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

Xeon coming to laptops (and Mac Mini?)

P

PhotoRunner

macrumors newbie
Original poster
Aug 10, 2015
1
0
Engadget has a post talking about Intel bring the Xeon to pro laptops. I was wondering it they brought that to the Mini would anybody buy one? For me, I would in a minute. I like the small size and I like to use it move big photo to my Drobo for long saving. With this update you could run 2 4K displays for great scene sizes for PhotoShop. For me it would great for a Mac Mini Pro unit. I like the PRO but I just will not use half if it. Anything I can put 16Gb memory in, great processors and run a couple 4K displays it for me.
What do you think?

http://www.engadget.com/2015/08/08/intel-xeon-for-laptops/
 
I would buy one in a heartbeat but have little faith it will happen. It may end up in an iMac though which I may go for if the Mini does not get a quad core refresh by the 2016 refresh cycle.
 
Crosscreek said:
I would buy one in a heartbeat but have little faith it will happen. It may end up in an iMac though which I may go for if the Mini does not get a quad core refresh by the 2016 refresh cycle.
Click to expand...

Why would a workstation processor (xeon) end up in a consumer computer? The average consumer has little need for anything a Xeon processor has to offer beyond the GT4e Graphics in this processor, but even then the GT4e will most likely be offered in other more affordable processors in later Skylake releases.

No the ONLY computer that this MAY end up in would be the high end 15" Macbook Pro since that is portable Professionally targeted computer, but even that I question whether it would happen. Even those who use Macbook Pros rarely have a need for ECC Memory.
 
  • Like
Reactions: old-wiz
paulrbeers said:
Why would a workstation processor (xeon) end up in a consumer computer? The average consumer has little need for anything a Xeon processor has to offer beyond the GT4e Graphics in this processor, but even then the GT4e will most likely be offered in other more affordable processors in later Skylake releases.

No the ONLY computer that this MAY end up in would be the high end 15" Macbook Pro since that is portable Professionally targeted computer, but even that I question whether it would happen. Even those who use Macbook Pros rarely have a need for ECC Memory.
Click to expand...

Yes your right that the average consumer would never need Xeon.

I'm not really concerned with basic consumer based computers. I would entertain Xeon for CAD and Graphics workstation
that can be used as desktop units and not just top tier laptops.

These kind of uses do not require full fledged dual Gpu s as the Mac Pro. iMacs would probably be the most likely candidate but I'm sure an office full of Xeon Minis with dual 4K displays would be a nice setup for engineering work although discrete graphics would be a problem.

Thats why I say the iMacs would be a more likely Xeon workstation.
 
Fishrrman said:
Would cooling the CPU become an issue?
Click to expand...

Yes, cooling would be a problem.

The most powerful cpu chip in the current mini is i7-4578U which runs at only 28W.

In contrast, most of the weight and volume of the current mac pro is taken up by a huge heat sink. The least powerful cpu chip available is a xeon E5-1620 v2 which runs at 130W! And then there are the honking graphics chips.

There are lower-power xeon such as the E3-1240 which dissipates only 80W, but this is still more than double the chips in the mini, and it is worth noting, the lower-power xeon also has a lower break-down temperature (69C versus 100C for the usual i5 or i7 laptop chip) so the cooling system must be all that much better. The savings in heat (80W) is made up by the cooler temperatures it needs to run.

Of course, apple could design a mini to cool the xeon but it would have a bigger heat sink and fan with more noise than the current models.

What apple does not want is a special mini chassis and logic board just for one low-volume product. So, no, there will never be a xeon in a mini. In fact, you even have to wonder if there will be a mini.
 
Last edited:
I can't see Intel doing this, unless they get the power and cooling sorted. Xeon's have always been targeted at servers and workstations and while power has become a massive issue in the data centre, it's not a big an issue as it is for laptops.

Unless the industry is going towards higher core counts and support for large amounts of RAM in laptops this is not going to fly. It's also very unlikely to appear in the Mini considering Apple scaled the last one down - the want you to buy an iMac. They don't even want you to buy a Mac Pro really, it's all about iMac.
 
grcar said:
Yes, cooling would be a problem.

The most powerful cpu chip in the current mini is i7-4578U which runs at only 28W.

In contrast, most of the weight and volume of the current mac pro is taken up by a huge heat sink. The least powerful cpu chip available is a xeon E5-1620 v2 which runs at 130W! And then there are the honking graphics chips.

There are lower-power xeon such as the E3-1240 which dissipates only 80W, but this is still more than double the chips in the mini, and it is worth noting, the lower-power xeon also has a lower break-down temperature (69C versus 100C for the usual i5 or i7 laptop chip) so the cooling system must be all that much better. The savings in heat (80W) is made up by the cooler temperatures it needs to run.

Of course, apple could design a mini to cool the xeon but it would have a bigger heat sink and fan with more noise than the current models.

What apple does not want is a special mini chassis and logic board just for one low-volume product. So, no, there will never be a xeon in a mini. In fact, you even have to wonder if there will be a mini.
Click to expand...

This thread is about the new Xeon processors designed for laptops. As mentioned earlier, they are 47W and the 2012 Mac Mini had a 45W processor in it.

It would be a nice model to have, but I think the lower spec processors of the last refresh were to prepare for a new form factor on the way that will only be able to fit low spec chips, but won't look too bad compared to the most recent version.

A more powerful Mac Mini would be great, but I think it may be going the other way: Very entry level.
 
grcar said:
If you really need the xeon then why not just buy a mac pro which nowadays takes up only a small amount of space.
Click to expand...
But leaves a large hole in your bank account.

There is a big gap between the Mini and the Pro, which Apple seem to think can be covered by iMacs. Not all of us are convinced.

I don't need twin discrete GPUs, not even close, certainly not at 3-4 times the price of a Mini. But I do want a bit of CPU grunt for video processing, do want to stay in the Apple environment, and don't want to buy an iMac. What are my choices if I want to stay fully Apple? None, as things stand. Apple are freezing me out of their world.

Are Apple downgrading the Mini with an eye to introducing another model between that and the Pro, possibly a lower specced, single GPU Pro? Or planning on abandoning that whole segment of the market completely, and hoping we buy iMacs instead?

I think the latter choice would be a huge mistake on Apple's part, they need to cover the full range of basic options to stay competitive.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ATC
Miat said:
But leaves a large hole in your bank account. ... they need to cover the full range of basic options to stay competitive.
Click to expand...

Yes, yes, yes I could not agree more. In the old old days the top of the line beige desk-side unit maxed out around $2k. Now you have to pay $3k just to get into the mac pro line. OK, there is inflation, but they always tell us the price of hardware is going down due to technology advances. Apple really needs a reasonably priced headless machine that does not have all the thermal management problems of the mini. The imac is not the answer because they overheat, too, and the integrated screens are another source of reliability problems.
 
grcar said:
Yes, yes, yes I could not agree more. In the old old days the top of the line beige desk-side unit maxed out around $2k. Now you have to pay $3k just to get into the mac pro line. OK, there is inflation, but they always tell us the price of hardware is going down due to technology advances. Apple really needs a reasonably priced headless machine that does not have all the thermal management problems of the mini. The imac is not the answer because they overheat, too, and the integrated screens are another source of reliability problems.
Click to expand...
I run a mini server without heat issues. You just need to place it somewhere cool.

As for an Xeon based MacBook I'd hit that! Multi core goodness would defiantly come in handy
 
grcar said:
Yes, yes, yes I could not agree more. In the old old days the top of the line beige desk-side unit maxed out around $2k. Now you have to pay $3k just to get into the mac pro line.
Click to expand...

Here in mexico the mac pro starts at 55,000 pesos which is 3,666.00 at this time. Not even an option for me.
 
grcar said:
Yes, yes, yes I could not agree more. In the old old days the top of the line beige desk-side unit maxed out around $2k. Now you have to pay $3k just to get into the mac pro line. OK, there is inflation, but they always tell us the price of hardware is going down due to technology advances. Apple really needs a reasonably priced headless machine that does not have all the thermal management problems of the mini. The imac is not the answer because they overheat, too, and the integrated screens are another source of reliability problems.
Click to expand...

You realize that 2k in say 1995 is equivalent to over 3K today right?

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Or how about the original iMac 1998 released at $1299 which by today's numbers gets you to almost 2K (which I will point out buys you a Retina 5K iMac!!).

You can't compare a price of something from 20 years ago without taking into account inflation. Otherwise you should be pissed you can't walk into a dealership lot and buy a brand new car for $3,000 (hey that's what they were in 1955, what happened?!?!?!).
 
paulrbeers said:
You realize that 2k in say 1995 is equivalent to over 3K today right?

http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/

Or how about the original iMac 1998 released at $1299 which by today's numbers gets you to almost 2K (which I will point out buys you a Retina 5K iMac!!).

You can't compare a price of something from 20 years ago without taking into account inflation. Otherwise you should be pissed you can't walk into a dealership lot and buy a brand new car for $3,000 (hey that's what they were in 1955, what happened?!?!?!).
Click to expand...

I bought a new car in 1976 for 3000.00 (not 1955).

What you are saying is only true for the people that are making 50% more money now than they were in 1995. I have no doubt many are, but I am willing to bet there are a lot that are not. So it depends on your perspective.
 
Toltepeceno said:
I bought a new car in 1976 for 3000.00 (not 1955).

What you are saying is only true for the people that are making 50% more money now than they were in 1995. I have no doubt many are, but I am willing to bet there are a lot that are not. So it depends on your perspective.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter whether people are making more money or not (that's a whole other discussion of salaries vs cost of living). The costs of goods and services have gone up by X% over the time span.

And I apologize for messing up the values of a new car relative to years. I was not in the market for vehicles at that time (errr born yet). It was simply an example of setting a value of a good based on a particular year is a ridiculous way of looking at things.
 
Moonjumper said:
they are 47W
Click to expand...

Where is the citation for 47W? For example, the intel website has a i7-6700K with 14nm lithography released 2015 Q3 (ie, yesterday) but it runs at 91W which is a lot more than 47W. And by the way, the case is 3.75cm square!
 
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