Intel 6th Generation Skylake-S Processors Officially Confirmed for Q3 2015

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by Marx55, May 4, 2015.

  1. Marx55, May 4, 2015
    Last edited: May 4, 2015

    Marx55 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    #1
  2. scottsjack macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Location:
    Arizona
    #2
  3. crsh1976 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    #3
  4. paulrbeers macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    #4
    Let me know when a quad core mobile process for the Mini is available...

    The only ones that might work are the T processors, but more than likely these will never see the Mini since the Mini has never used desktop processors.
     
  5. Marx55 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    #5
    The Apple Mac mini released on October 2012 is quad-core with eight threads. The above chips can be used in a Mac mini as well.
     
  6. crsh1976, May 5, 2015
    Last edited: May 5, 2015

    crsh1976 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    #6
    There are hyperthreaded mobile quad-core processor, but those listed above are the desktop chips, the last ones used were Ivy Bridge-M chips (Apple has since moved to dual-core -U chips only).

    The ones listed above for Skylake are all -S desktop chips (reflected by their TDP, which are all too high for current mobile processors).
     
  7. toddzrx macrumors 6502a

    toddzrx

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    #7
    It's the never ending dream of Mini-fans to get a Mini that is basically at the same power and capability as an iMac but without the screen. Sorry, but I don't think that will ever happen. In fact, given the processors available in the current Mini, and the recently released new MacBook, I think we will see the next Mini in a redesigned, smaller case that shares a lot of the components of the next MacBook update. In other words: the current MacBook will get updated with Skylake processors and such, and the next Mac Mini will probably use similar, if not identical, internals. This means no fan, requiring low TDP. If Apple makes the power supply external, it can be even smaller.

    The Mini has, and always will primarily be, the entry level Mac computer, and I don't see Apple changing that ethos.
     
  8. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #8
    The late-2012 minis with quad core Ivy Bridge CPUs were still mobile processors (they used the i7-3xxxQM series).

    Just because it's an i7 quad core doesn't mean that it's a desktop CPU. There's loads of laptop CPUs with quad core i7s as well.
     
  9. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #9
    The Core i7-6700T looks like it would work nicely.

    14nm, 4/8 cores, 2.8 GHz, 3.6 GHz boost, 8 MB cache, DDR4 2133 MHz memory, 35W TDP.

    The 2012 models had 45W TDPs. So this 35W should work out just fine with the current power-supply.
     
  10. magbarn macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #10
    The TDP is fine, but the chip's packaging isn't. As mentioned above, Apple is only going to use mobile parts with the associated chip packaging. Not bulky LGA chips like the i7-6700T. And spendthrift apple isn't going to design a special logic board to house the quad core version either as that's the excuse being used why the Haswell quad core mini (which uses a different chip size than the dual core) never came out. We got lucky with the Ivy Bridge as Intel designed the dual and quad core's to use the same chip packaging size. Unless Intel creates a one-off chip like they did with the original MBA, the chances of a quad core Mini are 0.
     
  11. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #11
    What are you talking about? The quad core 2.6 Mini bests all the latest Mini models when it comes to multi-core applications. The new Minis only have a distinct advantage with single core apps (in most cases) and certain video performance which turns out not to be all that much. So I would not call the 2.6 quad Mini a simple entry level Mac computer. However, I will agree that was the original intent before it got a following AND before Apple itself started offering Minis as Server models. - the latter is something to think about with Apple's perverse marketing scheme.
     
  12. poematik13 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2014
    #12
    The 2014 minis makeup for their dual core chips with better IO (TB2 and wifi AC), faster SSD (PCI-E) and better graphics (intel iris) than the 2012.

    keep holding on to your 2012 quad core, it'll be obsolete sooner than you think thanks to that intel 4000 chip and sata interface
     
  13. brdeveloper macrumors 68020

    brdeveloper

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Location:
    Brasil
    #13
    Hopefully the current generation will sell very badly and they'll bring a new generation with a quad-core option and Iris Pro.
     
  14. yjchua95 macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2011
    Location:
    GVA, KUL, MEL (current), ZQN
    #14
    If that's the case, they might as well as add in a new product line - the Mac Mini Pro.

    The regular Mac Mini would continue to use the same logic board as the baseline MBA and 13" rMBPs, while the Mac Mini Pro would use the same logic board as the 15" rMBP.
     
  15. brdeveloper macrumors 68020

    brdeveloper

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2010
    Location:
    Brasil
    #15
    Well, the 2012 quad i7 Mini matched the rMBP 15" in specs (quad core i7, ivy bridge, hd4000), but didn't have a dGPU.
     
  16. toddzrx macrumors 6502a

    toddzrx

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    #16
    Yeah, and that's history. I'm talking about the future and what I think Apple will do with the Mini given it's recent update and the release of the new MacBook.

    Doubt it; I see the Mini getting smaller than it is now using the MacBook internals.
     
  17. EnesM macrumors 6502

    EnesM

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    #17
    Appart from the obvious benefits of Skylake, for me the most anticipated feature is the Alpine Ridge Controller which will support full HDMI 2.0 capable of 4K60p 4:4:4, in other words perfect for those looking to use Mac Mini with a 4K TV.
     
  18. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #18
    What are you talking about...

    There are no more server models and many modern low level servers use atom or even arm low power processors...

    As mentioned above we got lucky with ivy bridge as the quad core mobile parts used the same die size and chip set as the dual core ones and so they could all go on the same logic board. Unless intel do that again (not happening in skylake as far as I can tell) then we will not see another quad core mac mini...

    Just think of the mac mini as a 13 inch rMBP without a built in screen and keyboard because basically thats what it is....
     
  19. phrehdd macrumors 68040

    phrehdd

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2008
    #19

    I am unsure why you even bother mentioning low powered servers that are nothing more than a fancy NAS unit. The Mini Server was far more capable that what you mention in both power and certainly OS.

    The degrading of the Mini with respect to CPU is what remains suspect. Apple certainly has its tiered marketing schema with respect to hardware for the masses and along with that, are plenty of people who wont (anymore) fit into their schema. I will say we agree that Apple will continue to somewhat parallel the Mini's CPU/mobo abilities with that of a given laptop offering.

    As for me, I'll happily accept a dual core future Mini if it at least matches the across board scoring of the quad 2.6 Mini model. Until such time, I'll have to look elsewhere for a solution and for those that like the latest Minis, I am glad for them.
     
  20. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #20
    How soon do you think 6Gbps will be obsolete? Or 10Gbps of TB1? And as for Intel 4000, as long as it can render the OS X UI, it's not going to be obsolete until OS X no longer supports it, except for gaming which it wasn't that good for even on day1.

    I can't speak for everyone, but I know many of us on this forum use the mini as a sort of basic browsing / photo editing / word processing / emailing / home server / itunes server. For those tasks, I am comfortable that it will work equally well, if not better, than a 2014 model.

    As for obsolete, the day the 2012 model is obsolete is the same day the 2014 model is obsolete. In 5+ years, they won't be that different to matter.
     
  21. crsh1976 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2011
    #21
    The only other thing I can think of is video playback; we're not there yet but at some point in some time in the future, the HD 4000 will struggle with high-def and more recent video formats because GPUs have built-in hardware acceleration based on current codecs - at some point, it'll be too behind the times to keep up.

    As I said tho, we're definitely not there yet.
     
  22. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #22
    I agree that video playback will give the HD4000 some trouble. However, even if doesn't support a future hardware decoding standard, the 2012 Mac Mini overall won't be obsolete until the CPU is too slow to software decode that video standard.

    Though, that is also a problem I welcome and cannot wait to have. The day video encoding gets so sophisticated that a quadcore cannot keep up, I hope it will mean that it is a lossless compression of an 8k movie that fits into a 4GB file. When that happens, I will gladly get a new Mac.

    Pide Piper!
     
  23. shaunp macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2010
    #23
    Ah, but there's the big gaping gap between the mini and the mac pro. Apple has filled this gap with the iMac, which is great unless you don't want an iMac and want to be able to choose your own screen.

    I have a 2012 Mini and a nMP and I actually think what is the current Pro should be just a 'Mac' (ditch Xeon for core i7 and add single fast desktop GPU), and a more expandable machine becomes the Pro. Then it wouldn't be so bad if the mini became the 'macbook without a screen' and redesigned to use an even smaller case.

    What do i know though, I only buy this stuff....
     
  24. EnesM macrumors 6502

    EnesM

    Joined:
    May 7, 2015
    #24
    Lossless 8k 90min movie, 4GB? Dream on...be happy if they ever manage to cram it into 40GB
     
  25. oneMadRssn macrumors 68040

    oneMadRssn

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2011
    Location:
    Boston, MA
    #25
    I am dreaming :cool:

    In theory, if such a dreamy compression did exist, I'm sure my 2012 QC Mini wouldn't be able to keep up. ;)
     

Share This Page