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.
The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming
- Thread starter GabrieleR
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mac mini new mac mini
- Sort by reaction score
It could have been better with a discrete mobile GPU and a better cooling solution but at this price point a Mini ITX is a much better choice.
With that price point if you wanted Linux or Windows machine you could have a decent desktop processor and GPU.
I worry about the Tom's Guide reviewer. Most of their disdain of the 617kyk seems to be about its gaming potential:
Honestly, I don't think Tom's really knows a thing about the "casual" PC gamer.
Their complaints mainly seem to be that the Skull Canyon isn't anything close to a desktop computer containing a high-end discrete graphics card. If they compared the device to any other mini PC (the way that Anandtech did), I think their review would be much more valuable; I don't see why anybody would care that a mini PC does not have as much pixel-pushing power as a high-end desktop...
I must confess I stopped going to Tom's website in 1999. This review was an exception for me.
The important reviews come from consumers who are using them. Tech sites just give benchmarks that most of the time tell half the story.
I see this unit coming down around $200 during the end of year holiday shopping time which is about the norm sale on NUCs.
If the consumers reviews are good up till then it will be a good buy for around $500-550.
I like the machine, but am hesitant to fully commit to it. Next to my iMac it is actually loud to me But most would probably not even hear it. I may return to Amazon or sell on eBay for a slight profit as it is built and operating.
I am going to wait at least until June and see if a new mini comes and possibly build my business around that. That way I could offer clients Win, Mac, or both
But most would probably not even hear it. I may return to Amazon or sell on eBay for a slight profit as it is built and operating.I am going to wait at least until June and see if a new mini comes and possibly build my business around that. That way I could offer clients Win, Mac, or both
People need to stop comparing Skull Canyon to mini-itx and other form factors. If size is not a big factor for you then of course SC does not make sense. In its class SC is currently the most powerful computer available. This thing is the size of a VHS video cassette.
Having said that, still slightly disappointed with the Iris Pro 580 performance. Rise of the Tomb Raider is off the table even at very low res all eye candy turned off.
For me the question is whether to go a little bigger (Mac Mini size) and get a discrete processor. Zotac ZBOX-SN970 has a GTX 960, Skylake i5-6400T with similar pricing. Size vs. power.
Or just wait for something better.
Having said that, still slightly disappointed with the Iris Pro 580 performance. Rise of the Tomb Raider is off the table even at very low res all eye candy turned off.
For me the question is whether to go a little bigger (Mac Mini size) and get a discrete processor. Zotac ZBOX-SN970 has a GTX 960, Skylake i5-6400T with similar pricing. Size vs. power.
Or just wait for something better.
It does strike me that the Skull Canyon team prioritized keeping size/volume as small as possible, over noise and thermals. I'm not saying they weren't aware of the issues, but if they had a larger volume budget, they could have reduced peak temperatures with more room for passive heat dissipation, a larger fan and/or better airflow. They also could have added room for a 2.5" storage device, and lowered noise vie bigger fan w/ lower rpms, and/or better acoustic design. As it is, it seems the balance was tilted towards making it as small as possible. The Mac Mini is a much more balanced design, because Apple prioritizes things differently.
I suspect the skull canyon guys kept getting their work compared to the other NUCs, and did as they were direct to do.
I suspect the skull canyon guys kept getting their work compared to the other NUCs, and did as they were direct to do.
I don't know why you question their design goals. They wanted to create something new and I believe they achieved this. The machine you describe is already available.
Again, wish the Iris 580 was a little faster but that's simply an indication that I need to look for something with a larger footprint. For me, SC was nearly there. I'm really split on it.
Yeah, I think Intel erred in marketing this machine as a gaming device. They did not factor in that people would make unfair comparisons to larger devices.Their complaints mainly seem to be that the Skull Canyon isn't anything close to a desktop computer containing a high-end discrete graphics card. If they compared the device to any other mini PC (the way that Anandtech did), I think their review would be much more valuable; I don't see why anybody would care that a mini PC does not have as much pixel-pushing power as a high-end desktop...
Pushing the whole $800 Razer Core add-on was a stretch as well. The whole concept of ucff pcs begins to break down in all but the most niche of use-cases.
I wasn't questioning their design goals per say, but pondering what they were. I'm speculating that keeping the chassis size small was one, if not the top goal after the CPU was chosen.
There's a ton of tradeoffs you can make engineering wise along the lines of 'a little more of this, and a little less of that'. For example, Intel has other NUC models that have room for 2.5" drives, but not in this one which limits max storage to less than those other models. And noting the hotspots in the thermal image pics in the Anandtech article as well - more space lets you use larger heatsinks/spreaders (and airflow) to lower the thermal peaks.
As for the 580, I like it as it is very efficient, and compares well to AMD and nVidia on the basis of GPU 'power' per watt, (and I often am doing graphics programming for a living). At just ~20-25 watts TDP for the EUs, it can't go head to head with a 150+ watt discrete GPU in total compute power, but it's really good tech. Right now, it's about 33-38% of what we consider 'min-spec' for VR (Vive) - a long way off from VR, but a long way from the days of nVidia ION being the king of iGPUs (the 580 benches at roughly 20x the ION)
Like anything else - it's about what your use case is. Playing Destiny at 4K Resolution? Not for you. Photoshop on the go? Might be perfect for you. The 580 increases the range of use cases a machine of that size can cover, and that's pretty cool.
Hmm. Honestly, I do play a decent amount of games on my Mac Mini, particularly Civilization V. This game plays surprisingly well on a 2010 Mini, although of course at minimal graphics settings. I think the idea of a mini PC with Iris Pro 580 level graphics could be quite appealing to a certain group of folks who enjoy both SFF PCs and some modest gaming...
The reviews to date would suggest its main strengths lie elsewhere and the benchmarks I've seen confirm it.
The Tom's review might appear harsh but if Intel are going to flog it as a gaming machine then that's how it will be judged.... but it ain't really a gaming machine so the 6/10 could be fair/unfair depending on how you look at that.
Looking at it as just a very fast nuc, i'd give it a 9/10.
[doublepost=1464172018][/doublepost]
The design goal was to pack in as much power as they could in a nuc form factor. The Intel product manager said that on the SC reddit AMA. Read that and it will answer a lot of your questions as well as why they had to expand the traditional nuc case.
No no, what I'm saying is that if you already know you want a NUC, but you also want to play games on it, Skull Canyon is in an entirely new league. You now have a chance to play games you've never even tried before. And yeah, the benchmarks I've seen confirm it.
Another tech review with benches
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016...n-nuc-is-a-workstation-for-the-size-obsessed/
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2016...n-nuc-is-a-workstation-for-the-size-obsessed/
Aha, Ars Technica does the same comparison that Tom's Guide makes, but reads the correct result out of it:
![Skull-Canyon-NUC.012-980x720.png]()
There's no question that the NUC is an efficient and FAST and Igpu wise powerful small computer. It will play older games well and I think Intel will optimize the Igpu further.
The only thing is the cooling compromise. I really see someone coming up with solution to this with an aftermarket kit at some point.
Still too expensive but I believe prices will come down over time.
The only thing is the cooling compromise. I really see someone coming up with solution to this with an aftermarket kit at some point.
Still too expensive but I believe prices will come down over time.
Another entry coming in the Mini PC market next week.
http://vrworld.com/2016/05/25/zotac-launch-vr-mini-pc-powerhouse/
http://vrworld.com/2016/05/25/zotac-launch-vr-mini-pc-powerhouse/
Why are they always so ugly? This looks like a power supply brick in my Hackintosh.
If the new mini has some serious power and is quiet and cool, then we will know for sure that Apple is paying attention to the market. No one can take away a man's dreams
I did.
I asked a question in that AMA while it was still live, but it must have been getting near the end as they didn't answer.
Checking out customer reviews on some of the sites for the NUC. Newegg customers are usually pretty hard on products but their giving stellar reviews so far.
For those interested in the new NUC. Detailed tear down and benchmarks including gaming.
http://hothardware.com/reviews/intel-skull-canyon-nuc-6i7kyk-mini-pc-review?page=1
And 5stars from PCWorld.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3074...n-nuc-smashes-all-mini-pc-preconceptions.html
http://hothardware.com/reviews/intel-skull-canyon-nuc-6i7kyk-mini-pc-review?page=1
And 5stars from PCWorld.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/3074...n-nuc-smashes-all-mini-pc-preconceptions.html
Last edited:
The performance of the Skull Canyon I think was expected. I mean, it's a IGP small profile system. The one surprising thing was that I had never looked at the Zotac system before.
The issue with reviewing it is how subjective "good enough" really is. Whether the reviewer is internally comparing it with a basic machine with a discrete nVidia or with another small profile system makes a big difference.
We'd scoff at these specs in a windows machine but it would be a miracle if a mac mini came close. Which totally sucks because obviously the hardware and form factor are there along with the price point. So it really is up to Apple to decide not to short change their users, and many of their users will insanely agree with the decision saying that its just fine.
So we'll see. I'm hopeful but not very optimistic that we'll be pleasantly surprised.
The issue with reviewing it is how subjective "good enough" really is. Whether the reviewer is internally comparing it with a basic machine with a discrete nVidia or with another small profile system makes a big difference.
We'd scoff at these specs in a windows machine but it would be a miracle if a mac mini came close. Which totally sucks because obviously the hardware and form factor are there along with the price point. So it really is up to Apple to decide not to short change their users, and many of their users will insanely agree with the decision saying that its just fine.
So we'll see. I'm hopeful but not very optimistic that we'll be pleasantly surprised.