A quick look at what Broadwell is proposed to bring doesn't inspire excitement on the iMac front. It seems the core count is going to be stuck at 4 for a couple more years, is that right?
A quick look at what Broadwell is proposed to bring doesn't inspire excitement on the iMac front. It seems the core count is going to be stuck at 4 for a couple more years, is that right?
It looks like it's going to be all about graphics for the time being which is why I created this thread.
My biggest concern is that the Mini will even exist in 2014.
As for integrated graphics I do believe Apple is behind the push to much higher performance out of integrated graphics. If you look at AMD, Intel or even Apples processors you notice one thing across the board, the GPUs take up far more space than the CPUs. CPUs are actually an after thought these days because for many users they are good enough. Beyond that GPU acceleration in many cases so out classes what can be done on CPUs that it doesn't make a lot of sense to invest in the CPU heavily. Of course there are exceptions to every rule but on average most users benefit more from GPU improvements than they do CPU improvements. Thus the heavy engineering effort into much better GPU performance.
It should also be noted that the industry is just getting there with GPU compute support. Having the GPU have direct access to main memory can dramatically boost GPU compute performance or feasibility. The reality is Mavericks is the first OS to enable OpenCL for Intels processors also. Given these two realities and a bunch of others we are just starting to see the benefits of integrated GPUs. So really we are at the dawn of a new age in processor development where performance isn't just about the CPU.
Now given all of that, don't be surprised if Broadwell doesn't bring improved CPU performance. It won't be near 100% like Apple has done but it could exceed the barely 7% we get out of Haswell.
If a Mac mini does cease to exist than what are my alternatives for a box like it?
I’m not sure I see that happening. Ooh, what they might do is cut the Mac Pro’s case in half and make a circular Mac Mini. But really, is there any cause for concern here?
I’m not sure I see that happening. Ooh, what they might do is cut the Mac Pro’s case in half and make a circular Mac Mini. But really, is there any cause for concern here?
Actually I suspect there is cause for concern. Mostly it has to do with the now almost nonexistent market for low end desktop machines. Walk into a computer store, office supply shop or any other common source of computers and you find laptops and tablet all over the place, 20 laptops might be on display to one desktop machine. In a nut shell demand isn't there and it is reflected in Mini sales.
Since we know full well how spastic Apple is when it comes to poor sales there is reason to suspect that the Mini might get canned. Is it written in stone - certainly not but we have the reality that an overhaul might actually help the machine. That implies that they don't completely can the machine. With the lack of an update this late into the holiday season I'd have to think that it is about to be pushed into the dust bin with other discontinued Apple hardware.
Speaking of can, I could easily see them doing something along your suggestion of a trimmed down Mac Pro. Motherboards these days are dense enough that they could easily cut it in half as you suggest. Get rid of the magnetic form factor drives and even more space gets freed up. I'd especially like such a machine if they could get the wattage up (power handling capability) to use the hotter Intel chip solutions.
Considering Apples past practices, tomorrow is the last day they really have to announce a new Mini. So if it doesn't happen then what are we to think? The lack of a Mini can't be due to the lack of engineering talent so I have to think the platform isn't long for this world. Of course they could produce something tomorrow, but honestly there hasn't even been a rumors to that effect.
Considering Apples past practices, tomorrow is the last day they really have to announce a new Mini. So if it doesn't happen then what are we to think? The lack of a Mini can't be due to the lack of engineering talent so I have to think the platform isn't long for this world. Of course they could produce something tomorrow, but honestly there hasn't even been a rumors to that effect.
They do stagger things, and the mini always seems to come out last. Last year it debuted with the imac announcement. My guess was around the time of the mac pro. No one should realistically be deciding between a mini and a mac pro unless their perceived limitations are highly specific. I knew it wouldn't hit with the notebooks though. No matter how late one thing slips, everything else moves back. Right now I think they'll ensure that orders can be placed on the mac pro in the current year to grab leftover equipment budgets. Otherwise I might have predicted January.
^^ yes that's correct. Haswell EP drops the quad variants in favor of a 6 core starting, but the other socket types remain the same.
hmm, hmm, that's more interesting. Maybe Haswell E will play a roll in the rumoured 'budget' iMac / split lineup scheduled for next year. Apple hasn't made use of the single processor configuration xeons as yet, but with quads already the baseline for the iMac it makes sense to shift to them now.
iMac 'budget' - Price drop the current machines, 4 core - integrated graphic CPUs only.
hmm, hmm, that's more interesting. Maybe Haswell E will play a roll in the rumoured 'budget' iMac / split lineup scheduled for next year. Apple hasn't made use of the single processor configuration xeons as yet, but with quads already the baseline for the iMac it makes sense to shift to them now.
iMac 'budget' - Price drop the current machines, 4 core - integrated graphic CPUs only.
The Mac Pro could then drop the 6 Core E5 to the base configuration when they introduce the split in the iMac lineup.
Wishful thinking?
That is extremely unrealistic. E/EP processors use a different socket, so that model would require its own board. There's nothing that would make it necessarily cheaper. With the mac pro, that's just the way Apple prices it. I don't expect Haswell EP and a mac pro refresh before 2015. Note how Ivy has been a slow rollout for workstations, just like Sandy. Haswell will require a new logic board due to socket incompatibilities. Usually that goes for 2 generations in E/EP lines, but Apple skipped Sandy there. When that does hit, assuming the intel slides are accurate, there wouldn't be any option other than hex cores for the mac pro at that point. A 6 core cpu would probably occupy the same price territory of $300-400 suggested retail. The cpus in themselves aren't that expensive. The imac actually uses some that are a little more expensive than those in the mac pro. The D300s are probably no more than $300. Apple charged $249 for a radeon 5770. These might cost a little more if they involve custom work, but they aren't going to be anything crazy. Memory was chopped down to 2GB, and the most likely candidates (chopped down pitcairns) for that model don't support the use ECC ram for the video framebuffer. What you have there already is a budget model. It's not really priced that way, but it is still a budget model in terms of specs. They didn't leave the gap you're suggesting.
That is extremely unrealistic. E/EP processors use a different socket, so that model would require its own board. There's nothing that would make it necessarily cheaper. With the mac pro, that's just the way Apple prices it. I don't expect Haswell EP and a mac pro refresh before 2015. Note how Ivy has been a slow rollout for workstations, just like Sandy. Haswell will require a new logic board due to socket incompatibilities. Usually that goes for 2 generations in E/EP lines, but Apple skipped Sandy there. When that does hit, assuming the intel slides are accurate, there wouldn't be any option other than hex cores for the mac pro at that point. A 6 core cpu would probably occupy the same price territory of $300-400 suggested retail. The cpus in themselves aren't that expensive. The imac actually uses some that are a little more expensive than those in the mac pro. The D300s are probably no more than $300. Apple charged $249 for a radeon 5770. These might cost a little more if they involve custom work, but they aren't going to be anything crazy. Memory was chopped down to 2GB, and the most likely candidates (chopped down pitcairns) for that model don't support the use ECC ram for the video framebuffer. What you have there already is a budget model. It's not really priced that way, but it is still a budget model in terms of specs. They didn't leave the gap you're suggesting.
You've confused me a bit there, your comment reads like I was suggesting xeons as the budget option. I don't follow processor evolution to closely, so bear with me. The top iMac model, topped up via CTO, has become a good option as a BIM/CAD station. I moved off the Mac Pro six years ago and have been updating iMacs every two years since. I really hope there's another way for the top iMac model to move beyond 4 cores, if at the end of 2014 Broadwell is still going to be stuck with just four.
I understand the xeons require a different socket, but if there's a budget iMac rumoured to be in the offing, doesn't that open up an opportunity for the upper end of the iMac line to distinguish itself by using single processor configuration xeons. This would bring 6 core + evolution (whatever their naming) to the iMac line, while the budget iMac sticks with the integrated 4 core options? Or is there some other way the iMac might get to 6 cores without using xeons?
I understand the xeons require a different socket, but if there's a budget iMac rumoured to be in the offing, doesn't that open up an opportunity for the upper end of the iMac line to distinguish itself by using single processor configuration xeons. This would bring 6 core + evolution (whatever their naming) to the iMac line, while the budget iMac sticks with the integrated 4 core options? Or is there some other way the iMac might get to 6 cores without using xeons?
I would be shocked if they came out with a different board design for the sole purpose of offering one more option from a socket that refreshes on a totally different cycle. It isn't a matter of Xeons. There are hex core Ivy Bridge cpus that aren't branded as Xeons. They still use LGA2011. I think it will happen when the sockets and price points that Apple uses in the imac currently go from 4 to 6 cores. It will be at least 2 years, possibly longer.
Well it is what is realistic. I'm not going to suggest that the price of a hex mac pro is competitive, but there is no reason they would go out of their way to implement a different design that covers the same socket in an imac. Even if they did that, you would probably see an insane markup due to the extra design work. They cut the mac pro down to single socket only. Why would they repeat cpu options with different monickers over the imac line? The only somewhat wacky thing is the price and configuration on the entry model. It's configured as a budget model, yet still costs $3k. Hopefully the line doesn't require terribly high volume for viability.
Comments
This hasn't had a post anyway so we'll give it until the end of the year before a new thread begins. I am looking ahead to Broadwell.
When are Broadwell chips due out?
When are Broadwell chips due out?
late next year
A quick look at what Broadwell is proposed to bring doesn't inspire excitement on the iMac front. It seems the core count is going to be stuck at 4 for a couple more years, is that right?
^^ yes that's correct. Haswell EP drops the quad variants in favor of a 6 core starting, but the other socket types remain the same.
It looks like it's going to be all about graphics for the time being which is why I created this thread.
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/160421/the-future-with-mobile-integrated-graphics-and-discrete-graphics
Here is the response it got on Anandtech forums.
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2350913
My biggest concern is that the Mini will even exist in 2014.
As for integrated graphics I do believe Apple is behind the push to much higher performance out of integrated graphics. If you look at AMD, Intel or even Apples processors you notice one thing across the board, the GPUs take up far more space than the CPUs. CPUs are actually an after thought these days because for many users they are good enough. Beyond that GPU acceleration in many cases so out classes what can be done on CPUs that it doesn't make a lot of sense to invest in the CPU heavily. Of course there are exceptions to every rule but on average most users benefit more from GPU improvements than they do CPU improvements. Thus the heavy engineering effort into much better GPU performance.
It should also be noted that the industry is just getting there with GPU compute support. Having the GPU have direct access to main memory can dramatically boost GPU compute performance or feasibility. The reality is Mavericks is the first OS to enable OpenCL for Intels processors also. Given these two realities and a bunch of others we are just starting to see the benefits of integrated GPUs. So really we are at the dawn of a new age in processor development where performance isn't just about the CPU.
Now given all of that, don't be surprised if Broadwell doesn't bring improved CPU performance. It won't be near 100% like Apple has done but it could exceed the barely 7% we get out of Haswell.
We'll one we have to wait and see what Apple does. Second Lonovo makes a nice box similar to the Mini.
I'm really surprised that Apple hasn't updated the Mini for the Christmas shopping season.
I’m not sure I see that happening. Ooh, what they might do is cut the Mac Pro’s case in half and make a circular Mac Mini. But really, is there any cause for concern here?
Actually I suspect there is cause for concern. Mostly it has to do with the now almost nonexistent market for low end desktop machines. Walk into a computer store, office supply shop or any other common source of computers and you find laptops and tablet all over the place, 20 laptops might be on display to one desktop machine. In a nut shell demand isn't there and it is reflected in Mini sales.
Since we know full well how spastic Apple is when it comes to poor sales there is reason to suspect that the Mini might get canned. Is it written in stone - certainly not but we have the reality that an overhaul might actually help the machine. That implies that they don't completely can the machine. With the lack of an update this late into the holiday season I'd have to think that it is about to be pushed into the dust bin with other discontinued Apple hardware.
Speaking of can, I could easily see them doing something along your suggestion of a trimmed down Mac Pro. Motherboards these days are dense enough that they could easily cut it in half as you suggest. Get rid of the magnetic form factor drives and even more space gets freed up. I'd especially like such a machine if they could get the wattage up (power handling capability) to use the hotter Intel chip solutions.
Considering Apples past practices, tomorrow is the last day they really have to announce a new Mini. So if it doesn't happen then what are we to think? The lack of a Mini can't be due to the lack of engineering talent so I have to think the platform isn't long for this world. Of course they could produce something tomorrow, but honestly there hasn't even been a rumors to that effect.
Considering Apples past practices, tomorrow is the last day they really have to announce a new Mini. So if it doesn't happen then what are we to think? The lack of a Mini can't be due to the lack of engineering talent so I have to think the platform isn't long for this world. Of course they could produce something tomorrow, but honestly there hasn't even been a rumors to that effect.
They do stagger things, and the mini always seems to come out last. Last year it debuted with the imac announcement. My guess was around the time of the mac pro. No one should realistically be deciding between a mini and a mac pro unless their perceived limitations are highly specific. I knew it wouldn't hit with the notebooks though. No matter how late one thing slips, everything else moves back. Right now I think they'll ensure that orders can be placed on the mac pro in the current year to grab leftover equipment budgets. Otherwise I might have predicted January.
^^ yes that's correct. Haswell EP drops the quad variants in favor of a 6 core starting, but the other socket types remain the same.
hmm, hmm, that's more interesting. Maybe Haswell E will play a roll in the rumoured 'budget' iMac / split lineup scheduled for next year. Apple hasn't made use of the single processor configuration xeons as yet, but with quads already the baseline for the iMac it makes sense to shift to them now.
iMac 'budget' - Price drop the current machines, 4 core - integrated graphic CPUs only.
iMac Pro(ish) - Haswell E (6 & 8 cores), discrete graphics, retina display.
The Mac Pro could then drop the 6 Core E5 to the base configuration when they introduce the split in the iMac lineup.
Wishful thinking?
hmm, hmm, that's more interesting. Maybe Haswell E will play a roll in the rumoured 'budget' iMac / split lineup scheduled for next year. Apple hasn't made use of the single processor configuration xeons as yet, but with quads already the baseline for the iMac it makes sense to shift to them now.
iMac 'budget' - Price drop the current machines, 4 core - integrated graphic CPUs only.
iMac Pro(ish) - Haswell E (6 & 8 cores), discrete graphics, retina display.
The Mac Pro could then drop the 6 Core E5 to the base configuration when they introduce the split in the iMac lineup.
Wishful thinking?
That is extremely unrealistic. E/EP processors use a different socket, so that model would require its own board. There's nothing that would make it necessarily cheaper. With the mac pro, that's just the way Apple prices it. I don't expect Haswell EP and a mac pro refresh before 2015. Note how Ivy has been a slow rollout for workstations, just like Sandy. Haswell will require a new logic board due to socket incompatibilities. Usually that goes for 2 generations in E/EP lines, but Apple skipped Sandy there. When that does hit, assuming the intel slides are accurate, there wouldn't be any option other than hex cores for the mac pro at that point. A 6 core cpu would probably occupy the same price territory of $300-400 suggested retail. The cpus in themselves aren't that expensive. The imac actually uses some that are a little more expensive than those in the mac pro. The D300s are probably no more than $300. Apple charged $249 for a radeon 5770. These might cost a little more if they involve custom work, but they aren't going to be anything crazy. Memory was chopped down to 2GB, and the most likely candidates (chopped down pitcairns) for that model don't support the use ECC ram for the video framebuffer. What you have there already is a budget model. It's not really priced that way, but it is still a budget model in terms of specs. They didn't leave the gap you're suggesting.
Apple has never promoted its desktops. They are niche machines , apples desktops. Not a one of them is a mainstream machine.
The bigger question is it even wise to promote a machine in a dying market.
That is extremely unrealistic. E/EP processors use a different socket, so that model would require its own board. There's nothing that would make it necessarily cheaper. With the mac pro, that's just the way Apple prices it. I don't expect Haswell EP and a mac pro refresh before 2015. Note how Ivy has been a slow rollout for workstations, just like Sandy. Haswell will require a new logic board due to socket incompatibilities. Usually that goes for 2 generations in E/EP lines, but Apple skipped Sandy there. When that does hit, assuming the intel slides are accurate, there wouldn't be any option other than hex cores for the mac pro at that point. A 6 core cpu would probably occupy the same price territory of $300-400 suggested retail. The cpus in themselves aren't that expensive. The imac actually uses some that are a little more expensive than those in the mac pro. The D300s are probably no more than $300. Apple charged $249 for a radeon 5770. These might cost a little more if they involve custom work, but they aren't going to be anything crazy. Memory was chopped down to 2GB, and the most likely candidates (chopped down pitcairns) for that model don't support the use ECC ram for the video framebuffer. What you have there already is a budget model. It's not really priced that way, but it is still a budget model in terms of specs. They didn't leave the gap you're suggesting.
You've confused me a bit there, your comment reads like I was suggesting xeons as the budget option. I don't follow processor evolution to closely, so bear with me. The top iMac model, topped up via CTO, has become a good option as a BIM/CAD station. I moved off the Mac Pro six years ago and have been updating iMacs every two years since. I really hope there's another way for the top iMac model to move beyond 4 cores, if at the end of 2014 Broadwell is still going to be stuck with just four.
I understand the xeons require a different socket, but if there's a budget iMac rumoured to be in the offing, doesn't that open up an opportunity for the upper end of the iMac line to distinguish itself by using single processor configuration xeons. This would bring 6 core + evolution (whatever their naming) to the iMac line, while the budget iMac sticks with the integrated 4 core options? Or is there some other way the iMac might get to 6 cores without using xeons?
I understand the xeons require a different socket, but if there's a budget iMac rumoured to be in the offing, doesn't that open up an opportunity for the upper end of the iMac line to distinguish itself by using single processor configuration xeons. This would bring 6 core + evolution (whatever their naming) to the iMac line, while the budget iMac sticks with the integrated 4 core options? Or is there some other way the iMac might get to 6 cores without using xeons?
I would be shocked if they came out with a different board design for the sole purpose of offering one more option from a socket that refreshes on a totally different cycle. It isn't a matter of Xeons. There are hex core Ivy Bridge cpus that aren't branded as Xeons. They still use LGA2011. I think it will happen when the sockets and price points that Apple uses in the imac currently go from 4 to 6 cores. It will be at least 2 years, possibly longer.
It will be at least 2 years, possibly longer.
Argh! That's not what I wanted to hear.
Argh! That's not what I wanted to hear.
Well it is what is realistic. I'm not going to suggest that the price of a hex mac pro is competitive, but there is no reason they would go out of their way to implement a different design that covers the same socket in an imac. Even if they did that, you would probably see an insane markup due to the extra design work. They cut the mac pro down to single socket only. Why would they repeat cpu options with different monickers over the imac line? The only somewhat wacky thing is the price and configuration on the entry model. It's configured as a budget model, yet still costs $3k. Hopefully the line doesn't require terribly high volume for viability.