Haswell Mac mini to have 25% better Intel HD graphics

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Lil Chillbil, May 26, 2013.

  1. Lil Chillbil, May 26, 2013
    Last edited: May 26, 2013

    macrumors 65816

    Lil Chillbil

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #1
    From what i'm seeing, the mac minis big selling point on apples page right now is its intel hd graphics for gaming. And the new haswell chips are expected to be more efficent which means cooler running. And have a much better upgraded version of intel hd graphics.
     
  2. macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Sol III - Terra
    #2
    The Mac mini doesn't use a powerbrick as it has a built in power supply.
     
  3. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Lil Chillbil

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2012
    Location:
    California
    #3
    When did this happen? sorry The last time I owned a mac mini it was a g4 :p


    edited
     
  4. macrumors 6502

    kurzz

    Joined:
    May 18, 2007
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
  5. macrumors 68030

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #5
    They have had an internal power supply since the "unibody" redesign in 2010.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    #6
    the 4000 was supposed to be 25 to 50 % better then the 3000. It started out with bad errors a screen flicker that took a month or so to fix. Then the crushed white problem took until feb of this year to fix. Now I would say the 4000 is better then the 3000.

    Based on Apple and Macmini graphics past history this will be a disappointment need patches and maybe 4 months after it comes out be 25% better then the 4000.

    Since 2006 at least 3 different minis came out with defective graphic drivers that need patches. So those waiting for the Haswell stand a very good chance of waiting until 2014 for corrected graphics on it.
     
  7. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #7
    I want to say 2010.


    I wouldn't believe everything you read. First there are several versions, and we don't know which will make it into the Mini. Beyond that 50% of the power draw isn't happening. The power management is supposedly much more aggressive with Haswell. Peak power draw isn't supposed to be much lower.

    Sadly intel
     
  8. macrumors 603

    philipma1957

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2010
    #8

    Yeah I started with the mini in 2006 which was the first year of Intel and minis.

    The nvidia chipset had a lot of issues with 10.6 snow. blackouts and flicker.

    the 4000 had issues. I want to say so did the 9400 but that was a while back
     
  9. macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #9
    You can probably achieve 20% of the 25% by just updating the graphics drivers. Or Apple can not upgrade the drivers, and make it seem like the new 4200 is soooooo much better than the 4000. It's not, the big difference is the much lower power requirements for the (roughly) same performance.
     
  10. macrumors 603

    thekev

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    #10
    Huh it chopped my post earlier. I was saying sadly intel graphics have been subject to a number of driver bugs at launch. Outside of those they're actually good enough for a lot of things. I was unaware of those NVidia problems.
     
  11. macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl
    #11
    That is the improvement on Windows & Linux machines with optimized drivers and certain software. On OS X machines, the improvement is probably something between 40-50 %, compared with Ivy Bridge.
     
  12. macrumors 601

    Mr. Retrofire

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2010
    Location:
    www.emiliana.cl
    #12
  13. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Location:
    Tasmania, Australia
    #13
    I'm in the market for a Mac Mini. I'm really hoping for a smaller, more modern form factor as the only reason Mac Minis were made that size was to accommodate an optical drive which aren't even in them any more. The size of the Intel NUC is what they should aim towards but admittedly, the NUC has an external power brick. Maybe a return of the cube form factor but tiny!
     
  14. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #14
    I think the current sizing is fine especially given I have the 2009 with external power brick and whilst not ideal I find the size of the machine fine. It would be nice if it were available in black as mine lives under / next to the tv.
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #15
    The mac mini is pretty much the best small form factor computer available. It's about as modern as it gets. The size allows it to accommodate 2 hard drives and an internal psu. How much more modern do you want? The argument that its size was dictated by optical media was thrown out the window back in 2010 when the entire mini was substantially wider than an optical drive needed to be.

    Its form factor is not dictated by optical media.
     
  16. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Location:
    Tasmania, Australia
    #16
    But how is that shape good unless you want to stack them in a server farm? I just can't think of a single reason.

    Current form factor started with:

    - A core 2 duo which required significantly more motherboard space
    - Separate dedicated video
    - An internal 2.5" hdd - Nowadays a single NGFF SSD is considerably smaller
    - An optical drive - not needed now

    I think a 3.5" cube would be ideal and easily achievable, even with an inbuilt PSU.
     
  17. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    #17
    I'm also wondering if next Haswell will have or not Thundebolt 2 inside..or will it remain a Mac Pro exclusive?
    I mean i heard TB2 could come also on next late 2013 Mac BooK Pro ..maybe because Broadwell seems shifted from 2014 to 2015...:rolleyes:
    just rumors i know..so i'm just trying to understand..
    even because i fear the Mac Pro entry level to be really expensive and without any replaceable Gpu inside...and i don't need a mini with steroids..also because i have already an Imac 27 so...:cool:
     
  18. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #18
    I believe when the mini was last redesigned, Apple adopted the footprint of the Airport Extreme.
     
  19. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #19
    That is not correct. The Airport Extreme is 1.5" smaller in width and depth.
     
  20. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #20
    Oops. The previous mini and Airport Extreme used the same footprint. Thanks for the correction.
     
  21. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2005
    #21
    This is interesting. I'm not sure the mini is due for a new design, but given the move away from optical drives in 2011, the move toward PCI-E based SSD storage (m.2, formerly known as Next Gen Form Factor or NGFF) it may be significantly smaller in both size and power consumption. There is already a great deal of unused space in the minis.

    But a new form factor may not happen until 2014 given cost (the mini is the low-cost entry mac) and 2.5mm hard drives and SSDs should remain cheaper than the m.2 (or custom Apple-connector) PCI-E based SSDs. Having said that, the iMac is already using the smaller blade SSD.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2012
    #22
    building up would be worse for heat flow in the mini. One of the advantages to its current design is that the heat just has to go up to its largest heat sink (the largest surface of its exterior.
     

Share This Page