They are hitting the limits of their current, fast paced Tick/Tock cycling and will probably return to 2-3 year cycles on the desktop side. It is a mature market and they are going to concentrate, along with AMD, on mobile devices.Why is "planned obsolescence" ? How many times must Intel wait to release a new CPU? One year, two years, three years?
The current mini already has the same integrated graphics as the MBP. So does your argument hold true based on Apple's current products?
The 15" MBP (and iMac) have discrete graphics anyway.
Plus, the 5000 is only going to be in the lowest TDP chips (the ones that will be used in the Air), which once again, aren't the chips used in the Mac Mini.
There won't be any quad-core chips using the HD5000 gpu. So you're basically saying that there will not be a quad-core Haswell mac mini.
Which will have the HD5000 only and will be AT MOST 50% faster than the 4000.
Plan accordingly.
It's probably just not worth it: it would seem reasonable to me that the highest-end integrated graphics won't be all that cheap, and so in a desktop where space and power usage aren't such a concern, you'd be better off including some mid-range discrete GPU, in terms of cost/performance ratios.Too bad the highest end 5200 iGPU chips won't be for desktops. Which seems a little odd.
Since the 13" MBP uses a 35w dual-core CPU, and since the 5200 requires a quad-core 47w CPU, it is very unlikely the 13" MBP will get the 5200.
What?.. a tower using an integrated graphics chip instead of a dedicated video card?
Talk about killing off the MacPro..
The HD3000 was crap, the 4000 at least for light video editing a MBA is good enough. Any more speed will be welcome but we'll have to see right, 50% would be noticeable I'm sure.
But did some test with my MBA vs Mini with AMD 6330 and the mini is a lot faster when adding color effects, both machines have a similar setup processor wise.
There are quad options available with the mini. It's just the lowest model that uses a dual core cpu at this point.You do realize that the mini tracks the internals of the MBP 13" ( before that the Macbook but once it disappeared the MBP 13") ?
I don't think Apple would go from a 35W CPU to a 28W CPU in the 13" MBP. Such a chip would likely be slower than the Ivy Bridge chips currently offered. So I suspect Apple will either try and force a quad in there, or do some other Intel collaboration trickery.
Windows XP, 7 and 8 are the proof that you are wrong.
No.