That was my point. If they stick to the current strategy of hardware shared with the notebooks, you would see a broadwell mini. Typically the mini comes out some time after notebook refreshes, as I would assume Apple prioritizes initial supply for the notebooks. It might also have something to do with costs, although I'm not sure.
I went back and looked for the past few years because that makes me a little bit optimistic, hmm. In January and June of 2009, they updated the MacBook Pro. In March and October of 2009, they updated the Mac mini. In April of 2010, they updated the 13" MacBook Pro and in June they updated the Mac mini. In 2011, the MacBook Pro was updated in February and the Mac mini in July. In October 2012, they introduced the 13" rMBP and Mac mini side by side.
I went back and looked for the past few years because that makes me a little bit optimistic, hmm. In January and June of 2009, they updated the MacBook Pro. In March and October of 2009, they updated the Mac mini. In April of 2010, they updated the 13" MacBook Pro and in June they updated the Mac mini. In 2011, the MacBook Pro was updated in February and the Mac mini in July. In October 2012, they introduced the 13" rMBP and Mac mini side by side.
So it seems as though a reasonably optimistic expectation would be December. I can handle that. I do remember a few years back when I was able to purchase a Mini on Black Friday from Amazon for a $100 discount. No matter - I will buy a Mini no matter what the update, as soon as the revisions are released.
No matter - I will buy a Mini no matter what the update, as soon as the revisions are released.
Now see that's where I'll disagree with you because Iris and Iris Pro are the selling points. If the mini is updated and there is no Iris/Iris Pro, I save my money for other things.
Now see that's where I'll disagree with you because Iris and Iris Pro are the selling points. If the mini is updated and there is no Iris/Iris Pro, I save my money for other things.
I guess I am assuming Iris will be included in the next update, just because it would be glaringly absent if it weren't. My dilemma is, I don't need an iMac, I don't want to pay for another laptop just to run my multiple monitors, and I don't want to get a year-old Mac Mini that's going to be obsolete pretty soon. I just need a Mac-in-a-box, that's all.
I guess I am assuming Iris will be included in the next update, just because it would be glaringly absent if it weren't.
Glaring would be the word. Without Iris Apple would give up a performance increase from the GPU of around 60%.
My dilemma is, I don't need an iMac, I don't want to pay for another laptop just to run my multiple monitors,
I hate the iMac so I'm unlikely to go that route in the future. For me the Minis problem are these: the lack of a decent GPU and less than stellar performance in the up sell models. Haswell can address the GPU issue very well and performance could be addressed by upping the power capacity of the box.
and I don't want to get a year-old Mac Mini that's going to be obsolete pretty soon. I just need a Mac-in-a-box, that's all.
Yep a huge problem seeing that Haswell is such a step forward when Iris is added. Ideally we will get TB2 and other optimizations. In a nut shell the Mini needs an overhaul.
I will never expect the mini to have discrete graphics. If I want a system with powerful discrete graphics, I will pay the money to do so be it on the Mac side or the Windoze side.
I simply want exactly what the $1,500 13" retina MacBook Pro has. Dual-core processor, Iris graphics, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB PCIe SSD. Quad-core and Iris Pro will work well for me too but I think Apple will price it out of reach for me for the time being. I only work part time retail. : /
Isn't that the exact opposite of what Thunderbolt expansion is about?
I'm not sure whatnot are asking for here! TB expansion was never intended to support GPUs and frankly what we are talking about has little to do with expansion.
Look at what I have said Haswell addresses the GPU performance issue which has nothing to do with TB expansion. Further upping the power capacity of the machine would allow Apple more room to support higher performance Haswell chips and I/O support. For example each TB has a power budget of some 10+ watts or power!so adding two more ports means either upping the power supply capacity or saving power someplace else. Considering the beefed up power demands from USB3, Apple has to budget a considerable amount of the total power supply budget just to support connected I/O.
Honestly I'm not sure what you think TB is all about.
I have yet to see a really well tested solution, meaning one that reliably passes data and can keep up entirely with the bandwidth of a card across all situations. The typical demos that pop up on youtube don't really constitute thorough testing, especially as most of those guys do claim that it took some work. In typical cases they aren't hot pluggable, therefore not certifiable. I am curious whether NVidia will continue to pay attention to OSX given that an increasing number of Macs will not employ anything beyond the basic integrated graphics. Another thing of importance is that the prior after market cards were basically variants of cards that worked in the mac pro. This meant mostly NVidia cards that worked without boot screens or after market Mac Pro upgrade cards. While the new cards are modular plugins, it seems highly unlikely that third party ones will show up. It would take a lot of work where the current ones such as the 680 mac edition use the same board layouts as those sold for Windows.
I guess my point is do not get too excited about any perceived potential here.
I went back and looked for the past few years because that makes me a little bit optimistic, hmm. In January and June of 2009, they updated the MacBook Pro. In March and October of 2009, they updated the Mac mini. In April of 2010, they updated the 13" MacBook Pro and in June they updated the Mac mini. In 2011, the MacBook Pro was updated in February and the Mac mini in July. In October 2012, they introduced the 13" rMBP and Mac mini side by side.
The mini is typically last, but I never suggested they wouldn't update it this year.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter
I will never expect the mini to have discrete graphics. If I want a system with powerful discrete graphics, I will pay the money to do so be it on the Mac side or the Windoze side.
I simply want exactly what the $1,500 13" retina MacBook Pro has. Dual-core processor, Iris graphics, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB PCIe SSD. Quad-core and Iris Pro will work well for me too but I think Apple will price it out of reach for me for the time being. I only work part time retail. : /
It was pointed out to me that iris graphics are slower than iris pro. If they could get quad + iris pro into the $800 model at that price, it would be a solid little machine, especially if you max the ram.
To be perfectly honest with you I'm not sure how this external GPU desire got started. The way to the future is for the GPU to be tightly coupled with the CPU. It is what AMD and Intel are striving for and get closer to with each new processor release. There is little future in discrete GPUs for normal system support.
Now attaching an external GPU or something like a XEON Phi over TB, to support software as computation nodes is a different discussion. Even here how well that would work is very very application dependent to the point it isn't worth a discussion unless you have the ability to test or know the behavior of the hardware really well. Like it or not TB is no where near as fast as the latest 16x PCI Express port.
By the way, I've seen mention of the use of external GPUs to drive monitors for gaming with laptops like MBA. Frankly the economics of doing such just isn't there. Basically if you want to game you purchased the wrong laptop. In a nut shell, the reason you don't see external GPUs for this purpose is that they would end up being very expensive due to low volume and the fact that you are basically buying a whole new computer.
I have yet to see a really well tested solution, meaning one that reliably passes data and can keep up entirely with the bandwidth of a card across all situations. The typical demos that pop up on youtube don't really constitute thorough testing, especially as most of those guys do claim that it took some work. In typical cases they aren't hot pluggable, therefore not certifiable. I am curious whether NVidia will continue to pay attention to OSX given that an increasing number of Macs will not employ anything beyond the basic integrated graphics.
NVidia is in a tough position right now, it isn't just Mac sales that are drying up, they are about to loose a major portion of their income stream. AMD has had good enough integrated GPUs for over a year now and Haswell is now to that point in many variants. The need really isn't there anymore for a decent discrete GPU. By this time next year, the only chips NVidia will be selling will be for high end gaming or workstation machines. Given that I would suspect that they will try hard to get designed into the Mac Pro, especially if the machine takes off sales wise.
Another thing of importance is that the prior after market cards were basically variants of cards that worked in the mac pro. This meant mostly NVidia cards that worked without boot screens or after market Mac Pro upgrade cards. While the new cards are modular plugins, it seems highly unlikely that third party ones will show up. It would take a lot of work where the current ones such as the 680 mac edition use the same board layouts as those sold for Windows.
Well I haven't seen the physical hardware yet but GPU upgrades seem to be very possible in the new Mac Pros. The problem is; does it make sense to do so anymore? Honestly I see us coming to a time where it doesn't make any sense at all to upgrade GPUs in these sorts of machines. 2-4 years from now the Mac Pro could be entirely built around a 14 nm process vastly changing its characteristics. At 14 nm the CPUs and GPUs could easily double in capacity over today's hardware so it really makes piece meal upgrades look ill advised.
I guess my point is do not get too excited about any perceived potential here.
I've never understood how people latched on to this external GPU baloney. I still see the major problem being one of economics followed very closely by the huge performance compromises such arrangements produce.
I've never understood how people latched on to this external GPU baloney. I still see the major problem being one of economics followed very closely by the huge performance compromises such arrangements produce.
Well that's because they are just so expensive not just for the enclosure which borders on the absurd but the Mac specific card aren't cheap either.
Comments
Maybe hot pink who knows.
But there aren’t Broadwell desktop chips.
If it is indeed a case of waiting until 2014, I would rather it have Broadwell over Haswell depending on how late it gets released.
There was a rumor regarding Broadwell delays.
But there aren’t Broadwell desktop chips.
The Mini hasn't used desktop chips so far. Winter has always expressed interest in the Mini.
That was my point. If they stick to the current strategy of hardware shared with the notebooks, you would see a broadwell mini. Typically the mini comes out some time after notebook refreshes, as I would assume Apple prioritizes initial supply for the notebooks. It might also have something to do with costs, although I'm not sure.
So it seems as though a reasonably optimistic expectation would be December. I can handle that. I do remember a few years back when I was able to purchase a Mini on Black Friday from Amazon for a $100 discount. No matter - I will buy a Mini no matter what the update, as soon as the revisions are released.
Now see that's where I'll disagree with you because Iris and Iris Pro are the selling points. If the mini is updated and there is no Iris/Iris Pro, I save my money for other things.
Now see that's where I'll disagree with you because Iris and Iris Pro are the selling points. If the mini is updated and there is no Iris/Iris Pro, I save my money for other things.
I guess I am assuming Iris will be included in the next update, just because it would be glaringly absent if it weren't. My dilemma is, I don't need an iMac, I don't want to pay for another laptop just to run my multiple monitors, and I don't want to get a year-old Mac Mini that's going to be obsolete pretty soon. I just need a Mac-in-a-box, that's all.
I simply want exactly what the $1,500 13" retina MacBook Pro has. Dual-core processor, Iris graphics, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB PCIe SSD. Quad-core and Iris Pro will work well for me too but I think Apple will price it out of reach for me for the time being. I only work part time retail. : /
Haswell can address the GPU issue very well and performance could be addressed by upping the power capacity of the box.
Isn't that the exact opposite of what Thunderbolt expansion is about?
I'm not sure whatnot are asking for here! TB expansion was never intended to support GPUs and frankly what we are talking about has little to do with expansion.
Look at what I have said Haswell addresses the GPU performance issue which has nothing to do with TB expansion. Further upping the power capacity of the machine would allow Apple more room to support higher performance Haswell chips and I/O support. For example each TB has a power budget of some 10+ watts or power!so adding two more ports means either upping the power supply capacity or saving power someplace else. Considering the beefed up power demands from USB3, Apple has to budget a considerable amount of the total power supply budget just to support connected I/O.
Honestly I'm not sure what you think TB is all about.
I was thinking that GPU expansion might soon be possible with TB 2.0.
I was thinking that GPU expansion might soon be possible with TB 2.0.
I have yet to see a really well tested solution, meaning one that reliably passes data and can keep up entirely with the bandwidth of a card across all situations. The typical demos that pop up on youtube don't really constitute thorough testing, especially as most of those guys do claim that it took some work. In typical cases they aren't hot pluggable, therefore not certifiable. I am curious whether NVidia will continue to pay attention to OSX given that an increasing number of Macs will not employ anything beyond the basic integrated graphics. Another thing of importance is that the prior after market cards were basically variants of cards that worked in the mac pro. This meant mostly NVidia cards that worked without boot screens or after market Mac Pro upgrade cards. While the new cards are modular plugins, it seems highly unlikely that third party ones will show up. It would take a lot of work where the current ones such as the 680 mac edition use the same board layouts as those sold for Windows.
I guess my point is do not get too excited about any perceived potential here.
I went back and looked for the past few years because that makes me a little bit optimistic, hmm. In January and June of 2009, they updated the MacBook Pro. In March and October of 2009, they updated the Mac mini. In April of 2010, they updated the 13" MacBook Pro and in June they updated the Mac mini. In 2011, the MacBook Pro was updated in February and the Mac mini in July. In October 2012, they introduced the 13" rMBP and Mac mini side by side.
The mini is typically last, but I never suggested they wouldn't update it this year.
I will never expect the mini to have discrete graphics. If I want a system with powerful discrete graphics, I will pay the money to do so be it on the Mac side or the Windoze side.
I simply want exactly what the $1,500 13" retina MacBook Pro has. Dual-core processor, Iris graphics, 8 GB RAM, 256 GB PCIe SSD. Quad-core and Iris Pro will work well for me too but I think Apple will price it out of reach for me for the time being. I only work part time retail. : /
It was pointed out to me that iris graphics are slower than iris pro. If they could get quad + iris pro into the $800 model at that price, it would be a solid little machine, especially if you max the ram.
Now attaching an external GPU or something like a XEON Phi over TB, to support software as computation nodes is a different discussion. Even here how well that would work is very very application dependent to the point it isn't worth a discussion unless you have the ability to test or know the behavior of the hardware really well. Like it or not TB is no where near as fast as the latest 16x PCI Express port.
By the way, I've seen mention of the use of external GPUs to drive monitors for gaming with laptops like MBA. Frankly the economics of doing such just isn't there. Basically if you want to game you purchased the wrong laptop. In a nut shell, the reason you don't see external GPUs for this purpose is that they would end up being very expensive due to low volume and the fact that you are basically buying a whole new computer.
I've never understood how people latched on to this external GPU baloney. I still see the major problem being one of economics followed very closely by the huge performance compromises such arrangements produce.
I've never understood how people latched on to this external GPU baloney. I still see the major problem being one of economics followed very closely by the huge performance compromises such arrangements produce.
Well that's because they are just so expensive not just for the enclosure which borders on the absurd but the Mac specific card aren't cheap either.