Mac Mini 2013 PCIe SSD

[sublunar]

Unfortunately, there isn't any i7 mobile Haswell processor (Dual or Quad Core) + Iris Pro 5200 graphics combination below MAX TDP 45W Mac Mini case limit.

Most possible combination is dual-core i7 mobile Haswell processor with Iris HD5100 or HD5000 graphics.

Staying below the MAX TDP 45W case limit, the only quad-core i7 mobile Haswell processors combined with HD4600 graphics...

I can't find a more specific and recent article based on a minute's searching but basically see the link below:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/376882/haswells-single-chip-design-marks-end-of-the-chipset

Intel have incorporated parts from a chipset that would previously have been left out of the TDP calculation. This artificially inflates the TDP figure because the PCH is now included on the CPU rather than on the chipset/motherboard but it's known that the overall system TDP is comparable to an Ivy Bridge setup with 45w CPU.

Either way, I think Apple will have a a better design waiting in the wings rather than just speed bump an existing system although obviously as with an iMac, it's an easy (and silent) update if you do that.

 

[MJL]

Unfortunately, there isn't any i7 mobile Haswell processor (Dual or Quad Core) + Iris Pro 5200 graphics combination below MAX TDP 45W Mac Mini case limit.

Most possible combination is dual-core i7 mobile Haswell processor with Iris HD5100 or HD5000 graphics.

Staying below the MAX TDP 45W case limit, the only quad-core i7 mobile Haswell processors combined with HD4600 graphics...

Max TDP is at max performance, there are plenty of computers which have the CPU/GPU "de-rated", i.e. running at less than their maximum capability. In fact I regard the current mini already in this category - at 100% load it is just running extremely hot (let's be politically correct and not start a flaming war).

Setting the max speed of the CPU lower will result in a lower TDP. It is already standard practice by Intel to offer certain chips at different speeds, basically because they come from a different part of the die. De-rating them a bit more should be no problem.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

Max TDP is at max performance, there are plenty of computers which have the CPU/GPU "de-rated", i.e. running at less than their maximum capability. In fact I regard the current mini already in this category - at 100% load it is just running extremely hot (let's be politically correct and not start a flaming war).

Setting the max speed of the CPU lower will result in a lower TDP. It is already standard practice by Intel to offer certain chips at different speeds, basically because they come from a different part of the die. De-rating them a bit more should be no problem.

Do you think a new Mac Mini case can be reconstructed to resist higher MAX TDP? (i.e. 47W).

Do you think the below combinations (processor/graphics) are possible options?

Intel® Core™ i7-4750HQ Processor 2GHz (6M Cache, up to 3.20 GHz), quad-core mobile, MAX TDP 47W, Intel® combined with Iris™ Pro graphics 5200.

Intel® Core™ i7-4850HQ Processor 2.3GHz (6M Cache, up to 3.50 GHz), quad-core mobile, MAX TDP 47W, Intel® combined with Iris™ Pro graphics 5200.

Intel® Core™ i7-4950HQ Processor 2.4GHz (6M Cache, up to 3.60 GHz), quad-core mobile, MAX TDP 47W, Intel® combined with Iris™ Pro graphics 5200.

Otherwise, there are combinations of Iris HD5100 or HD5000 graphics only with dual-core i7 mobile Haswell processors (below MAX TDP 45W).

OR

HD4600 + quad-core i7 mobile Haswell processors (to comply with MAX TDP 45W).

(I am talking about the best possible BTO option in the new Mac Mini).

Your opinion?

----------

I can't find a more specific and recent article based on a minute's searching but basically see the link below:

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/376882/haswells-single-chip-design-marks-end-of-the-chipset

Intel have incorporated parts from a chipset that would previously have been left out of the TDP calculation. This artificially inflates the TDP figure because the PCH is now included on the CPU rather than on the chipset/motherboard but it's known that the overall system TDP is comparable to an Ivy Bridge setup with 45w CPU.

Either way, I think Apple will have a a better design waiting in the wings rather than just speed bump an existing system although obviously as with an iMac, it's an easy (and silent) update if you do that.

Do you think a new Mac Mini case can be reconstructed to resist higher MAX TDP? (i.e. 47W).

There isn't any i7 mobile quad-core Haswell processor combined with Iris™ Pro graphics 5200, below 45W MAX TDP.



Your opinion?

 

[mayuka]

Max TDP is at max performance, there are plenty of computers which have the CPU/GPU "de-rated", i.e. running at less than their maximum capability.

Apple does this with their current MBA line. The GPU is not running at full speed. It was discussed somewhere in the gaming thread and on Anandtech.

However, the current Mac mini (2012 and 2011) all use mobile desktop processors, not the U processors used in the MBA line. Those are less restrained. The switch over to Haswell should decrease heat significantly. For example. My MBA 2012 has about 55°C under normal conditions. My 2013 MBA has about 38°C. A similar reduction will be achieved with the next Mac mini.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

Apple does this with their current MBA line. The GPU is not running at full speed. It was discussed somewhere in the gaming thread and on Anandtech.

However, the current Mac mini (2012 and 2011) all use mobile desktop processors, not the U processors used in the MBA line. Those are less restrained. The switch over to Haswell should decrease heat significantly. For example. My MBA 2012 has about 55°C under normal conditions. My 2013 MBA has about 38°C. A similar reduction will be achieved with the next Mac mini.

what do you mean?

can IRIS PRO HD5200 graphics be an option in the updated Mac Mini?

Do you think the Mac Mini case can be reconstructed to resist higher MAX TDP? (i.e. 47W).

OR

do you think APPLE will ignore case MAX TDP limit by choosing Iris Pro HD5200 graphics in their best BTO version?

 

[mayuka]

can IRIS PRO HD5200 graphics be an option in the updated Mac Mini?

It can be done if Apple chooses to not change the design of the Mini. The TDP is not different from the 2011 models with dedicated Radeon graphics card.

Personally, I think that Apple chooses a different path and redesigns the whole Mini. It will be significantly smaller and performance will be more leaned towards the MBA line. Of course, only integrated graphics (the HD5000) would fit into the smaller form factor. This probably won't happen until 2014. This year maybe we'll see a silent upgrade. It would make a lot of people happy.

 

[blanka]

My MBA 2012 has about 55°C under normal conditions. My 2013 MBA has about 38°C. A similar reduction will be achieved with the next Mac mini.

Isn't the thing with the MBA that the base frequency of the haswell is much lower than that of the Ivy? I don't care about 38°C on simple tasks and 5watt less power consumption on a Mini. I think that maxed out, running all cores full speed, the MBA 12 and 13 use the same amount of battery, and so will a Haswell vs Ivy Mini.
Remember that both are 22nm CPU's, so there is no efficiency gain in the dye process.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

Isn't the thing with the MBA that the base frequency of the haswell is much lower than that of the Ivy? I don't care about 38°C on simple tasks and 5watt less power consumption on a Mini. I think that maxed out, running all cores full speed, the MBA 12 and 13 use the same amount of battery, and so will a Haswell vs Ivy Mini.
Remember that both are 22nm CPU's, so there is no efficiency gain in the dye process.

Let's become more practical....

do you think APPLE will ignore Mac Mini case 45W MAX TDP limit by choosing Iris Pro HD5200 graphics (TDP 47W) in their "full" BTO version?

 

[barkmonster]

Are you sure? While introducing the new "biggest" Mac (the Mac Pro), Apple will also unveil the "smallest Mac ever" -- a Mac Mini cube. No room for a fusion drive, but PCIe SSD.

That would be form before function garbage. Where do you get nonsense information like that from?

The Mac Mini in it's current form offers everything it needs to for them to offer an affordable i5 based entry level system with a HDD and still offer a server model with dual HDDs and SSD/PCIe SSD models in between with BTO options to suit.

If anything, they could re-design the internals with no change in form-factor to house a PCIe SSD in place of the current lower HDD bay and then allow space for a 15mm 2.5" HDD using the additional depth it would free up.

That way you can still order it with a HDD to keep costs down and they could offer up to a 2Tb PCIe Fusion drive in the server model.

That's far more likely than ruining their only remaining desktop system that isn't self-indulgent design before out of the box functionality.

----------

Did the price of the 2012 Fusion and SSD in the Mac Mini drop?

I think before it was $250 for the fusion and $300 for the ssd.
Now, both the fusion and ssd in the $799 model is $200.

Also these are the same prices as upgrading to fusion and ssd in the new 2013 imac!!

I think they realised they could still gouge their customers with BTO pricing if they swap £50 worth of 1Tb HDD for £130 worth of 256Gb SSD or add £70 worth of 128Gb SSD to the existing HDD and then charge £160 for either option because enough people would be duped by how much they used to overcharge previously

 

[mayuka]

Isn't the thing with the MBA that the base frequency of the haswell is much lower than that of the Ivy?

Yes of course. This is one reason. When running under load, the 2013 MBA is significantly cooler than the 2012 MBA as well. approx. 2013 i5: 75°C, 2012: 84°C. They both have the same max. frequency. The further integrating of chipset components and the new power management are the reason for that. You can expect similar results with the mobile desktop variants. If Apple chooses to integrate the 5200 Pro, the resulting TDP will be similar to the 2011 Mini, but with significantly more speed.

----------

The Mac Mini in it's current form offers everything it needs to for them to offer an affordable i5 based entry level system with a HDD and still offer a server model with dual HDDs and SSD/PCIe SSD models in between with BTO options to suit.

Even today the base model has some space unused. When using PCIe SSDs there will be even more space unused. Apple won't sit on their tails. They will redesign the Mac Mini sooner than later. If you believe it or not. That's not form over function, it's evolution. Size reduction happened before with the original cube and the transition with both Mac Mini form factors. The recent Haswell technology allows Apple to significantly reduce size, while retaining most of the current speed.

 

[comatory]

Apple tends to keep current tech in line with other products (lets exclude soon-to-be extinct Mac Pro). When Thunderbolt came, in 6 months all Macs had it, even Mac mini.

For now, it seems that wi-fi AC will be this thing so I at least expect this new wireless chip to be included. New processors wont do much in terms of performance but it would still be nice to keep heat level down. Mac mini owners know how annoying the fan sound can be when doing intensive tasks.

Only thing Im not so sure about is PCIe SSD. I woudnt be surprised if this was the thing thats missing.

 

[barkmonster]

Yes of course. This is one reason. When running under load, the 2013 MBA is significantly cooler than the 2012 MBA as well. approx. 2013 i5: 75°C, 2012: 84°C. They both have the same max. frequency. The further integrating of chipset components and the new power management are the reason for that. You can expect similar results with the mobile desktop variants. If Apple chooses to integrate the 5200 Pro, the resulting TDP will be similar to the 2011 Mini, but with significantly more speed.

----------



Even today the base model has some space unused. When using PCIe SSDs there will be even more space unused. Apple won't sit on their tails. They will redesign the Mac Mini sooner than later. If you believe it or not. That's not form over function, it's evolution. Size reduction happened before with the original cube and the transition with both Mac Mini form factors. The recent Haswell technology allows Apple to significantly reduce size, while retaining most of the current speed.

But my point about 2.5" drives, the cost factor of using a 2.5" HDD in the entry level version and the need to house either 2 x 9.5mm HDDs or 1 x 15mm HDDs in the server model still remains. Also, it wouldn't benefit anyone to change the shape and size of the Mac Mini. It goes back to my form before function point. If it's thinner at the expense of internal expansion, it's pointless and achieves nothing. If it remains the same but only offers increased CPU and better GPU options, people will complain it's nothing more than a minor spec-bump. If it suddenly goes all PCIe Flash and doesn't offer the HDD option at all just to be some pointless form factor, it's going to offer token CPU increases, better GPU and yet lack internal storage, lack internal expansion because they could go so small, it has soldered RAM and then Apple will lack a true entry level system because the cost of PCIe Flash of a reasonable capacity would push the cost up and it would be less value for money than the current systems because they'd have to cut corners with drive capacity to keep costs down.

If anything, they could reduce the size of the internals to offer even more space and it could come with 2 x 2.5" bays, room for a PCIe SSD and still have the user accessible RAM coupled with better GPUs and slightly faster CPUs. That would be the ideal situation as long as prices don't change as a result.

 

[mvmanolov]

i'd have to agree with barkmonster.
i think what many fail to keep in mind is who the real consumer base is. one the one hand you have the budget conscious windows switches. and that's great so you have very basic model yada, yada, yada.

But ontbhe other hand you have hundreds of thousands of small and mid size business runing the mini as a server not to mention all the colllocation business who buy thousands of these things...

the first group sort of cares about ram/ssd/cpu/gpu

the second group (i imagine huge market share) cares deeply about ram/storage and quad cpu's

So why would apple change the form factor in a way that would even remotely make that second group reconsider future server purchases away from apple..?

p.s.
Pardon my spelling

 

[philipma1957]

redesign due to the intel nuc and gigabyte brix is possible.


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102035


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856164001


frankly I do not think they do this just yet.


I wonder if the plan is to have mac pros as low as 1200 and have them replace a hi end mini.

I would not mind a low end mac pro instead of a mini.

just give me 1 good gpu and a quad core cpu.
an empty pcie ssd slot. for expansion
an empty gpu slot. for expansion
room for 4 sticks of ram.
a low end hdd
and 3 t-bolt ports.

 

[MJL]

I wonder if the plan is to have mac pros as low as 1200 and have them replace a hi end mini.

I would not mind a low end mac pro instead of a mini.

just give me 1 good gpu and a quad core cpu.
an empty pcie ssd slot. for expansion
an empty gpu slot. for expansion
room for 4 sticks of ram.
a low end hdd
and 3 t-bolt ports.

IMHO Apple does not like to compete in a market - I can see just about see them thinking about moving to only selling the Mac Pro in a number of variants. An enclosure in the shape of the Airport or Time capsule will not do it for me, I rather stay with the current enclosure.

I would like a base Mac Pro (can do with more than two screens).

 

[Cape Dave]

redesign due to the intel nuc and gigabyte brix is possible.


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856102035


http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16856164001


frankly I do not think they do this just yet.


I wonder if the plan is to have mac pros as low as 1200 and have them replace a hi end mini.

I would not mind a low end mac pro instead of a mini.

just give me 1 good gpu and a quad core cpu.
an empty pcie ssd slot. for expansion
an empty gpu slot. for expansion
room for 4 sticks of ram.
a low end hdd
and 3 t-bolt ports.

I would switch in a heartbeat!

 

[MJL]

I was just looking at some other pointing devices and realized that there is hardly any point in making the Mac mini any smaller than it already is.

With severe arthritis I'll be switching to a track pad for "swiping and scrolling" and using a Kensington Expert Optical Trackball as pointing device. (My present Kensington Orbital Trackball with scroll ring is worn out plus is giving me trouble with moving the scroll ring hence the track pad).

The latter is already higher than the Mac mini plus getting similar is size for desk area so why bother going to a size as small as the Intel NUC?

Would have loved to use an Android tablet as large track pad but could not find a decent piece of software to do so.

 

[IGregory]

Well Apple just increased the price of the Mac Mini and they don't normally do that just before refreshing it. So I reckon 2014 is looking a lot more likely than it did before the price rise. I hope it is updated next month though as I might buy one if that happens.

The Mac Mini price increase was prompted by currency fluctuation. Prices in the US for example did not change. So, I believe there is no relationship between the price increase and the release of the next Mini.

 

[mdgm]

The Mac Mini price increase was prompted by currency fluctuation. Prices in the US for example did not change. So, I believe there is no relationship between the price increase and the release of the next Mini.

They usually wait for a new model to be released before adjusting the price for currency fluctuations unless a refresh is not imminent. So I think it's likely now that the Mini may not be updated till next year. They also often wait a while after releasing new MBPs before releasing new Minis (wait for the hardware to get a bit cheaper etc.).

 

[ioannis2005gr]

They usually wait for a new model to be released before adjusting the price for currency fluctuations unless a refresh is not imminent. So I think it's likely now that the Mini may not be updated till next year. They also often wait a while after releasing new MBPs before releasing new Minis (wait for the hardware to get a bit cheaper etc.).

I think MBP is coming around the event of Oct. 22nd. Mac Pro is almost announced....If these happen, Mac Mini is round the corner, I mean a silent update by the end of Oct. 2013.

Let's wait and see...

PS: wi-fi ac, PCIe, Haswell processor, Iris graphics...all these don't need a "show" to be announced...