Haswell CPUs are out - what's in the store for mini?

[comatory]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...l-announces-first-4th-generation-core-cpus/2/

they havent announced mobile chips yet but it seems there might be a nice GPU leap there at least. seems like raw performance wont be any different but better GPU performance is a common request among the mini crowd.

also less heat is good too, mini's can get a bit hot (especially 2010/2011 models) so those are good news too.

personally, i still find the current design very nice. it would be cool if fusion drive was standard on base model.

 

[justperry]

t would be cool if fusion drive was standard on base model.

No way for that money.(Base Model)

 

[Che Castro]

do you guys think fusion drive in the base mini would be a possibility this year ?

or is it too expensive at $600

 

[Count Blah]

do you guys think fusion drive in the base mini would be a possibility this year ?

or is it too expensive at $600

Seeing as a fusion drive isn't even an option on the current base model, I'm guessing the hope would be for it to actually BE a BTO option on the base model, with a minor price break - $200 instead of $250.

Sorry.

 

[justperry]

do you guys think fusion drive in the base mini would be a possibility this year ?

or is it too expensive at $600

Don't you even read my post just above you.

 

[Che Castro]

Don't you even read my post just above you.

I was looking for an experts opinion

 

[justperry]

I was looking for an experts opinion

So, I am not one, believe me, you won't get Fusion/SSD in the Base Mini unless the cost of both the HD and SSD is the same as a the current HD, not only that, you seem to forget this is Apple.

 

[comatory]

OK maybe Fusion Drive wont be standard in mini but one would expect it to be next-gen standard storage for at least base iMac. Apple is pushing hard for SSD or Fusion, this would show their dedication much like with Thunderbolt that is on every Mac (except Pro) now.

I hope they keep some sort of expansion in future mini's at least (RAM and HDD) but the overall feeling is that this wont happen. I thnk that the current design could stay with us for at least two more years though.

Anyway, mini looks tempting with these new CPUs coming out. I was always worried that mini would get really hot with long AV editing sessions, it is the main reason why I have Mac Pro now.

Looking back at my purchase of Mac Pro (Oct of last year) I see that I mainly did it because of storage options, CPUs nowadays seems pretty sufficient for what I do, especially Quad Core i7s - both desktop and mobile.

Now that mini has USB3 I can get external dual drive RAID box for cheap. This RAID box + quad core i7 mini with SSD will probably be my next setup. But I dont plan on upgrading in next three years or so for my desktop computer. Who knows what will be around then (might even build hackintosh but if something like mini is available, I'll go that route).

 

[barkmonster]

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2013...l-announces-first-4th-generation-core-cpus/2/

they havent announced mobile chips yet but it seems there might be a nice GPU leap there at least. seems like raw performance wont be any different but better GPU performance is a common request among the mini crowd.

also less heat is good too, mini's can get a bit hot (especially 2010/2011 models) so those are good news too.

personally, i still find the current design very nice. it would be cool if fusion drive was standard on base model.

The fussion drive is the biggest con in recent history. £200 more for £70 at most worth of additional SSD and a cable. If the fusion upgrade went the whole hog and upped the 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm one, it would be worth an additional £100 AT MOST. There's plenty of info on how to create your own fusion drive for far less than Apple charge.

 

[justperry]

The fussion drive is the biggest con in recent history. £200 more for £70 at most worth of additional SSD and a cable. If the fusion upgrade went the whole hog and upped the 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm one, it would be worth an additional £200 AT MOST. There's plenty of info on how to create your own fusion drive for far less than Apple charge.

Bold, isn't that the case with many other electronics.

Example, I opened my LG Tv a while ago, there's plenty of empty spots on the Logic board, the components they add are only worth maybe a few dollars or several 10's, but if you get the model with everything inside it will be a few $100 or even as much as $1000 more!
So, it has always been that way.

 

[comatory]

The fussion drive is the biggest con in recent history. £200 more for £70 at most worth of additional SSD and a cable. If the fusion upgrade went the whole hog and upped the 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm one, it would be worth an additional £200 AT MOST. There's plenty of info on how to create your own fusion drive for far less than Apple charge.

Yeah i know about that option but this is typical Apple with their premium prices. I dont mind paying premium for CPU, I/O but storage is silly.

If I were to buy mini I'd get SSD and cable and just do it myself. I need plenty of faster storage just for video so getting external 1-2TB seems sufficient, even in RAID0 over USB3 (Thunderbolt is way expensive).

----------

The fussion drive is the biggest con in recent history. £200 more for £70 at most worth of additional SSD and a cable. If the fusion upgrade went the whole hog and upped the 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm one, it would be worth an additional £200 AT MOST.

also I wouldnt call it con - it is just taking advantage of an opportunity. also, some people dont care about internal components and if they can afford it, having fast boot times/app launching with really big storage is not that bad proposition. it definitely makes more sense than paying Apple's RAM prices.

Also, 2.5" 7200 RPM drives are on the way out, 5400RPM are pretty close performance wise - seems like the extra hassle isnt worth it. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2029...roduction-of-7200-rpm-laptop-hard-drives.html

 

[philipma1957]

The fussion drive is the biggest con in recent history. £200 more for £70 at most worth of additional SSD and a cable. If the fusion upgrade went the whole hog and upped the 5400rpm drive to a 7200rpm one, it would be worth an additional £200 AT MOST. There's plenty of info on how to create your own fusion drive for far less than Apple charge.

overpriced yes con no. they work very well so that means they are not a con. also they allow you the chance to make a diy version with a bigger ssd.

I have a 250 ssd with a 500 gb hdd
I have a 960 gb ssd with a 1 tb hdd
I sold a 500 gb ssd with a 1tb hdd


all diy all work great. so fusion is very good tech not a con as it works well.

Apple just builds theirs too weak (128gb ssd) and too expensive.

 

[Count Blah]

so fusion is very good tech not a con as it works well.

Apple just builds theirs too weak (128gb ssd) and too expensive.

Immediately following the con claim, he points to the component prices. Yes, fusion works nicely. But he is referring solely to the premium price for it.

 

[Lunfai]

Immediately following the con claim, he points to the component prices. Yes, fusion works nicely. But he is referring solely to the premium price for it.

People just can't read before they put up their defence mechanisms for Apple.

 

[Ice Dragon]

I hope the Iris Pro is available at least by BTO. If not I will probably pass on this year's mini.

 

[CausticPuppy]

Looks like you get a choice between top CPU performance, and top GPU performance (Iris Pro 5200), but not both.

If you want the faster quad-core chips up to 3.0GHz and 8MB cache, you're stuck with the HD4600 CPU.


Only the slower chips (up to 2.4GHz) come with the Iris Pro 5200.


Maybe the Mini Server will have the faster CPU's and the midrange models will have the 5200?

 

[barkmonster]

2.5" 7200 RPM drives are on the way out, 5400RPM are pretty close performance wise - seems like the extra hassle isnt worth it. http://www.pcworld.com/article/2029...roduction-of-7200-rpm-laptop-hard-drives.html

That's just one manufacturer with an ongoing self-interest in pushing their incredibly pointless hybrid drives as an alternative to SSDs. I can assure you, a 5400rpm can't match the access time of a 7200rpm drive by design and no caching scheme can change that. They're also useless for multitrack audio recording, a situation where a fast SSD for booting and software synth patches and a fast recording drive with speedy access time is essential.

Looks like you get a choice between top CPU performance, and top GPU performance (Iris Pro 5200), but not both.

If you want the faster quad-core chips up to 3.0GHz and 8MB cache, you're stuck with the HD4600 CPU.


Only the slower chips (up to 2.4GHz) come with the Iris Pro 5200.


Maybe the Mini Server will have the faster CPU's and the midrange models will have the 5200?

This seems really odd, you'd think GPU performance scales with CPU performance. Unless it's designed to take the load off the CPU in gaming and other situations where a fast GPU can compensate for a slower CPU and it's designed to conserve power requirements?

 

[philipma1957]

Back to the op what is in store for the new mini A 5 month wait since not many u chips are out.


http://ark.intel.com/products/series/75032

launch date for the i5 mobile is 3rd quarter



My other guess would be 2 t-bolt ports no fw800 port.

possible cpu below if this is in the base mini they will keep ddr3 1600 ram

http://ark.intel.com/products/75033/Intel-Core-i5-4350U-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-2_90-GHz


maybe this cpu

http://ark.intel.com/products/75114/Intel-Core-i7-4650U-Processor-4M-Cache-up-to-3_30-GHz


right now I can't find a spec for a quad core mobile cpu. waiting for the new haswell will be a long time.

edit
I did find a quad not launched yet but 2nd quarter is listed..

even if it is launched in the next 25 days we still need some 2 core ones which are due in the next quarter.



here are the specs on this quad looks like 1600 ram and the 4600 hd gpu

http://ark.intel.com/products/75117/Intel-Core-i7-4700MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

Back to the op what is in store for the new mini A 5 month wait since not many u chips are out.


http://ark.intel.com/products/series/75032

iThought™ that they use the ULV versions in the MBA (15 W TDP). Not!?

 

[philipma1957]

iThought™ that they use the ULV versions in the MBA (15 W TDP). Not!?

they did so with ivy.

if they are going to keep that up there are no i5's listed at all same with the i3's

just the quad i7's with the mQ label does this mean the base mini will have a 383usd chip ?

not Apple's way


http://ark.intel.com/products/75131/Intel-Core-i7-4900MQ-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz a 570 usd chip

http://ark.intel.com/products/75128/Intel-Core-i7-4800MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz a 378 usd

http://ark.intel.com/products/75119/Intel-Core-i7-4702MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_20-GHz a 383 usd


http://ark.intel.com/products/75117/Intel-Core-i7-4700MQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz a 383 usd


http://ark.intel.com/products/75469/Intel-Core-i7-4700EQ-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_40-GHz a 383 usd



I do not see apple making all quads. with the lowest price chip of 378


the i5's are u type for now as are the i5's.

so this means wait a long time a really long time.

 

[thunng8]

they did so with ivy.

just the quad i7's with the mQ label does this mean the base mini will have a 383usd chip ?

not Apple's way

here you go, the dual core Haswell chips:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7021/introducing-the-dualcore-haswell-skus

My guess: Base Mac mini will get the i5-4200M or i5-4300M

They might not be on Intel's site yet, but should be soon. They should be priced the same as the equivalent Ivy Bridge chip.

 

[philipma1957]

here you go, the dual core Haswell chips:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7021/introducing-the-dualcore-haswell-skus

My guess: Base Mac mini will get the i5-4200M or i5-4300M

They might not be on Intel's site yet, but should be soon. They should be priced the same as the equivalent Ivy Bridge chip.

good don't see a launch date but maybe this means an oct mini not a jan-feb

 

[Ice Dragon]

good don't see a launch date but maybe this means an oct mini not a jan-feb

I hope you are right. I could not wait until 2014 for the next mini and I am again hoping Apple utilizes the GT3e graphics.

 

[thunng8]

This seems really odd, you'd think GPU performance scales with CPU performance. Unless it's designed to take the load off the CPU in gaming and other situations where a fast GPU can compensate for a slower CPU and it's designed to conserve power requirements?

Nothing strange about it. The Iris Pro is faster, hence more power hungry. To fit in the same power envelope, Intel have had to decrease the CPU speed.

 

[philipma1957]

Nothing strange about it. The Iris Pro is faster, hence more power hungry. To fit in the same power envelope, Intel have had to decrease the CPU speed.

yep.



looks to me that the new quad core will be better then the 2012 quad for ht.as the 4600 will be 20-30 % better at graphics. The cpu will be close to 5% better maybe 10% better then the 2.3 in the 2012 mini.


But as always these will be short for good gaming.

So far the big jump for minis has been 2010 c2d to 2011 sandy.

that was a big improvement.


I cold argue a 2011 mid model with the 6630m is a best value mini for many users.