to ship the Mac Pro pretty soon.
The Intel keynote video had a few interesting things but they are going all out with this mobile stuff too. They had a Quark processor 1/5 the size of the Atom and 1/10th the power draw. They had a fanless 4.5W Haswell laptop on show and they have 14nm Broadwell in production.
Processors like the i7-4850HQ are supposed to be launched:
http://ark.intel.com/products/76086/Intel-Core-i7-4850HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz
I notice they've put the i5 models on their site now but some are listed as Q4 2013:
http://ark.intel.com/products/family/75024/4th-Generation-Intel-Core-i5-Processors/mobile
The Mini could be waiting on the likes of this:
http://ark.intel.com/products/76750/Intel-Core-i5-4330M-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz
Q4 starts in October so that'll be the earliest.
Is this the twelve core chip that was to be made out of two six core chips in the same package? That might explain some of the cost. Really, shipping motherboards? Intel is at risk of loosing all, they don't have much of a choice. Unfortunately the industry moved to ARM and Intel has nothing that really competes.
I alway thought the big hold up was TB2 which originally was to ship next year. One rumor was November / December in high quanities.