Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Intel Mac mini

This sucks!

Screw the gripes about integrated graphics.... my hot button is the pricing of the intel macs. In all the hype and speculation of this move, the exciting thing about going Intel was the potential to see Mac's go down in price..... not UP!!!!!

Competing winblows machine come better equipped than the mini (and include monitors, keyboard, and a mouse for that matter) for the same or often LESS money.

I LOVE Apple... but I'm not loving what I'm seeing so far with the Intel move on the Macs.

Some of the upgrades to the mini are a nice deal, but I'd rather see some items be options and lower entry level pricing.

I really hope the Ibook (or Macbook which I hate that name...) do not disapoint this bad or jump to high in pricing.
 
"It shares fast 667MHz memory4 with the Intel Core processor, for an incredible value proposition."

Wooo! An incredible value proposition! Just what we expect from a Jobs keynote...

Benchmarks will be interesting, graphics performance is crucial to OSX performance (Quartz Extreme/Quartz Compositor in particular; plus Core Image, Core Video), I wonder how the crappy graphics card will balance out the performance increase from the CPU.
 
AtariMac said:
I think the sad part about this is that the handwriting is on the wall for the iBook. I'd imagine the same crummy graphics are headed our way. I'm glad my wife got the last of the 12" G4 models. I can at least play WOW on it whilst sitting on the couch. This new Mini is a disaster for even the casual gamer.

I hope that Apple gets the point that many of us want a small tower design with at least one slot to change our video cards. Charge $1000 for a Core Duo 1.6, 1 gig of ram and a decent video card that can be upgraded. I don't care if all other add ons need to be external.

Am I the only one who would buy one of these the moment it was available?

Pete
Click to expand...

Nope. If apple released a headless mac in the 1000 dollar range i would buy in a heartbeat.

I think this mini is good and it has is place...sort of. But you have to have an LCD and keyboard and stuff to go with it. I would MUCH rather have an iMac then this mini.

If they take the iMac guts and make it headless but make it so there is one slot for a PCIe graphics card to go into i think A LOT of people would buy.
 
gekko513 said:
Does anyone think those benchmarks could be a driver issue?
Click to expand...

I think that same article you got the pic from mentions that Intel admits there are driver issues with several games. So the performance isn't as bad as the graphs show, though it is still disappointing.
 
Integrated Graphics

For most people, the integrated graphics does the job.

Check out http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1821808,00.asp for a comparison on the same chipset. It holds its own on many functions.

However, and its a BIG however, it sucks for games. Doom was at like 16 FPS, and many games just plain did not run. For something oldschool like Diablo II LOD it may be fine, but if you want the latest game on your mini, forget about it. If you want a nice OS feel, it should be fine.

It is too bad that no PVR or optional graphics was added. The mini is a perfect dorm machine except that audience needs decent video for games, as we all know you study Doom 3 before Calculus.
 
stcanard said:
Originally Posted by dvdiva...

Great, I'm glad I have an expert available!

Please let me know what media centre system I can buy...
Click to expand...

Dvdiva,

Still looking for an answer here. Seriously if you can point out a $700 media centre that fits those requirements (one of the big ones being streamin off my existing system) and doesn't look like a big grey box, with fans drowning out my sound, I'd be really curious.
 
I'm a little confused by the comments in this thread, mostly about the graphics. Let's play "what if" for a moment?

If the mini had something like the ATI X1300 and the same price would the mini be a "great value" or a "super machine?"

Everyone keeps talking about mini gaming, and that it's not sutiable, but I don't think anyone here truly believes the mini is a viable gaming rig. So are just talking past each other on this point?
 
prostuff1 said:
If they take the iMac guts and make it headless but make it so there is one slot for a PCIe graphics card to go into i think A LOT of people would buy.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what PCIe graphics card is. What is it used for?

Oh, and about the core solo.....
 
Up to a 1.66 GHz Core Duo processor - nice
2 DDR2 Ram slots - even better
Four USB 2.0 ports - a nice addition
Front Row - I really wish I had that on my mini right now. 😛

Integrated graphics card? - pathetic😱


I'll just stick with my Mac mini for now.😛

On a side note; where's my full screen iPod?!😡
 
chasepgh said:
Competing winblows machine come better equipped than the mini (and include monitors, keyboard, and a mouse for that matter) for the same or often LESS money.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this - most PC vendors give you a crap 17" CRT (or a lousy small analog LCD for more money than it's worth), plus a $5 mouse and keyboard. I'd rather get my own, thanks. The stuff that the Mini DOES come with (DVI out, wifi, bluetooth, OS X/iLife, small quiet form factor) are missing on most cheaper PCs.
 
seamuskrat said:
The mini is a perfect dorm machine except that audience needs decent video for games, as we all know you study Doom 3 before Calculus.
Click to expand...

In all honesty, wouldn't an iMac be a better dorm machine because the monitor becomes integrated too?
 
gekko513 said:
How do you know?
Click to expand...

Because I ran a ati x200 integrated graphics for a bit before I got my 7800GT. The x200 scores better than the Intel option in the mini. It's horrible for any kind of gaming with this years games (even last years, lol)
 
There's a lot of bitterness and strange ideas floating around in this thread.

Where do people get the idea that the Core Solo is a cheap processor? Cheaper than what?
Cheaper than Core Duo, yeah. Keep in mind that the Core Solo is BRAND NEW, as in just released with Apple as the FIRST company to put out a shipping Core Solo product. It's an expensive, new CPU. Don't let dual core everything go to your head like the G5's "64 bit" did. This isn't the Russian Revolution. It's the birth of the next big thing, sure, but it won't be fully realized for some time.

The integrated graphics are a strange move, sure. It's disappointing that they didn't do better, but at the same time, get over it. They added another RAM slot, additional USB ports, and the IR receiver. Granted the second two are small bits, but everything takes up space. The RAM slot occupies a huge amount of volume. Dedicated memory for the GPU is just one more thing to wedge in on a computer with little free space and one already poorly suited to gaming. The hard drives aren't particularly fast and it's probably for the best that games which will heat up a lot of the components stay away from the mini.

For everyone upset that 720p is the limit for HD content, it's a pebble in the road. The only real HD content is TV and the mini's not set up for that (yet). If you're planning on creating a High-Def media center with a several thousand dollar display and all the trimmings, why would you single out an entry level Mac mini to piece it all together? For the current market, current customers, and the current mini, it's all about standard definition in the living room. DVDs will look the same, and now with 5.1 support, you've got a very competent start.

The price went up, and that's always unpopular. But the Core Solo is way more expensive than the G4 before it, and with Airport and BT 2.0 standard now, it's just a necessary price bump. I think you should be able to custom-configure minis without these things to drop the price back, but saving $50 by dropping the wireless package isn't a big deal.

It's not what we expected and it's not what we'd hoped, but that's because of the speculation and anticipation on these forums that has always been unrealistic, and sometimes we've been spoiled by big surprises. But enough is enough with the HD whining and the lost opportunity for "gaming" and the "slow" Core Solo that wipes the floor with the G4.
 
stcanard said:
Dvdiva,

Still looking for an answer here. Seriously if you can point out a $700 media centre that fits those requirements (one of the big ones being streamin off my existing system) and doesn't look like a big grey box, with fans drowning out my sound, I'd be really curious.
Click to expand...

He won't find one...many higher-end barebones shuttle systems are half that to start with, and by the time it's all put together you are meeting or exceeding the Mini's price for something that is bigger, hotter and louder.
 
Don M. said:
I'm a little confused by the comments in this thread, mostly about the graphics. Let's play "what if" for a moment?

If the mini had something like the ATI X1300 and the same price would the mini be a "great value" or a "super machine?"

Everyone keeps talking about mini gaming, and that it's not sutiable, but I don't think anyone here truly believes the mini is a viable gaming rig. So are just talking past each other on this point?
Click to expand...

If the mini came with X1300 and Core Duo for 659 Euros, I'd think about getting one.
Why X1300? It's not about gaming, it's about video playback. H.264 decoding needs a lot of power - either from the CPU or, better, from a dedicated chip or an optimized GPU such as the X1300.
 
Airforce said:
Because I ran a ati x200 integrated graphics for a bit before I got my 7800GT. The x200 scores better than the Intel option in the mini. It's horrible for any kind of gaming with this years games (even last years, lol)
Click to expand...
But you're looking at a comparison with a Geforce 6200 which is pretty much on par with the x200 as far as I know.
 
Apart from the Integrated graphics it's good

Sure I would prefer not to have integrated graphics, but hey...

Now a comparison to Dell (UK site) (well when their site FINALLY loads, it's the slowest website i've ever used...)

Using http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=18483 which provides comparisons between Pentium 4's and Core Duo/Solo, a 1.5Ghz Core Solo is the same a 2.8Ghz Pentium 4.

Now comparing the specs
Dell vs Apple
2.8Ghz Processor - 1.5Ghz Core Solo (same)
Intel Extreme Graphics - Intel GMA950 (apple better, no seriously!)
80GB HD - 60GB HD (dell better)

No Wireless - Wireless Networking (apple better)
No Bluetooth - Bluetooth 2.0 (apple better)
Windows XP Home - Mac OS X 10.4 (apple better)
No Remote - Remote Control (apple better)
No movie/dvd making software - iMovie/iDVD (apple better)
No photo organising software built in - iPhoto (apple better)
MS Works - No Office Software (Dell better)
100MB Ethernet - 1GB Ethernet (apple better)
No digital audio out - Digital Audio In/Out (apple better)
Standard PC case - Biscuit Tin Sized Case (apple better)
Firewire PCI - Firewire (Dell better as more ports)
Firewall/Antivirus - Firewall
No Remote - Remote (apple better)
No media software - media software (apple better)
No Speakers - Mono Speaker (apple better, slightly as they are both rubbish)
-------
USB Keyboard/Mouse - No Keyboard/mouse (dell better)
17" Flat Screen - No Screen (dell better)
Ability to run the next operating system to be released... (with Aero Glass or equivalent for enhanced security etc.)
No - Yes (Apple Better)

to get a 17" TFT screen and keyboard/mouse from amazon.co.uk for the mac mini is £140.16+£19 (apple keyboard) + £10.15 Logitec mouse (all better than from dell)
Price with Extras
Dell £530 - Apple £618 (dell better by a margin!)

Price without extra's
Dell £530, Apple £449

so the dell seems cheaper, except it is WORSE on everything (except the HD) except the price. I'm not sure what to make of this, but surely Wireless, iLife '06 and OS X are worth £90?
 
from a review of the mini's GPU family:

"Another interesting feature of the new GMCH is the add-on digital video output card. Dubbed "ADD2+", the card can use 4 or 8 lanes of x16 PCI Express and support up to two displays in multimonitor mode. Alternatively, it can work together to support one very high resolution display. The GMCH can also output S-Video. In addition to the 3D capabilities of the integrated core, Intel has built in a video engine with full hardware motion compensation, MPEG2 hardware decode, subpicture support (e.g., for closed captions), and dynamic de-interlacing."

makes it sound like if we pulled it from the case there would be expansion options. am i totally wrong?
 
Don M. said:
I'm a little confused by the comments in this thread, mostly about the graphics. Let's play "what if" for a moment?

If the mini had something like the ATI X1300 and the same price would the mini be a "great value" or a "super machine?"

Everyone keeps talking about mini gaming, and that it's not sutiable, but I don't think anyone here truly believes the mini is a viable gaming rig. So are just talking past each other on this point?
Click to expand...

The x1300 is more media centered. It would make more sense and do a bit better in gaming. Nothing great, but better with decoding and such. Throw in the fact that there would be less load on the CPU and it is a much better solution/better offering than a $300 Dell in the graphics department 😉
 
Apologies in Advance

stcanard said:
Repeat after me:

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

The Mac Mini is not intended to be a game machine.

Okay, get it?

The Mac Mini is intended to be a media machine. And as you just said, as a media machine it will perform better than the older Mini.

Not everybody plays videogames.

Not everybody who buys a computer is buying it to play videogames.
Click to expand...

Sorry guys, but completely agree with this. I understand there is some disappointment employing a limited graphic capability though. I actually had hoped (in an earlier thread) for the intel chip and upgraded audio out for the mini. And Apple delivered on both. These minis are going to become the core of a lot, and I mean a LOT of people's stereo systems. And not just average stereo systems either. CD players of all makes, models and prices are going to find their way going out the door.

If you can deliver the same sound to your home stereo, and maybe a very good one using the analog or better yet, the optical out, this is a great base machine to run a jukebox. Hundreds of CDs can be loaded onto a firewire drive and sit nicely next to the mini.

I'll be using my G4 15" powerbook more as a controller than the remote Apple is offering or even my handheld's bluetooth software.

Just placed my order and will be happy with this. For the cost, it's actually very good for the audio folks. 😎
 
ok jobs your out go to disney now

this time apple have just crash period .....

the new mac mini is a scam .... its you put a few 100$ more you have a imac ...

there some good weed at apple man ...

now mac mini come with window vista free .....
 
You guys make too many assumptions. How do you know that the integrated graphics in the new Mac Mini suck? Have you even used one for yourself?

I for one think that the integrated graphics are perfect for the Mac Mini. The ATI graphics it had last time were LITERALLY integrated. This has more memory as well. Also, it freaking hooks up to a TV! Crappy graphics couldn't handle that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back