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.
The new Mac mini is almost certainly coming
- Thread starter GabrieleR
- Start date
-
- Tags
- mac mini new mac mini
- Sort by reaction score
That's what the current rumours (which have appeared on the MR front page in the last week or so) are saying of the M4 Pro mini - 5 USB-C ports (of unspecified type) - 2 on the front, 3 on the back along with HDMI, ethernet and power. Just rumours of course - but I get the impression that these are starting to "firm up" as a likely launch approaches.
Meanwhile, photos of base M4 chips are showing what looks like 4 TB controllers rather than the previous two - if so, I'd guess that the M4 Pro (which, like the M3 Pro, will be primarily designed for the MacBook Pro) will have the same configuration and only the Max will offer more. So the current difference in port configurations between the M2 and M2 Pro minis might go away.
What still nags at me, though, is that 5 ports shouts "one of those will be dedicated to an external USB-C power supply or docking station" - which would also solve the 15W-per-port problem.
...and I think that was partly influenced by the use of Intel dual port TB controller chips of which (say) the 2019 MacBook Pro had two. With Apple Silicon, Apple have their own USB4 controllers.
Also, with USB4 you have the possibility of hubs with multiple downstream USB4 ports, so from a typical Apple laptop/mobile-centric point of view it makes more sense to have single full-bandwidth ports in the computer and let people buy hubs to share that out between devices.
Apple could stick a bunch of USB4 hub controllers in the Mini and give it as many of 12 USB4 ports... but that would make the base computer more expensive.
Well, yes - there have been plenty of Macs with ports specified as "USB4/Thunderbolt 3" because they didn't support the two displays required by TB4. However, with a 4-port chip I think its more likely that any "extra" ports will be USB 3.2-over-USB-C just like the 4-port iMac and Mx Max Studio.
One thought though - M1/M2 SoCs clearly have enough spare "non-USB4" I/O to drive HDMI, Ethernet and extra USB 3 ports maybe any increase in USB4 controllers in M4 will come at the expense of stealing one or more of those for internal use.
I wonder that too - even the Rackmount Mac Pro is just a desk tower turned on its side with brackets (hilariously putting the RAM access hatch on the underside back when the 2019 Pro still had replaceable RAM) - Apple Silicon could pack a lot of power into a 1U rackmount. Current Mac Pro is exclusively for a niche of customers that need non-GPU PCIe cards. If you're rackmounting I think you'd add separate storage units connected via Thunderbolt.
When Apple dropped the xServe I think it was partly because, with the switch to Intel, there was no longer anything to distinguish it from generic x86 server kit running Linux. Now, with Apple Silicon, plus its proprietary GPUs and neural engines, an Apple Silicon server could have a Unique Selling Point again. Also, there's a big uptick in software developers working "in the cloud" and you need a Mac to build Mac/iPhone/iPad/Watch apps.
Still, I'd expect an Apple servec chip to be reassuringly expensive and biassed towards growing your AI tulips - probably pitch at something like the NVIDIA Grace/Hopper chipset (which itself looks somewhat inspired by Apple Silicon).
That would be a disappointment. Going forward from 2024 on, I'd be a little unpleasantly surprised if any USB-C ports on Macs were anything less than USB 4 / Thunderbolt. One of the features of USB 4 / Thunderbolt after all is that ports can be split via a hub. It's not like the old days where extending Thunderbolt required daisy chaining.
...which is great for your MacBook Air where it makes sense to use a "dock", but increasing the need for external hubs is not so great for a desktop Mac.
Also, how many people actually need more than 4 20/40Gbps devices? Even today, all but the most expensive/specialised USB-C peripherals are still using USB 3.1 (if not USB 2) so almost everybody will have a few of those in their mix that they can hang off a USB 3.2-C port to free up the full USB4 ports for things that can take advantage of them.
It's also important to remember that - to USB 3.2 devices - a USB4 hub is no different, or better, than an old-school USB 3 hub - they're still contending with everything else on that hub for a single USB 3 stream. If you can't hang at least one display or true USB4 device off each hub you might as well just use a cheaper USB 3 hub.
I ended up getting an Element TB4 hub for my Mac Studio but only because my monitors are limited to 50Hz via HDMI so I needed them both connected via USB-C, while I also had two audio interfaces which - even though they are only USB 2 - I wanted on separate USB controllers. I'd file that under "picky" (the difference between 50Hz and 60Hz is pretty insignificant) and otherwise the Studio pretty much hits the spot when it comes to connectivity.
Quote: @theluggage "I also had two audio interfaces which - even though they are only USB 2 - I wanted on separate USB controllers."
If you are using a Thunderbolt4 interface to a TB4 dock/hub, then the USB functions of any device attached to the dock are (through the use of USB-Tunneling) still controlled by the host Mac's USB controllers.
You have to use a TB3 dock to introduce a separate USB controller.
Linked from:
arstechnica.com
If you are using a Thunderbolt4 interface to a TB4 dock/hub, then the USB functions of any device attached to the dock are (through the use of USB-Tunneling) still controlled by the host Mac's USB controllers.
You have to use a TB3 dock to introduce a separate USB controller.
Linked from:
Breaking down how USB4 goes where no USB standard has gone before
USB4 vs. Thunderbolt 4—and everything else to know about the newest USB standard.
arstechnica.com
Last edited:
Thunderbolt support is helpful if you want to use external SSDs for example. The monitor support is irrelevant to most people once they already have 2-3 other ports that can support monitors.
The point I was making is that with 4 Thunderbolt controllers, Apple could make a machine with three true USB 4 / Thunderbolt 4 ports, and two USB 4 / Thunderbolt ports. There is no need to downgrade those latter ports to to USB 3.2 in 2024. Apple's old chips only had 2 Thunderbolt controllers, so that was a completely different scenario.
Last edited:
Sorry, but an AppleTV-sized Mini just won't be big enough. 😹
This should be used to establish the footprint of the new Mac mini. It can be smaller, but not as small as an Apple TV.
Something tells me he will adapt to the new size
Sure - but that's kinda a niche between the bulk of external SSDs that only use 3.2g2 (and are perfectly adequate for most applications) and the fastest 4xNVMe or RAID SSDs which can potentially use the whole 40Gbps. If speed/latency was so important that I'd paid a ton of cash for one of the latter, I'd probably hang it off one of the 'dedicated controller' ports.
My point is that if you've got 4 top level TB ports with dedicated controllers you've probably got enough to run your speed/latency-critical TB devices and any TB4 hubs, while you'll most likely have plenty of plain old USB 3 devices (webcams, mice, audio devices, memory sticks) to hang off any extra USB 3.2 ports and leave the full bandwidth of the USB4 controllers available for USB4 devices.
Obviously, more faster ports = better, but also more expensive, and the Minis are not Apple's most expensive, "pro"-est desktops.
...and there's nothing wrong with that idea except that its going to need an expensive USB4 hub controller chip adding to the Mac.
Based on the evidence from the Studio and current Minis, there's enough spare I/O to add at least one USB 3.2 port without poaching bandwidth from the 4 full-fat USB4 ports - and most users will have at least one USB 3.2 or lower device to make good use of that port.
...but that's so out of date: surely everybody has switched to wireless cats or cloud-based pets by now...?
That is the rumor for the new M4Pro mini. Those same rumors say the new basic M4 mini has just 2 in the back and 1 in the front for a total of 3. And that sounds very much like an approach that Apple traditionally takes. To [occasionally artificially] limit a lower end offering to “encourage” upgrading to a higher tier product. Just trying to be realistic and not overly optimistic.
As far why make the mini smaller. It is not practicality. It is for marketing hype. It doesn’t have to make sense as long as it brings in new customers. Look at “all new all time smallest Mac” just makes a better advertising byline than “same mini on the outside but new on the inside” or even worse “new larger mini”. Apple is NOT concerned about selling mini to Mac enthusiasts on MacRumors.
Smaller with polycarbonate means cheaper manufacturing and cheaper shipping. Anyhow, the current Mac mini is way larger than it needs to be. There is a ton of unused empty space inside.
I feel like there are two well-defined groups of Mac mini users on this forum: Those who, for some reason, despise the redesign even before seeing it in real life, and those interested in seeing the final product, because the old design is more than a decade old and the new logic boards are too small to justify so much aluminum on the case.
The smaller Mini could fit this use case. However, I fear it won't have the same comforting warmth and loudly purring fans of the 2018 Mini. 😺
All of this is inevitable as long as you allow a mouse to reside on your desk.
Think it needs a thunderbolt monitor or at least one with a sufficiently high version of displayport that supports it from a usb c port on the mini (1.4?). The hdmi 2.0 port won’t cut it.
Let's not forget that M4 Macs are meant to be coming with 16Gb RAM and the commensurate price increase. Even if you then try and mitigate that by adding binned M4 chips to the Mini range for the first time I don't think it would be wise to be penny pinching by only doing 2 full USB4/TB3 ports with an M4 chip which is capable of having 4. Would not surprise me if they did though.
At the very least we should see 3 USB4 ports on the back and the rumoured 2 USB-C on the front for both M4 and M4 Pro SKUs, with M4 Pro having at least 1 of 2 front ports being USB4.
I'd be happy with extra fast USB-C ports, if that meant I could hang more SSD storage off native ports.
But all M4 Macs are about to get a price increase due to having more RAM on board (from 8 to 16Gb base models), surely having 4 Thunderbolt ports across the range should give something back to the consumer in return for what I think could be at least a $100 price uplift across the board - on high end models it's going to be the full $200.
Or do Apple think a fancy new form factor, and maybe a name change (yes, it's the Mac Nano with 16Gb RAM, 3 (or 4!) Thunderbolt ports, a massive 256Gb SSD, in a shiny space black polycarbonate case!) is going to dazzle people?
I think the gambit of fewer but more powerful ports might be compelling enough for some. For the others, I think a base M2 mini will remain on sale if a Nano is going to have a higher starting price.
I wouldn't have thought that the modern Thunderbolt controller chips were that much more expensive - Titan Ridge was meant to have been about $10-15 for the Intel Macs if I recall. If we were still going down the Intel route then the USB4 version - Goshan Ridge? - can't be much more than that.
FWIW, the Plugable brand powered USB 4 / Thunderbolt 4 hub I bought is only US$129.95, and that includes a USB-C to 4K HDMI adapter dongle in the box too. There is also one for $119.95 also with the free HDMI dongle, but which doesn't include the USB-A port mine has.
Each of the USB-C ports on these hubs is (certified) true Thunderbolt, including supplying 15 Watts power per port as well. At these prices, I can't see the hub controller chips being that expensive.
Each of the USB-C ports on these hubs is (certified) true Thunderbolt, including supplying 15 Watts power per port as well. At these prices, I can't see the hub controller chips being that expensive.
I went back to compare with the m3 and m3 pro MacBook Pros and it seems that Apple only offer official thunderbolt 4 ports (3 of them) with m3 pro models and presumably m3 max.
The m3 models have thunderbolt / usb 4.
There’s only 2 ports on the m3 MacBook Pro 14 but I believe it was because it only had 2 thunderbolt controllers.
And it’s the same with the m1/m2 models. I think they only cover enough of the usb spec to declare the port to be a thunderbolt port with no number (but realistically that’s thunderbolt 3 for us who are using hubs) but definitely a usb4 spec port but we know that means they have not fully featured the ports to be thunderbolt 4 but could meet the thunderbolt 3 spec.
And the understanding that the m4 could have 4 controllers allows up to 4 thunderbolt ports with m4 pro potentially having 4 like the m3 pro or perhaps even more (but just speculation that this stage).
On this basis the removal of the usb-a ports could leave a mac nano with with 3 usb4/thunderbolt ports on the back or 3 full fat thunderbolt 4 ports depending on which processor you spec.
And it’s then up to apple if they offer 1 or 2 further usb-c ports on the front and what they could provide.
Could be combinations of additional usb4/thunderbolt or thunderbolt 4 depending on processor choice.
The wording of the iMac 24 section of the linked document allows for 2 types of usb-c ports on the same machine (with the full thunderbolt ports labelled up with the requisite symbol)
And the m2 mini appears to have full fat thunderbolt 4 ports.
So there’s scope for m4 nano to have 3 full fat ports on the back and 2 usb-c 10Gps on the front while m4 pro could go with a fourth thunderbolt port on the front (or even a fifth if an extra controller over the m2 spec was allowed).
If they went for label simplicity it could just mean 4 ports (3 on the back and 1 on the front and all ports would be either usb4/thunderbolt or thunderbolt 4 depending on processor choice.
This would mean a net connectivity upgrade for m4 users (they gain extra faster usb-c ports) while it’s the m4 pro buyers who are losing 2 usb-a ports with nothing in return.
Last edited:
Then yeah, hopefully it will come with HDMI 2.1 like most of the electronics nowadays do, and we’ll be able to enjoy 120 refresh rate on the monitors that allow it. Actually, I’m going to buy a 27“ 4K 144Hz monitor soon, and it will come in handy! waiting for the next Mac mini will be worth it.
By the way, does anyone know if the M3 Pro/Max MBP has an HDMI 2.1 port? And does it allow 120 Hz refresh on third party USB-C or HDMI connected monitors?