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

Evidence that Next iMacs and Mac Minis to use NVIDIA Chipsets

confirm?

There's been like 3 ppl that have said 'i have a new mbp and i dont see this kext entry anywhere'... or said that they found it in a kext that wasnt in /System/Library/Extensions/

Is this a fake? I want a new mini as much as the rest of you. But i haven't seen enough ppl saying they see these strings too to make me believe it.
 
I'm really of a mind that Jobs and Co might have been swayed by public opinion into saving the baby Mac...... we can change the world ;)
The New Mini is coming .....
Happy new Year :D
 
Finally

Yes it is about time they updated the Mac Mini. This is suppose to be the system to draw in switchers so this needs to be the most attractable system in their line up (price and spec wise).
 
If the Mac mini is going to see an NVIDIA update at MWSF (as rumored), then the chance of the iMac having the same thing has increased quite a lot too.

I had long doubted a MWSF iMac update, but now I'm starting to swing the other way. Since (last I heard) the 2.0 GHz mobile quad is due for a Q1 2009 release, if I try to be optimistic enough, I can see the 24" models going to 2.0/2.27 GHz quad-core (2.53 GHz BTO) and the 20" models staying dual-core (higher GHz though). This would also fit in with my thoughts that the 20" and 24" iMacs are going farther apart. Plus, a MWSF update would be fairly reasonable considering Nehalem is coming in Q3 2009 and Q1 2010 (but then again so is a late January/February update).

(I'm not so sure Apple can stay all-dual-core for much longer. Intel's pushing quad-core in the high-end, and dual-cores aren't going faster than 3.07 GHz.)

I would also expect one Mac mini to be the older model, like with the MacBooks, at $499. I would also expect a redesign to aluminum and black etc. CPU speeds I don't see going too much higher than 2.0 GHz (there may be a sub-2.0 GHz model).
 
blakjak said:
long time lerker, first time poster....

how is it no one has put two and two together? nVidia just released the Ion platform... Atom processor and 9400M chip in the palm of your hand, say hello to the new mini! HD output small form factor.

http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3478

can't wait

case closed :)
Click to expand...

There is no way Apple would use an Atom processor in the Mini. Apple doesn't do super cheap and a wouldn't put in any less than a Core 2 Duo. Plus the performance would be so much less than even the current Mini.
 
11800506 said:
There is no way Apple would use an Atom processor in the Mini. Apple doesn't do super cheap and a wouldn't put in any less than a Core 2 Duo. Plus the performance would be so much less than even the current Mini.
Click to expand...
Apple would need to use a quad-core Atom (which doesn't even exist) to get anywhere near Core 2 Duo performance.

I only see an Atom in a mini version of the MacBook Air.

But if Apple used Atom in the Mac mini...it would be renamed the Mac nano and it would be quite cheap. It would also increase the chance of an Apple netbook.

Come to think of it, if the Mac mini loses its optical drive (as some speculation here says), it might be renamed the Mac nano. An optical drive would just stack on top/bottom of the Mac nano.
 
ChrisA said:
You don't have to be all that old to remember punch cards. I studied computer programming in 1972 and not many people back then have glass screens. They were very expensive. Although I did get to use the CRT based operator's console on the CDC 6400 Have a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CDC_6600_console.JPG It's not as primitive as you might think. Those a two huge screens and they worked like a pen plotter and drew characters on the screen on e at a time
Click to expand...

Yup, my university had a CDC 6500. Read your job in the card reader, then watch the monitors as it traversed its way from the input queue to the compute queue to the output queue. When it disappeared that meant your printout was ready.

One nice thing about punch cards is that we did not have to type in the source code. We'd write by hand with a pencil and turn the forms into the keypunch service and they would do the work for us
Click to expand...

Ooh, hoity toity. ;) We used the keypunch machines ourselves. After you got to know the Hollerith code it was sometimes possible to make changes to the code by hand-punching your own cards, instead of waiting in the keypunch machine lines.

My start in programming was even more primitive - punching Fortran programs onto paper tape.
 
sapota said:
..for me personally an iMac is a better deal...note that the macmini lacks webcam, keyboard, mouse...remote etc....
Click to expand...

Depends if you don't want to choose a monitor. I hate all in one devices, so the iMac is out for me.

They have to keep FW on the replacement. I wouldn't want to use my external drives on USB.
 
Joe The Dragon said:
moving from ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory to 9400m useing system ram is a down grade and at $1,199.00 or more will just make apple look bad next to psystar.

The mac mini should have 9500 / 9600 or better in the $700 - $900 system.
Click to expand...

Thats not true about the Radeon versus the 9400M actually.

Apple always uses mobile GPUs in their iMacs the same way they use mobile chipsets and mobile CPUs.

So that was the mobile Radeon HD 2400 XT. Which was actually not any better than the GeForce 8400M GS.

And I have a PC with the GeForce 8400M GS and the 9400M outperforms it by double on average.

So the 9400M in the low end model would actually be an upgrade over the HD 2400 XT.

Plus you don't have to worry about ATI/AMD's AWFUL drivers if you're running Windows.
 
just release

mac mini's already. My old 12" powerbook needs to find a new home as soon as they release them. Anyone gotten a fair trade in deal from powermax?
 
I hope they keep the mini around for a good, long time. I'll buy on in 2013 to upgrade from my, by then, flagging MacPro. :p I wonder what the power of a modern mini is compared to older PowerMacs.

corywoolf said:
The average mini user needs no more then 160 GB at this point.
Click to expand...
I would like to see your research data. Called toilet paper.
 
tr0jan said:
new mini with nvidia chip would be great for my home theatre (watching full hd)

but without a dp-hdmi adapter i cant connect the mini to my TV.. so im happy to have an old one :)


btw this would be nice:
macmini.jpg


with magsafe..
Click to expand...

That looks great. I would love to have a mag-safe enabled mini to protect against the dog's legs.
 
corywoolf said:
The new mini will be thinner if they leave out the optical drive. I seriously doubt Apple would put in a 3.5" drive and keep the same form factor. The average mini user needs no more then 160 GB at this point. So look to see a mini with the same form factor as the Apple TV. Even though that code says Mac Mini, I wouldn't be surprised to see a change of the name as well. The Mac Mini has gotten stale and needs a new name for the relaunch.
Click to expand...

Dropping the DVD drive kills the product. It's not an AppleTV.
 
Beric said:
And a LOT of SSD's have been shown to not provide any significant boosts. And of course, cost defeats all.
The moral is, I'll wait for numerous others to attest to a SSD being all positives and no negatives over a HDD. Until then, I'll use what's tried and true.
Click to expand...

Apparently, you haven't done any research if you are waiting for these nebulous "others" to attest to the performance advantages of SSDs, because there are plenty of reviews. The big problem with SSDs in the consumer/prosumer market is primarily an issue of perception. Saying "a lot of SSDs have been shown to not provide any significant boosts [over HDDs]" is irrelevant because every SSD model is different. Unlike the mature technology of platter-based harddrives in which it is fairly easy to determine performance and power usage by size and rotational speed, and which all are pretty much built with similar architecture, the technology utilized in flash-based SSDs is very diverse -- All SSDs are NOT built alike. In addition to utilizing either SLC NAND flash or MLC NAND flash, the largest component of an SSD's performance lies in how advanced the flash controller hardware is and how many independent channels it uses. Besides the huge range of performance, different SSDs also use dramatically different amounts of power, again based on the architecture, flash controller, and optimizations.

Perhaps many of you on this forum are uneasy about SSDs because unfortunately Apple used a very poor performing 64GB SSD in the original Macbook Air (not sure about the new one). Well, do not let that color your perspectives of all SSDs, because there are many that are MUCH faster from companies like Samsung, OCZ, Supertalent, etc.

Intel's name gets thrown around a lot because they have entered the SSD market (in a partnership with Micron technology) with next-gen flash controller technology that has blown away speed records. And one of the biggest advantages of Intel's SSD technology is that they have been able to get much better performance out of the vastly cheaper, higher-density "MLC" type of flash. As seen here on an initial Anandtech review, the 2.5" 80GB X-25M (the cheaper MLC version) absolutely blows away many of the fastest 3.5" 10,000RPM harddrives on the market. Compared to an average 5400RPM laptop drive, this thing is in another league.

Check out the whole review which gives an excellent technical overview of SSD technology:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3403&p=15
 
LukeW16 said:
i hope the imacs get Geforce 9800 GX2 or the Geforce GTX 260/280 graphics cards. Or maybe the new graphics cards released by Nvdia in January? Does this seem likely or?
Click to expand...

Rorikynn said:
IMHO, the low-end iMac should have the best Performance graphics and the high-end models should have enthusiast cards. I mean, come on Apple, $3000 for a high-end iMac and we get yesterday's performance cards.
Click to expand...

GTX 280 in an iMac? "Enthusiast cards" in an iMac? You both are dreaming...


blakjak said:
how is it no one has put two and two together? nVidia just released the Ion platform... Atom processor and 9400M chip in the palm of your hand, say hello to the new mini! HD output small form factor. http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3478
can't wait

case closed :)
Click to expand...

Welcome lurker.. but no way will the over-hyped Atom go in the Mini. It is much too slow and would represent a huge *downgrade* in CPU.


ctone said:
Agreed. Because they use slow (and fairly small capacity) drives inside the Mini, booting from external Firewire drives is a great option increase its performance.
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't you just replace the 2.5" HDD with a decent 250GB 7200RPM version?
 
voidptr said:
OS X drives my HDTV at 1080p over a DVI -> HDMI cable connected to my MacBook Pro perfectly. A modern HDTV over HDMI should look just like a 1920x1080p monitor.
Click to expand...

Not always. Many modern HDTVs don't even support a "computer" connection over HDMI. For example, my Samsung HDTV doesn't and it's just over a year old.

HDTVs that support computer connections over HDMI, DVI or VGA can be equally as annoying as they sometimes turn off image processing automatically, which can lead to color shifting among other issues.

Also, I have a 720p Samsung that is nightmare to use with a Mac mini. The lack of native resolution support is a big problem. You can literally waste hours with DisplayConfigX trying to find the right resolution and timing.

Windows Media Center gets around this by creating a special 720p, 1080i and 1080p "mode" that sort of tricks your TV into thinking it's decoding pure video. Using that mode, Windows Media Center works perfectly fine on my Samsung via DVI to HDMI, and looks fantastic.

Front Row or Mac OS X in general not so much.
 
SuperMacMan said:
Euck!! What the hell? Apple would never imagine something so ugly!! Not putting you down.. But bleck!
Click to expand...
Ha! This is sooo funny. It was actually after I photoshopped the thing I did from a photo of the new Mac Book that I realized that it looked VERY MUCH like Apple's new Mac Book Air Super Drive. Just goes to show that you don't have much to say afterall, SuperMacBoy.

Slam!
 

Attachments

  • wtf.jpg
    wtf.jpg
    39 KB · Views: 105
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