Did anyone see the BTO 2.6 Ghz on the new Mini?

[blanka]

I have not read it anywhere on the net, but I was configuring a new Mini, and this is a BTO option:

Uitbreidbaar tot 2,6-GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 (Turbo Boost tot 3,6 GHz).

That means the Mini can be made faster than basic top iMac 27 inch model! And it still leaves you 1100 bucks for a hellufagood monitor like the NEC PA271W!

 

[Poki]

Isn't the 2,3 GHz chip also just as fast as the 2,9 GHz i5 in the iMacs?

Likewise, it is really a small little beast - just not for games.

 

[george-brooks]

Its a very tempting option! Nothing will replace a mac pro for my serious work, but this makes the mini a very viable option for a second machine or server.

 

[blanka]

You can buy 4 quad 2.6 mini's for the price of 1 12 core MacPro, and that gives you a very capable render-farm that is twice as effective per kWh! Wonder if you can interconnect them over Thunderbolt?

 

[Poki]

Wonder if you can interconnect them over Thunderbolt?

No, because there's only one port per Mini.

 

[rezinous]

Still weighing up on the 2.3 vs 2.6Ghz. Probably the 1 thing I can't upgrade myself in the long term, so most likely should get 2.6.

 

[Poki]

Still weighing up on the 2.3 vs 2.6Ghz. Probably the 1 thing I can't upgrade myself in the long term, so most likely should get 2.6.

When there are thunderbolt graphic cards, SSDs and PCIe-extensions, the only thing you can't upgrade is the CPU.

 

[blanka]

And at 100 bucks it is not the biggest deal. In the 2011 lineup, you needed the top model for the fastest number crunching, now you can just upgrade the mid model.

 

[Mojo1]

You just have to decide if a 10% increase in speed is worth an additional $100.

I think that the 2.3 is plenty fast for me. I'll put the extra $$$ into 16GB RAM.

 

[Westyfield2]

2.6 quad sounds nice .

 

[Mr Rogers]

Ah, but excuse me, what's all the fuss over a 2.4Ghz Quadcore or 2.6Ghz quad core, basically, the higher CPU clock speed will do nothing to change the fact that you are stuck with crippled Intel HD4000 graphics - no discrete GPU option - and hence, as far as graphics work is concerned, its a bit of a non starter.

So, for all those thinking how brilliant this is, had this been a Haswell chip with HD5000, then okay I can understand the lack of discrete GPU, that it is a Ivy Bridge laptop chip with crippled graphics worries me deeply - so deeply in fact that I'll not be purchasing this Mac Mini - rather stick with my 2010 model which still has 14 months of AppleCare left and invest in the Haswell model when that becomes available hopefully in less than 12 months time.

 

[mac jones]

The 2.6 quad is the screaming deal of the decade.
I'm going to get one for sure.

----------

ah, but excuse me, what's all the fuss over a 2.4ghz quadcore or 2.6ghz quad core, basically, the higher cpu clock speed will do nothing to change the fact that you are stuck with crippled intel hd4000 graphics - no discrete gpu option - and hence, as far as graphics work is concerned, its a bit of a non starter.

So, for all those thinking how brilliant this is, had this been a haswell chip with hd5000, then okay i can understand the lack of discrete gpu, that it is a ivy bridge laptop chip with crippled graphics worries me deeply - so deeply in fact that i'll not be purchasing this mac mini - rather stick with my 2010 model which still has 14 months of applecare left and invest in the haswell model when that becomes available hopefully in less than 12 months time.

There are other endeavors than graphics work.

 

[blanka]

No, because there's only one port per Mini.

Are there no TB hubs?

BTW: for rendering gigabit with a router is enough.

----------

There are other endeavors than graphics work.

The quad is great for graphics work: Photosoup, Cinema4D, FinalCut... all run great. What does not run great is games, but there's other machines for that. Yes Photosoup uses GPU, but only for crap features like white lines between pixels, panning with slide-through effect, annoying zoom-effects etc.

 

[Mr Rogers]

The 2.6 quad is the screaming deal of the decade.
I'm going to get one for sure.

----------



There are other endeavors than graphics work.

The primary use of my Mac Mini is as a HTPC, with net surfing, email check - Exchange Server - and some gaming. I don't play games but my daughter does.

Now, when I invest in Apple products I also purchase AppleCare and expect to get a minimum two years work/use out of each purchase, three if I'm lucky - so this Mac Mini revision whilst in CPU terms is head and shoulders above my old 2010 model, the fact is a Haswell equipped Mac Mini will blast this present one out of the water: Haswell to me equates to future proofing, whilst a Ivy Bridge equipped Mac Mini without option of discrete GPU just sucks!!!!!!

 

[Poki]

The primary use of my Mac Mini is as a HTPC, with net surfing, email check - Exchange Server - and some gaming. I don't play games but my daughter does.

Now, when I invest in Apple products I also purchase AppleCare and expect to get a minimum two years work/use out of each purchase, three if I'm lucky - so this Mac Mini revision whilst in CPU terms is head and shoulders above my old 2010 model, the fact is a Haswell equipped Mac Mini will blast this present one out of the water: Haswell to me equates to future proofing, whilst a Ivy Bridge equipped Mac Mini without option of discrete GPU just sucks!!!!!!

Don't think Haswell will be that great. Yeah, it will be better, but if Intel says it will be 20% faster than Ivy Bridge, it will be only 10-15% faster in real world. Not enough to wait a year in my books.

 

[Mr Rogers]

Don't think Haswell will be that great. Yeah, it will be better, but if Intel says it will be 20% faster than Ivy Bridge, it will be only 10-15% faster in real world. Not enough to wait a year in my books.

When you say Haswell will be 10-15% faster than Ivy Bridge, that's not what I'm referring too, I'm actually referring to the built in graphics, HD5000, which will see as much as an improvement as HD4000 over HD3000 - by what I've read, HD5000 will be 2.5X faster than HD4000 - and basically catching up with AMD's SoC options.

As others have noted, if the Mac Mini had a AMD chip with built in graphics, it would be a good machine.

Moral of the tale - why can't Apple offer a BTO choice and its nothing to do with thermals on this occasion - greed more like!!!!

 

[Mojo1]

I've been using a 13" MBP with an Intel HD3000 GPU running Photoshop, Aperture, etc. just fine. So the HD4000 will be an improvement for me.

I need a new Mac now, so waiting until 2013 isn't in the cards... I already waited all summer for this update!