I am pretty sure the Mac Mini can support mobile quad core cpu, pending they get the air flow right. I say this because there a few mini pc from Shuttle and various other PC manufactures that have tri-core(AMD) and quad core machine(Intel and AMD) in a form factor that is a little larger than the Mini. Hell, I think some of them are even using core 2 quad desktop cpu when they were new. I personally would love a quad core(tri-core would also do) Mac Mini to go along with a nvidia quad core based tablet. I don't need extras the iMac offers as I kind of prefer a desktop vs an AIO.
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.
Quad core Mac mini's likely in near future?
- Thread starter Woodcrest64
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't think it's going ARM.
My bet would be on exactly the same CPU options as the current 13" MacBook Pro.
My bet would be on exactly the same CPU options as the current 13" MacBook Pro.
G4er?,
I left feedback for Apple ( http://www.apple.com/feedback/macmini.html ) saying that they are losing business because people who want an quad core iMac without a screen aren't then going to buy a much lower spec'd machine. I have and know other people that have gone off and bought a PC instead.
Apple aren't stupid, if they see a want in the market they will take our money. Just means those people need to shout louder to get their attention!
G4er?,
I left feedback for Apple ( http://www.apple.com/feedback/macmini.html ) saying that they are losing business because people who want an quad core iMac without a screen aren't then going to buy a much lower spec'd machine. I have and know other people that have gone off and bought a PC instead.
Apple aren't stupid, if they see a want in the market they will take our money. Just means those people need to shout louder to get their attention!
I'm definitely leaving them feedback. I've written them a couple of letters describing how I got my start using Mac computers and how frustrated I am over the lack of a product positioned between the mini and the Mac Pro.
If Apple made clothes it would sell only three things;
coveralls= all in ones, bikini briefs = mini and three piece suits = Mac Pro.
Heck, I would take a dual core w/hyperthreading (4 threads) but at least a 2.5 Ghz. 8 GB ram would still work with this setup too. A pure quad core would still be preferable though.
Mac Mini
Well, I'm hoping that the new Mini will have a Quad core processor. They can count me in for a sale if it does.
Well, I'm hoping that the new Mini will have a Quad core processor. They can count me in for a sale if it does.
G4er?,
I left feedback for Apple ( http://www.apple.com/feedback/macmini.html ) saying that they are losing business because people who want an quad core iMac without a screen aren't then going to buy a much lower spec'd machine. I have and know other people that have gone off and bought a PC instead.
Apple aren't stupid, if they see a want in the market they will take our money. Just means those people need to shout louder to get their attention!
I'm sure Steve J will appreciate your feedback while counting his profits from the millions of iPads and iPhones sold this month.
And that's fine. I'm glad Apple is successful. But I am looking for a desktop computer that fits my needs and wants. Until then I'm not interested in any other products, certainly things that I personally see little need in having.
Erm, you serious?
Have a look at that 3.5" HDD. Have a look at those heat sinks. Do you really think all that will fit inside a Mac Mini?
I think a Mini will run hotter, even if they do use the same heat sinks. You know, because it's more compact.
However if they'd double the height and then use desktop processors instead of mobile processors (and not trade down to slower versions
) I wouldn't mind.From what I understand the reason they didn't get the older i3s previously was due to lack of room i.e. there was simply no room for a Radeon graphics card inside the unibody construction which is what the i3 uses. Given that is still the case then I can't see how that can happen.
Just a slight clarification... all of the mobile Sandy Bridge parts have HD 3000... for desktops, you only get HD 3000 on the unlocked parts.
Given that the Barefeats benchmarks put the HD 3000 at roughly the same or slightly slower than the GeForce 320m, I'd have to think twice about the 2011 Mini even if it had a quad-core BTO option.
Why would you be buying a Mac Mini for graphics? It's not a gaming rig... In fact, it's far from a gaming rig.
I was wondering that too..... Mac Mini = generic PC for everyday computing tasks or Mac Mini = HTPC. However, Mac Mini for gaming, maybe in a parallel universe but not in this one. There just isn't the room inside a Mini for bolt on graphics so it's either forget jumping from C2D or accepting the Intel graphics option if it is upgraded.
New SB and larger capacity HD would more than suit me.
Ow come on. We've had this 'Mini isn't a gaming rig so why care about graphics'-thing by now, haven't we?
It is a generic PC - so? It can still be used for casual gaming right? Because alot of people do game a bit, but not enough to spend so much money on a proper gaming rig. The Mini could be seen as Apple's budget solution that could still support some gaming, so a (slight) step back in graphics is bad.
It is an HTPC - so? Why wouldn't you want halfway proper graphics on an HTPC? Even if you don't think you'll be using all of its power soon, you may 2-3 years onwards. If you're going to use it to power a second display/display+projector setup. If you're going to do different tasks while watching HD movies.
But most importantly: Is it so strange for an upgrade to be an upgrade on all parts instead of an upgrade to CPU at the cost of a dent in graphics?
It is a generic PC - so? It can still be used for casual gaming right? Because alot of people do game a bit, but not enough to spend so much money on a proper gaming rig. The Mini could be seen as Apple's budget solution that could still support some gaming, so a (slight) step back in graphics is bad.
It is an HTPC - so? Why wouldn't you want halfway proper graphics on an HTPC? Even if you don't think you'll be using all of its power soon, you may 2-3 years onwards. If you're going to use it to power a second display/display+projector setup. If you're going to do different tasks while watching HD movies.
But most importantly: Is it so strange for an upgrade to be an upgrade on all parts instead of an upgrade to CPU at the cost of a dent in graphics?
I thought all sandy bridge desktop parts have the HD3000, just that its only exposed using a H67 motherboard which doesn't support overclocking. The P67 does support overclocking but disables the onboard graphics, you need a discrete GPU.
as for performance, anyone know if the HD3000 supports hardware acceleration for video under OSX? I know it has an engine, just not sure if its supported in OSX. I'm considering upgrading for plex and just need it to playback 1080p without a sweat, and also be capable of realtime transcoding to an appleTV.The current C2D is a little borderline for the last case, I'd like some headroom from a sandybridge processor. Even an i3 with hyperthreading would probably be enough.
While it's true that only H67/Z68 boards expose the onboard graphics, only the unlocked desktop chips have HD3000; the rest have HD2000 (same clock speed, just a fewer number of 'shaders'). Here's an example comparison between the i5-2500 and i5-2500K.
That would be a good question to pose in the iMac or MacBook forums. If I had to guess though, I would doubt it. Apple restricts hardware decoding to a few nVidia and ATI GPUs. Hardware transcoding assistance is even less likely at the moment, since AFAIK it currently requires leveraging a proprietary Intel 'framework.' I'd imagine the sandy bridge CPUs by themselves are quite capable for plex transcoding... whether or not it could do simultaneous transcoding and playback though is a little more uncertain.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think the new mac minis will be released tomorrow - 24th may 2011
I think the new mac minis will be released tomorrow - 24th may 2011
If you're real name is Harold Camping you know what happened to your last prophecy don't you?
Hey it will be Tuesday, there are only around 30 Tuesdays left in the year so odds are 30:1 not bad. Otherwise we're talking about a 2012 mini.
But a quad option will really surprise me.
But a quad option will really surprise me.
I suspect you won't see a quad Mini this year. My guess is that Apple will configure the new Mini roughly similar to the MBP 13: 2.3GHz i5 and 2.7GHz i7.
Apple has their market segmented just the way they want it. So it seems to me that a quad might erode sales of the lower end iMac.
Apple has their market segmented just the way they want it. So it seems to me that a quad might erode sales of the lower end iMac.