Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The engineering penalty for that would be pretty large. Given the shared memory model, the crossbar would be very complicated and performance would suffer. Better to have a single die with double the core count and a correspondingly beefier cache memory hierarchy. And given the size of the TSMC reticle and Apple’s cores (so far), you could easily just tape out a chip with many more cores - if some of them don’t work due to yield fall-out, you just down-bin them.
What about being able to plug an external GPU that would really work as an internal one? How many channels will the new architecture allow for the purpose of an external GPU?
 
It's great to see the Mac Mini getting more attention than it has in the past, but Apple really needs to stop screwing about and launch the 27" iMac replacement already.
I totally agree. One thing I hate of iMacs is that you cannot reuse their screen when the computer's power has expired with time. Why wouldn't Apple add an HDMI IN plug so you can eventually use it as a monitor for other purposes than using your computer? And another thing: Why don't they make iMacs more easy to transport, with a foldable base for instance. iMac's design is very spectacular and refined but not so intelligent in terms of adapting the machine to human needs (like transporting your computer while on "vacation" when you still have to work at times while travelling with your family, for instance). iMacs are more pretentious than ergonomic. Discovering an office full of iMacs might impress many people (many clients) but within an ecological point of view, is such a waste of materials and technology... it is sad when you are conscious about it. Apple should try to make those computers more versatiles, less obsolescent. a Mac Mini Pro with a certain incentive to purchase an Apple monitor that would go with it would be a much more efficient way to go for the planet and for any potential client.
 
(NB: There's no point placing too much weight on what the chip will be called - ultimately, the M2 is whatever chip Apple decides to stick an "M2" label on, or they might still decide to create a separate "branding" for the "Apple Silicon Pro" chips. However, taking the usual understanding that "M1X" is the "pro" version of the M1, whereas "M2" is the next generation of core designs...)

Last I looked, the M2 is expected to debut in the all-new MacBook Air sometime next year whereas the M1X was expected to debut in the 14/16" MacBook imminently (...and may have been held up by component shortages).

When it does arrive, the M2 in the 2022 MacBook Air will, like the M1, be configured primarily for ultrabooks and tablets in terms of number of cores, balance of performance/economy cores/GPU cores, clock speeds etc. and may well have similar limitations on RAM and display support to the M1 - which is perfectly sensible for the target market of 'general computing'. It's likely to be all-round incrementally faster and more power-efficient than the base M1 - maybe 15%.

The M1X, on the other hand, is going to be the M1 souped up for higher-end applications (which in Apple terms usually means graphics, video and audio production). Exactly how depends on which rumours you read* - but a significantly souped up GPU (probably too power hungry for Air/iPad use) is most likely, also supporting more displays, maybe with double the number of cores, probably at least 12 CPU cores, maybe with a higher performance:economy core ratio etc... They'll also have support more than 2 LPDDR4 chips worth of RAM to be credible. For the applications in question - which typically support multi-threading and GPU-accelerated computing - the benefits of the "X" could be far more significant than the relatively small across-the board improvement of M2 over M1.

So, really the 14/16" MBP, 5k+ iMac and high-end Mac Mini couldn't just wait for the M2 say, early next year, they'd need some sort of "M2X" which is probably a lot further down the pipeline.

(* Of course, Apple are not infallible, and the M1X could turn out to be a pathetic warmed-over version of the M1 that doesn't meet the needs of higher-end users, but we can burn that bridge when we come to it...)
I have a slight suspicion that we will indeed burn that bridge. I believe this first version of Mac Mini "Pro" will be internally considered at Apple as a poll to check if it is worth to apply more energies to a better MacMini line in the future.
 
Yes, the first generation of Minis had a plexiglas top. Since the current Mini design with a full aluminum case seems to cause problems with Bluetooth reception. The bluetooth issue has been a problem with Minis for years. Some people have reported getting better Bluetooth by turning their Mini upside down. Having a plexiglas top might be a big improvement.
Speaking of Bluetooth: My Apple Mouse always fails to work when placing a mobile phone some place more or less in between my MacMini and the mouse. The latest Apple's mouse has been a deception for me.
Concerning Plexiglass, I do not like Plexiglass. it gets ugly with time. But anyways, many many many of us need a tiny powerful computer with integrated SD card reader and a few more ports. As long as it works for hours and hours of rendering make it with whatever material. Machines have to be first efficient and, secondly, beautiful if possible.
 
You'll be wanting a Mac Pro not a Mac Mini if you want 3080 level of graphics performance. I'm sure the M1X will be a great leap over the M1, but that's asking for a lot.
I do care about the price and gold is not sold at the price of peanuts. It would be nice to have from Apple an architecture that would allow external GPUs for those who really need them. And external sound cards. Integrated SD card readers and 6 USB-C and 4 USB is a must.
 
This could be a very nice replacement for my 2012 quad-core i7 Mac Mini as my main desktop. If the rumored "Mac Pro Cube" never happens or ends up too out of my price range, I may just get one of those M1X Mac Minis, configured with a 1 TB SSD like I have in my current Mini, AND with 32 GB of memory to give it a big boost compared to not only my current Mini but my M1 MacBook Air as well. (Of course I'll still use the Air as my laptop for when I'm on the go and such.) And I'll also get one of those nice OWC Thunderbolt 3 docks I can plug into the Mini for a wider variety of ports than the Falwedi USB-C hub I use with my MacBook Air.
 
All the low end ipads (non-ipad pro is) still have A-processors. And Apple TV’s. The only thing using M is macs and ipad pros. So your theory seems to rely on bad information?
Have those devices been refreshed yet?
 
What's a pain about running it headless? I have one that has been headless for all but initial setup.
What about any reboot - Big Sur devices are cloaked to the network until you log-in.
I have to connect a Pikvm to my Mac mini just to be sure to be able to log into the machine in case a reboot is required/happened.

What about any higher resolution (e.g. 5K) over VNC - even with switchResX on a M1 you cannot go beyond 4K and that requires a dongle - otherwise you are stuck with what the headless video adapter allows.

So are you sure you are running a headless Mac mini wih big SUR and an M1? - hard to miss on those …
 
What about any reboot - Big Sur devices are cloaked to the network until you log-in.
I have to connect a Pikvm to my Mac mini just to be sure to be able to log into the machine in case a reboot is required/happened.

What about any higher resolution (e.g. 5K) over VNC - even with switchResX on a M1 you cannot go beyond 4K and that requires a dongle - otherwise you are stuck with what the headless video adapter allows.

So are you sure you are running a headless Mac mini wih big SUR and an M1? - hard to miss on those …
I just have it auto-login.
I only use it at 1080, but I also have the 4K HDMI dongle because I bought into the internet's unknown if the M1 has some sort of graphics acceleration that's disabled without a display. Also for the $7 or whatever, I didn't see a reason to not do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joecomo
I just have it auto-login.
I only use it at 1080, but I also have the 4K HDMI dongle because I bought into the internet's unknown if the M1 has some sort of graphics acceleration that's disabled without a display. Also for the $7 or whatever, I didn't see a reason to not do it.
So we are aligned.
I am not saying it can‘t be handled - but it is a nuisance and always gets worse.
E.g. with an Intel processors, I can set the internal display adapter to 5K(or more) without any problem,
with M1 this has become impossible.
On any windows or Linux host this would be trivial ….
 
  • Like
Reactions: macsound1
I just have it auto-login.
I only use it at 1080, but I also have the 4K HDMI dongle because I bought into the internet's unknown if the M1 has some sort of graphics acceleration that's disabled without a display. Also for the $7 or whatever, I didn't see a reason to not do it.
Also with M1 it makes a lot of sense to have file vault enabled - which makes auto-login impossible.
I would also not bet that this option will always be available in the future …
 
Also with M1 it makes a lot of sense to have file vault enabled - which makes auto-login impossible.
I would also not bet that this option will always be available in the future …
Why does it make more sense on an M1 than an Intel to have file vault enabled?
Personally, file vault is disabled. I don't have any sensitive documents stored on my machine.
 
Why does it make more sense on an M1 than an Intel to have file vault enabled?
Personally, file vault is disabled. I don't have any sensitive documents stored on my machine.
well: no performance hit - (not M1 exclusive as the 2018 Intel mac mini has a T2)
 
Does anyone think apple could fit a dual m1x into the 16” model? This would allow for a 64Gb option while reducing the number on M1X variants.
 
Why does it make more sense on an M1 than an Intel to have file vault enabled?
Personally, file vault is disabled. I don't have any sensitive documents stored on my machine.
Though it doesn’t really fit the thread title, this aspect of Apple security, locking down the machine, is a bit of an annoyance.
I don’t keep nuclear launch codes on any of my machines and I want them to be instantly available and easily serviceable.
Having to log in, not being able to boot from external devices and repair or rescue data, removal of target disk mode et cetera provides no value to me, it just makes my life more cumbersome.
It’s even worse for my elderly parents who couldn’t remember a password if their life depended on it, and whose eye sight and failing fine motorics make involuntary mistyping commonplace, causing frustration or outright being locked out of their device.

Apple should have a ”This device is used in a safe environment.” toggle at setup that lets us bypass these things permanently.
 
Why does Apple want to turn its 'entry level' Mac into a high end one?
because they can? high-end is a relative term, at it wont be undercutting their eventual AS Mac Pro, you can be your bottom dollar on that. as it says in this post the intel Mac mini are still the most performant mini's for certain tasks, especially if you need an eGPU or BlackMagic PCI cards.
 
Though it doesn’t really fit the thread title, this aspect of Apple security, locking down the machine, is a bit of an annoyance.
I don’t keep nuclear launch codes on any of my machines and I want them to be instantly available and easily serviceable.
Having to log in, not being able to boot from external devices and repair or rescue data, removal of target disk mode et cetera provides no value to me, it just makes my life more cumbersome.
It’s even worse for my elderly parents who couldn’t remember a password if their life depended on it, and whose eye sight and failing fine motorics make involuntary mistyping commonplace, causing frustration or outright being locked out of their device.

Apple should have a ”This device is used in a safe environment.” toggle at setup that lets us bypass these things permanently.
agree that turning off file vault is a good idea in some cases, but the risk of identity theft for people who go online, especially naive people shouldn't be underestimated.
 
Ports could also mean interfaces, maybe Apple has found a way to use PCI slots, or add storage like a Xbox X can do and add M.2 interface for more memory if you need more ram with an interface to SOC system. If a Sony and Microsoft can figure it out Apple should be able to do also.
what Apple can do and would want to do as a global corporation focused on profits are two different things. R2R movement needs to take some shots at Apple and hit them between the eyes I think. On some enviro things Apple are better than most mega-corporations but on R2R and DYI upgrades they actively deter, even at the component and documentation levels.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.