new mac mini another disappointment

[Sniff]

Just get whichever one fits YOU.... that's why they make more than one model....


The mini gets 95% of my use..... but I also have a quad core Hack for that other 5%...

 

[LeandrodaFL]

I dont get you folks. Do you want to game on a MacMini? get a freaking iMac, it ships with GT 640M and GTX 675MX

What kind of serious gamer wants to game on a Macmini??? Heck, even gaming on a Mac is not that advised, if you wanna play current titles with MAX settings.

Having said that, I was able to play Bioshock (2006) Max out on a 2010 MacMini (m320), wich is inferior to HD 4000

 

[jdryyz]

I'm looking forward to it. 🙂

Exactly, My 2009 2.66GHz (7200RPM WD, 8GB RAM) performs very well. Video via EyeTV looks good. Both Photoshop CS 5 and CS 6 move along acceptably. The new 2.6GHz will kill my 2009 with even better graphics performance.

 

[gregorsamsa]

The mini isn't a heavy gamer though. Didn't we all expect the HD 4000 to replace the previous line up?

True, but that's still no cause to drop the HD 6630M Mini, even if HD 4000 makes sense in the base model.

FWIW, I have the HD 6630 model & it's no slouch for anything but fairly modern, graphically-intensive games.

IMO, far better would've been to have offered the same updates generally, but at least improve the HD 6630M discrete card with a slightly better discrete card & also offer 512 VRAM (doubling the previous VRAM) in the higher-end Mini.

I imagine most of those complaining might have been pacified.

As it is, only Apple in the entire computer hardware industry would effectively give you a a slight graphical downgrade in the higher-end Mini.

Quite agree with the guy who started this thread: disappointing! Greed seems to have no bounds with this company.

 

[LaunchpadBS]

This isn't about cost for me. Maybe this works for you and that's all fine and good. I don't understand how they could take a step backwards. Surely you can see why people are disappointed.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

The 6630M is the 271st most powerful and the HD4000 is 269th most powerful.

Technically it's a step up, that coupled with the Ivy Bridge CPU's which also outstrip their predecessors quite handsomely it's overall a fairly big improvement.
Like I stated before I have the equivalent dual core 13" i5 MBP with the HD4000 and I play Diablo 3 and SC2 at full res on my 1900x1200 external monitor on medium settings with no noticeable lag.

The new middle tier mini is a QUAD CORE with HYPERTHREADING, seriously what more do you really want(and actually need)?????

 

[gregorsamsa]

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

The 6630M is the 271st most powerful and the HD4000 is 269th most powerful.

Technically it's a step up, that coupled with the Ivy Bridge CPU's which also outstrip their predecessors quite handsomely it's overall a fairly big improvement.

All depends on what benchmarks are used. In the updated link below, the HD 4000 isn't a step up graphically, not even marginally so.

These 3D benchmarks (updated 23rd October), whilst not surprisingly confirming both cards to be relatively low-end, clearly have the HD 6630M as better.

HD 6630M is placed at 572, whilst the Intel HD 4000 is well behind at 522.

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html

That points to the HD 4000 card being a graphical downgrade. However slight that difference is, to some of us that's disappointing for an update.

 

[keema]

http://www.videocardbenchmark.net/gpu_list.php

The new middle tier mini is a QUAD CORE with HYPERTHREADING

On this new mac mini, how will you enable Hyperthreading? or is already enabled?

On a windows type pc I've seen they are enabling it on the bios...

 

[LaunchpadBS]

On this new mac mini, how will you enable Hyperthreading? or is already enabled?

On a windows type pc I've seen they are enabling it on the bios...

The i7, certain apps use hyperthreading, but for the most part quad core is more than enough.