My guess is that the Mac mini will get Core 2 when Apple has a sufficient supply. I don't see a graphics card because of the size factor, but I understand that Intel is going to improve the integrated graphics in 07 with a new chipset - seem to have read that somewhere.
My guess is that the Mac mini will get Core 2 when Apple has a sufficient supply. I don't see a graphics card because of the size factor, but I understand that Intel is going to improve the integrated graphics in 07 with a new chipset - seem to have read that somewhere.
i agree about the core 2 duo, but why no graphics card...they were able to do it in the PPC minis, so why not these
I see a Core 2 Duo Mobile or whatever they are calling it, (Merom) and Intel's more advanced intergrated graphics. The Merom you can pop into an exisiting Mac mini yourself if your careful. Video will always be lack luster. The onboard now is Core Graphics enabled, while the previous dedicated GPU (Radeon 9200) was not.
In Quake 4 between a 1.4 GHz G4 and a 1.5 GHz solo I get similar numbers. So dedicated is kinda meh if they don't back it up with a DECENT dedicated and VRAM to match. Best we can hope for is better onboard. Yippie.
I see a Core 2 Duo Mobile or whatever they are calling it, (Merom) and Intel's more advanced intergrated graphics. The Merom you can pop into an exisiting Mac mini yourself if your careful. Video will always be lack luster. The onboard now is Core Graphics enabled, while the previous dedicated GPU (Radeon 9200) was not.
In Quake 4 between a 1.4 GHz G4 and a 1.5 GHz solo I get similar numbers. So dedicated is kinda meh if they don't back it up with a DECENT dedicated and VRAM to match. Best we can hope for is better onboard. Yippie.
I don't think the mini wil ever be a gaming machine.
Merom sucks ass. Its 90% more transistors and gives <10% performance over core duo. They would have been better putting two core duos together for a quad core. Almost same amount of transistors, >70% performance benefit.
Merom sucks ass. Its 90% more transistors and gives <10% performance over core duo. They would have been better putting two core duos together for a quad core. Almost same amount of transistors, >70% performance benefit.
I don't think the mini wil ever be a gaming machine.
Nor would I, did I say that? Its funny the reactions I get when I put "Mac mini" as my clan name and they say, "your using a Mac mini!?" Haha. It's not fast, but its an interesting challenge as a gamer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcUK
Merom sucks ass. Its 90% more transistors and gives <10% performance over core duo. They would have been better putting two core duos together for a quad core. Almost same amount of transistors, >70% performance benefit.
If a Merom 2.1 GHz doesn't outbench a Core Duo I won't get it. If it is based on Core 2 Duo, and THAT outbenches Core Duo I don't see how it couldn't. Merom even out yet?
Nor would I, did I say that? Its funny the reactions I get when I put "Mac mini" as my clan name and they say, "your using a Mac mini!?" Haha. It's not fast, but its an interesting challenge as a gamer.
If a Merom 2.1 GHz doesn't outbench a Core Duo I won't get it. If it is based on Core 2 Duo, and THAT outbenches Core Duo I don't see how it couldn't. Merom even out yet?
Merom is modestly (~10% overall) faster than Yonah clock for clock. Sometimes more, sometimes less. See link below for thorough comparisson of Merom to yonah.
I'd rather see better graphics in the Mini before a new processor. Why use the GPU alone to sell higher end machines when they can use both the processor and the GPU?
low end = Core Duo + dedicated 64MB decent but not great card
high end = Core 2 Duo + 128-256MB good GPU
Using faster chips limits the use of the Mini to the likes of developers rather than being a good all-round machine.
Even if they used something like the Geforce fx 5200 go that is in the powerbook I'm using. If they can put it in a laptop, they can put it in a Mini. That GPU doesn't support core video so it would probably be better getting a dedicated GPU that does.
I'd rather see better graphics in the Mini before a new processor. Why use the GPU alone to sell higher end machines when they can use both the processor and the GPU?
Most consumer computers in this class use onboard video. IMHO we will only see better onboard, or maybe a dedicated chip but low-end.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
low end = Core Duo + dedicated 64MB decent but not great card
high end = Core 2 Duo + 128-256MB good GPU
With those specs it would eat into the iMac sales wouldn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin
Using faster chips limits the use of the Mini to the likes of developers rather than being a good all-round machine.
Even if they used something like the Geforce fx 5200 go that is in the powerbook I'm using. If they can put it in a laptop, they can put it in a Mini. That GPU doesn't support core video so it would probably be better getting a dedicated GPU that does.
The onboard GMA950 supports Core though. It may be a surprise but outside of games, my 1.5 GHz Core Solo and GMA950 is faster then my 1.4 GHz G4 with dedicated Radeon 9200. So in this case, its better for all around users that they used onboard. And I'm sure Apple loves it because its cheaper for them that means more profit.
Would I love a Radeon X1600 Mobility in the next Mac mini? Yeah! But will we see a Radeon X1600 Mobility in the next one? Hahaha
Comments
My integrated graphics suck
My guess is that the Mac mini will get Core 2 when Apple has a sufficient supply. I don't see a graphics card because of the size factor, but I understand that Intel is going to improve the integrated graphics in 07 with a new chipset - seem to have read that somewhere.
i agree about the core 2 duo, but why no graphics card...they were able to do it in the PPC minis, so why not these
i agree about the core 2 duo, but why no graphics card...they were able to do it in the PPC minis, so why not these
COST.
In Quake 4 between a 1.4 GHz G4 and a 1.5 GHz solo I get similar numbers. So dedicated is kinda meh if they don't back it up with a DECENT dedicated and VRAM to match. Best we can hope for is better onboard. Yippie.
I see a Core 2 Duo Mobile or whatever they are calling it, (Merom) and Intel's more advanced intergrated graphics. The Merom you can pop into an exisiting Mac mini yourself if your careful. Video will always be lack luster. The onboard now is Core Graphics enabled, while the previous dedicated GPU (Radeon 9200) was not.
In Quake 4 between a 1.4 GHz G4 and a 1.5 GHz solo I get similar numbers. So dedicated is kinda meh if they don't back it up with a DECENT dedicated and VRAM to match. Best we can hope for is better onboard. Yippie.
I don't think the mini wil ever be a gaming machine.
Well, I would like to see a REAL graphics card in one,
My integrated graphics suck
Absolutly agree 1000%! Integrated graphics is cheesy cheap crap best left to the windows world.
I almost bought a new intel mac mini but I found out they came with integrated graphics so I changed my mind.
- Mark
Merom sucks ass. Its 90% more transistors and gives <10% performance over core duo. They would have been better putting two core duos together for a quad core. Almost same amount of transistors, >70% performance benefit.
And twice the heat, twice the power draw.
I don't think the mini wil ever be a gaming machine.
Nor would I, did I say that? Its funny the reactions I get when I put "Mac mini" as my clan name and they say, "your using a Mac mini!?" Haha. It's not fast, but its an interesting challenge as a gamer.
Merom sucks ass. Its 90% more transistors and gives <10% performance over core duo. They would have been better putting two core duos together for a quad core. Almost same amount of transistors, >70% performance benefit.
If a Merom 2.1 GHz doesn't outbench a Core Duo I won't get it. If it is based on Core 2 Duo, and THAT outbenches Core Duo I don't see how it couldn't. Merom even out yet?
Well, I would like to see a REAL graphics card in one,
My integrated graphics suck
Yeah it sucks that it can only run Motion, Final Cut Pro and Shake.
It sucks that it can playback video at 1080p.
Must be dreadful for ya.
C.
Nor would I, did I say that? Its funny the reactions I get when I put "Mac mini" as my clan name and they say, "your using a Mac mini!?" Haha. It's not fast, but its an interesting challenge as a gamer.
If a Merom 2.1 GHz doesn't outbench a Core Duo I won't get it. If it is based on Core 2 Duo, and THAT outbenches Core Duo I don't see how it couldn't. Merom even out yet?
Merom is modestly (~10% overall) faster than Yonah clock for clock. Sometimes more, sometimes less. See link below for thorough comparisson of Merom to yonah.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...spx?i=2808&p=1
low end = Core Duo + dedicated 64MB decent but not great card
high end = Core 2 Duo + 128-256MB good GPU
Using faster chips limits the use of the Mini to the likes of developers rather than being a good all-round machine.
Even if they used something like the Geforce fx 5200 go that is in the powerbook I'm using. If they can put it in a laptop, they can put it in a Mini. That GPU doesn't support core video so it would probably be better getting a dedicated GPU that does.
I'd rather see better graphics in the Mini before a new processor. Why use the GPU alone to sell higher end machines when they can use both the processor and the GPU?
Most consumer computers in this class use onboard video. IMHO we will only see better onboard, or maybe a dedicated chip but low-end.
low end = Core Duo + dedicated 64MB decent but not great card
high end = Core 2 Duo + 128-256MB good GPU
With those specs it would eat into the iMac sales wouldn't it?
Using faster chips limits the use of the Mini to the likes of developers rather than being a good all-round machine.
Even if they used something like the Geforce fx 5200 go that is in the powerbook I'm using. If they can put it in a laptop, they can put it in a Mini. That GPU doesn't support core video so it would probably be better getting a dedicated GPU that does.
The onboard GMA950 supports Core though. It may be a surprise but outside of games, my 1.5 GHz Core Solo and GMA950 is faster then my 1.4 GHz G4 with dedicated Radeon 9200. So in this case, its better for all around users that they used onboard. And I'm sure Apple loves it because its cheaper for them that means more profit.
Would I love a Radeon X1600 Mobility in the next Mac mini? Yeah! But will we see a Radeon X1600 Mobility in the next one? Hahaha