When the Haswell mini comes out, I feel the (I guess it will be) Intel HD 4600 will be a decent jump up from the Intel HD 3000. At the moment, I don't see myself buying a Haswell iMac.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
How will Apple gimp the mini with Haswell?
- Thread starter Count Blah
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Gimp? The mini is more a complement than competition. If you don't want or need an iMac and have a laptop but want some form of desktop then the mini fits the bill. Or a secondary PC. The only real "gimping" is the use of laptop parts due to space and heat issues but that's more of a required compromise.
GT3 or bust for me. but i think apple would only integrate it in the mini if nvidia's 700 series is out at the time, in the new imacs and are screamers.
I find it ridiculous that this thread is nothing but 'How Apple is going to design the worst device possible ever.'
Some cannot be pleased because they set the bar too high, however I think Apple could do better on some things.
This thread is retarded. Like so many on these forums.
Apple didn't gimp the mini to protect iMac sales, and never will, because they're completely different products for different customers. The reason the mini went from an nVidia GPU to an Intel one is the same reason the 13" MacBook Pro & Retina & Airs did.
Cost and heat/power relative to performance. Haswell will narrow the gap between integrated and discrete GPUs even further, so that's what will be in the next mini and I wouldn't be surprised if they replaced the 640M in the base iMac with it too when that gets a refresh for Haswell.
Apple didn't gimp the mini to protect iMac sales, and never will, because they're completely different products for different customers. The reason the mini went from an nVidia GPU to an Intel one is the same reason the 13" MacBook Pro & Retina & Airs did.
Cost and heat/power relative to performance. Haswell will narrow the gap between integrated and discrete GPUs even further, so that's what will be in the next mini and I wouldn't be surprised if they replaced the 640M in the base iMac with it too when that gets a refresh for Haswell.
Sorry though that is a terrible idea in my view. If they aren't going to ever go back to discrete graphics in the mini, they should not only make the iMac all discrete (as they have been doing), though also increase the graphics memory to at least 1 GB across the board.
Depends what the performance difference is. If GT3 is 90% as fast as the 640M and uses less power and produces less heat, it's a no brainer.
What about the 740M if it will be called that? That should have at least 1 GB of graphics memory, no?
I agree with you on your point though.
But nVidia will probably have the 740m or whatever it's called out by then too which would defeat the purpose of enabling the Haswell GPU on the processor as the discrete GPU would be faster again - it's like some sort of paradox.
You realize that the iMac gets Haswell CPUs and faster graphics, too? The Mac Mini might be so fast that it flies, but that doesn't mean that a 767 is as fast as an F-22.
Both are going to get decent improvements. Will the Haswell iMac be a significant jump over the Ivy Bridge iMac, I'm not sure. As I have mentioned before, I have a 2011 base mini so the Haswell mini I know will be a big improvement especially if I go with the quad-core model.
No, this thread is basically, "will apple do to the mini what they have done to the MBP and iMac." Both of those computers are becoming increasingly inoperable. Will they do that to the mini as well. The guts will surely be powerful, but it would be very disappointing to have to pay Apple to install an SSD instead of going third party for 50% the cost.
In 2011, Apple charged $600 for a 256 GB SSD that was a SATA II. In 2012, they charged $300 for a 256 GB SSD that was SATA III. Prices will probably only continue to go down.
Sure, but as it stands, I could upgrade the RAM and the SSD for the same price as Apple charges for the SSD alone. I like the idea of saving $100.
On top of that, I like the idea of being able to fix my machine if something (relatively simple) fails, instead of bringing in to the local Apple Store for them to take for 3 weeks.
I did an awful job at putting in the SSD so I'll pay for Apple to do it when I get the 2013 mini if it isn't too expensive. The RAM I can do just fine.
So nice to see comments like "Stupid" and "retarded", super intelligent conversation.
My whole point to this is that apple has taken steps to make the mini the obvious lesser choice, when compared to the iMac(drop discrete graphics, give it a lesser GPU with 1/2 the memory, etc...). For me, a quad-core Haswell with the GT3, is what I would buy without thinking twice. But that is something that Apple has historically NOT done with the mini - IMHO(which is apparently "stupid" and "retarded").
After doing a bit more research, I am convinced that Apple will put the GT2/HD4600 graphics in the mini, thus ensuring it's perceived inadequacies, yet again.
I REALLY hope I am wrong. And I would not be shocked to see the GT3 as a BTO option that would raise the $799 top non-server option to $999/$1099 to put it more in line with the low end iMac. Basically, it would not be a simple $100 upgrade for the CPU, as it is today. They would make it at least $200 to get to the G3 graphics, if it was available at all.
Again, IMHO.
My whole point to this is that apple has taken steps to make the mini the obvious lesser choice, when compared to the iMac(drop discrete graphics, give it a lesser GPU with 1/2 the memory, etc...). For me, a quad-core Haswell with the GT3, is what I would buy without thinking twice. But that is something that Apple has historically NOT done with the mini - IMHO(which is apparently "stupid" and "retarded").
After doing a bit more research, I am convinced that Apple will put the GT2/HD4600 graphics in the mini, thus ensuring it's perceived inadequacies, yet again.
I REALLY hope I am wrong. And I would not be shocked to see the GT3 as a BTO option that would raise the $799 top non-server option to $999/$1099 to put it more in line with the low end iMac. Basically, it would not be a simple $100 upgrade for the CPU, as it is today. They would make it at least $200 to get to the G3 graphics, if it was available at all.
Again, IMHO.
Last edited:
the mac mini has always had lower graphics then the imac..
So when it comes out in summer/fall 2013 once again it will have lower graphics then the iMac. it will have the haswell gpu 4600 or whatever the name will be. the newer imacs will have 3 or 4 gpu choices maybe the cheapest imac will have no gpu just the haswell gpu 4600.
While I appreciate your opinion, why do you believe the HD4600 will NOT be in the Mac Mini? All you state is that Apple will want to make the Mini inadequate?
Right now, all Haswell processors that I am aware of will come with the HD4600. Sure by the time the Mini is released the GT1 and GT3's will be out, but look at Ivy Bridge. The HD2500 based processors were out but Apple still chose to go with the HD4000 based processors did they not? You said, you did research, so I'm just interested to know what research made you come to the conclusion that they will be GT1 processors?