Intel Unveils Fanless PC Reference Design Based on Upcoming Broadwell Chips

[MacSince1990]

Intel Core M processor, 20nm nVidia Maxwell GPU, PCIe SSD.

This has the potential to be both very powerful in terms of CPU and GPU and yet still be incredibly small and cool.

But since Apple is more about looks than functionality, they won't put a GPU inside the mini and use the built-in "Intel HD" GPU instead. Hopefully they will lower the price by 200$. Imagine a Mac nano for 399$!

edit: I'm looking at my Mac mini 2010 right now, with an external WD 2.5" drive on top of it, and I can imagine a Mac nano being the same size as that external drive.

The Haswell GPU is plenty powerful. It's not much slower than the GeForce 750M

 

[LordVic]

The Haswell GPU is plenty powerful. It's not much slower than the GeForce 750M

ehh, I'd still rather a 750m

however, since no Mac is designed for gaming anyways, having an integrated GPU is a better, more power efficient, cooler and smaller footprint than adding on a discreet gpu

 

[firedept]

How old are you?

We are sleepwalking now compared to the pace of change years ago.
Everyone back then was leapfrogging each other all the time, and totally brand new machines were coming out all over the place.

These days it's dullsville in comparison.

I'd be 54. Sure does not feel like sleepwalking to me. Maybe its just me. It just feels like something new every other day.

 

[Yvan256]

The Haswell GPU is plenty powerful. It's not much slower than the GeForce 750M

There's multiple Haswell GPUs. Intel HD 4000 up to Iris Pro. You can be sure a low-power CPU will have the low-end HD 4000.

As for the nVidia, I was referring to the current GTX 750/GTX 750TI, with the reference model using only 65 watts. With the future 20nm process, I'm guessing the regular GTX 750 would be low-power enough for the current Mac mini case, given the reduction in power of the future Core M CPU.

But as I said, I imagine Apple will go with the Core M CPU + HD4000. But with a PCIe SSD drive, the whole computer could become small enough to be, once again, incorporated directly inside the keyboard. What's old is new again.

 

[LordVic]

There's multiple Haswell GPUs. Intel HD 4000 up to Iris Pro. You can be sure a low-power CPU will have the low-end HD 4000.

As for the nVidia, I was referring to the current GTX 750/GTX 750TI, with the reference model using only 65 watts. With the future 20nm process, I'm guessing the regular GTX 750 would be low-power enough for the current Mac mini case, given the reduction in power of the future Core M CPU.

But as I said, I imagine Apple will go with the Core M CPU + HD4000. But with a PCIe SSD drive, the whole computer could become small enough to be, once again, incorporated directly inside the keyboard. What's old is new again.

Just like my first ever computer!

 

[MarkusL]

I hope at some point they offer both ARM and Intel. That seems like the classy “Apple” thing to do is offer a choice.

Offer a choice, huh? Maybe the classy thing to do, but not the Apple thing to do...

 

[bobdobalina]

edit

 

[VoR]

Perhaps as I simply don't believe "some" of the so called limitations some chip companies go on about.

We see it all the time. Your chip is the best, and you almost do nothing other than rake in the sales.

Then your competitor brings out a new model of chip which places you in 2nd place.

Then, wow, could you believe it, you just the manage to magically make your chips just that bit faster again to get the lead back. Who would of thought it

We see it all the time? Yeah, we've seen stumbles in the past and I'm not saying it won't happen again, but....
Have you compared the size of amd and intel recently? Looked at their profit/loss? Looked at the r&d budgets? There's absolutely no comparison.
I can't see a netburst/Athlon situation suddenly appearing tomorrow Intel need amd to stop themselves getting destroyed by anti-competition, doesn't look they have (or possibly could have) any though.

 

[spinedoc77]

Wow, that thing is insane. There is also the Asus T300, Broadwell Core cpu, fanless, THINNER than the ipad air, has a hard keyboard dock which makes the entire package only .5". I was going to preorder a SP3 but I really think I may wait until the holidays and see what comes out, this seems like Intel's/Microsoft's year.

 

[tuxon86]

I don't understand these "cannibalize" arguments. A sale is a sale, I'm guessing Apple always tries to have roughly the same profit margin on everything they sell.

Of course the margin on a lower-priced Mac means less profits, however given the number of comments about people who don't want an all-in-one, I'm guessing the loss of sales (and the loss of potential switchers) is much greater than any "cannibalization" that would happen with a "screen-less iMac" (i.e. decent CPU and GPU).

The only two non-laptop options are, for a lot of people, the Mac mini and the Mac Pro. There is a terrible gap between these two units, both in price and in computing power.

In the end, even people who want an xMac end up buying an iMac or a nMP... Apple knows this hence the no xMac.

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

And to think Intel was about to double down on GHz before Apple approached them about jumping the PPC ship.

 

[thatisme]

Would love to see this chip in a keyboard-less iMac with touch screen/wacom digitizer. The power of your iMac and the utility of the iPad... a direct competitor to the Surface Pro 3, using OSX. I could see a big enterprise market for something of this sort.

 

[Piggie]

We see it all the time? Yeah, we've seen stumbles in the past and I'm not saying it won't happen again, but....
Have you compared the size of amd and intel recently? Looked at their profit/loss? Looked at the r&d budgets? There's absolutely no comparison.
I can't see a netburst/Athlon situation suddenly appearing tomorrow Intel need amd to stop themselves getting destroyed by anti-competition, doesn't look they have (or possibly could have) any though.

Nvidea and AMD do this all the time the GPU's also.

I've no doubt if "CPU Industrial Incorporated" Suddenly launched a X86 compatible CPU that was say 20% faster than an Intel and Intel went into a "OMG we are going to lose all of profits mode" they'd magically come out with some answer to it before long.

 

[dysamoria]

You left out the word "be", twice in this article.

Hello proof reading.

 

[MacSince1990]

There's multiple Haswell GPUs. Intel HD 4000 up to Iris Pro. You can be sure a low-power CPU will have the low-end HD 4000.

As for the nVidia, I was referring to the current GTX 750/GTX 750TI, with the reference model using only 65 watts. With the future 20nm process, I'm guessing the regular GTX 750 would be low-power enough for the current Mac mini case, given the reduction in power of the future Core M CPU.

But as I said, I imagine Apple will go with the Core M CPU + HD4000. But with a PCIe SSD drive, the whole computer could become small enough to be, once again, incorporated directly inside the keyboard. What's old is new again.

65W is a very high powered part. You would be wrong (very) about a 20nm die shrink allowing it to hit 35 or even 45W, btw.

The Mini isn't really meant for that kind of power. It's a bare bones headless mac for less.

 

[knewsom]

There was a time when people simply don't buy things they can't afford.

There's also that. Unfortunately, those days are gone, baby gone.

 

[VoR]

Nvidea and AMD do this all the time the GPU's also.

I've no doubt if "CPU Industrial Incorporated" Suddenly launched a X86 compatible CPU that was say 20% faster than an Intel and Intel went into a "OMG we are going to lose all of profits mode" they'd magically come out with some answer to it before long.

Nvidia and AMD are different beasts compared to intel.
I'm sure you're right, but intel made ~10 billion last year and amd lost ~100 million. Intel's R&D budget absolutely dwarfs every other company on the planet - they can keep things up their sleeve for as long as they want, amd can't compete.
I don't think we're not going to see 'CPU Industrial Incorporated' suddenly spring from nowhere.

 

[iMacFarlane]

You're kidding right? I'm 33 years old and these days technology leaps forward a lot faster than before. Just look at how much mobile computing changed in 7 years since the introduction of the iPhone. Which 7 years can you point out in the 80's or 90's that saw that kind of a change?

It seems to have slowed to me. I'm 46 and I started out on the Commodore 64. My first PC was in 1992, with a 120MB hard drive. Looking at the graph below, there was a period between 1992 and the early 2000's where hard drives just kept getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger. How long has it taken to go from 1TB standard to 2TB standard? Oh, that's right. Nobody is 2TB standard yet.

 

[Dustman]

Thank god. While possibly unfounded, the idea of ARM based Macs makes me feel uncomfortable. I can probably thank Microsoft for that.

 

[xmichaelp]

Yeah, Mac Mini has quad-core CPU and dedicated graphics and is exactly what an iMac would be without display

But it does have a quad core.

And really, you want something exactly like an iMac without a screen? That would be a hideous device.

 

[slash7844]

It seems to have slowed to me. I'm 46 and I started out on the Commodore 64. My first PC was in 1992, with a 120MB hard drive. Looking at the graph below, there was a period between 1992 and the early 2000's where hard drives just kept getting bigger, and bigger, and bigger. How long has it taken to go from 1TB standard to 2TB standard? Oh, that's right. Nobody is 2TB standard yet.

Image

That's because getting bigger and bigger does not equal to technological advancement. HDD technology have moved on to SSD, with smaller storage but more advanced technology. Same for CPUs. Lower clock speed but multiple cores. Monitors have evolved from CRTs to LCD/LED with different technologies such as TN to IPS and SAMOLEDs. Thus, that graph is totally irrelevant because you can't compare hdd to ssd, and CRT panels to IPS panels.

 

[mikeray]

Hey, if Apple are SOOOOOO clever why can't they write an OS that works on almost any hardware combination like Msoft can do ?

Apple could of slaughtered windows years ago if they had done this.

Even now, if OSX ran on almost any hardware combination, like Windows, their market desktop share would probably blow sky high after a little while.

Oh not this argument again! Apple sells hardware. OS X is free! Why would they let it run on anything?

 

[Tech198]

Intel having troubles eh ....

Its just not possible i tells ya...

Have a fan-less tablet, people will want to play games....

Poof !! There's goes the tablet, up in smoke.

 

[melendezest]

How about a Mac Pro lite? That is desktop hardware inside a tower similar to the Mac Pro.

A question I've been asking for years.

Eventually technology will get to the place where the Mini platform could house a pretty good desktop PC. We aren't far from that now. My fear though is that Apple will take this move to 14NM and try to make an even smaller fan less machine instead of giving us a maximal performance Mac Mini. In other words just about the time the right technology debuts for a decent Mini, Apple will cancel the machine to make a smaller machine.

----------


Not today's Mini!!

Given that the coming technology has the potential to really enhance the machine. That is if Apple actually leverages 14nm to seriously up the Mini's performance. Right now we need a substantially better GPU in the machine and more cores. Broadwell has the potential here, especially if Apple sticks with chips in the 35 watt range.

That is exactly what they're going to do. Give us an even (unnecessarily) smaller Mac Mini.

With an A8 in it.

Because, well, it'll save them money.

That's what a business is supposed to do, right? RIGHT?

----------

But it does have a quad core.

And really, you want something exactly like an iMac without a screen? That would be a hideous device.

Image

LOL. I love it. Defend Apple without understanding.

Listen, if Apple can turn the behemoth Mac Pro into a tiny (albeit sexy) tube, they damn sure can give us a sexy Mac Mini with a quad-core desktop (or mobile--don't care) processor and a discrete, powerful graphics card, like, you know, the iMac.

It doesn't have to be arranged like the pic, man!

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

A sale is not a sale, as you point out yourself...

What investors/shareholders and top management are focused on is shareholder value. That comes from profits, not volume...

That is what smart shareholders are interested in. Not-so-smart shareholders get distracted by sales, not profits. Worse than that, sometimes only this quarter's sales.

If Apple can get massive profits from selling to just 8-10% of the market, and let's face it, it is doing just that, then why lower brand, value, margin etc just to sell more? Apple already has the vast majority of the profit available in the PC/tablet market space.

Agreed. But, it is more than that. Apple has been quite good at looking a medium-term profit, not just this quarter's profit.