The "similar design" would only be the shiny outside part, nothing more. If the inside is completely different, none of that design would be similar at all.
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.
Intel Preparing to Launch New Xeon Processors for Potential Mac Pro Upgrade
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The "similar design" would only be the shiny outside part, nothing more. If the inside is completely different, none of that design would be similar at all.
Umm....
How much "engineering effort" would this really take, though? I guess you're referring to having nVidia put their video chipset on the proprietary board the new Mac Pro uses? I don't see why that would be a huge issue for Apple, especially if it gave them a way to sell the systems with either video option, regardless of any "gaming" configuration they might do.
Otherwise, we're just talking about bundling a machine the right way to appeal to whoever might want to buy a Mac primarily with a focus on gaming.
I never said there was a "huge" gaming market out there for Macs. The fact is, the market for gaming on home computers, period, is dwindling. Game consoles massively ate into that market-share, not to mention all the portable devices (everything from PSP or GameBoy to iOS devices or Android tablets).
Still, there USED to be a huge market for PC gaming and I don't see a reason you couldn't actually bring some of it back, especially if a player like Apple was the one to do it? The current crop of consoles (Playstation 4 and new XBox) aren't thrilling a lot of people, thanks to the requirement of paying to keep a monthly subscription active, just to allow online play of any of the game titles you buy. And gaming on tablets and phones is really in a different class than what you get on a larger display, with full size control devices.
How much "engineering effort" would this really take, though? I guess you're referring to having nVidia put their video chipset on the proprietary board the new Mac Pro uses? I don't see why that would be a huge issue for Apple, especially if it gave them a way to sell the systems with either video option, regardless of any "gaming" configuration they might do.
Otherwise, we're just talking about bundling a machine the right way to appeal to whoever might want to buy a Mac primarily with a focus on gaming.
I never said there was a "huge" gaming market out there for Macs. The fact is, the market for gaming on home computers, period, is dwindling. Game consoles massively ate into that market-share, not to mention all the portable devices (everything from PSP or GameBoy to iOS devices or Android tablets).
Still, there USED to be a huge market for PC gaming and I don't see a reason you couldn't actually bring some of it back, especially if a player like Apple was the one to do it? The current crop of consoles (Playstation 4 and new XBox) aren't thrilling a lot of people, thanks to the requirement of paying to keep a monthly subscription active, just to allow online play of any of the game titles you buy. And gaming on tablets and phones is really in a different class than what you get on a larger display, with full size control devices.
Why do you think, that inside of Mini must be different from Mac Pro?
The design would make it obvious that it must have a good Quad Core CPU, lots of RAM, dual GPU's, and a PCi-Ex SSD.
And be a lot less expensive to buy than Mac Pro.
Current Mini factor is dead, Apple can't do with it anything. If they would go with fanless, NUC route - they could kill the AppleTV.
And thats what they really DON'T want to do.
I was thinking of the industrial design and not the interior configuration. I'd expect a circular board with solid state drive modules and not a ring of PCB's.
If it is still mini size, it would be completely different. The MP has vertical boards with a big space for cooling in the middle. Unless it's no longer really a mini computer, the mini would have a flat motherboard like the current design.
On the mini? I'd love to see better CPU, more ram, and PCIe-SSD (the second and third have a decent chance of happening although likely still less ram than the MP). But dual GPU? Never gonna happen in the mini, you're basically asking Apple to redesign the mini so it has everything the MP has, which won't happen, and if it did it would jack the price way up. Right now there are plenty of people who would like to see a version of the MP with one GPU, not have the mini go to dual.
I'd love to see the mini get a desktop CPU and more ram, going up to the same specs as the high end iMac, which would require it to get a bit bigger. And even that is probably not going to happen. No way it gets too close to the MP.
Last edited:
How much will cost Xeon E3 3.3GHz(220$), 8 GB of RAM 1600 MHz, SO-DIMM, Dual Nvidia GTX 860M, and 256 GB SSD?
Around 500-600 dollars.
So the price of that Mini would be around 1000-1200$
.How much will cost Xeon E3 3.3GHz(220$), 8 GB of RAM 1600 MHz, SO-DIMM, Dual Nvidia GTX 860M, and 256 GB SSD?
Around 500-600 dollars.
So the price of that Mini would be around 1000-1200$
Add another $300 for the industrial sized cooling tower required to keep that stuff from melting upon powerup.
How much will cost Xeon E3 3.3GHz(220$), 8 GB of RAM 1600 MHz, SO-DIMM, Dual Nvidia GTX 860M, and 256 GB SSD?
Around 500-600 dollars.
So the price of that Mini would be around 1000-1200$
A xeon with dual laptop GPU? That's an odd combination to say the least. Apple would probably be much more likely to just use a better i7 and probably use the onboard GPU. Maybe a separate GPU but hard to imagine why they'd do two.
Regardless of what parts cost, based on what Apple charges for the current mini and for the quad core MP, I can't see Apple making that combination for that price. They probably could sell at that price, but they won't.
Price aside, the biggest thing keeping the mini from having a decent desktop CPU is heat in that size form factor. For the sake of comparison, the fastest chip available in the current mini is 45 watt while the xeon E3s at 3.3 are about 80W, plus you want to add two GPU in there as well. MP design is mainly for quiet cooling, a super short version of that for a mini would be really impractical and probably too short for that cooling design to even work. And even if they could make it, why would Apple want to cheapen their most premium (expensive) design by doing a much cheaper variation on it?
The most realistic upgrade to the mini would be make the current one just big (tall?) enough to handle cooling a desktop CPU, and a bit more ram. And even that doesn't seem likely considering how much apple would hate to make a current model bigger.
The Intel i7-4770R on the zotac zbox EI750 benchmarks about 80% of the 4c8t Xeon on the base Mac Pro, it's Iris pro also scores similar to GEFORCE 650M, so if Apple release an well spec'ed mini or iMac many people won't need a Mac Pro or at least could have an usable backup workstation.
The power envelope of the mini is the reason why Apple has to redesign it totally. Lets just say, that everythig points out, that soon, very soon, Intel will let you change the components of computer ONLY if you have a Xeon platform. So mini, with mobile components will be consuming iMac clients. And clients will see that if you have a monitor from Apple to buy for 1k$ and 1k computer, they will choose iMac instead.
Then is the NUC factor, where AppleTV is. Mini in that form factor cannot be, which you all will see in few months.
Why it should melt, when its the same design as Mac Pro with 250W power supply? Only with 3/4th of total Mac Pro height.
Forgive me for being skeptical that Intel would place restrictions on computer makers that would require them to redesign most of their machines, and that Apple would be willing to do it.
The MP is three vertical boards with an air channel in between. It would be insane to try and design a mini the same but shorter. There's just no reason to make the mini that complicated when they can put everything on one flat board, same as they have always done. Especially when two of the three MP boards are for GPU, and for the mini they'll likely stick with using the GPU built into the CPU.
First, Intel plan to focus mostly on Ultrabook, NUC and All-In-One segment.
The segment where you don't need another GPU, apart from the one built into the CPU. And where you buy whole computer, not different parts.
Second thing. Going with Xeon for Mini soon will be ONLY possibility for Apple to offer any other computer with GPUs. Mini in current design is dead. Why?
It can only fit 45W of power envelope. And the idea of using it as an AppleTV, but just better is not good idea for Apple.
4.5W TDP Broadwell processors are made specifically for that segment. For computers that will run fanless in the living room, and help increase the impact of Television on users.
Apple has its own way, and idea of that. iBeacon, that will recognize you just by the smartphone you are using. iBeacon, that will help controlling the house with HomeKit. iBeacon that will be a console for games from AppStore. That will stream, music, TV shows, moovies and youtube films. Or will run everything from built in hard drive. Those 4.5W CPUs are an answer for Apple A8.
Mini in current form HAS TO DIE in order to make room for that kind of hardware for living room.
Mini Mac Pro with quad core Xeon E3 and dual GPUs will be far better computer than current one. In every single way, and everywhere, where it was meant to.
Basic desktop computer in Apple mind right now is the basic iMac.
That is what i believe Apple will do in few months.
Even if they focus mostly on something, that doesn't mean they're going to force the entire PC industry to change how they design machines outside that focus.
The mini probably won't have a discrete GPU. You keep saying otherwise but not giving any reason for it.
IF they wanted to use a chip with more than 45W they would have to change the design to handle the extra power and heat. But they've been using mobile chips for years now, unless they give up on the whole idea of mini being "mini" they will just continue to do just that.
Just don't understand why you keep bringing up aTV. It has nothing in common with the mini, the OS and hardware are closer to the iPhone and iPad than to any mac.
That's nice. But irrelevant to the mini. And it seems unlikely that apple would switch an iOS device from their own chips compatible with iPhone to a different intel chip.
aTV is a set top TV box. Mini is a computer. The two are completely unrelated and Apple doesn't consider either in competition with the other. The mini has to do absolutely nothing to do with aTV and they aren't going to redesign their computers because of anything related to aTV.
Any quad core cpu with a higher clock speed than the current top end mini would be better. Xeon is irrelevant, the same improvement would come from i7. And dual GPU would be pointless, the vast majority of users running a mini wouldn't benefit from it. Especially two of a mobile GPU, instead of double something mediocre (which most consumer software won't support), they'd be better off just doing a single better GPU. But they won't, they'll most likely stick with i5/i7 and use the onboard GPU.
Basic desktop computer in Apple mind right now is the basic iMac.
I agree with that to a degree, right now the mini is pretty much a laptop without the screen. I'd love to see that change, but they would just need to go to more desktop parts (and make the machine bigger to handle the power and heat). But that's not going to happen, whether or not we see a total redesign it will be i5/i7 (probably mobile), and probably integrated GPU. In short, same as we have now just bumped to newer generations of components and a bit higher specs. The most likely change would be pci-e SSD which is coming to all macs, maybe a bit higher ram capacity.
i'm so glad that i waited...i ALMOST pulled the trigger...but now...HELL NO! lol.
I'm so happy too
I hope they will add second drive slot too
Myths:
* Xeon based Mac mini or Mac mini Server, will not happen neither now (next 1-2 keynotes) neither mid term unless Intel rebranded all its cpu s as Xeon.
* ARM bases Mac, with the exception of OSX Server no ARM setup rival on Intel on user experience, neither consider to rebuild and optimize apps for an cpu with different endians.
Plausible:
* New Mac mini only with mobile cpu: it's an industry tendency go to soldered mobile cpu on mini pc, look at zotac.
* Fanless new Mac mini, of a complete redesign it's done it's very possible and will be very appreciated, also could happen having two different Mac mini, one with <20w TDP fanless, and another on 65W TDP with fan cooler and more powerful cpu.
* Discrete GPU on mac mini, if Apple goes on very low TDP cpu may offer a dGPU version as on the very successful Zotac en760, this case forget powerful 4c8t i7 cpu,as much a 2c i7 would be offered, this combination it's also more powerful than i7-iris Pro and cheaper.
* X99/i7 Haswell-E/gaming GPU: based Mac Pro, of course this is my speculation, but besides being cheaper could sell as hot bread as fills the gap among mini and iMac and the Mac Pro.
Reality:
* Updated Mac Pro at last delivering sensitive performance improvement over 5.1 Mac Pro.
* Retina (4k/5k) Thunderbolt Display a mandatory offering delayed at Mac stores since the release of the Mac Pro.
* Updated iMac (maybe upto 4k/5k resolution and latest nVidia gpu) another long awaiting products with slave market, only intrigued about the fate of the 21" iMac will move to 3k resolution?
* Xeon based Mac mini or Mac mini Server, will not happen neither now (next 1-2 keynotes) neither mid term unless Intel rebranded all its cpu s as Xeon.
* ARM bases Mac, with the exception of OSX Server no ARM setup rival on Intel on user experience, neither consider to rebuild and optimize apps for an cpu with different endians.
Plausible:
* New Mac mini only with mobile cpu: it's an industry tendency go to soldered mobile cpu on mini pc, look at zotac.
* Fanless new Mac mini, of a complete redesign it's done it's very possible and will be very appreciated, also could happen having two different Mac mini, one with <20w TDP fanless, and another on 65W TDP with fan cooler and more powerful cpu.
* Discrete GPU on mac mini, if Apple goes on very low TDP cpu may offer a dGPU version as on the very successful Zotac en760, this case forget powerful 4c8t i7 cpu,as much a 2c i7 would be offered, this combination it's also more powerful than i7-iris Pro and cheaper.
* X99/i7 Haswell-E/gaming GPU: based Mac Pro, of course this is my speculation, but besides being cheaper could sell as hot bread as fills the gap among mini and iMac and the Mac Pro.
Reality:
* Updated Mac Pro at last delivering sensitive performance improvement over 5.1 Mac Pro.
* Retina (4k/5k) Thunderbolt Display a mandatory offering delayed at Mac stores since the release of the Mac Pro.
* Updated iMac (maybe upto 4k/5k resolution and latest nVidia gpu) another long awaiting products with slave market, only intrigued about the fate of the 21" iMac will move to 3k resolution?
All well said.
I think this one is the biggest stretch. Apple could do this and I'd love to see it (and it would probably appeal to me more than any other model Apple has released in years) but it seems really unlikely. A model like that should be much cheaper than the mac pro. But if it was, it would likely take a big cut out of MP and even mini sales, so if they released it I could see them jacking up the price a lot to compensate for cannibalizing MP. This would basically be the xMac, and we all know how that turns out.
I think i7 is less of a factor than the dual "pro" GPU. If they just did a single consumer GPU version of the MP and brought down the price enough I think it would cover that part of the market (and sell really well). But even in that case I doubt the price would come down that much considering how they have the base MP priced.
I have always wanted to see an xMac but I'd probably be happy with either a beefed up mini or a cheaper quad MP. But at this point I'm skeptical that even either of those would happen.
I think this one is the biggest stretch. Apple could do this and I'd love to see it (and it would probably appeal to me more than any other model Apple has released in years) but it seems really unlikely. A model like that should be much cheaper than the mac pro. But if it was, it would likely take a big cut out of MP and even mini sales, so if they released it I could see them jacking up the price a lot to compensate for cannibalizing MP. This would basically be the xMac, and we all know how that turns out.
I think i7 is less of a factor than the dual "pro" GPU. If they just did a single consumer GPU version of the MP and brought down the price enough I think it would cover that part of the market (and sell really well). But even in that case I doubt the price would come down that much considering how they have the base MP priced.
I have always wanted to see an xMac but I'd probably be happy with either a beefed up mini or a cheaper quad MP. But at this point I'm skeptical that even either of those would happen.
Bad math, if Apple sells 100 nMP and 200 iMac 27 for pro-sumer market and earn 300 * X (assuming a flat earn margin) for Apple actually could make more sense if they sell 50 nMP + 100 iMac 27 + 200 xMP since totals 350 * X, the balance it's positive because the xMP will eat more market on non Apple slave users (read gamers).
So I don't see it as unlikely, of course still an hypothetic product which should revolutionize Apple high end offering.
Note: xMP = x99/i7/non Pro gpu(s) based Mac Pro.
Last edited:
I don't think we will ever see an xMac at least not with the current Mac Pro. Gamers go where the games are, thats not Apple.
Also if such a thing existed who in their right mind would buy a Xeon Mac Pro which surely has a high markup given that Apple went to the trouble of a completely new factory for a new form factor pro-descktop.
ECC? Is that even required for the things the Mac Pro is aimed at? I suppose if your using a machine for work theres no reason not to have it but some people on here moan about "workstation class" components yet use an iMac or MacBook Pro every time a generic PC is brought up to make them sound super professional.
Also if such a thing existed who in their right mind would buy a Xeon Mac Pro which surely has a high markup given that Apple went to the trouble of a completely new factory for a new form factor pro-descktop.
ECC? Is that even required for the things the Mac Pro is aimed at? I suppose if your using a machine for work theres no reason not to have it but some people on here moan about "workstation class" components yet use an iMac or MacBook Pro every time a generic PC is brought up to make them sound super professional.
FYI, Macs use to be the best Gaming Computers for... WINDOWS, since you can install Windows thru Bootcamp and then run natively Windows Applications, this is also valid for Steam since latest ubuntu also has an specific version for Macs.
About XEONs no case gaming on Xeon, maybe a bit more useful the dual GPU, but both are optimized for very different applications so its perfomance for gaming at best its non optimal.
I named an Hypothetic xMP based on latest enthusiast chipset from intel: X99 and having non-PRO dGPU as well its an Machine theorically much cheaper and much more efficient for gaming (and photo/video edit too) than a Mac Pro (sharing the "trash can"chasis), having similar "per unit" profits for apple.
Apple doesn't have a flat margin. So if they release a product that reduces base MP sales and makes a lower profit, they have to sell a lot more of the new model to make that money back. And if theres any extra computer market share to be gained for Apple, gamers are probably very little of that.
I'm not really sure what the big advantage is supposed to be for x99/i7 considering the xeon E5-1620 they are using already is about the same price as the equivalent i7. The biggest price savings would be going to one GPU (and consumer version) but it seems like despite Apple's hype, the low end GPU probably doesn't cost Apple that much - going to a single might save a couple hundred bucks but they're probably not paying much more for "pro" cards compared with the consumer alternatives they would use instead. Not to mention that they're not PCI cards, any savings from using a different GPU would be negated by having to redesign it for the MP form factor.
As much as I'd love to see a "prosumer" MP I think it's much more likely we'll just see incremental improvements to mini and iMac. And even those will probably be modest, no desktop CPU in mini and probably no six core iMac any time too soon.
At least, who in their right mind would buy a quad xeon MP. Which is what many people are wondering already when you compare the performance of the quad MP with the high end versions of other macs.
I agree that some Macs do make decent gaming machines. Oddly enough, every PC game I have ever played in the past 6 years has been on my 2008 Mac Pro (via Windows 7) but I don't think it was intentional on Apples part. I use a PC 5870, still chugging along nicely.
The thing about Xeons, is that the equivalent single socket Xeons (E3-1XXX-> 1150 socket i7 4770 etc, E5-1XXX socket 2011/-3 socket i7 5930) perform just as well even at gaming. Obviously with the k series i7s you get overclocking and with Xeons you get stability but these days overclocking isn't required. I think Xeons run a bit cooler too in practice. Its all about the GPU. I honestly don't expect Apple to produce a box that lets you put any old GPU in, Apple loses out on sales. The Old Mac Pro was good in this way but lacked the convenience of a proper modular power supply.
I am considering a gaming PC with a high speed Xeon, 3.5 GhZ 6 core maybe as I do indulge in a bit of work related things at home now and again.
----------
Exactamundo.
2500 Elizabeths IIs (or 2999 Washingtons) is nuts for quad core.
I think there are one or two special cases where money doesn't matter. Our 8 year old Xeon workstations are near idle 99 % of the time but they control instruments worth millions, so in this case such workstations with ECC make sense I suppose.
Flat margin was just to illustrate the hypothetical escenario, actually Apple margins vary on product lines, being the iPhone the most profitable along with cables and beats, the less profitable are the Pc Apple sells at high price when actually delivers expensive components, the Mac Pro a e it's a bit cheaper than just to assembly the same configuration DIY with pc components.
A 6 core Haswell-E with 28 pcie lines (enough for single gpu pcie ssd and 2-3 Thunderbolt 2 plus usb3) cost less than 350$ it's 50% faster than Xeon E5v2 1620 (295$), it's chipset x99 also its cheaper than c608 and don't require ECC ram.
i7-5820K is rumored at under $400 which will be great for a six core chip. But it requires DDR4 and the newer motherboard is pricier than the older options. CPU a couple hundred bucks cheaper but the ram and mobo may eat up that savings. It certainly wouldn't be a big enough difference for Apple to have a huge price drop on 4 and 6 core MP.
There are some intensive application that requires ECC ram (large 3D modeling, Chemical simulation) coz a single byte could deliver unrecoverable results, common apps uniquely affected (or at least perceiving changes) by 1 on a billion bytes errors, and if such error happens it's easy to recover.
Xeon worth each cent where they are intended, this is not the case of gaming where the GPU does at least 75% of the work.
Apple may not intentionally build PC for Windows gaming, but remember Steams has an OSX client older than its sounded Linux version, IMHO Steam had a much better experience on any Mac than on any Linux, this is due the graphics drivers stability, maybe this the reason why they will control Steam OS so close.
I don't consider even drunk Apple allowing to overclock any Mac.
The point with the iMac and the mini is the iMac is thermally restricted very difficult to offer something more powerful, we could expect a new Haswell 4771 and nVidia 980m as much without introduce some mod to the chassis allowing a higher TDP cpu/gpu.
The mini also its more complicated, apple designed it to handle upto 44W TDP not enough for Haswell i7-4770R (65w), hopefully a full redesign it's close to be released but I only expect soldered ram, slightly more powerful cpu/gpu pcie ssd or hdd and maybe fanless, but never something capable to compete with other non headless Mac.