Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Chance of '13 Haswell entry-mini being quad-core?

phoenixsan said:
that a quad-core Haswell is very likely. Entry level? I dont think so....Having said the latter, cannibalizing goes right now, with the delaying and problems of the current batch of 2012 iMacs. And being fair, not ALL users need an iMac or a Mac Pro. Even more.....we not are now in the Post-PC era?....So, too much computing needs are covered with the combo iPad+iPhone...IMHO

:):apple:
Click to expand...

If only the ipad experience was better at document processing then I might consider it more for work and study. I agree quad core in the more expensive models just like the current line up and will these be made in America minis?
 
Mal67 said:
If only the ipad experience was better at document processing then I might consider it more for work and study. I agree quad core in the more expensive models just like the current line up and will these be made in America minis?
Click to expand...

Remember the difference between Made in the USA and Assembled in the USA. Made usually means more domestic or all domestic parts and assembled usually means of domestic and foreign components.

Maybe there will be an option as a BTO for an i7 dual for $100 in the base mini. Long shot but it would be interesting.
 
Quad Core on Entry level is 10% likely
Quad Core on Upper model is 80% likely
Would anyone like to know next months lottery numbers ? :)
 
BeeJee said:
The iMac is definitely going to stick around. I think Apple would drop the Pro before the iMac. Honestly it seems like the Mini might be too upgradable for Apple's new standards.
Click to expand...

Agreed re iMacs, but I seriously hope you're wrong re latter point.

If, for eg., future Minis come with soldered down RAM & are otherwise non-upgradable, unless of course one pays Apple's extortionate prices, that'd be the last new Mac I'll buy. That's 100% certain. I'd buy 2nd user only.

Little doubt here that future Minis will continue starting with a barely adequate 4GBs RAM & slow 5400 rpm drives. If one has to pay Apple's rip-off prices to upgrade these, I imagine that for many users the Mini will no longer be as viable. For those who also don't like AIO's with glossy screens, but find Mac Pros to be overkill & beyond their budget, a PC then becomes an increasingly attractive option. :)
 
Ice Dragon said:
Well they've revealed some of the Haswell desktop processors. Do you think the hexa-core get revealed this year or start with Broadwell?
Click to expand...

No,i think hexa core will be just for the New Mac Pro.
I hope to see Quad Hashwell just in the new 13" retinas but for entry Mac Mini
i think we will see dual.
Maybe Quad Core for all the lines from the Air to MbPro and from the Mini to the Entry Mac PRO are just for 2014,maybe.
 
Unless I am reading all the Haswell info wrong, it's 100% certain a Haswell based Mini will be quad-core because all Haswell-M processors are Quad Core.

There is only one dual-core model in the line-up and it's a desktop model (4570T). All the Mini's use mobile processors.

My guess is Ivy Bridge will remain as the base CPU and Haswell will be the upgrade. I bet on the i7-4900MQ (2.8GHz, 4600HD with 47w TDP). That compares (TDP-wise) with the current top i7 (3720QM) with 45w TDP.
 
MatthewAMEL said:
Unless I am reading all the Haswell info wrong, it's 100% certain a Haswell based Mini will be quad-core because all Haswell-M processors are Quad Core.

There is only one dual-core model in the line-up and it's a desktop model (4570T). All the Mini's use mobile processors.

My guess is Ivy Bridge will remain as the base CPU and Haswell will be the upgrade. I bet on the i7-4900MQ (2.8GHz, 4600HD with 47w TDP). That compares (TDP-wise) with the current top i7 (3720QM) with 45w TDP.
Click to expand...

The dual-core mobile processors haven't been revealed yet.
 
I guess no model will have quad core Haswells.
Don't forget: Haswell is a new architecture, not a die-shrink.
The current quad is maxing out the heat dissipating capabilities of the current case. The Haswell has 2 times as much GPU transistors and a bunch more CPU transistors, so that would really push it. Maybe they drop the Ghz, but that might make the CPU performance lower than the current one.

Don't forget, the Mini went from Core2Duo 45nm straight to 32nm Sandy, just because the 45nm i5/i7 chips would have melted the machine. Thanks to the 22nm of Ivy, they were able to increase the quad core speed from 2.0 to 2.6. If they go quad Haswell, they might have to drop it again to 2.0 Ghz base speed.
Guess this time they have to skip Haswell as well, and go straight to the 16nm version of the new architecture.
 
blanka said:
Don't forget, the Mini went from Core2Duo 45nm straight to 32nm Sandy, just because the 45nm i5/i7 chips would have melted the machine. Thanks to the 22nm of Ivy, they were able to increase the quad core speed from 2.0 to 2.6. If they go quad Haswell, they might have to drop it again to 2.0 Ghz base speed.
Guess this time they have to skip Haswell as well, and go straight to the 16nm version of the new architecture.
Click to expand...

Actually, they went from the Core2Duo to Sandy because Nvidia couldn't make chipsets for the i-series processors. That meant Apple would either have to go from the Nividia 9400 to the really crappy Intel HD graphics processor (not the HD3000 or HD4000 used in the last two minis). So instead, Apple only included i-series processors in computers that could use discrete graphics chips (iMacs, Macbook Pro 15", etc.) and left the Core2duo with the Nvidia 320M GPU.

It really helps to understand the true root cause.

Westmere processors released January 2010:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westmere_(microarchitecture)

Mac Mini released June 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_mini#Unibody_Mac_Mini

Westmere could have easily been included in the 2010 Mac Mini's, but the GPU step back would have been outrageous.
 
blanka said:
I guess no model will have quad core Haswells.
Don't forget: Haswell is a new architecture, not a die-shrink.
The current quad is maxing out the heat dissipating capabilities of the current case. The Haswell has 2 times as much GPU transistors and a bunch more CPU transistors, so that would really push it.
Click to expand...
No, not at all.

cpu-world.com said:
From:
http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2012121601_Specifications_of_mobile_Haswell_CPUs.html

As was mentioned above, Haswell processors will have higher TDP than the current generation of mobile CPUs. That doesn't mean that Haswell will have higher power requirements than Ivy Bridge. For once, Haswell processors integrate voltage regulator (VR) on a chip, which increases their TDP. This also enables them to use single on-board VR for CPU/GPU, rather than 5 different VRs. Intel claims that their integrated VR is more efficient than on-board VRs, which leads to lower overall system power consumption. Additionally, Intel reduced TDP of a Lynx Point chipset by about 25%, which lowers system TDP even further.
Click to expand...
Turbo Boost is probably a bit lower, if Apple does not redesign the cooling system.
 
blueroom said:
Quad core, entry level, zero chance. Hopefully amazing battery life will be the benefit as the 22nm process and possibly 3d transistors should keep heat down and speed up.

But this next generation CPU might be software upgradable to unlock cores for a price.
Click to expand...

That's great, but most people will be plugging their mini's in lol. Of course, you could be referring to laptops..

----------
jtara said:
The iMac has a built-in screen, the Mini doesn't. That's differentiation enough.

The top Mini is already as powerful as any other Mac save for Mac Pro. (And very little different at the low-end of the Pro line, at that.)

I'd expect the processor lineup for the Mini to continue to track those of the notebooks and iMac.
Click to expand...

I agree as well.

----------
paulrbeers said:
Actually, they went from the Core2Duo to Sandy because Nvidia couldn't make chipsets for the i-series processors. That meant Apple would either have to go from the Nividia 9400 to the really crappy Intel HD graphics processor (not the HD3000 or HD4000 used in the last two minis). So instead, Apple only included i-series processors in computers that could use discrete graphics chips (iMacs, Macbook Pro 15", etc.) and left the Core2duo with the Nvidia 320M GPU.

It really helps to understand the true root cause.

Westmere processors released January 2010:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westmere_(microarchitecture)

Mac Mini released June 2010
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_mini#Unibody_Mac_Mini

Westmere could have easily been included in the 2010 Mac Mini's, but the GPU step back would have been outrageous.
Click to expand...

You really have to understand the true root cause....Apple wasn't willing to pay a little more & reduce profit an x amount to use i-series, as well as what you just said too.:)
 
MatthewAMEL said:
Unless I am reading all the Haswell info wrong, it's 100% certain a Haswell based Mini will be quad-core because all Haswell-M processors are Quad Core.

There is only one dual-core model in the line-up and it's a desktop model (4570T). All the Mini's use mobile processors.

My guess is Ivy Bridge will remain as the base CPU and Haswell will be the upgrade. I bet on the i7-4900MQ (2.8GHz, 4600HD with 47w TDP). That compares (TDP-wise) with the current top i7 (3720QM) with 45w TDP.
Click to expand...
#Hopes up!
Ice Dragon said:
The dual-core mobile processors haven't been revealed yet.
Click to expand...
#Hopes squashed!
 
blanka said:
Haswell is 22nm, and thus a much larger and hotter chip. You mean Rockwell (other name is used now).
Click to expand...

Please provide source. Leaked Intel's documents currently show Haswell chips with Quad core Mobile processors with 45TDP which is exactly what is in the current 2012 Ivy Bridge Mini's...

http://www.tomshardware.com/gallery/haswell_mobile_core-i7,0101-364982-0-2-3-1-png-.html

Dual cores will be even less. These all have HD4600. So please provide your source (and your own conjecture is not acceptable as we have already disproven your theories).
 
iPhil said:
The Base model mini won't get Quad-core until iMac base model gets hexa-core then it'll be a dual-core on a chip gap, in which I think would be a big enough spacing between Mini n iMac lines... :eek:
Click to expand...

No. The base model of the mini is coupled to the MBP 13". This as little if anything to do with the iMac. The iMac uses "desktop" processors. The mini uses the ones that go into MBP's.

There are no hex core processors coming any time soon to Intel's mainstream desktop line ( the ones used in most laptop's and desktops ).
Those are going to stay quad core likely throughout the Haswell/Broadwell transition. The GPUs are going to continue to get the bulk any increase in any transistor budget. Merging more elements of the IOHUB chips is next after that if any left over.

----------
paulrbeers said:
Please provide source. Leaked Intel's documents currently show Haswell chips with Quad core Mobile processors with 45TDP which is exactly what is in the current 2012 Ivy Bridge Mini's...

http://www.tomshardware.com/gallery/haswell_mobile_core-i7,0101-364982-0-2-3-1-png-.html
Click to expand...

Those are i7 though. Unless Intel is going to completely change pricing policies ( not likely) those are going to miss base Mac min on price.

As for his original assertion that no quads in any Mac mini. LOL. There are Quads now. Haswell isn't a net gain after add up the reductions made elsewhere. What is happening overtime is functionality is being removed from other chips and moved into the CPU package. Eventually the majority of functionality needed to implement the computer will all be in one package. Essentially what was motherboard design is turning into chip die design.
 
deconstruct60 said:
Those are i7 though. Unless Intel is going to completely change pricing policies ( not likely) those are going to miss base Mac min on price.

As for his original assertion that no quads in any Mac mini. LOL. There are Quads now. Haswell isn't a net gain after add up the reductions made elsewhere. What is happening overtime is functionality is being removed from other chips and moved into the CPU package. Eventually the majority of functionality needed to implement the computer will all be in one package. Essentially what was motherboard design is turning into chip die design.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Those are only the i7's, but the way he keeps going on (in this and other threads) he thinks that Haswell's won't end up in the Mini at all and that they will skip directly to Broadwell. Somehow he has come to the conclusion that the only way to reduce power usage is die shrinks and since there isn't a die shrink with Haswell and they are increasing the GPU that the TDP will go crazy. Which based on the current known processors, TDP is only slated to increase 2TDP on the highest end models which the Mini should be able to handle (pretty sure the Mid-2011 + Discrete GPU would have had a higher TDP than 47).
 
paulrbeers said:
Agreed. Those are only the i7's, but the way he keeps going on (in this and other threads) he thinks that Haswell's won't end up in the Mini at all and that they will skip directly to Broadwell.
Click to expand...

There is a decent chance that Broadwell might bring the return of discrete graphics. If "no Mac mini is worth buying without a discrete GPU" then yeah... they'll "skip" Haswell. ;)

If they can get rid of the IOHUB chip completely without gimping what is currently on CPU die then that would free up space. Coupled with higher VRAM densities at more affordable prices they might be to squeeze in a GPU+VRAM with the new overall system TDP budget without loosing a 2.5" drive sled position.

The Haswell SoC ( CPU+GPU+IOHUB) implementations are aimed at MBA like constraints which are too much for a Mac mini to sacrifice in order to be competitive.

Somehow he has come to the conclusion that the only way to reduce power usage is die shrinks and since there isn't a die shrink with Haswell
Click to expand...

There is a reduction because power gating is better in Haswell. Plus Haswell probably only works on the 22nm process. The ivy bridge "shrink" was not optimized for the new 3d transistor process. It was good-very good shrink just not designed explicitly for it.

and they are increasing the GPU that the TDP will go crazy.
Click to expand...

GT3 chips are very likely to just be bigger and therefore more expensive.
You can increase the number of GPU cores easily if will to just let the whole CPU die get bigger. ( same thing with going from 4 to 8 cores in the Xeon E5 class offerings. Just a bigger die with a 4 more core+cache layers squeezed in the "middle") with 99% of the two variants sharing the same logic design. Intel just charges more; get more, pay more.

Intel's margins might shrink slightly but, since AMD is still getting their act together, whatever the cost increase is Intel can just pass the vast majority of that cost increase off onto the customers.


Which based on the current known processors, TDP is only slated to increase 2TDP on the highest end models which the Mini should be able to handle (pretty sure the Mid-2011 + Discrete GPU would have had a higher TDP than 47).
Click to expand...

The heatpipe may need some tweaks but nothing major. However, the more the significant thermal producers are directly attached to the heatpipe the better. Since in that config, heat can be transferred to the mini's edge and blown directly out of the box. Lots of different things that generate heat spread all over the motherboard is actually harder to deal with given the mini's phsyical space constraints and somewhat limited and very twisted air ingest-expel path.
 
deconstruct60 said:
There is a decent chance that Broadwell might bring the return of discrete graphics. If "no Mac mini is worth buying without a discrete GPU" then yeah... they'll "skip" Haswell. ;)
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir on all your points. Yes the GT3 may not fit in the TDP envelope of the mac Mini, but there are so many variants (or will be anyway) of Haswell that will be released that many will (especially the GT1 and GT2 based variants). Blanka comes to these forums and spouts off random opinions as if some how based in reality and never responds to the counter views. I am pretty sure he is nothing more than a Troll. That's fine and all, but those kinds of posts inevitably get picked up by some Tom, Dick or Jane who just haphazardly reads these forums and takes it as gospel when they aren't rooted in any kind of truth. Thus the misinformation is spread further and further... So annoying.
 
Last edited:
Within a year or two, you will probably be able to see a quad-core processor inside the mini and same with the 13" rMBP.
 
paulrbeers said:
Preaching to the choir on all your points. Yes the GT3 may not fit in the TDP envelope of the mac Mini, but there are so many variants (or will be anyway) of Haswell that will be released that many will (especially the GT1 and GT2 based variants). Blanka comes to these forums and spouts off random opinions as if some how based in reality and never responds to the counter views. I am pretty sure he is nothing more than a Troll. That's fine and all, but those kinds of posts inevitably get picked up by some Tom, Dick or Jane who just haphazardly reads these forums and takes it as gospel when they aren't rooted in any kind of truth. Thus the misinformation is spread further and further... So annoying.
Click to expand...

It's also not like intel wants oems to keep ordering quad - Ivy instead to avoid a drop in performance. As you mentioned integrated graphics prior to Sandy were too big a drop even compared to the older NVidia chips.
 
thekev said:
It's also not like intel wants oems to keep ordering quad - Ivy instead to avoid a drop in performance. As you mentioned integrated graphics prior to Sandy were too big a drop even compared to the older NVidia chips.
Click to expand...

EXACTLY. Intel is not stupid. They know what their OEM's want for processors and the max TDP's they require. 35/45/55 are pretty standard TDP's for ALL OEM's (not just Apple). They have to make processors to fit laptop's (which the Mini is just a display/keyboardless laptop) thermal dissipation. In order to do that, they have to make sure the entire CPU/GPU can stay under said limits. And as you stated, they want to sell quad cores (larger profit margins) as much as possible. They will not go much about 45 TDP (looks like 47 for the currently known Haswell) in order to not alienate their clientele and lose a lot of upselling (i.e. clients ordering duals rather than quads because of the TDP).

Frankly, if TDP (and the associated power consumption) wasn't an issue, I'm sure Intel could slap one heck of a GPU on their processors (quad core GT3 maybe?) but then how would anyone be able to cool a GPU like that and how many people would truly take advantage?
 
paulrbeers said:
=
Frankly, if TDP (and the associated power consumption) wasn't an issue, I'm sure Intel could slap one heck of a GPU on their processors (quad core GT3 maybe?) but then how would anyone be able to cool a GPU like that and how many people would truly take advantage?
Click to expand...

I don't know enough about cpu design to know what choices might be enabled by such a thing, but I certainly don't see them completely reversing direction when their marketing has been all about improved power management. Also as you pointed out, intel is not run by idiots.
 
Ice Dragon said:
I think the setup will be virtually the same and I mentioned this over at Anandtech.

$599 - Dual core i5/4 GB RAM 1600 MHz/HD 4600/500 GB HDD but hopefully more (would like to see them have an option for the Fusion drive)

$799 - Quad core i7/8 GB RAM 1600 MHz (though 4 GB is more likely)/HD 4600/1 TB HDD/(options for Fusion and SSD though hopefully a bigger SSD). If they offer a dual core i7 then hopefully a good discrete graphics chip but I won't hold my breath.

$999 - Same as above except no discrete/dual possibility and two hard drives or two SSDs as an option.
Click to expand...

Personally, I see this being the most possible case. It is my own opinion that I do not need a quad core processor, so when I purchased my Mac Mini last month, I got the low end model. All I use it for is browsing the web, working on schoolwork, listening to music, email, and iMessage. I might do occasional gaming, but that will most likely be more once I get more RAM in the system. (Which is my only regret, but RAM is a "dime a dozen" and I'm sure the RAM upgrade for the mini is much cheaper to do it yourself.) Otherwise I am happy with my purchase, and am glad to be a Mac User again!!! (And I know we had better alternatives with netbooks and other comparable Windows PCs, but my wife and I didn't really like Windows 8 as much as Mountain Lion, and we also wanted a good desktop that we know would last us at least a few years.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back