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

2016 Mini to have TB3?

jpietrzak8 said:
Oh, I have no doubt that Apple absolutely does understand this. Of course, what they really want you to do is to purchase an iMac instead. The 2014 update showed that Apple no longer considers the Mini as an option for "serious" Mac users... :(
Click to expand...

And not ONLY an iMac, but a $1700 iMac to get one with discrete graphics. Or a $2300 MacBook Pro

It's basically this: You (Apple) better hope this mini lasts quite a long time. This is because if things don't change, my next desktop WILL NOT be a Mac. If I want the Mac OS, I will Hackintosh it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crosscreek, OLDCODGER and jpietrzak8
jpietrzak8 said:
First question though: 2016 to have a new Mini?
Click to expand...

Actually, if you look the last "upgrade" and trend, My prediction is if we see new mac mini this year will be not a good deal, with M processors 1.1Ghz or something like this. Mac mini computers always take processors from macbooks last year, and the last year they announced this thin macbook with (M) mobile processor with 1.1Ghz. For me this is a very big sh*t. Hope to wrong.
Cheers!
 
benx1111 said:
Actually, if you look the last "upgrade" and trend, My prediction is if we see new mac mini this year will be not a good deal, with M processors 1.1Ghz or something like this. Mac mini computers always take processors from macbooks last year, and the last year they announced this thin macbook with (M) mobile processor with 1.1Ghz. For me this is a very big sh*t. Hope to wrong.
Cheers!
Click to expand...

The low end model has a highly throttled down i5. I certainly hope they don't take the processor from those Crapbooks and put it in a mini. If they do it, they might as well show up at my door personally to say, "We don't want your business."
 
Mago said:
count on this: 2016 Mini, 2x TB3, 4x Usb-C, NO-Internal PSU, No-Spinner HDD, SSD-Only, radically smaller semi-cubic form factor.

Maybe also Back to Quadcore CPUs.

Source: DarknetGuy (anonymous leaker wannabe trying to ain reputation for paid leaks, lets see how of this is truth).
Click to expand...

The problem is even if they do go with Thunderbolt 3 (presumably with usb-C connectors) they can't support Displayport 1.3 or 1.4 yet. Unless they create their own chips or something, which I guess is possible but doesn't seem likely. It seems strange that Intel is taking so long to support Displayport 1.3.

MysticCow said:
Hell, I'll take anything that isn't Intel integrated crap.

ANYTHING

There's a REASON why I stuck with my 2011 mini with the Radeon card.
Click to expand...

I've never used them, but people say the newer Iris and Iris Pro are actually ok. I expect Apple stick with integrated graphics if they ever update the Mini, but I'm probably ok with that if they can manage Iris or Iris Pro.

Even non-Iris HD 530 graphics should be faster than your Radeon 6630M.
 
tuc said:
The problem is even if they do go with Thunderbolt 3 (presumably with usb-C connectors) they can't support Displayport 1.3 or 1.4 yet. Unless they create their own chips or something, which I guess is possible but doesn't seem likely. It seems strange that Intel is taking so long to support Displayport 1.3.
Click to expand...

Even the New Mac Pro loaded with dual Polaris GPU (dp1.4 capable) wont have DP1.3 even less DP1.4, NEITHER IS NECESSARY, a 5K Display can perfectly be feeded by 2 DP1.2 Signals (aka MST) this don't impede having 60fps refresh neither gaming (just the GPU has to be capable to split game display to "two screen", pretty common Metal also is fully capable to do that), What does SST (feeding the entire 5K panel with a single signal) is to save Money and an extra cable, at the potential expense of more line noise.

Don't care about D.P. 1.3/1.4 it's more GPU Spec-War gimmick than actual practical need.

On Dual D.P. 1.2 (MST) you stil can drive a 5K Panel with 10Bit color space (aka HDR) w/ANY-Sync at 60 fps, this is how the MP6,1 does (very well) futher on TB3 you'll only need a single cable (TB3 has dual DP1.2 channels).

Further, did you know NONE Integrated GPU from Intel even next Gen Kabby-Lake is DP1.3 capable, even cant support more than 4K on DP 1.2 SST (but on MST Iris Pro are capable to drive a 5K/10bpp Display at 60p plus a 4K/10bpp Display at 30p or at 60p/8bpp at same time).

Further Macs with an TB3 display no only drive the 5K Panel at 60fps, also feed it witn an usb3 channel and a TB1 channel you can daisychain to other devices.

Even it's rumored some future macbooks pro and iMac to support an new advanced Target Mode, sharing both storage, display and input device with they clients, as emergency display/input for mac pro, mac mini or other iMacs, and those would be capable to keep it charged powering it thru USB-C's Power Delivery.
 
tuc said:
I've never used them, but people say the newer Iris and Iris Pro are actually ok. I expect Apple stick with integrated graphics if they ever update the Mini, but I'm probably ok with that if they can manage Iris or Iris Pro.

Even non-Iris HD 530 graphics should be faster than your Radeon 6630M.
Click to expand...

Keyword "should." Real world experiences with me never match the benchmarks. Yes, it is anecdotal evidence, but that's simply how it works when it comes to me.
 
Mago said:
Even the New Mac Pro loaded with dual Polaris GPU (dp1.4 capable) wont have DP1.3 even less DP1.4, NEITHER IS NECESSARY, a 5K Display can perfectly be feeded by 2 DP1.2 Signals (aka MST) this don't impede having 60fps refresh neither gaming (just the GPU has to be capable to split game display to "two screen", pretty common Metal also is fully capable to do that), What does SST (feeding the entire 5K panel with a single signal) is to save Money and an extra cable, at the potential expense of more line noise.

Don't care about D.P. 1.3/1.4 it's more GPU Spec-War gimmick than actual practical need.
Click to expand...

Well reasonable people can disagree, but I do care. I will probably hold off buying a new machine until I can get one with at least Displayport 1.3, and preferably Displayport 1.4. (This isn't saying much. I'm the kind of guy who waits a long time between upgrades. My last mac laptop is an aluminum G4. My last mac desktop is a Mini with an internal optical drive. I've also got a hackentosh.)

And don't worry about line noise over digital connections. (Though you can worry about display stream compression if you want to. I don't expect it to result in visible artifacts, but it's possible that it could.]

Further, did you know NONE Integrated GPU from Intel even next Gen Kabby-Lake is DP1.3 capable, even cant support more than 4K on DP 1.2 SST
Click to expand...

Yes, I did know that. That's why I expect to be waiting a while.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cosmos
tuc said:
I do care. I will probably hold off buying a new machine until I can get one with at least Displayport 1.3, and preferably Displayport 1.4.
Click to expand...


then stay tuned, given the new Mac (as leaks suggest) will support display output on both TB3 and USB-C_only ports, the USB-C ports will be enabled for DP1.3 even DP.1.4 as long the GPU supports DP1.3 and DP1.4 (only macs with dGPU as the Mac Pro, rMBP-16 with dGPU and iMac with dGPU), even ASUS just previewed its first USB-C/DP1.3 4K Display capable of 120hz refresh.
 
My guess is that there will be a 2016 Mac mini with Skylake processors, so that could be with TB3.
 
jpietrzak8 said:
I don't think Apple really wants or needs to keep a significant presence in the PC market any more. If I remember correctly, well over half of their income is coming from the iPhone alone; it makes sense for them to continue to concentrate on that product. As such, with Apple putting all its energy into the mobile sector, there's really no reason for them to put a lot of effort into creating new desktop options...
Click to expand...

Oh really? Considering that Mac OS X is the only way to create iOS apps says they'll continue developing new macs and OS X versions for a loooooong time. That is unless they port the development environment to the PC!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cape Dave
dogslobber said:
Oh really? Considering that Mac OS X is the only way to create iOS apps says they'll continue developing new macs and OS X versions for a loooooong time. That is unless they port the development environment to the PC!
Click to expand...

Maybe they can port it to IOS? Don't know but that could fall in line with iPad Pro solutions.
 
dogslobber said:
Considering that Mac OS X is the only way to create iOS apps says they'll continue developing new macs and OS X versions for a loooooong time. That is unless they port the development environment to the PC!
Click to expand...

Hmm. Considering the huge number of posts here of people talking about their Hackintoshes, I see no reason why Apple would need to bother with any porting tasks. Simply declare (1) Apple will no longer make Macs and (2) OS X / macOS is now officially supported on non-Apple hardware (easily done since it already runs just fine on non-Apple hardware). Voila, problem solved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crosscreek and Cape Dave
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