Intel Unveils Fanless PC Reference Design Based on Upcoming Broadwell Chips

jnpy!$4g3cwk · Jun 3, 2014

melendezest said:
That is exactly what they're going to do. Give us an even (unnecessarily) smaller Mac Mini.

Bad idea. Too small and light, and, it would be an Apple TV and be pulled off the table by its cables, and, not have enough room for all the connectors it needs. It is just right the way it is right now.

With an A8 in it.

Now, that could be a great idea if third party S/W developers could get on board.

Because, well, it'll save them money.

Not sure how super-small saves money.

MagnusVonMagnum · Jun 3, 2014

Beats is often criticized as being a bass-heavy fashion accessory and not a true audiophile product, but sales figures reveal that the typically younger consumers who buy Beats are more interested in appearance than audio quality.

LOL. Apple has been more interested in "appearance" than performance for a LONG time now so I guess now it all makes sense with Beats (i.e. overpriced, overhyped crap, kind of like Bose but supported by a celebrity name).

Asia8 · Jun 3, 2014

mazz0 said:
What exactly is a handful of watts, and how does that compare to 15? What an utterly useless comparison.

Well, if a watt is anything like a grain of rice... About... 100?

However, I think a watt must be smaller than rice, as I've never seen one, so probably a whole lot more more.

iMacFarlane · Jun 3, 2014

slash7844 said:
That's because getting bigger and bigger does not equal to technological advancement. HDD technology have moved on to SSD, with smaller storage but more advanced technology. Same for CPUs. Lower clock speed but multiple cores. Monitors have evolved from CRTs to LCD/LED with different technologies such as TN to IPS and SAMOLEDs. Thus, that graph is totally irrelevant because you can't compare hdd to ssd, and CRT panels to IPS panels.

Holy frijoles, dude. Totally irrelevant? A little strong, don't you think? Especially, since I was in fact comparing HDD size over a decade, which the graph totally nails. YOU brought up SSDs and monitor tech and the like. Sure, let's debate and discuss, but seriously, gotta work on the social skills a little bit, unless you think they're totally irrelevant too.

pearvsapple · Jun 3, 2014

Won't be long till Apple switches to Intel processors, completely. Let the true Apple eco-system commence.

inscrewtable · Jun 3, 2014

iMacFarlane said:
Gonna say something about the Mini, but just don't have it in me.

Is that a Haiku?

wikiverse · Jun 4, 2014

Keane16 said:
Thinner than an iPad Air. Damn, tech is progressing at a ridiculous rate.

Would like a peak to see what's been cooking in Ive's labs using these processors - a new MBA would be very, very slick with this inside. (And I still think the current one is great).

The recently announced Surface Pro 3 is slimmer and lighter than a MBA. So technology had already progressed at least a year faster than you think. It's a pretty cool time for gadgets.

Piggie · Jun 4, 2014

mikeray said:
Oh not this argument again! Apple sells hardware. OS X is free! Why would they let it run on anything?

Oh, I thought that People here bought Apple machines as they loved the design and quality of the build, the looks etc etc.

Are you saying this is not the case?

You think rather than carrying on buying macs as now, AND even more people moving to OSX to help it become an industry standard.
People would stop buying Apple hardware and buy other brands of hardware to run OSX on?

And Apple would not sell as much hardware.
I always read here that people love the hardware. You are saying they are only buying it as that's the only way for them to get OSX but they don't really want to and would jump ship to other hardware brands if they could.

Keane16 · Jun 4, 2014

wikiverse said:
The recently announced Surface Pro 3 is slimmer and lighter than a MBA. So technology had already progressed at least a year faster than you think. It's a pretty cool time for gadgets.

The Surface Pro 3 has a fan though.

I'm excited as this processor should allow devices as thin as the iPad Air/Surface pro 3 (and thinner) with the power of the MacBook Air. And no fan.

Mac32 · Jun 4, 2014

Fanless design sounds great, but I'd rather have a quite fan device design with a cooler and more comfortable temperature. Hot laptops and tablets are not so good IMO...

jnpy!$4g3cwk · Jun 4, 2014

Mac32 said:
Fanless design sounds great, but I'd rather have a quite fan device design with a cooler and more comfortable temperature. Hot laptops and tablets are not so good IMO...

On the CPU side, I'm quite sure the A7 is already plenty fast enough for a notebook. Even using floating point, it is approaching 1 GFLOPS (64-bit). What I don't know is how the A7 can do with respect to I/O and graphics, and, how many extra watts it would take to be able to drive a Thunderbolt/DP with 4K resolution and read/write to SSD at 500MB/sec. At the same time. In Intel terms, that is roughly an HD4000 GPU, and, on the I/O side, the previous generation of stock ARM SOCs were somewhat I/O challenged as well.

melendezest · Jun 4, 2014

jnpy!$4g3cwk said:
Bad idea. Too small and light, and, it would be an Apple TV and be pulled off the table by its cables, and, not have enough room for all the connectors it needs. It is just right the way it is right now.

Now, that could be a great idea if third party S/W developers could get on board.

Not sure how super-small saves money.

So, you are defending the current Mac Mini against a post that didn't attack it. Sigh, Apple fans.

My entire post was against the idea of a smaller mini. Apple already made it smaller (twice) when it didn't need to be, at the expense of features we computer (vs appliance) fans would like (discreet, high-powered graphics card, for one).

The saving money part is simple: smaller = less material cost. An in-house chip may also be less money than an outsourced one.

In short, I'd like to see Apple release a mini that is essentially a high-end iMac without the screen, but I believe they'll probably release a smaller, more "appliance-y" mini instead because Apple does whatever the hell it wants, and not what us customers would like (most of the time--iPad mini being a notable exception).

slash7844 · Jun 4, 2014

iMacFarlane said:
Holy frijoles, dude. Totally irrelevant? A little strong, don't you think? Especially, since I was in fact comparing HDD size over a decade, which the graph totally nails. YOU brought up SSDs and monitor tech and the like. Sure, let's debate and discuss, but seriously, gotta work on the social skills a little bit, unless you think they're totally irrelevant too.

It's irrelevant because it's a graph of dying technology, which is replaced by SSD. If you see a graph of CRT monitor's size and see how it stalled from certain size since the late 90s, would you say that the monitor technology has stopped evolving? In that sense, the graph is irrelevant.

iMacFarlane · Jun 4, 2014

slash7844 said:
It's irrelevant because it's a graph of dying technology, which is replaced by SSD. If you see a graph of CRT monitor's size and see how it stalled from certain size since the late 90s, would you say that the monitor technology has stopped evolving? In that sense, the graph is irrelevant.

Right on. I see where you're coming from.

melendezest · Jun 4, 2014

mschmalenbach said:
A sale is not a sale, as you point out yourself...

What investors/shareholders and top management are focused on is shareholder value. That comes from profits, not volume...

If Apple can get massive profits from selling to just 8-10% of the market, and let's face it, it is doing just that, then why lower brand, value, margin etc just to sell more? Apple already has the vast majority of the profit available in the PC/tablet market space.

That there is a potentially large volume market of people who WANT an Apple laptop or desktop, but either cannot, or will not, pay for it, should not be the primary reason to drop price, quality, brand etc simply to grab that slice of the market - it's just not a profitable slice of business - ask Dell, HP, Lenovo, and everybody else in the non-Apple camp - it's tough out there!

And there's the rub. I've had other posters beat me down when I point out that Apple is all about making money, not the best products (despite this being the very mechanism by which they accomplish money-making).

Nobody is asking Apple to drop pricing or quality or tarnish their brand. We want Apple to provide a product between their two desktops, with the same build quality and corresponding pricing to their current offerings.

Apple is more than profitable, and asking Dell, Lenovo, etc about the business is pointless. I believe that sales represent the fact that both their hardware and software (Windows) are (IMO) inferior, but their sales driver is price.

In contrast, I think Apple's success lies in that what they do put out is really, really good, so many buy it at any price (although the I find their pricing to be reasonable for what you get).

So omitting a slice of the market is annoying to (some of) us, but non-impactful for them.

----------

barkmonster said:
Missing the point there. Since the switch to Intel and the removal of the BTO £1,399 Mac Pro from the range since the initial line up, it's either a Mac Mini, a Mac Pro or a giant glued together laptop for your desk.

The performance of higher end quad i7s used in the Macbook Pro and iMac and quad Xeons in the Mac Pro are so close that a headless iMac or 'Xmac" geared towards the video/audio market that would be easily repurposed as a server Mac would make sense for so many reasons.

People fanboy blathering about Hackntosh, buy a PC etc... whenever this issue is raised really miss the point. There needs to be something other than barebones entry level and over-the-top Xeon niche market workstation (if you could call the iBin a workstation with it's utter lack of internal expansion).

EXACTLY.

I do not want to build a damn thing (although I know how).

I want to buy it.

From Apple.

At a reasonable (ie. NOT current Mac Pro) price.

jnpy!$4g3cwk · Jun 4, 2014

melendezest said:
So, you are defending the current Mac Mini against a post that didn't attack it. Sigh, Apple fans.

I was defending the mini, but, not against you. I think it is OK to comment on something without violently disagreeing with it. I guess that caught you by surprise.

My entire post was against the idea of a smaller mini. Apple already made it smaller (twice) when it didn't need to be, at the expense of features we computer (vs appliance) fans would like (discreet, high-powered graphics card, for one).

Agreed. Again.

The saving money part is simple: smaller = less material cost. An in-house chip may also be less money than an outsourced one.

At some point, smaller = more material cost. An iPhone costs as much as a mini. Or more.

While we are on the subject, there is a weight at which a Mini simply doesn't weigh enough. Like the ATV. When a device can't keep from sliding off a stand because its cables weigh more than it does, its weight is too little.

In short, I'd like to see Apple release a mini that is essentially a high-end iMac without the screen, but I believe they'll probably release a smaller, more "appliance-y" mini instead because Apple does whatever the hell it wants, and not what us customers would like (most of the time--iPad mini being a notable exception).

I think the Mini is OK for what it is. What I would like is a low-cost mini-tower system. And, to have the 17" MBP back. With a matte display option.

melendezest said:
And there's the rub. I've had other posters beat me down when I point out that Apple is all about making money, not the best products (despite this being the very mechanism by which they accomplish money-making).

Nobody is asking Apple to drop pricing or quality or tarnish their brand. We want Apple to provide a product between their two desktops, with the same build quality and corresponding pricing to their current offerings.

Apple is more than profitable, and asking Dell, Lenovo, etc about the business is pointless. I believe that sales represent the fact that both their hardware and software (Windows) are (IMO) inferior, but their sales driver is price.

In contrast, I think Apple's success lies in that what they do put out is really, really good, so many buy it at any price (although the I find their pricing to be reasonable for what you get).

So omitting a slice of the market is annoying to (some of) us, but non-impactful for them.

----------

I do not want to build a damn thing (although I know how).

I want to buy it.

From Apple.

At a reasonable (ie. NOT current Mac Pro) price.

Well said.

yellowtruck · Jun 4, 2014

MarkusL said:
Offer a choice, huh? Maybe the classy thing to do, but not the Apple thing to do...

....We'll see....

jnpy!$4g3cwk · Jun 4, 2014

iMacFarlane said:
How long has it taken to go from 1TB standard to 2TB standard? Oh, that's right. Nobody is 2TB standard yet.

2 TB standard for what? I have a 3 TB 3.5" Seagate Barracuda two feet from where I am typing. It was inexpensive. (External, of course. Bare, sitting in the dock.) That is what you need to back up 512GB-1 TB. Most of these are going into data centers and "the cloud". But some go in to workstations, too, and some are used for local backup. It still isn't that cheap and easy to quickly back up 1 TB into "the cloud".

slash7844 said:
That's because getting bigger and bigger does not equal to technological advancement. HDD technology have moved on to SSD, with smaller storage but more advanced technology.

No argument against SSDs. I love them. But, 3 TB SSD is a pretty expensive /backup/large file storage/ drive.

slash7844 said:
It's irrelevant because it's a graph of dying technology, which is replaced by SSD.

Dying for inside your laptop. Not dying for providing bulk storage, backups, and cloud storage. I wonder how many disk drives Amazon has in all its cloud services?

mazz0 · Jun 6, 2014

Asia8 said:
Well, if a watt is anything like a grain of rice... About... 100?

However, I think a watt must be smaller than rice, as I've never seen one, so probably a whole lot more more.

Did you see that watt?
What watt?

Mattsasa · Jun 10, 2014

Yvan256 said:
There's multiple Haswell GPUs. Intel HD 4000 up to Iris Pro. You can be sure a low-power CPU will have the low-end HD 4000.

As for the nVidia, I was referring to the current GTX 750/GTX 750TI, with the reference model using only 65 watts. With the future 20nm process, I'm guessing the regular GTX 750 would be low-power enough for the current Mac mini case, given the reduction in power of the future Core M CPU.

But as I said, I imagine Apple will go with the Core M CPU + HD4000. But with a PCIe SSD drive, the whole computer could become small enough to be, once again, incorporated directly inside the keyboard. What's old is new again.

You mean HD4400? HD4000 is ivy bridge

----------

Tech198 said:
Intel having troubles eh ....

Its just not possible i tells ya...

Have a fan-less tablet, people will want to play games....

Poof !! There's goes the tablet, up in smoke.

I don't see any iPads going up in smoke...

Yvan256 · Jun 10, 2014

Mattsasa said:
You mean HD4400? HD4000 is ivy bridge.

Is it really an HD4400 in all the Haswell CPUs, down to the Celeron G1840, Celeron G1850 and Pentium G3240?

Mattsasa · Jun 10, 2014

Yvan256 said:
Is it really an HD4400 in all the Haswell CPUs, down to the Celeron G1840, Celeron G1850 and Pentium G3240?

I think those are just called 'HD graphics'

But I am hoping that apple's new device uses HD4400, that is in the surface pro 3

driftless · Jun 10, 2014

iMacFarlane said:
It seems to have slowed to me. I'm 46 and I started out on the Commodore 64. My first PC was in 1992, with a 120MB hard drive.

1984 Tandy 1000, dual floppies & no HDD here. Better than IBM at the time.

----------

jnpy!$4g3cwk said:
It still isn't that cheap and easy to quickly back up 1 TB into "the cloud".

backblaze.com designed to work with Macs. Quick back-up? No, but once it is backed up then the incremental changes are virtually instant. $5.00/mo for unlimited back-up. Let that sink in - unlimited back-up.

coolfactor · Jun 10, 2014

KingofGotham1 said:
I would be very interested in a Macbook Air with fan-less design, with a slimmer profile and longer battery life!

What is all of this talk about a fanless MacBook Air? I *never* hear the fan on my Air. It never gets warm enough for that. It's the coolest, quietest computer that I've ever had! And slimmer design? Longer battery life? Okay, this guy is being sarcastic! I missed that!

Rettun1 · Jun 24, 2014

I smell a tiny Mac mini with this inside.

tiny

Intel Unveils Fanless PC Reference Design Based on Upcoming Broadwell Chips

macrumors 65816

macrumors 603

macrumors regular

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502

macrumors 68000

macrumors 6502a

macrumors G3

macrumors 6502a

Suspended

macrumors 65816

Suspended

macrumors regular

macrumors 65816

Suspended

macrumors 65816

macrumors regular

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68040

macrumors 68020

macrumors 603

macrumors 68020

macrumors 65816

macrumors 604

macrumors regular

Our Staff