Sidebar Sidebar
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?

When do you think we'll see quad core Mac minis

  • Sometime this year

    Votes: 29 15.4%

  • 2011

    Votes: 41 21.8%

  • 2012 or later

    Votes: 116 61.7%

  • Other, please explain

    Votes: 2 1.1%
  • Total voters
    188
Tulpa said:
And crash twice as much, give perplexing system errors twice as much, take 10x longer to boot, etc.
Click to expand...

Funny my Vaio TT in time I have owned it had the same number of crashes as my MBP during the same time. A a combined total of 6(3 each). Now my iBook that's another story. It mostly depends on the user and the activities one does with the machine. If you know what you are doing neither computer will crash.

I will admit the prospect of a quad core mini sounds great, but I doubt we will see more than a dual core Mini update, for the sole fact that a quad core may take away sales from the iMac, and maybe even the Mac Pro.
 
Tulpa said:
And crash twice as much, give perplexing system errors twice as much, take 10x longer to boot, etc.
Click to expand...

Ever heard the one about a good workmen not blaming his tools?

W7 and crashes are two words most people would not put in the same sentence. As for long boot times - again W7 is like OS X in that you don't need to do full shut downs except for updates or sometimes new programme installs. Sleep mode is the shut down of choice - start up from sleep on my machine is approx 4 seconds.
 
Tulpa said:
And crash twice as much, give perplexing system errors twice as much, take 10x longer to boot, etc.
Click to expand...
I've had my PC laptop just over a month now, which I've used heavily every day. Bar initially taking much longer to set up than a Mac (due to loads of MS security updates, downloading W7 SP1, uninstalling some bloatware, etc.), I've had no crashes whatsoever. Both my Macs, however, including an iMac with lots of RAM, had quite a lot of beach-balling.

Both formats have their pros & cons. I generally have a high regard for OS X & some of Apple's software (Garageband, iPhoto, etc.), hence I'm looking to buy a Mini. But Windows 7, on the whole, provides an excellent user-friendly experience.
 
Lankyman said:
Ever heard the one about a good workmen not blaming his tools?
Click to expand...

Agreed, and I think this applies to crashes and malware/viruses/whatever. If you use your machine responsibly you'll get into less problems.

Lankyman said:
Sleep mode is the shut down of choice - start up from sleep on my machine is approx 4 seconds.
Click to expand...

Disagreed, it's a matter of preference. Some people don't like their machines still lurking power when they aren't actually using it. For those, it'd be nice to have faster startup times. I don't care about boot times all that much though.
 
lvlarkkoenen .......Disagreed, it's a matter of preference. Some people don't like their machines still lurking power when they aren't actually using it. For those, it'd be nice to have faster startup times. I don't care about boot times all that much though.
Click to expand...

We are only talking about tiny amounts of power though when in RAM state. I did a check on mine and it was only drawing just over 2 watts - a miniscule amount. There's being green and being green. :eek:
 
I don't think that Windows 7 has any place in this discussion other than to point out that Apple's competition is getting better at things and Apple's method of charging a premium for the name on the machine and its native operating system while under-powering the specs relative to other comparable pcs on the market is coming to a close.;)
 
bloodycape said:
Funny my Vaio TT in time I have owned it had the same number of crashes as my MBP during the same time. A a combined total of 6(3 each). Now my iBook that's another story. It mostly depends on the user and the activities one does with the machine. If you know what you are doing neither computer will crash.
Click to expand...

I was talking about the machines you can get for 1/2 the price of a mini... the VAIO doesn't fit in that category.

lankyman said:
Ever heard the one about a good workmen not blaming his tools?
Click to expand...

That may have been valid when we were talking about simple tools like hammers and shovels. A proprietary bloated OS like Win7, not so much. My windows-fu has not advanced to the point where I can control the little beasties infesting the registry. Perhaps that makes me a bad workman, but it is what it is.

My current experience with Win7 is with a laptop that costs slightly less than the mini, and it's been decent so far, superior to XP but I don't really see it being comparable to OS X yet. Perhaps it's the Revenge of the Sith syndrome where not sucking as bad as one's predecessors earns one positive reviews. I'd hate to see what happens with a $300 desktop running Win7 (and no, not one you build yourself for $300 -- one that you can buy prefabricated).
 
Last edited:
Lankyman said:
We are only talking about tiny amounts of power though when in RAM state. I did a check on mine and it was only drawing just over 2 watts - a miniscule amount. There's being green and being green. :eek:
Click to expand...

I know, I know. As I said, I don't care about boot times enough. Anything below 1 minute is fine. And to be full honest, there's other reasons people might want their computer completely turned off.
 
WWDC, a hardware tumbleweed..

Hmmmm...

So, no hardware at WWDC. Normally if new stock is going to come out then there will be a run down of the existing.

Not heard of any Mac Mini run downs yet...
 
BigBlenderTech said:
Hmmmm...

So, no hardware at WWDC. Normally if new stock is going to come out then there will be a run down of the existing.

Not heard of any Mac Mini run downs yet...
Click to expand...

I think given that speculation on this forum alone has been running since at least February and we are now in June then a Mini refresh this time around is looking as likely as hens teeth.
 
Apple is probably waiting for their stock of C2D chips to run out and/or the price of i5 and i7 chips to come down. I really don't expect a quad this year.
 
Jason Beck said:
http://www.dell.com/us/p/inspiron-zino-hd-410/fs

The one on the right has a blu-ray and AMD quad in it. I am sure Apple can follow suit. If they wanted to release a quad mini.
Click to expand...

Well, yes, but the AMD quad doesn't have hyperthreading, so in actual fact, you probably won't see much performance difference with the dual-core mobile Intel chips that are currently in the 13" MBP. According to Geekbench, the P960 AMD quads score about 3000-3500, while the MBP's score 6500-7500. So I'd much rather have an Apple that goes the 13" MBP route than one that goes the AMD Phenom II P960 quad-core route.
Your point stands though, Apple could put a quad in a mini, but it should be a better quad than this one.
 
Last edited:
Lankyman said:
No constraints showing on Apple UK - showing in stock with 24hr delivery both mini models same for Europe too? However, I would be more than happy for Apple to prove me wrong.
Click to expand...

I read it as it's constrained from Manufacturing to Channel, not Channel to Consumer.

I'm also coming around to the idea that the Mac Mini Server as a SKU would be made End Of Life and would be replaced with a newer low end Mac Pro.

The MMS currently is $999, maybe a new entry Mac Pro with an expandable case could be around $1500. Just a thought.
 
Intel 22nm Ivy Bridge = Mac mini quad core. Expect that by Spring or Summer 2012.
 
BigBlenderTech said:
I read it as it's constrained from Manufacturing to Channel, not Channel to Consumer.

I'm also coming around to the idea that the Mac Mini Server as a SKU would be made End Of Life and would be replaced with a newer low end Mac Pro.

The MMS currently is $999, maybe a new entry Mac Pro with an expandable case could be around $1500. Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Well there it is, a quad core Mac Mini in 2011.

Personally I'd go for 8GB but get it from Crucial direct for half the price.

I'll wonder which i7 they went with. I'll wait for iFixit to strip one. The fan must be bigger to deal with the heat but without the optical drive in there, there is more space for one.

Shame they couldn't get the ATI graphics in there too but still, quad core :)

http://store.apple.com/uk/configure/MC936B/A?mco=MjMzOTQ2NTE
 
BigBlenderTech said:
Well there it is, a quad core Mac Mini in 2011.

Personally I'd go for 8GB but get it from Crucial direct for half the price.

I'll wonder which i7 they went with. I'll wait for iFixit to strip one. The fan must be bigger to deal with the heat but without the optical drive in there, there is more space for one.

Shame they couldn't get the ATI graphics in there too but still, quad core :)

http://store.apple.com/uk/configure/MC936B/A?mco=MjMzOTQ2NTE
Click to expand...

Doing some digging. Likely candidates are..

The i7 would be a mobile 2.0GHz which would point to :

i7 QC 2635QM / 8 Logical cores / 6MB Cache : PassMark 6327
i7 QC 2630QM / 8 Logical cores / 6MB Cache : PassMark 6294

Now.. you could go for the mid range MM 2011 with the better ATI graphics and an i7 dual core 2.7GHz

i7 DC 2620M / 4 Logical cores / 4MB Cache : PassMark 3942

I'm running Pro Tools 9 happily on a four physical cores Core Quad Q9300 : PassMark 3586

Tempted by the mid range now...
 
I voted with my wallet. Should have the quad server by next week! I hope it can use 16GB ddr3.. That would be nice although I can live with 8 for now.:)
 
TA031 said:
Not the Consumer Mini, and it uses a very slow Quad at that too.
Click to expand...

True but it comes down to audience.

Putting a Quad in the base model would make the price unattractive to Mac newcomers.

No point putting a Dual into the server because it needs more processor crunch to deal with server processes.

They couldn't really put a 2.3 GHz QC 2820QM in there because it would of added £120 / $200 to the price plus the TDP would probably be too high on the i7 Extremes as well as the cost.

Yes, you are paying for Lion Server rather than Lion in the price. £14 / $23 difference.

For me, I have a 600w PC tower running a quad core sound mixing server . Pro Tools plugins are very processor intensive. The MM server is almost twice as fast and runs at 85w . For me that's a boon.
 
Is this the Intel Core i7-2635QM 2.0 GHz that Apple is using in the server mini? Benchmarks very well in the MBP. I ordered mine with SSD and 7200 rpm option. Had to change my order with customer service, but am glad I opted on the ssd version for sure.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back