AMD Trinity

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by -SD-, Sep 27, 2012.

  1. -SD- macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Location:
    Peterborough, UK
    #1
    I was just reading this article over on Engadget regarding AMD's new line of processors.

    It sounds like the A10 would be perfect for the Mini if it offers the performance of an i5/HD4000 combo in a single, relatively cheap component.

    :apple:
     
  2. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #2
    I don't think Apple will go towards AMD any time soon, although an APU like this would make sense for at least one Mini model. The A10 5800K may not be suitable due to the 100W TDP, but the A10-5700 would be a good fit.
     
  3. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #3
    The problem with this, is that the max TDP in a Mac Mini is believed to be around 45-55watts (only Apple would know for sure). So none of the desktop varieties would work. You need to look at their mobile chips to make it work in a Mini. No K models exist in the mobile chips and all of the GPUs are clocked considerably slower.
     
  4. Poki, Sep 27, 2012
    Last edited: Sep 27, 2012

    Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #4
    Apple always uses mobile chips, and the TDP in the current Minis for CPU+GPU is 35W (entry level), 53W (mid model) and 45W (server). I don't think AMD has to offer anything comparable to a i7-3612qm right now.
     
  5. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #5
    Serious? ....

    I've searched around and it seems that the 6630M TDP's is secret, but assumed to be around 15-19W. The i5-2520M is 35W so your figure is right. Surely they could squeeze the A10-5700 with its 65W TDP? Or, *shock, horror, gasp* they could make the mini just a little bit taller. People will say that goes against Apple's philosophy, but they just made the iPhone bigger so why not?

    I can see the tag line now:

    "The new Mini with some decent graphics. It's the biggest thing to the happen to the Mini since, well, forever. "
     
  6. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #6
    First, they made the iPhone smaller (18% less volume), second they won't change the form factor of the Mini to the bigger side 'cos of the cost. If they invest in a new design, it will be smaller because, well, it doesn't need to be that big anymore. After all, in the exact same case were a DVD player two years ago, so it could easily be made smaller quite a bit.
     
  7. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #7
    Agreed that Apple only uses Mobile chips in the Mac Mini, and that's my point. If a desktop AMD Trinity is needed to match the i5/HD4000 or beat it, then no mobile version is going to match it. Slower GPU's in the mobile chips just do not make it competitive as well as considerably lower clock speeds.
     
  8. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #8
    I think you missed the sarcasm and humour (they made the iPhone TALLER so they can make the Mini TALLER)

    Besides that, the 2011 model was made smaller in comparison to the 2010 due to removal of the DVD drive. The 2010 and the 2011 cases are not exactly the same.
     
  9. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #9
    Why make something bigger, just so they can use a different product when they could keep their Mac Mini's the same size and just use the tried and true (and equally as powerful)?
     
  10. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #10
    Unfortunately I haven't seen the benchmarks for the 65W Trinity variants yet, but the 2 100W models reviewed by Anandtech are far ahead of the HD4000 so I struggle to follow the equally as powerful bit. The HD 4000 also differs in performance depending on whether it's running in a desktop CPU, full voltage mobile or ULV.

    Call me crazy, but the HD4000 is not very good so maybe a change would be a good idea so that people can have this crazy thing called choice.
     
  11. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #11
    Well, it uses 100W. A 3612qm - probably a faster CPU - uses 35W and a GeForce GT650, certainly a more powerful GPU than the one in the Trinity, needs 65W, so we can get much more power and space shouldn't the place, as like I said, there's much space where the DVD drive was.

    ----------

    Sorry for missing the sarcasm.

    And according to Apple's tech specs, the cases ARE exactly the same size - there's now a black hole where the superdrive was.
     
  12. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #12
    But then we need to talk about pricing...

    Hmm... you're right. Somehow I had it in my brain that the 2011 Mini was made shorter. Having taken my 2011 mini apart, I can't fathom where the DVD was.
     
  13. APlotdevice macrumors 68040

    APlotdevice

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2011
    #13
    That extra space is used to hold an additional hard drive in the server model though.
     
  14. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #14
    Yep, but a superdrive is probably bigger than a 2,5" hard drive.
     
  15. theSeb macrumors 604

    theSeb

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2010
    Location:
    Poole, England
    #15
    It certainly is in a MBP. But that does not really change the fact that it's already cramped in there. I would rather have something taller with better thermals that does not kick up the fans every time I do something that requires a bit of CPU activity.
     

Share This Page