I'm only looking to buy a computer once every few years and not spend a ton. Sandy Bridge is adequate but it's getting old. I have a Samsung 470 in this thing.
That's so sad. I need newer Macs and faster chips and I can't keep laying out $1500 to $2500 every year or two. The Mac mini serves my purposes so well.
Please Apple, please keep this machine alive, and relevant. Please make a new quad core model with Iris Pro graphics. At least one more. That machine will last me a while.
The statement puzzles me a bit, because quad core + iris isn't exactly bleeding edge. You could have had performance roughly on par with that as far back as 2010 or so in a mac pro. Even the base gpu would still be significantly faster than iris pro. CPU wise it would have obviously been at the upper end of that price range. I just don't see what you're really getting from a 1-2 year cycle when I look back at the past 5-6 years.
The statement puzzles me a bit, because quad core + iris isn't exactly bleeding edge.
Well for an integrated solution it isn't bad and frankly the best we could expect out of the Mini these days. Further it is a sizable upgrade over the current Mini and its GPU. You are right though even when comparing to other integrated GPUs, Iris is not the bleeding edge. The only thing about Iris that really counts is that it is an improvement over the current GPUs. Not a little improvement either.
You could have had performance roughly on par with that as far back as 2010 or so in a mac pro. Even the base gpu would still be significantly faster than iris pro. CPU wise it would have obviously been at the upper end of that price range. I just don't see what you're really getting from a 1-2 year cycle when I look back at the past 5-6 years.
I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.
So maybe a little insight here as to why anybody would put themselves on a 1 year update cycle is in order.
I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.
I just haven't seen enough growth in performance to justify that under any circumstances. There is one area where I kind of understand the behavior. Some people buy a conservative model without applecare and trade up within a year, figuring that it's cheaper than opting for cto options and applecare. If it allows them to structure their expenses and avoid the majority of repair issues, I can understand it. I don't really see it for performance reasons. The big changes in performance have been much more sporadic in recent years. The iOS devices are interesting to me. I just wish they supported something like OpenCL. It's not perfect, but it provides a more elegant solution than things like compute shaders.
I just haven't seen enough growth in performance to justify that under any circumstances. There is one area where I kind of understand the behavior. Some people buy a conservative model without applecare and trade up within a year, figuring that it's cheaper than opting for cto options and applecare.
That is an angle I haven't seen before, or maybe I just dismissed it. I still see AppleCare like warranties on desktop hardware as a bit of a ripoff. The primary reason for going desktop (for me at the moment) is the low cost and self serviceability. Of course such a desktop needs to support the performance I want which is where the wait for Haswell in the Mini comes from.
If it allows them to structure their expenses and avoid the majority of repair issues, I can understand it. I don't really see it for performance reasons.
They only way to get more performance these days is to buy more cores and that only works for people that have an applications profile that can use those cores.
The big changes in performance have been much more sporadic in recent years. The iOS devices are interesting to me. I just wish they supported something like OpenCL. It's not perfect, but it provides a more elegant solution than things like compute shaders.
I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.
Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.
That is an angle I haven't seen before, or maybe I just dismissed it. I still see AppleCare like warranties on desktop hardware as a bit of a ripoff. The primary reason for going desktop (for me at the moment) is the low cost and self serviceability. Of course such a desktop needs to support the performance I want which is where the wait for Haswell in the Mini comes from.
They only way to get more performance these days is to buy more cores and that only works for people that have an applications profile that can use those cores.
That is in line with my typical suggestions. I don't see a lot of value in a minor bump in ghz, yet people still ask about performance differences between one Air and another.
Quote:
I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.
Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.
Well Apple okay'd the use of OpenGL computation some time ago in iOS. It just could in many cases be accomplished more elegantly via OpenCL. I would find it odd if they couldn't properly handle 32 bit floats, given that graphics pipelines often use linear color mappings in rendering calculations.
That is in line with my typical suggestions. I don't see a lot of value in a minor bump in ghz, yet people still ask about performance differences between one Air and another.
Yeah I've seen such issues also. Or I will have issues trying to explain to someone why an Apple Air is worth a bit more than the Sony at staples that only has 24 GB of flash. People still look at processor clock rates as the only value worth considering when buying a machine. Frankly a larger internal cache is often of more value than a 100MHz here or there.
As for giving advice to people that ask about it I've pretty much have given up and have a rather sour attitude about it anymore.
Well Apple okay'd the use of OpenGL computation some time ago in iOS. It just could in many cases be accomplished more elegantly via OpenCL. I would find it odd if they couldn't properly handle 32 bit floats, given that graphics pipelines often use linear color mappings in rendering calculations.
I'm not sure if it is a case of not handling 32 bit floats but rather being poorly optimized for 32 bit floats. Again finding information on the Imagination Processors is like finding a needle in a hay stack, but apparently they have some sort of optimization that uses less that 32 bit floats that the GPUs are built around. I really don't know it would kinda make sense in a mobile processor to sacrifice some quality for fewer transistors and less power. In any event I'm just as much in the dark as most people about the lack of OpenCL on iOS devices.
I just realized that we pulled this thread far off the tracks with this Imagination discussion. In an attempt to put the engine back on the track: maybe this (no OpenCL on Imaginations GPU Apple wise) will keep ARM out of Mac OS devices for awhile longer. That is the GPU isn't suitable for all the goodies built into Mac OS.
It's a lot more expensive unless you're selling last years model every time. Then the cost would be comparable. Assume 50% of original value:
$2496 - $948 = $1547
$1748 - $425 = $1323
But it's a reasonable strategy. You get thunderbolt earlier. You get to the Core series faster. 2009 you're slower. 2010 it's kinda a wash (better GPU but slightly slower CPU). 2011 you're ahead in terms of CPU. 2012 you're behind again after the 3 year refresh happens but ahead until then.
For the mini it's somewhat risky as Apple has had years in the distant past where no refresh occurred. In 2013 the refresh every year person gets screwed.
The Macbook Air got a boost and $100 knocked off.
Can't Apple at least knock $100 of the current mini while we wait for an update?
They also have knocked $200 off the 2013 Airs so yeah the Mini looks pretty pathetic. If they don't have a replacement ready and debuted at WWDC I will be fully perplexed. Effectively the Airs have lapped the Mini technology wise.
What is even more interesting is the total lack of rumors about the Mini. Not even a leak that is an obvious wild ass guess.
I've never posted to the incorrect thread before. There's a first. I disagree about the mini being dropped though. People have claimed that many times over in past years. It's still there.
Again I repeat Mini will be dropped from the Apple line soon.
And you base this on what information?
I don't doubt it really but I do wonder what will replace it. A scaled down Mac Pro like machine, a souped up AppleTV or something different again. The Mini might be dead but dropping it leaves Apples desktop lineup unbalanced.
I don't doubt it really but I do wonder what will replace it. A scaled down Mac Pro like machine, a souped up AppleTV or something different again. The Mini might be dead but dropping it leaves Apples desktop lineup unbalanced.
Agreed. Can't see it disappearing, but the long term neglect makes me think it might get "refreshed" (or replaced/rebranded) with a black machine that either looks like a smaller version of the Pro or a slightly bigger Apple TV (it wouldn't surprise me if they made it non-expandable in a totally sealed box the like aTV).
Agreed. Can't see it disappearing, but the long term neglect makes me think it might get "refreshed" (or replaced/rebranded) with a black machine that either looks like a smaller version of the Pro or a slightly bigger Apple TV (it wouldn't surprise me if they made it non-expandable in a totally sealed box the like aTV).
Even if they have a new form factor coming, it really doesn't justify putting the buying community on hold for 8 months now. I'm not sure about the engineering effort required to slap Haswell on the motherboard but I can't imagine it was a huge foot print change from the previous solution. I really just don't get it, the Mini attracts a lot of people, geeks if you will, that do understand the differences in the processor families and will put off purchases until the hardware is updated.
As for the new platform, it would be nice to see something along the lines of a Mac Pro Lite. That is if they can keep the price reasonable. I suspect the price can be kept reasonable simply by using different manufacturing methods (a cheaper case). This would be a refresh of the product.
Why refresh? Simply due to the same reasons the Mac Pro got a major work over, to set the product up for another ten years. In this regard circuit density will increase significantly making for very compact motherboards. We could see by next year a mother boards that has a processor chip, RAM, some analog stuff and little else. The days of massive motherboards, to deliver basic computing functionality, are gone. Intel is in a mad rush to deliver low power highly integrated chips for laptops, tablets and other hardware, it is just a matter of time.
Believe it or not, I think it's being held back for the 4K screen.
I think the Mini's about to go mobile.
Mobile is where everything's at now, and 'Home on iPod' never really took off.
Users can take their computer from home to work without a hassle, in their pocket.
However, in true Apple style, they want to sell you two (!) screens for the privilege, and so the product cannot debut before the next display upgrade is ready to ship.
Believe it or not, I think it's being held back for the 4K screen.
I think the Mini's about to go mobile.
They would share minimal market overlap. It remains to be seen if there is a price bump, but I don't see a 4K screen coming in any less than what is there now. The mini is probably paired with cheaper alternatives on a frequent basis. Some are sold as light duty servers. It makes absolutely no sense to hold it back for something like that when they could have shipped last year. I doubt Apple will bring out a 4K display until closer to Broadwell, so that's a non-issue. My bet would be on chip cost. If they attempted to go the same route as 2012, it would be another increase in chip cost due to Apple's current selections for the 13" and 15" mbps.
Comments
That's so sad. I need newer Macs and faster chips and I can't keep laying out $1500 to $2500 every year or two. The Mac mini serves my purposes so well.
Please Apple, please keep this machine alive, and relevant. Please make a new quad core model with Iris Pro graphics. At least one more. That machine will last me a while.
The statement puzzles me a bit, because quad core + iris isn't exactly bleeding edge. You could have had performance roughly on par with that as far back as 2010 or so in a mac pro. Even the base gpu would still be significantly faster than iris pro. CPU wise it would have obviously been at the upper end of that price range. I just don't see what you're really getting from a 1-2 year cycle when I look back at the past 5-6 years.
I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.
So maybe a little insight here as to why anybody would put themselves on a 1 year update cycle is in order.
I'm with you on this, I don't understand people professing to be on a 1-2 year upgrade cycle. It is like they are still living in the 1990's or something. There was a time when you could really double performance every year but that is long gone. It looks like Haswell Refresh will give us 100MHz on most of the new processors, a performance boost alone that is hardly worth it. It is actually pretty amazing that Apple has been able to continuously boost the performance of iOS devices the way they have but even here it is hardly worth an update every single year.
I just haven't seen enough growth in performance to justify that under any circumstances. There is one area where I kind of understand the behavior. Some people buy a conservative model without applecare and trade up within a year, figuring that it's cheaper than opting for cto options and applecare. If it allows them to structure their expenses and avoid the majority of repair issues, I can understand it. I don't really see it for performance reasons. The big changes in performance have been much more sporadic in recent years. The iOS devices are interesting to me. I just wish they supported something like OpenCL. It's not perfect, but it provides a more elegant solution than things like compute shaders.
I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.
Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.
That is an angle I haven't seen before, or maybe I just dismissed it. I still see AppleCare like warranties on desktop hardware as a bit of a ripoff. The primary reason for going desktop (for me at the moment) is the low cost and self serviceability. Of course such a desktop needs to support the performance I want which is where the wait for Haswell in the Mini comes from.
They only way to get more performance these days is to buy more cores and that only works for people that have an applications profile that can use those cores.
That is in line with my typical suggestions. I don't see a lot of value in a minor bump in ghz, yet people still ask about performance differences between one Air and another.
I'm beginning to believe that OpenCL doesn't work all that well on Imaginations GPUs. Yeah they support it and the hardware was revved some time ago to be compliant but I'm not convinced that the end result is all that good. Of course information in this respect is very hard to come by due to Imaginations tight controller on documentation, but I'm left with the impression that Imaginations ALU's don't handle larger data types well including 32 bit floats. It would be nice though to get the real scope and find a platform that actually runs OpenCL code on an Imagination GPU. It would be very interesting to say the least to see how it performs.
Or maybe Apple is just slow like in the way it took forever to bring OpenCL code to Intels GPUs. Or maybe they are just waiting for all of those AMD engineers they hired to make a GPU that is worth targeting.
Well Apple okay'd the use of OpenGL computation some time ago in iOS. It just could in many cases be accomplished more elegantly via OpenCL. I would find it odd if they couldn't properly handle 32 bit floats, given that graphics pipelines often use linear color mappings in rendering calculations.
I have Sandy Bridge and no problem at all I have after 2 1/2 years with the MM.
As for giving advice to people that ask about it I've pretty much have given up and have a rather sour attitude about it anymore.
I'm not sure if it is a case of not handling 32 bit floats but rather being poorly optimized for 32 bit floats. Again finding information on the Imagination Processors is like finding a needle in a hay stack, but apparently they have some sort of optimization that uses less that 32 bit floats that the GPUs are built around. I really don't know it would kinda make sense in a mobile processor to sacrifice some quality for fewer transistors and less power. In any event I'm just as much in the dark as most people about the lack of OpenCL on iOS devices.
I just realized that we pulled this thread far off the tracks with this Imagination discussion. In an attempt to put the engine back on the track: maybe this (no OpenCL on Imaginations GPU Apple wise) will keep ARM out of Mac OS devices for awhile longer. That is the GPU isn't suitable for all the goodies built into Mac OS.
Upgrade strategies:
Upgrade every year:
2009 2.26 Ghz Core 2 Duo GeForce 9400M $599
2010 2.4 Ghz Core 2 Duo GeForce 320M $699
2011 2.3 Ghz Core i5 (dual Sandy Bridge) HD3000 $599
2012 2.5 Ghz Core i5 (dual Ivy Bridge) HD4000 $599
$2496 Total
Upgrade every three years
2009 2.66 Ghz Core 2GeForce 9400M $849
2012 2.6 Ghz Core i7 (quad Ivy Bridge) HD4000 $899
$1748 Total
It's a lot more expensive unless you're selling last years model every time. Then the cost would be comparable. Assume 50% of original value:
$2496 - $948 = $1547
$1748 - $425 = $1323
But it's a reasonable strategy. You get thunderbolt earlier. You get to the Core series faster. 2009 you're slower. 2010 it's kinda a wash (better GPU but slightly slower CPU). 2011 you're ahead in terms of CPU. 2012 you're behind again after the 3 year refresh happens but ahead until then.
For the mini it's somewhat risky as Apple has had years in the distant past where no refresh occurred. In 2013 the refresh every year person gets screwed.
The Macbook Air got a boost and $100 knocked off.
Can't Apple at least knock $100 of the current mini while we wait for an update?
They also have knocked $200 off the 2013 Airs so yeah the Mini looks pretty pathetic. If they don't have a replacement ready and debuted at WWDC I will be fully perplexed. Effectively the Airs have lapped the Mini technology wise.
What is even more interesting is the total lack of rumors about the Mini. Not even a leak that is an obvious wild ass guess.
Again I repeat Mini will be dropped from the Apple line soon.
I've never posted to the incorrect thread before. There's a first. I disagree about the mini being dropped though. People have claimed that many times over in past years. It's still there.
And you base this on what information?
I don't doubt it really but I do wonder what will replace it. A scaled down Mac Pro like machine, a souped up AppleTV or something different again. The Mini might be dead but dropping it leaves Apples desktop lineup unbalanced.
And you base this on what information?
I don't doubt it really but I do wonder what will replace it. A scaled down Mac Pro like machine, a souped up AppleTV or something different again. The Mini might be dead but dropping it leaves Apples desktop lineup unbalanced.
Agreed. Can't see it disappearing, but the long term neglect makes me think it might get "refreshed" (or replaced/rebranded) with a black machine that either looks like a smaller version of the Pro or a slightly bigger Apple TV (it wouldn't surprise me if they made it non-expandable in a totally sealed box the like aTV).
Even if they have a new form factor coming, it really doesn't justify putting the buying community on hold for 8 months now. I'm not sure about the engineering effort required to slap Haswell on the motherboard but I can't imagine it was a huge foot print change from the previous solution. I really just don't get it, the Mini attracts a lot of people, geeks if you will, that do understand the differences in the processor families and will put off purchases until the hardware is updated.
As for the new platform, it would be nice to see something along the lines of a Mac Pro Lite. That is if they can keep the price reasonable. I suspect the price can be kept reasonable simply by using different manufacturing methods (a cheaper case). This would be a refresh of the product.
Why refresh? Simply due to the same reasons the Mac Pro got a major work over, to set the product up for another ten years. In this regard circuit density will increase significantly making for very compact motherboards. We could see by next year a mother boards that has a processor chip, RAM, some analog stuff and little else. The days of massive motherboards, to deliver basic computing functionality, are gone. Intel is in a mad rush to deliver low power highly integrated chips for laptops, tablets and other hardware, it is just a matter of time.
Believe it or not, I think it's being held back for the 4K screen.
I think the Mini's about to go mobile.
Mobile is where everything's at now, and 'Home on iPod' never really took off.
Users can take their computer from home to work without a hassle, in their pocket.
However, in true Apple style, they want to sell you two (!) screens for the privilege, and so the product cannot debut before the next display upgrade is ready to ship.
I think the Mini's about to go mobile.
What?
The Mini now competes, in part, with the Intel NUC.
Mobile computers-in-your-pocket are now a real thing.
If Apple's retooling the Mini, this market has to be part of the equation.
I understand that the Mini wouldn't NEED a 4K monitor, but if Apple hasn't built a low end monitor for the Mini yet, they aren't going to at all.
So whatever the next display upgrade is (4K or not) it will be the default solution for the Mini.
Believe it or not, I think it's being held back for the 4K screen.
I think the Mini's about to go mobile.
They would share minimal market overlap. It remains to be seen if there is a price bump, but I don't see a 4K screen coming in any less than what is there now. The mini is probably paired with cheaper alternatives on a frequent basis. Some are sold as light duty servers. It makes absolutely no sense to hold it back for something like that when they could have shipped last year. I doubt Apple will bring out a 4K display until closer to Broadwell, so that's a non-issue. My bet would be on chip cost. If they attempted to go the same route as 2012, it would be another increase in chip cost due to Apple's current selections for the 13" and 15" mbps.