Broadwell Mac Mini Release Dates!!!

[goatghost]

According to MacRumors' historical data of the number of days between previous Mac Mini releases, these would be the most likely release dates:

Earliest: 2015 (June 11)

Most Likely: 2016 (January 4)

Latest: 2016 (October 15)

The "earliest" date is based on the shortest time between releases (231 days). The "most likely" date is based on the average time between releases (438 days). And, the latest date is based on the longest time between releases (the current 723 days between the 2012 and the 2014 models).

There is no doubt in my mind that Apple will not release a Mac Mini Broadwell before releasing an iMac Broadwell. The chances of them releasing a Mac Mini Broadwell in Q1 or Q2 of next year seems pretty slim, since they just did a refresh, last week.

 

[philipma1957]

According to MacRumors' historical data of the number of days between previous Mac Mini releases, these would be the most likely release dates:

Earliest: 2015 (June 11)

Most Likely: 2016 (January 4)

Latest: 2016 (October 15)

The "earliest" date is based on the shortest time between releases (231 days). The "most likely" date is based on the average time between releases (438 days). And, the latest date is based on the longest time between releases (the current 723 days between the 2012 and the 2014 models).

There is no doubt in my mind that Apple will not release a Mac Mini Broadwell before releasing an iMac Broadwell. The chances of them releasing a Mac Mini Broadwell in Q1 or Q2 of next year seems pretty slim, since they just did a refresh, last week.

but you need to look at apple's one time mac mini spec bump on wiki. this was more of a none update a spec bump and it was about 7 months so if we get a short space between minis.

it will be the same cpu series the 4500's maybe they put in a

http://ark.intel.com/products/83505/Intel-Core-i7-4770HQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz


and bump from here

http://ark.intel.com/products/83506/Intel-Core-i7-4578U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz

but the sockets are not the same

 

[phrehdd]

Wont matter to many of us. The 2014 roll out of Apple's iCrap Mini is setting us on a different direction along with our dollars that we held for a real upgrade (as in quad core). Sarcasm aside, for some of us the wait is way too long and we are looking for solutions now which is not offered by Apple at this time.

 

[BJonson]

October 2023

 

[philipma1957]

Wont matter to many of us. The 2014 roll out of Apple's iCrap Mini is setting us on a different direction along with our dollars that we held for a real upgrade (as in quad core). Sarcasm aside, for some of us the wait is way too long and we are looking for solutions now which is not offered by Apple at this time.

yeah if you need a quad core desktop apple has really been nasty. I am not sure what I will do long term. prices are brutal for a decent quad core .

I have no need for an iMac. I owned a 6 core mac pro. from 2010. I could use a stripped basic nMP for 1500-2000 but it does not exist. oh well.

 

[Crosscreek]

yeah if you need a quad core desktop apple has really been nasty. I am not sure what I will do long term. prices are brutal for a decent quad core .

I have no need for an iMac. I owned a 6 core mac pro. from 2010. I could use a stripped basic nMP for 1500-2000 but it does not exist. oh well.

There will be no more quad cores unless you go iMac or Mac Pro.

The Mini has been delegated to the emerging market 2 core.

 

[phrehdd]

There will be no more quad cores unless you go iMac or Mac Pro.

The Mini has been delegated to the emerging market 2 core.

Perhaps you are right that Minis will be only 2 core from now on. I guess the Mini will be relegated to the likes of Apple Server, Aperture, and all the other items Apple created and abandoned for the sake of their unholy market model. Candidly, while I appreciate companies trying to remain strong and profitable, there is really no reason Apple couldn't have met its computer fan base's needs and reposition some models. The Mini could have just as easily have become a "junior" Mac Pro, a gaming/entertainment box and then some.

Always sad when some of us have to look outside Apple for solutions because of Apple itself being a bit of a business prig.

 

[philipma1957]

Perhaps you are right that Minis will be only 2 core from now on. I guess the Mini will be relegated to the likes of Apple Server, Aperture, and all the other items Apple created and abandoned for the sake of their unholy market model. Candidly, while I appreciate companies trying to remain strong and profitable, there is really no reason Apple couldn't have met its computer fan base's needs and reposition some models. The Mini could have just as easily have become a "junior" Mac Pro, a gaming/entertainment box and then some.

Always sad when some of us have to look outside Apple for solutions because of Apple itself being a bit of a business prig.

yeah I have to hope they sell a scaled down nMP. What annoys me is I would give them 2k if they built something I could really use..

With the loss of the head less quad core mini they only make really overprice gear filled with features I do not need.
I don't need or want any screens. I don't need or want any mobile gear.

So nMP or mac mini.

The nMP with 1 gpu and a pcie ssd in the other gpu slot works.

So what is the base nMP 2999

pull the second gpu and offer another ssd in its spot it works for me.

 

[sublunar]

According to MacRumors' historical data of the number of days between previous Mac Mini releases, these would be the most likely release dates:

Earliest: 2015 (June 11)

Most Likely: 2016 (January 4)

Latest: 2016 (October 15)

The "earliest" date is based on the shortest time between releases (231 days). The "most likely" date is based on the average time between releases (438 days). And, the latest date is based on the longest time between releases (the current 723 days between the 2012 and the 2014 models).

There is no doubt in my mind that Apple will not release a Mac Mini Broadwell before releasing an iMac Broadwell. The chances of them releasing a Mac Mini Broadwell in Q1 or Q2 of next year seems pretty slim, since they just did a refresh, last week.

On the one hand, I am glad that the Mini finally got updated. The timing is odd though as updates to the current Mac Mini could have been done last year with original Haswell chips in the existing case 12 months before they opted to use the Haswell refresh chips in the 2014 model.

Either way, the new Mini is here and I am looking forward to seeing reviews - the case is designed for a 47w quad core processor and seems to have a redesigned quieter fan too so perhaps with the 'extra' thermal headroom this Mini can sustain longer periods under load without becoming too noisy.

I have a feeling we could be looking at 2 years again till the next Mini, mainly because the next major innovation for Apple desktops is Skylake and Thunderbolt 3, possibly with a 4k and/or 5k display capability from the graphics. Obviously we need to keep a weather eye on the 13" Macbook Pro retina. Some early suggestions seem to point at current Iris Pro performance in 25W dual core processors by the time Skylake comes out. This would be enough to run a retina cinema display.

The only reason I can see for a Broadwell refresh would be to enhance the GPU as well as possible in the event that we see a 4k cinema display next year but the U series dual core Broadwell chips would only have an Iris 6100 graphics capability and still only Thunderbolt 2 connectivity.

 

[phrehdd]

On the one hand, I am glad that the Mini finally got updated. The timing is odd though as updates to the current Mac Mini could have been done last year with original Haswell chips in the existing case 12 months before they opted to use the Haswell refresh chips in the 2014 model.

Either way, the new Mini is here and I am looking forward to seeing reviews - the case is designed for a 47w quad core processor and seems to have a redesigned quieter fan too so perhaps with the 'extra' thermal headroom this Mini can sustain longer periods under load without becoming too noisy.

I have a feeling we could be looking at 2 years again till the next Mini, mainly because the next major innovation for Apple desktops is Skylake and Thunderbolt 3, possibly with a 4k and/or 5k display capability from the graphics. Obviously we need to keep a weather eye on the 13" Macbook Pro retina. Some early suggestions seem to point at current Iris Pro performance in 25W dual core processors by the time Skylake comes out. This would be enough to run a retina cinema display.

The only reason I can see for a Broadwell refresh would be to enhance the GPU as well as possible in the event that we see a 4k cinema display next year but the U series dual core Broadwell chips would only have an Iris 6100 graphics capability and still only Thunderbolt 2 connectivity.

I find that the notion of bending the Mini around 4K display to be rather limited in potential. The quad core for many has as much value as the ability to pump out video at higher resolution given all the applications that really do take advantage of multi-core multi-threading. It shouldn't have to be one or the other but alas, it is to some extent.

Given that the newest high end iMac out performs in many tests the bottom of the line Mac Pro, one would think that at least one of the Minis should be a reasonably powerful quad core with newer on board graphics. While many wave their hands wanting a smaller Mini, some of us would have welcomed a slightly "taller" Mini to afford either discrete GPU or even just to provide better cooling under load.

I'll be honest, if a quad core had come out with something around 3.2 and higher end on board graphics, l think Mini 'fans' would have upgraded with minor bickers and realize it as a speed/graphics bump for now. For some of us, that is all we wanted and not the latest dual core, soldered RAM, less flexible storage options.

 

[sublunar]

I find that the notion of bending the Mini around 4K display to be rather limited in potential. The quad core for many has as much value as the ability to pump out video at higher resolution given all the applications that really do take advantage of multi-core multi-threading. It shouldn't have to be one or the other but alas, it is to some extent.

Given that the newest high end iMac out performs in many tests the bottom of the line Mac Pro, one would think that at least one of the Minis should be a reasonably powerful quad core with newer on board graphics. While many wave their hands wanting a smaller Mini, some of us would have welcomed a slightly "taller" Mini to afford either discrete GPU or even just to provide better cooling under load.

I'll be honest, if a quad core had come out with something around 3.2 and higher end on board graphics, l think Mini 'fans' would have upgraded with minor bickers and realize it as a speed/graphics bump for now. For some of us, that is all we wanted and not the latest dual core, soldered RAM, less flexible storage options.

3.2GHz Quad and higher end on board graphics sounds like a 65W Iris Pro desktop part. The 2.7GHz i5 would have been perfect but would definitely have needed a new (bigger) case and a better cooling solution.

Maybe one is coming, because we lost the Mini Server, it might be time for a Mac Server with room for 2 hard drives and a PCIe Flash slot that's user upgradable. Sounds unlikely though.

 

[wiredup72]

Wont matter to many of us. The 2014 roll out of Apple's iCrap Mini is setting us on a different direction along with our dollars that we held for a real upgrade (as in quad core). Sarcasm aside, for some of us the wait is way too long and we are looking for solutions now which is not offered by Apple at this time.

Nailed it. It bums me out. I love OSX. Best xWindows I have ever used over a unix OS.

 

[now i see it]

We wait on pins and needles for over two years for an updated Mini...And then on the day of it's arrival, all we can talk about is our (justified) disappointment and how we can't wait for the NEXT version. A very sorry state of affairs indeed.

 

[crazzapple]

I'll be honest, if a quad core had come out with something around 3.2 and higher end on board graphics, l think Mini 'fans' would have upgraded with minor bickers and realize it as a speed/graphics bump for now. For some of us, that is all we wanted and not the latest dual core, soldered RAM, less flexible storage options.

Yep, I was looking for ssd, upgradable ram, quad-core and the ability to drive a 4k monitor. Certain things I could've given up, but what we got was crap. Spent a little of my "mini upgrade" money on a new Dell monitor and will hold out for something else when the Skylake stuff starts rolling out.

 

[Buckaroo]

Keep in mind the other Mac upgrades, along with this problem was created by Intel and their socket fiasco. Things for the Mac Mini may change in the future, remember, Apple designers are also Apple users.

 

[johngwheeler]

Would interference with thermal design, I guess.

yeah I have to hope they sell a scaled down nMP. What annoys me is I would give them 2k if they built something I could really use..

With the loss of the head less quad core mini they only make really overprice gear filled with features I do not need.
I don't need or want any screens. I don't need or want any mobile gear.

So nMP or mac mini.

The nMP with 1 gpu and a pcie ssd in the other gpu slot works.

So what is the base nMP 2999

pull the second gpu and offer another ssd in its spot it works for me.

I think Apple have done a bit of work on the thermal design of the nMP so that the 3 sides of the "toblerone" shaped guts are calibrated to generate the same thermal output. Putting different components with lower output would probably throw off the design.

I'd love more options with the nMP though:

1) An "entry level" model with a single GPU - if they can solve the thermal problem (stick in a heating element in place of the 2nd GPU?)

2) A dual-CPU model with a single GPU - this would rock!

As it stands paying $3000 ($AU4000 inc taxes) is a HUGE price for what is basically a computer that is no more powerful than a $1000 Windows desktop with a top-level i7. The only exception is if you need the dual GPUs for your work, or do a lot of GPGPU calculations.

I looked at the nMP hard when it came it, but couldn't justify the cost. I bought a 4-core Dell Xeon E3 server, stuck in GPU, SSDs and 32GB RAM and called it a day for $1400.

 

[phrehdd]

Keep in mind the other Mac upgrades, along with this problem was created by Intel and their socket fiasco. Things for the Mac Mini may change in the future, remember, Apple designers are also Apple users.

Apple designers most likely use iMacs or Mac Pros so the Mini is not their "baby."

----------

I think Apple have done a bit of work on the thermal design of the nMP so that the 3 sides of the "toblerone" shaped guts are calibrated to generate the same thermal output. Putting different components with lower output would probably throw off the design.

I'd love more options with the nMP though:

1) An "entry level" model with a single GPU - if they can solve the thermal problem (stick in a heating element in place of the 2nd GPU?)

2) A dual-CPU model with a single GPU - this would rock!

As it stands paying $3000 ($AU4000 inc taxes) is a HUGE price for what is basically a computer that is no more powerful than a $1000 Windows desktop with a top-level i7. The only exception is if you need the dual GPUs for your work, or do a lot of GPGPU calculations.

I looked at the nMP hard when it came it, but couldn't justify the cost. I bought a 4-core Dell Xeon E3 server, stuck in GPU, SSDs and 32GB RAM and called it a day for $1400.

Nothing stops Apple from building a non Xeon based Mac Pro "mini" that might be different in shape than the Mac Mini but met the needs of those who simply can't afford a Mac Pro yet want to remain in the OSX camp with their own peripherals (thus no iMacs please).

As for the Mac Pro, if you add up all the parts and "power," along with the ports, it comes out reasonably priced. However, I don't need dual GPU nor proprietary drives so the Mac Pro (even if I had the money) wont be a real deal for what I need a computer for in terms of work, recently back to school and play.