Haswell Mini

[Yebubbleman]

Originally Posted by visim91

What are the chances a Mac Mini sporting Intel's Haswell chip will show up during the summer? I'd love to pick up a new baseline Mini for my wife for Christmas, but wouldn't mind waiting till her birthday in August as, in the meantime, I can let her use my iMac to get used to OSX..

There are those of you who will insist to just buy what you need now, and to you I say I don't need it never, I just want it and will wait for it.

Then, there are those of you who will say a baseline Mini then will only be 10% faster than a baseline Mini now, and to you I say I'm listening, tell me so if that is the case.

Image

The integrated graphics will be the thing that largely improves from this Mac mini to the Haswell mini. Though really, this is the perfect time to buy a Mac mini. As someone who was ready to buy a 15" MacBook Pro when they came out with Sandy Bridge, I didn't wait because the CPUs weren't fast enough. I waited because I wanted USB 3. Waiting for the next CPU architecture to arrive in a Mac that just arrived with the current is a little silly unless there's a feature that will come along with it. If you are hopeful that the FireWire 800 port will be dropped in favor of a second Thunderbolt port, or if you really want those faster integrated graphics, I'd say that those are good reasons to wait.

Otherwise, Apple isn't known to release EVERY NEW Mac with the latest Intel chip on the day it is announced by Intel. Mac minis got Sandy Bridge four months after general availability and they're now getting Ivy Bridge a good eight months after general availability. With Haswell due out sometime between March and June and with these Mac minis having just arrived, I'd say it's a safe bet that you won't see new Mac minis for a good year or so.

[paulrbeers]

Originally Posted by thekev

It once again came out just a bit after the imac. This year they only delayed until the imac announcement. Given that they share parts with the notebooks, they take second priority. Their volume is lower and margins are probably not as high. Apparently they came out more than a month after the imac last year. Also it was actually just shy of 5 months. The base mini cpu officially launched 5-31-12. The minis launched 10-23-12. It could have been sooner if the imac was getting a standard refresh. Looking at the ipad event where the desktops were tacked on, it's likely that the original plan was to have them ready to ship by that time.
.

So you agree then with my original post that they will not be available until Christmas next year (which the Christmas shopping season generally starts around October). Since haswell isn't set to release until late Spring at the earliest, then 4 months from that is pretty much the Christmas shopping season which means it Will Not be ready for his wife's birthday in August.

[thekev]

Originally Posted by paulrbeers

So you agree then with my original post that they will not be available until Christmas next year (which the Christmas shopping season generally starts around October). Since haswell isn't set to release until late Spring at the earliest, then 4 months from that is pretty much the Christmas shopping season which means it Will Not be ready for his wife's birthday in August.

Blah yeah it's quite possible. I apparently lost focus while disagreeing with the other person. Their scenario makes little sense with intel's current release cycle on their mainstream cpu packages, as in everything beneath the E5/E7s.

[blanka]

Another reason the Haswell might be skipped (or be included as a dual-core only) is the Mini can't deal with the heat.
Sandy had 2.0Ghz quad max (8 threads)
Ivy has 2.6Ghz quad max, with a larger HD4000 GPU, but 22 instead of 32 nm, so it is probably on par in heat production and it is at the max the mini can handle.
Haswell will see again a twice the size of the GPU, but without die-shrink this time. It will mean a melting Mini. Or Apple needs to go back to dual core, but that would mean a drop in spead.

Apple did the same in the previous generation. They went from 45nm Core2Duo straigt to 32nm i5/i7, as the original 45nm i5 and i7's did not fit.

[Rhinoevans]

Sandy Bridge / Ivy Bridge / Haswell /Broadwell whatever!

Sit someone down at a computer and let them tell you what chip is inside.

They cant. All insignificant upgrades. A little faster, a little less heat, smaller die size, all good stuff, but usually not recognizable except on a Benchtest.

I have a first gen i7 and cant tell ANY difference to my NEW cMBP Ivy.

I buy when I need, not what's coming, because in most practical use, you can not tell the difference.

I just installed a Samsung 830 in my Sony i7, and I think it is great. Showed it to my friend, and his comment, Yea, a little faster. Nothing I have seen in the last 10-15 years has been truly REVOLUTIONARY.


And as far as the Mac Mini, already OVER powered with current processor, and I really doubt the new Intel GPU on the haswell with be "Revolutionary". JMHO

[majkom]

Originally Posted by Rhinoevans

Sandy Bridge / Ivy Bridge / Haswell /Broadwell whatever!

Sit someone down at a computer and let them tell you what chip is inside.

They cant. All insignificant upgrades. A little faster, a little less heat, smaller die size, all good stuff, but usually not recognizable except on a Benchtest.

I have a first gen i7 and cant tell ANY difference to my NEW cMBP Ivy.

I buy when I need, not what's coming, because in most practical use, you can not tell the difference.

I just installed a Samsung 830 in my Sony i7, and I think it is great. Showed it to my friend, and his comment, Yea, a little faster. Nothing I have seen in the last 10-15 years has been truly REVOLUTIONARY.


And as far as the Mac Mini, already OVER powered with current processor, and I really doubt the new Intel GPU on the haswell with be "Revolutionary". JMHO

that is little confusing about mini - so overpowered with CPU, SSD, RAM but so underpowered by GPU... having it more decent GPU, best computer for ordinary man

[thekev]

Originally Posted by blanka

Another reason the Haswell might be skipped (or be included as a dual-core only) is the Mini can't deal with the heat.
Sandy had 2.0Ghz quad max (8 threads)
Ivy has 2.6Ghz quad max, with a larger HD4000 GPU, but 22 instead of 32 nm, so it is probably on par in heat production and it is at the max the mini can handle.
Haswell will see again a twice the size of the GPU, but without die-shrink this time. It will mean a melting Mini. Or Apple needs to go back to dual core, but that would mean a drop in spead.

Apple did the same in the previous generation. They went from 45nm Core2Duo straigt to 32nm i5/i7, as the original 45nm i5 and i7's did not fit.

You're not accounting for the fact that they lost the option to use NVidia graphics as soon as they left Core2duo. That may have been part of it. They went the same route on some of the notebooks. I do not expect intel to go too hot on chips designed for notebooks when one of their biggest focuses has been lower tdp. You are unlikely to see anything over a 45W chip like we have today. If they are cramming in more gpu space, they will limit clock rates rather than release chips that are too hot to run in any notebook.

I just looked up the entire line from nehalem and westmere. Oddly Nehalem got the 45W QM variants which Apple didn't use until Sandy. Westmere era options used dual core chips. I guess the rest was allocated to the gpu, but Apple has used 45W chips since then in both the Mini and the 15" macbook pros. The mini does use an internal power supply these days, but they've dropped discrete graphics. It should be possible with a decent airflow design. It seems a bit limiting on the current model, given the vent placement, yet they're still using chips that run at the same tdp as nehalem.

[Mr. Retrofire]

Originally Posted by blanka

I'm not interested in coulds: sure Apple could put haswell in the mini. But they have introduced new architectures in the Mini always in 400-500 days. Never sooner. So they will milk out ivy for at least total 2013. If by then Rockwell is ready, they will skip Haswell.

Intel plans already a second revision of IB:

Originally Posted by Intel

From:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/12/3/37...gnaling-longer

"We’ll be introducing a new line of low power chips targeted to operate at about 10 watts initially. Thanks to the benefits of Intel’s leading 22nm process technology, Intel is planning to offer very limited quantities of the new low-power processor line with the 3rd Gen Intel Core processor family in 1H’13."

3rd Gen Intel Core processor family = IB

----------

Originally Posted by thekev

Your comment on temperatures is also ignoring a lot of detail. You're right that much of it will be power management, but there's no reason to believe they'll be left without an option that can run in the mini when intel has been increasingly focused on providing low power options.

I think Apples heat problem in the newer Mac minis is the internal power supply and the old cooling system, not the CPU/GPU.

----------

Originally Posted by majkom

that is little confusing about mini - so overpowered with CPU, SSD, RAM but so underpowered by GPU... having it more decent GPU, best computer for ordinary man

A better GPU requires a larger case and a bigger power supply. Unlikely, IMHO.

[primalman]

Originally Posted by visim91

What are the chances a Mac Mini sporting Intel's Haswell chip will show up during the summer? I'd love to pick up a new baseline Mini for my wife for Christmas, but wouldn't mind waiting till her birthday in August as, in the meantime, I can let her use my iMac to get used to OSX..

There are those of you who will insist to just buy what you need now, and to you I say I don't need it never, I just want it and will wait for it.

Then, there are those of you who will say a baseline Mini then will only be 10% faster than a baseline Mini now, and to you I say I'm listening, tell me so if that is the case.

Image

I love your GIF!

[Exodist]

I'd say just get her the current Mac Mini. I got the late 2012 model just 2 weeks ago and I am very happy with it. The Intel HD4000 iGPU isnt bad, its no means half as good as my NV SLI setup in my gaming rig mind you. But unless your into heavy 3D gaming or need a high end video card for photoshop. This will be fine.

Mine is slightly upgraded over the base model. Went with the 2.6Ghz Core i7 and 8GB of DDR3-1600. Stayed with the 1TB 5400RPM base hard drive. Its not bad, its not an SSD either.. But ran Novabench and got 1087 total score. Not sure how good that is compared to others. My gaming rig though is a Core i7-3770 overclocked to 4.2Ghz, 16GB DDR3-1600, 256GB Samsung 830 series SSD (520R/420W)MB/s with 2 NV GTX560Ti's in SLI. Other then gaming performance I dont notice any real difference. Sure something compiles or encodes a few seconds faster on my gaming rig, but unless your a benchmark freak. Its not worth the extra 2000 bucks I spent on that system compared to this one. I will admit I will be pulling my SSD out of it and putting in my mini, but the drive in the mini is spunky for a 5400RPM model...

So hope that little info helps. Like I said, unless your benchmarking or 3D gaming most folks will not notice the difference.

[blanka]

Originally Posted by thekev

yet they're still using chips that run at the same tdp as nehalem.

Not all processors with the same TDP have the same heat generation. I had a E8400, which was TDP 65W but it only used 35W with 2 cores full active.
Just observe what happens right now:
- Mini gets totally hot in Ivy 2.6 quad config doing video at the same time
- Haswell with twice the transistors for the GPU and even a bit more for the CPU, so they either have to cut the cores, or decrease the mhz.

[propower]

Holding out for Haswell literally weeks after ivy mini is released means you neither need nor really want a new machine now. The 2012 mini is SO CPU rich I have a hard time imagining when Apple will even release a newer hardware version (at least a year seems reasonable). The 4000 GPU is truly fine for a very large portion of the users (assuming all the kinks get worked out).

[53x12]

Originally Posted by blanka

Not all processors with the same TDP have the same heat generation. I had a E8400, which was TDP 65W but it only used 35W with 2 cores full active.
Just observe what happens right now:
- Mini gets totally hot in Ivy 2.6 quad config doing video at the same time
- Haswell with twice the transistors for the GPU and even a bit more for the CPU, so they either have to cut the cores, or decrease the mhz.

Before typing anymore on this topic you need to read this post:

Originally Posted by paulrbeers

Yeah, but you realize they are building haswell from the ground up to maximize power usage. You realize that the nm is only a portion of how a company can lower power usage/heat right? Further, in a lot of ways, by going to a smaller nm, it doesn't even necessarily mean less heat, because now you are cramming more transitions into a smaller area which can make it MORE difficult to cool. Seems as though you have equated smaller transister processes as the ONLY way to reduce heat. Finding ways to get processors in to lower power states faster, creative use of speed steps, grouping functions within the cores close together, etc. etc. can make a much greater impact to power savings.

Here's a wikipedia article for you to read, so you no longer trivialize what can be done on the engineering side...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_(microarchitecture)

[thekev]

Originally Posted by blanka

Not all processors with the same TDP have the same heat generation. I had a E8400, which was TDP 65W but it only used 35W with 2 cores full active.
Just observe what happens right now:
- Mini gets totally hot in Ivy 2.6 quad config doing video at the same time
- Haswell with twice the transistors for the GPU and even a bit more for the CPU, so they either have to cut the cores, or decrease the mhz.

I'd suspect they'll handle it by clock rates and aggressive power management. Given that intel has been somewhat focused on mobile products, I don't see them skipping an entire chip generation. They're bringing out a second round of ULV Ivy chips early next year. That might support your theory in that they could be bringing them out if Haswell ULVs aren't the first to be released. Right now we have no idea how far out Broadwell is from there. It's a weird expectation that they would suddenly return to an earlier in the year release cycle in spite of all of this.

[53x12]

Originally Posted by visim91

What are the chances a Mac Mini sporting Intel's Haswell chip will show up during the summer? I'd love to pick up a new baseline Mini for my wife for Christmas, but wouldn't mind waiting till her birthday in August as, in the meantime, I can let her use my iMac to get used to OSX..

There are those of you who will insist to just buy what you need now, and to you I say I don't need it never, I just want it and will wait for it.

Then, there are those of you who will say a baseline Mini then will only be 10% faster than a baseline Mini now, and to you I say I'm listening, tell me so if that is the case.

Image

The mini in the past has been updated an average of every 381 days. The range is 238-574 days. More recently the updates have been 400-461 days. The typical update cycle is summer or fall. The earliest I could see is a small silent bump this summer but wouldn't be surprised if they waited until next fall as well.