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.
Can't WAIT 2012 Mac mini!
- Thread starter stvchu
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
When not watching movies, it would be busy helping scientist cure diseases at WCG (www.worldcommunitygrid.org), and some web surfing. Already moved over to the PC for video editing so that's already covered. You stick a 3 Ghz quad w/hyperthreading in a mini and apple couldn't make enough of them. Would sell like hot cakes. If they don't, I'll build one myself. iTunes runs fine on my windows PC now. Apples loss, not mine.
Not only that, but encoding movies. The more cores, and the faster the cores, the quicker you'll rip a movie and have it in iTunes at various sizes for various devices. Plus who knows where we'll be in 6, 12, 24 months time. The Olympics is being shot in 8K and the Hobbit in 4k. Every little helps.
While I agree with you, a 3GHz quad would sell well, there isn't a mobile quad i7 at 3GHz. The closest is 3920XM at 2.9GHz but that has a TDP of 55W with is 10W higher than the current 2GHz server. If Apple could up the cooling, like in the rMBP, then it's possible.
This is what I'm predicting
Model Family Clock Cores TDP (in W)
6.1 - 3210m i5 2.5 2 35
6.2 - 3360m i5 2.8 2 35
6.2 BTO - 3612qm i7 2.1 4 35
6.3 - 3615qm i7 2.3 4 45
6.3 BTO - 3820qm i7 2.7 4 45
How do these models correspond with the existing Mac Mini models? Would model 6.3 be a non-server model? I'm planning to get a BTO Mini with only a CPU upgrade. I would upgrade the RAM and HD myself.
If they use a 45W CPU, they probably won't be able to fit in a decent GPU, so while the model with the 3612qm is entirely possible, the 'predicted' 6.3 should be a Server-model without a discrete GPU.
However, I strongly believe the 3612qm is going to be a stock option - even if this pushes the stock price to 899. Why do I think this? Simple: If it's a BTO, they won't be able to promote it in a big way. They never promoted BTO options more than with a single chart on their website. And even the current server model doesn't get promoted too strongly. So I'm pretty sure they'll want a Quad-Core in the stock non-server model, and if it's just to say "The new Mac Mini. Double the power, half the noise [or whatever]."
I could live with the 3820qm provided its under a grand but preferably under 800. Shot off feedback to apple basically telling them my history with them and what I wanted in a mini. I know it will fall on deaf ears though. If apple FURBARs the mini, I'll build my own micro PC for a HTPC and leave apple for good.
The price of that machine would be astronomical, so it would most likely be relegated to a niche product. One of the main points of the mini is that it is supposed to be affordable.
Sorry I should have been more clear:
6.1 would be the base model
6.2 would be the discrete GPU model
6.3 would be the server model
While I'm hoping Apple will go all quad across the range, the cost would be very high. I've posted some more thoughts on the available quad core i7's on my blog. The fastest CPU is over $1000
read the blog they will not put in the 3920xm but the 3820qm i could see it used.
3820qm
http://ark.intel.com/products/64889/Intel-Core-i7-3820QM-Processor-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz)
3920xm below
http://ark.intel.com/products/64887...ssor-Extreme-Edition-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz)
i would like a machine with the 3820qm core
I am doing a build with this cpu
http://ark.intel.com/products/65525/Intel-Core-i7-3770T-Processor-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz)
this case
http://www.amazon.com/Silverstone-G...28&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=silverstone+tec+gd08
this mobo
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5904/gigabyte-dual-thunderbolt-on-z77
and this gpu
http://www.google.com/search?q=sapp...-ra0QHc3JX7Ag&ved=0CKAEELAE&biw=1483&bih=1102
amazing that the mini with a 3820qm cpu would be the equal or better to this machine in many ways except these three
1) the hd7770 gpu would be better in my build.
2) my build is quieter.
3) My build has more storage.
maybe 4 as my build may be a little cheaper.
the mini would be equal in cpu or close.
use less power but not that much less.
size well forget the comparison.
I never ran a hackintosh but with this build having t-bolt I will efff around a bit to find out what I can do.
3820qm
http://ark.intel.com/products/64889/Intel-Core-i7-3820QM-Processor-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz)
3920xm below
http://ark.intel.com/products/64887...ssor-Extreme-Edition-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz)
i would like a machine with the 3820qm core
I am doing a build with this cpu
http://ark.intel.com/products/65525/Intel-Core-i7-3770T-Processor-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_70-GHz)
this case
http://www.amazon.com/Silverstone-G...28&sr=8-1-fkmr0&keywords=silverstone+tec+gd08
this mobo
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5904/gigabyte-dual-thunderbolt-on-z77
and this gpu
http://www.google.com/search?q=sapp...-ra0QHc3JX7Ag&ved=0CKAEELAE&biw=1483&bih=1102
amazing that the mini with a 3820qm cpu would be the equal or better to this machine in many ways except these three
1) the hd7770 gpu would be better in my build.
2) my build is quieter.
3) My build has more storage.
maybe 4 as my build may be a little cheaper.
the mini would be equal in cpu or close.
use less power but not that much less.
size well forget the comparison.
I never ran a hackintosh but with this build having t-bolt I will efff around a bit to find out what I can do.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
First, you know your build is approximately 39 times larger than a Mac Mini? (55 liter vs. 1,4 liter) According to your last sentence, I think you know ... It's four times as long, as wide and 6 times higher than a Mac Mini (if the specs on Amazon are correct - but the could well be, looking at the DVD drives).
1) Yeah, but only by a little bit. The GT 540M is REALLY stunning for what it is! AMD is really behind since this generation of GPUs.
2) Are you sure? If they use asymmetrical fans, the new Minis could be quite quiet.
3) You can have up to 2 TB in a Mini (2x1TB 2,5" HDDs). If you aim to build a machine yourself, you shouldn't have a problem putting these in the Mini.
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
The current quad is 45w, so if they can improve the cooling then the only reason to not use it is cost.
That is why I have minis and plan to get a 2012!
I was 100% mac for 15 years but last year I spent a long time running a windows 7 system for my friend I realized that windows caught up a lot in osx.
Also windows has better graphics in all but the top of the line iMac and the mac pro. I still like my minis.
Most use is tv/dvr/pc/htpc . I have 4 minis and a diy pc. the minis are better in all but graphics. but since i can do direct picture in picture with my sony tv as a monitor I know the pc has better graphics. I sold my iMac and my mac pro. i had 1 mini.
I now have 4 minis and the diy pc plus money left over.
The large size of the next pc build was intentional as i can use low rpm fans low power cpu and keep the unit really quiet. these are the fans
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835185056
they will do the job because the cpu is low power and I am using a big heat sink
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16835103099
pull the fan and use the scythe the machine will not get hot. fans will run a constant 500rpm.
my ht has a rack that fits the huge case. I will hook it up to a pegasus r6 and hook up a mac mini to the same pegasus r6. that mini will have windows 7 in parallels . I am thinking all my computers can play nice this way. if it works I will drop 1 mini out and sell it ending up with 3 minis a 2010 a 2011 and a 2012.
The last 5 months i have been checking out pc building and built 5 or 6 pcs. Building a great pc that looks great works great good price is doable.
but try to make one that is small and the world changes the mini is still the king of small gear!
just wish they would make one with a good discrete gpu.
Mac not powerhouse ???????
I don,t know, I run 48 audio tracks, multiple instances of a few terabytes of samples and a lot of processing simultaneously on my Mac Pro 8 core and it just cruises along. My friends do it with 3 PC,s . I am not a computer geek- Just a woodwind player/composer/engineer, but I did teach physics at two major universities in my former life( USC, NYU ) Macs just work for dummies like me. That,s why I love them and use them- don't need to build or hack anything-I have enough to do.
I don,t know, I run 48 audio tracks, multiple instances of a few terabytes of samples and a lot of processing simultaneously on my Mac Pro 8 core and it just cruises along. My friends do it with 3 PC,s . I am not a computer geek- Just a woodwind player/composer/engineer, but I did teach physics at two major universities in my former life( USC, NYU ) Macs just work for dummies like me. That,s why I love them and use them- don't need to build or hack anything-I have enough to do.
Even though it was thinner, they didn't use it in the retina MacBook Pro thus I don't expect them to use it here.
The rMBP isn't a server and the Mini server doesn't have a discrete GPU though
I agree, I don't expect them to use it but it would be a nice surprise
Considering Apple's approach with the Mini, a 3820qm is practically impossible. I think we can hope for a 3612qm in the GPU model and a 3615qm in the server model at best.
Even better would be a Mac PC. Basically a bigger Mini with more room for better cooling and more powerful processors (3GHz+ i5's or i7's) with higher heat output, some removable components (disks, memory, graphics) but not a full blown Mac Pro with a stupid Xeon processor in it.
Still nice and small and quiet though. Not like a big gaming PC.
Apple would sell MILLIONS of those.
----------
What you're really saying is that you love OS X. There's nothing special about the hardware that makes it go any faster or more reliably than any other hardware. It's just OS X.
The trouble is OS X is so damned restrictive in terms of hardware options. The more I think about it, I might go Linux.
I'm with you. Right now Apple's desktop line is lacking. The mini which is neutered, the iMac that restricts you to Apple's choice of screen and the Mac Pro which is overkill for consumers.
I would gladly pay $1500 for a mid sized Mac that contained iMac parts in a box that was easy to open and let me choose my monitor.
You're probably right. The specs and price are about right with the 3612qm and 3615qm. The 3820qm is about $200 more than those two, and Apple probably doesn't want to sell a base Mini server for over $999. If we do get the 3615qm in the server, what kind of overall improvement do you think we can expect over the 2.0 in the 2011 server?
omg that would be awsome, the first easily upgradeable mac! they could start using non soldered processors so you could change your own (prehaps even AMD compatible OS X
) the gaming mac, what a novel idea Oh yeah, and if they do do any major changes, i hope they would replace the diskdrive.
Last edited:
In raw processing power, hopefully up to 30%. In real world use, however, it should be far less. You can look at the retina MBPs, which use the 3615qm in the "base" model.
However, most people will be interested in the new model with a dedicated GPU, which should be interesting. Problem is the 3612qm costs just as much as the 3615qm, so if they fit a graphic card in, it can't cost less than the server Mini ...
The Mini Server will likely have the integrated graphics from Intel, to reduce heat, to leave more room for a beefier processor with a higher TDP. (Like the 2011 model)
The base Mini will likely have the integrated graphics from Intel to reduce cost. (Like the 2011 model)
If you want dedicated graphics you will probably have only one choice.
The base rMBP 3615qm scores a 10,817 in Geekbench compared to the 8,538 put up by the 2011 Mini server 2635qm. I bet they go with a Nvidia part for the dedicated GPU in the mid-range Mini. I'm not familiar with GPUs so I won't guess which one. We may see the same formula in 2012 as with the 2011s. Dual cores (probably those in the 2012 13" MBP) in all but the Mini server to keep costs low on the base Minis.