The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming

[Miat]

Have you ever heard about Intel NUCs? Until now they used 15W and 28W CPUs, but for the first time intel is releasing one "powerful" called Skull Canyon with Iris Pro 580... so it's likely using Skylake Quad Core + Iris Pro GT4e.

Maybe this could lead Apple to release a Mac Mini also with this CPU.

Hope they can pressure Apple to keep up with the headless desktop game.

I need enough CPU grunt to process video at a reasonable rate. Dual-core just doesn't cut it, and a quad iMac or Macbook is not for me. Much rather set up a cheap quad i7 Linux box in the corner dedicated to just video processing, and use a dual-core Mini or Macbook for everything else.

 

[Crosscreek]

Hope they can pressure Apple to keep up with the headless desktop game.

I need enough CPU grunt to process video at a reasonable rate. Dual-core just doesn't cut it, and a quad iMac or Macbook is not for me. Much rather set up a cheap quad i7 Linux box in the corner dedicated to just video processing, and use a dual-core Mini or Macbook for everything else.

I tried the iMac experiment over the past month and all though they are nice machines I just can't see paying for a sealed up computer that if it does have a problem and needs service is hard to move around. Also the display cannot be used in target machine mode. Upgrades for BTO for Flash or RAM in the 21" case are very expensive.

A cheap Linux machine with quad core is the answer for me and maybe a new Mac Mini for the OS X and IOS compatibility stuff.

It's a dame shame Mini users need two machines to get the heavy lifting done.

 

[psylence2k]

I just went to 12 gb of RAM and a 240 gb SSD in my early 2011 Macbook Pro, and it's like having a new computer. And it's far less expensive than a new computer.

I'm thinking about upgrading the ram. It's dual core 4 GB right now, maybe to 8 ? I dont know if it'll show much difference though because I mainly just browse the web and use media players. I also can't decide between a 250 or 500 gb SSD.

was switching out your Hd for your SSD and ram in any way difficult or time consuming ? Does your 2011 MBP have Sata 2 or 3 ?

Thanks for the feedback

 

[DesertSurfer]

I'm thinking about upgrading the ram. It's dual core 4 GB right now, maybe to 8 ? I dont know if it'll show much difference though because I mainly just browse the web and use media players. I also can't decide between a 250 or 500 gb SSD.

was switching out your Hd for your SSD and ram in any way difficult or time consuming ? Does your 2011 MBP have Sata 2 or 3 ?

Thanks for the feedback

Replacing the HDD was pretty easy. I used the OWC how-to video for my model to walk me through it, and a free trial of Carbon Copy Cloner to clone my HDD to the SSD. I checked the internet for how to use CCC, and that was quite easy too. I used a Crucial MX 200 250gb because it was cheap and plenty for my use. Apparently you can put a SATA 3 drive in if you like: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4089381?tstart=0

I had previously upped the RAM from 4 to 8 gb but was still getting some swapping slowdowns, so I bumped it up to 12. But the SSD made a huge difference, so I would try the SSD first, maybe that would be fine for you. Replacing the memory is really easy, you can do that any time.

 

[koyoot]

What do you guys think of an idea, of quad core, 35W desktop CPU, coupled with single AMD GPU, in a Mac Pro design? Only maybe 60% of its height?

SSD, and RAM soldered, non user replaceable.

CPU's for example:
http://ark.intel.com/products/88200/Intel-Core-i7-6700T-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
http://ark.intel.com/products/88189/Intel-Core-i5-6600T-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz

Whole package should have around 200W PSU with iMac Class GPU. Besides, downclocking Fury to 850 MHz, and letting it on 125W of TDP should not be that hard, if it is possible, to run Nano on 175W? .

This is my dream computer.

 

[Alexrat1996]

I believe no new mac mini its dead already

 

[AirdanMR]

What do you guys think of an idea, of quad core, 35W desktop CPU, coupled with single AMD GPU, in a Mac Pro design? Only maybe 60% of its height?

SSD, and RAM soldered, non user replaceable.

CPU's for example:
http://ark.intel.com/products/88200/Intel-Core-i7-6700T-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_60-GHz
http://ark.intel.com/products/88189/Intel-Core-i5-6600T-Processor-6M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz

Whole package should have around 200W PSU with iMac Class GPU. Besides, downclocking Fury to 850 MHz, and letting it on 125W of TDP should not be that hard, if it is possible, to run Nano on 175W? .

This is my dream computer.

Alienware already did that with the AW Alpha, and it's aprox. same size of Mac Mini but taller. Apple could do that, just double the heigh of the Mac Mini and release a "Mac" with that specs. If they do the cooling design right they could even fit desktop cpu and gpu like the AW X51.

I would love it, but that's not how Apple works, it will kill the Mac mini and iMac sales, and they don't wan't that.

 

[koyoot]

What I think, Apple will not update old Mac Mini, but will simply "revision it". For me last update was a placeholder. They did not updated Mid 2012 for a long time, because they planned something for it. Intel did not delivered(possibly TB3), therefore, they brought new Minis with worse specs than before. With new way of installing SSD and RAM.

Base iMac and Mac Mini will remain in the lineup, IMO. But iMac 4K, 5K, Mac Pro, and new Mac Mini, can be a premium offering from Apple, to go in line with their own 4K and 5K displays. I don't know why, but i have a similar feeling about all of their computers. Macbook Pro, Mac Pro, Mac Mini did not had update for a very long time, even if there was new tech available(CPUs, GPUs). Why? Because the most important tech was not on the market, and for that Apple was waiting.

That is my view on this situation.

 

[koyoot]

Alienware already did that with the AW Alpha, and it's aprox. same size of Mac Mini but taller. Apple could do that, just double the heigh of the Mac Mini and release a "Mac" with that specs. If they do the cooling design right they could even fit desktop cpu and gpu like the AW X51.

I would love it, but that's not how Apple works, it will kill the Mac mini and iMac sales, and they don't wan't that.

Well, AW Alpha has possibly GTX950M, or anything based on GM107, from Nvidia. That Mac Mini would be MUCH more powerful. Alpha with GM107 would not be able to run games in 60 FPS in 4K, Fury, even clocked at 850 - would(at least the games from Blizzard...).

But I have to say, That Dell is pretty neat computer...

 

[Luap]

Good lord, you guys are still bumping this turd of a post? You do realise it's so old that there has already been a new MacMini since this post was created, right?
Time for a new post perhaps..

 

[Micky Do]

I believe no new mac mini its dead already

Some have suggested the same for years, but the new Mac Minis have kept on coming, and will almost certainly continue to do so.

 

[scottsjack]

Good lord, you guys are still bumping this turd of a post? You do realise it's so old that there has already been a new MacMini since this post was created, right?
Time for a new post perhaps..

I think you missed the point that the last mini update was disappointing to a number of enthusiasts so the thread keeps going until an acceptable mini is released.

 

[Mal67]

I'd be happy just to read something, anything, about some new mac hardware release of any of the models at the moment let alone the mini.

 

[talmy]

Good lord, you guys are still bumping this turd of a post? You do realise it's so old that there has already been a new MacMini since this post was created, right?
Time for a new post perhaps..

As long as there will be a new Mac mini coming, this thread is appropriate. It just seems like lots of people here expect more from the line than it's intended to be. (Hint-- it's the lowest cost entry to Macs for switchers and for the "faithful" it was intended to be used as a secondary computer. Watch Steve Job's revealing of the mini on Youtube.)

 

[Crosscreek]

As long as there will be a new Mac mini coming, this thread is appropriate. It just seems like lots of people here expect more from the line than it's intended to be. (Hint-- it's the lowest cost entry to Macs for switchers and for the "faithful" it was intended to be used as a secondary computer. Watch Steve Job's revealing of the mini on Youtube.)

What Steve innovated as a Mini PC has become an industry all in itself. Times have changed in hardware and the potential in the Mini form.

The Mac Mini could truly be so much more than entry level now while reserving an entry level model for those who want it.

 

[g33k]

I love the Mac mini. I'm sad to say it but, Apple will surely kill it off, eventually. We all know it.

 

[psylence2k]

Replacing the HDD was pretty easy. I used the OWC how-to video for my model to walk me through it, and a free trial of Carbon Copy Cloner to clone my HDD to the SSD. I checked the internet for how to use CCC, and that was quite easy too. I used a Crucial MX 200 250gb because it was cheap and plenty for my use. Apparently you can put a SATA 3 drive in if you like: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4089381?tstart=0

I had previously upped the RAM from 4 to 8 gb but was still getting some swapping slowdowns, so I bumped it up to 12. But the SSD made a huge difference, so I would try the SSD first, maybe that would be fine for you. Replacing the memory is really easy, you can do that any time.

So that means your 2011 has Sata 2 right ? If I get a Sata 3 SSD it probably wont make any difference over a Sata 2 if my machine only supports up to Sata 2 right ?

with the 8 GB were you getting any slowdowns with simultaneous basic tasks like browsing and Itunes/media players or were these more intensive applications ?

Thanks again.

 

[DesertSurfer]

So that means your 2011 has Sata 2 right ? If I get a Sata 3 SSD it probably wont make any difference over a Sata 2 if my machine only supports up to Sata 2 right ?

with the 8 GB were you getting any slowdowns with simultaneous basic tasks like browsing and Itunes/media players or were these more intensive applications ?

Thanks again.

I think you are right about sata. I typically have mail, several tabs in safari, pages, Dashlane, and sometimes PowerPoint or word going. It sounds like 8gb would work fine for you.

 

[rezwits]

To me there are two factors I am looking at for my MacMini Future. They have to do one of these two things or it's over.

Either:
A. Make a Quad Core Version. --OR--
B. Bring the $499 model up to around ~2.2 GHz or more and offer an SSD option for $200 making this $699.

Otherwise I am going to dig deep, and hit eBay for about 6 months and find customizable MacMinis that I can throw in whatever RAM I want and whatever SSD I want. I would like to get 2-3-4 for my house and work on projects, but a 1.4 GHz with a 500GB/5400RPM drive? Are you kidding me? For $499? That is such a basic email and safari browser model it makes me want to puke! and then on the other side it's a $1099 model that's not Quad Core, Lame!

Laters...

 

[DesertSurfer]

To me there are two factors I am looking at for my MacMini Future. They have to do one of these two things or it's over.

Either:
A. Make a Quad Core Version. --OR--
B. Bring the $499 model up to around ~2.2 GHz or more and offer an SSD option for $200 making this $699.

Otherwise I am going to dig deep, and hit eBay for about 6 months and find customizable MacMinis that I can throw in whatever RAM I want and whatever SSD I want. I would like to get 2-3-4 for my house and work on projects, but a 1.4 GHz with a 500GB/5400RPM drive? Are you kidding me? For $499? That is such a basic email and safari browser model it makes me want to puke! and then on the other side it's a $1099 model that's not Quad Core, Lame!

Laters...

Maybe we need to steel ourselves by imagining terrible new Mac Mini's, so that what we get won't seem so bad. In that spirit, the new HDD will come in three speeds: 33 1/3, 45, and 78 rpm. The CPU will be a down clocked version of the Macbook.

There was a lot of excitement and hope in this discussion before the 2014 model came out. It's a shame.

 

[rezwits]

One thing that pisses me off is, the New MacMinis are based on taking the guts from a MacBook and using those chips. Which is BS because a MacMini doesn't need power efficiency for battery usage and CPU cooling features like a MacBook. If they just went and used the good ole Ivy Bridge Models that use more power and are hotter AND ARE CHEAPER now that it's 3 years old, they could make MacMinis for $599 with an SSD with an IVY BRIDGE processor, it's to bad they don't base the MacMini off of the iMac internals. STUPID, but pre-2014. Look at the drop in iMac speed from 2013 to 2014. The iMac 21.5 inch went from 2.7 to 1.4. All in the name of LESS POWER CONSUMPTION and HEAT? wtf, who cares. I mean I know yes yes in the long run you will save on your power bill in 2 years, but come on. But we are in a CPU recession, because now that these chips use lower GHz, they are optimized more and generally faster per GHz, understood. But the recession is that we have to wait 4-5 years for these more efficient processors to get back up to 2.6 or 3.2 GHz. It's cold winters for sure...

 

[rezwits]

Oh but btw it's not really Apple's fault, they are just following the "Intel Roadmap" as intel tries to make these CPUs compete with ARM... which they are going to fail anyways...

 

[Celerondon]

Maybe we need to steel ourselves by imagining terrible new Mac Mini's, so that what we get won't seem so bad....
There was a lot of excitement and hope in this discussion before the 2014 model came out. It's a shame.

If they just went and used the good ole Ivy Bridge Models that use more power and are hotter AND ARE CHEAPER now that it's 3 years old, they could make MacMinis for $599 with an SSD with an IVY BRIDGE processor... But the recession is that we have to wait 4-5 years for these more efficient processors to get back up to 2.6 or 3.2 GHz. It's cold winters for sure...

Oh yeah!

Just a few months ago folks were complaining about "fan noise" from the i7 quads. Some of us tried to tell them that the whoosh was the sound of power. Now we're stuck with near-fanless wonders. These 2014s have some good qualities but I can't recall one complaint about rude fan noise during big jobs.

Go on and say it, you know it's true...

Winter is Coming.

 

[DesertSurfer]

The new Mac mini will almost certainly have a 1.1ghz processor and a really loud fan to make it sound powerful.

 

[Altis]

One thing that pisses me off is, the New MacMinis are based on taking the guts from a MacBook and using those chips. Which is BS because a MacMini doesn't need power efficiency for battery usage and CPU cooling features like a MacBook. If they just went and used the good ole Ivy Bridge Models that use more power and are hotter AND ARE CHEAPER now that it's 3 years old, they could make MacMinis for $599 with an SSD with an IVY BRIDGE processor, it's to bad they don't base the MacMini off of the iMac internals. STUPID, but pre-2014. Look at the drop in iMac speed from 2013 to 2014. The iMac 21.5 inch went from 2.7 to 1.4. All in the name of LESS POWER CONSUMPTION and HEAT? wtf, who cares. I mean I know yes yes in the long run you will save on your power bill in 2 years, but come on. But we are in a CPU recession, because now that these chips use lower GHz, they are optimized more and generally faster per GHz, understood. But the recession is that we have to wait 4-5 years for these more efficient processors to get back up to 2.6 or 3.2 GHz. It's cold winters for sure...

I don't disagree with you, but I do wonder how much CPU power the average person really needs these days. I'd say a mid-tier CPU and SSD with decent RAM is about all the hardware you need at the moment.

In fact, I have a PC from 2007 (I believe) with a Q6600 (quad). That thing with an SSD is just as fast as any new computer for what 80%+ people do on a computer. Booting up, opening/using office suites, browsing, email, etc, all worked about as quickly as it does on my i7 4790K with 16GB of 2133 MHz RAM and GTX970. Keep in mind that computer is turning 8 years old this month.

Where I'm going with this is that I think that Apple doesn't really care that much about the so-called 'power users'. It seems to me they just want to move devices, and to do that they just want to target the average user and profit off them as much as possible.

Also, selling low-power chips will make it so people will feel the need to upgrade sooner. How long do you think it'll be before a 4790K needs to be upgraded? It's way overpowered for anything but the intensive tasks such as CAD, video work, or other heavy computing demands. Personally, I can't see needing to upgrade this for quite a few years and when I do, it'll be more for newer chipset tech and higher efficiency than for raw computing power. I suspect that Apple knows that they can get people to upgrade sooner by putting in low-powered chips that sell to those who aren't as aware of what that really means.

In the end, Apple is always putting their profits ahead of all else. They don't care about any of us any further than what we're willing to spend.