How much better is ivy bridge?

[theRAMman]

I am soon going to be buying a mini for home use and minerafting. I was wondering wether the current base model will be significantly worse than a new mini with, say a 2.5ghz ivy bridge.

 

[dukebound85]

the main improvement is the graphics (~40% jump)

cpu should be about a 10% jump

usb3 is nice to have though

 

[theRAMman]

USB3 doesnt really bother me, but will the graphics and processer improvements significantly improve my usage? Minecraft will be the most strenuous thing I'll do.

 

[mjcharlton71]

Isn't there a decent reduction on thermals with IB as well?

 

[Ice Dragon]

Isn't there a decent reduction on thermals with IB as well?

I believe IB runs a tad hotter than SB. If thermals are your main concern, you might wish to wait for Haswell.

 

[Poki]

I believe IB runs a tad hotter than SB. If thermals are your main concern, you might wish to wait for Haswell.

They run cooler for the same specs (i.e. a 2.5 GHz i5 will be cooler as IB than as SB), but as they are going to bump clock speeds and the graphic unit also consumes more power, it will run a little bit hotter.

 

[TacticalDesire]

There's about a 5-10% boost in CPU performance per clock. But if it's the thermals you're worried about, I'd wait for haswell or later.

 

[Acorn]

the jump is mostly the hd4000 in performance. buy the one with the dedicated nvidia and then it wouldnt matter if you had the hd4000 or not

 

[Ice Dragon]

They run cooler for the same specs (i.e. a 2.5 GHz i5 will be cooler as IB than as SB), but as they are going to bump clock speeds and the graphic unit also consumes more power, it will run a little bit hotter.

Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I had heard Intel used worse thermal compound hence the reason for higher temps.

 

[theRAMman]

the jump is mostly the hd4000 in performance. buy the one with the dedicated nvidia and then it wouldnt matter if you had the hd4000 or not

But the nvidia mini would cost more than a 4000 mini

 

[bearcatrp]

Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I had heard Intel used worse thermal compound hence the reason for higher temps.

Have read allot of stories about bad thermal paste too. Could be apple is waiting for a better batch before releasing an upgrade. Don't think I would upgrade until its confirmed that intel fixed that issue. Have also read IB is better on the electricity consumption.

 

[longer.zhou]

when is the mac mini 2012 released ?

 

[Ice Dragon]

Have read allot of stories about bad thermal paste too. Could be apple is waiting for a better batch before releasing an upgrade. Don't think I would upgrade until its confirmed that intel fixed that issue. Have also read IB is better on the electricity consumption.

I never thought of it like that. That does make sense though.

 

[blanka]

when is the mac mini 2012 released ?

If you do the math, it will be around november.

 

[longer.zhou]

If you do the math, it will be around november.

Any evidence ?

 

[blanka]

Any evidence ?

Get the introduction dates of the 1.1, the 2.1, the 3.1, the 4.1 and the 5.1 (new architecture ones). The interval is 476 days on average. Add that to last years introduction of the Sandy, and you will see the next step is around november 7th.

 

[foranor]

Get the introduction dates of the 1.1, the 2.1, the 3.1, the 4.1 and the 5.1 (new architecture ones). The interval is 476 days on average. Add that to last years introduction of the Sandy, and you will see the next step is around november 7th.

According to the buyers guide.. Avg = 356... Not 476 days.

 

[blanka]

According to the buyers guide.. Avg = 356... Not 476 days.

Yeah, but they include useless 0.1 Ghz bumps. These don't count as serious update. BTW, if you check major updates, the interval is much more constant. Fastest is 400 days, slowest 550 or so where speedbump intervals sometimes are more like 100 days. Anyway, everybody here is waiting for Ivy, and that is a major update. So count on around 476 days.