What GPU in 2013 Mac Mini?

[corvus32]

Any GPU they choose to go with using the current Mini's design is still going to be garbage.

Instead, hopefully they will release a more purchasable Mac Pro - a headless Mac able to handle a halfway decent GPU that doesn't cost $3000. Something in the $600-$800 range would be a great first effort.

If Sony can come up with a new $399 console that has similar performance to AMD HD 7870, surely Apple could do better than Intel graphics for not much more.

Also, whoever thought it was a great idea to make your customers pay a minimum of $1500 for an all-in-one computer just to have a discrete GPU (and a lousy mobile one at that) needs to be shot out of a cannon.

 

[Ice Dragon]

You think the 750M is lousy? It might be mediocre but not lousy. I think the bigger issue is not including an SSD by default and instead using a 5,400rpm HDD (it might be 1 TB but it's still slow) but that's for another matter.

I think the reason they used Iris Pro for base iMac is because the 740M was not a substantial jump over the 640M. Could they have offered a 1 GB 740M option on the base model? Sure.

The point of the mini is that it isn't supposed to have a great GPU. It's meant to be small, affordable, cool, and quiet in my view. Although at $800, I'm not sure how affordable that might be. It certainly costs less than a base 13" MacBook Pro which is nice.

Would I want an nVidia discrete card in the Mac mini if it were possible. Yes, absolutely. I do however credit Intel for making strides and don't pass off their GPU efforts as just "garbage" though respectable.

 

[hudson1]

Any GPU they choose to go with using the current Mini's design is still going to be garbage.

Instead, hopefully they will release a more purchasable Mac Pro - a headless Mac able to handle a halfway decent GPU that doesn't cost $3000. Something in the $600-$800 range would be a great first effort.

If Sony can come up with a new $399 console that has similar performance to AMD HD 7870, surely Apple could do better than Intel graphics for not much more.

Also, whoever thought it was a great idea to make your customers pay a minimum of $1500 for an all-in-one computer just to have a discrete GPU (and a lousy mobile one at that) needs to be shot out of a cannon.

Sounds like you want to buy a Mac Pro for the price of a Mac mini. I don't think it's going to happen.

 

[corvus32]

You think the 750M is lousy? It might be mediocre but not lousy.

Mediocre at the iMac's 1080p resolution would be a desktop GTX 660 with 2-3GB VRAM

New consoles = new game engines

I think the reason they used Iris Pro for base iMac is because the 740M was not a substantial jump over the 640M. Could they have offered a 1 GB 740M option on the base model? Sure.

More like Iris Pro is free. That's why.

In a few months, it will feel like HD 4000 does today.

The point of the mini is that it isn't supposed to have a great GPU. It's meant to be small, affordable, cool, and quiet in my view. Although at $800, I'm not sure how affordable that might be. It certainly costs less than a base 13" MacBook Pro which is nice.

Its graphics performance is probably the number one complaint people have about it.

The Mini's physical design resembles a desktop computer about as much as a gaming console does, which cost a lot less, so there's no excuse why Apple couldn't do better. None.

Sounds like you want to buy a Mac Pro for the price of a Mac mini. I don't think it's going to happen.

Actually, I don't because I have a gaming PC and a Mini. I was just thinking of others and why Mac sales continue to go down. Maybe because there's nothing for consumers to be excited about.

 

[Moonjumper]

If Sony can come up with a new $399 console that has similar performance to AMD HD 7870, surely Apple could do better than Intel graphics for not much more.

Apple makes a profit on their hardware. Games consoles are mostly sold at a loss, but they then make their money on licensing fees for the games. You cannot compare the prices.

I had expected to see the HD5000 in the Mac Mini, possibly with a better Iris in the upper model, maybe configured-to-order only.

But the Mac Mini recently saw currency adjustments, plus configuration upgrade prices adjustments to match the new iMac. I fear that means they might bypass Haswell. I was planning on getting a Mini after an update, but I don't want to buy old tech at full price.

 

[corvus32]

Games consoles are mostly sold at a loss, but they then make their money on licensing fees for the games.

That was true for the last generation of consoles, but not this go around. At least, Sony execs have said as much.

I fear that means they might bypass Haswell.

That would probably be a good thing.

 

[corvus32]

Also, next year Valve's array of Steam Machines will be available.

Yet another offering that will almost certainly have better GPU performance within the Mini's price range.

I really hope Apple begins to wake up, and realize what's going on.

 

[donato]

Also, next year Valve's array of Steam Machines will be available.

Yet another offering that will almost certainly have better GPU performance within the Mini's price range.

I really hope Apple begins to wake up, and realize what's going on.

Not everyone cares about gaming (most don't, in fact).

 

[Moonjumper]

That was true for the last generation of consoles, but not this go around. At least, Sony execs have said as much.

In August, Sony executive Andrew House said the PS4 "will not generate anything like the losses we did for the PlayStation 3." Last month Sony Japan executive Masayasu Ito said the PS4 would be sold at a loss, but hoped to make it back on the PS+ subscription and games bought with the console.

 

[Ice Dragon]

I am not totally throwing your ideas out the window corvus. I actually think you make some good points and don't want you to think that I'm drinking the Apple Kool Aid where anything they give is great no matter the price point.

I do however give credit to Apple for improving upon specs for the price. The base model iMac a few years ago had the nVidia GeForce 9400M with 256 MB of memory. That was lousy. The Iris Pro is immensely better especially given the fact that it uses 1 GB of main memory although it is inferior in some ways to the 640M and 740M, it has its advantages as well.

I do not feel Iris Pro and the Intel HD 4000 are a fair comparison.

I feel Apple messed up only including a 755M in the base 27" model and wish they went with a 765M. They are getting better with video memory though still are a bit stingy. 2 GB of VRAM in the base 27" would have served nicely either standard or as an option. Apple will never put a desktop GPU in the iMac.

I hope Apple does not skip the mini with Haswell as I feel both Iris and Iris Pro deserve to go in there. If not one of them than both of them. I am not in desperate need for a new computer but both options could serve me well as an upgrade over my HD 3000.

Before I bought the 2011 Mac mini, I had wanted a Mac for as long as I could remember. The 2008 unibody 13"/15" MacBook Pro grabbed my attention but I never pulled the trigger then and not in 2009. 2010 brought the unibody Mac mini but I felt the specs were not worth $700.

Finally 2011 came and I felt the base mini was perfect. While the dGPU model would have served me well, I wanted to save the $200 for an SSD.

2012 came with the Ivy Bridge mini and I wasn't too impressed except for the fact that the 256 GB SSD was now $300 instead of $600 from a year earlier. It is now $200 as of a few weeks ago. I wanted a better GPU in the $800 model than the HD 4000 and I wasn't going to drop $600 on a new computer when I've had the previous one a year.

As I reply on many forums though including this one, I will take a wait and see attitude. I hope Apple updates for one and two that the updates are sufficient.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

More like Iris Pro is free. That's why.

In a few months, it will feel like HD 4000 does today.

good point!

 

[corvus32]

Not everyone cares about gaming (most don't, in fact).

Valve's Steam Machines will not be locked down.

They will be open in terms of software and hardware, so expect people to do more with them than just game.

I do not feel Iris Pro and the Intel HD 4000 are a fair comparison.

It is absolutely a fair comparison because they're in the same category. Both are perfectly capable of handling OS X, but neither one is sufficient for playing modern games at 1080p.

With next-gen consoles releasing next month, a new era of gaming is coming with titles being developed using more advanced engines. It's not 2007-2012 anymore.

That's why I said, in a few months, Iris Pro will feel like HD 4000 does today - especially on the desktop and in the living room.

 

[Ice Dragon]

It is absolutely a fair comparison because they're in the same category. Both are perfectly capable of handling OS X, but neither one is sufficient for playing modern games at 1080p.

With next-gen consoles releasing next month, a new era of gaming is coming with titles being developed using more advanced engines. It's not 2007-2012 anymore.

That's why I said, in a few months, Iris Pro will feel like HD 4000 does today - especially on the desktop and in the living room.

Ah ha! Now we're getting somewhere

I'm not a gamer so I'm not worried about playing modern games at 1080p but also I thought 1920x1200 is 1080p and 1920x1080 is 1080i, no?

In that case either way, I agree that Iris Pro is not sufficient. Even the Anandtech reviews did only 1366x768 and 1600x900. My HDTV operates at 1366x768 or 720p.

Then we come to the issue of graphics memory. I admit Apple is getting better with this because remember last year that 3 out of the 4 minis last year had a mere 512 MB of memory which is sad. This year, at least the upper 21.5" and base 27" have 1 GB of memory. Still, I feel they should have options to max out the graphics if they don't offer it standard.

The base 27" could have had the 2 GB 765M for $150 more which is what the Razer Blade/Blade Pro have. Would the 765M be enough for the base 27" iMac.

Or... given the design, give me what you would put mobile wise in the iMac?

 

[harcosparky]

Not everyone cares about gaming (most don't, in fact).

I have to agree.

When I want to play a game, I go on a game console.

 

[Moonjumper]

I'm not a gamer so I'm not worried about playing modern games at 1080p but also I thought 1920x1200 is 1080p and 1920x1080 is 1080i, no?

I am a gamer, but not on my Mac. I don't think the Mac Mini is aimed at the gamers, so the GPU isn't top priority. However, reports suggest Iris is approaching the performance on some dedicated GPUs that were in the outgoing generation of Macs. Integrated graphics are a very different breed from just a couple of years ago.

By the way, 1920x1080 is 1080p and 1080i. The p stands for progressive, and means every line is updated every frame. The i stands for interlaced, and means even lines are updated one frame, odd the next.

1080i is used in broadcasting to reduce the bandwidth needed, and some 720p screens attempt to fake 1080 lines by alternating which parts of the image they show.

 

[corvus32]

I am a gamer, but not on my Mac. I don't think the Mac Mini is aimed at the gamers, so the GPU isn't top priority.

Putting a real GPU in a computer doesn't mean it's only aimed at gamers.

It just makes it that much more of a multipurpose device.

One of the main reasons I built a "gaming" PC was to participate in Boinc projects like GPUGRID and MilkyWay@Home.

 

[Fishrrman]

[[ Putting a real GPU in a computer doesn't mean it's only aimed at gamers.
It just makes it that much more of a multipurpose device. ]]

Apple is never going to outclass their iMac and Mac Pro offerings by putting equivalent CPUs and GPUs into the Mini line.

That's not good from a business standpoint and it simply isn't going to happen.

They will always "keep a lid" on the Mini, just enough so that it won't be chosen over the iMac or Mac Pro by those who "demand the cutting edge".

I bought a late-2012 Mini i7 to replace an older PowerMac g4/1.25 MDD tower that had served me well for 9 years. A very capable replacement, at that.

I have no interest in "computer games", however, absolutely none.
I'll guess that Apple's intended market for the Mini doesn't include gamers, either.

 

[hudson1]

Putting a real GPU in a computer doesn't mean it's only aimed at gamers.

It just makes it that much more of a multipurpose device.

One of the main reasons I built a "gaming" PC was to participate in Boinc projects like GPUGRID and MilkyWay@Home.

Apple has targeted the mini for SOHO and media server applications. It does very well at those.

 

[Ice Dragon]

Putting a real GPU in a computer doesn't mean it's only aimed at gamers.

It just makes it that much more of a multipurpose device.

I agree with you though if Apple did put a good GPU in the mini, I probably wouldn't be able to afford it unfortunately.

 

[iamthedudeman]

[[ Putting a real GPU in a computer doesn't mean it's only aimed at gamers.
It just makes it that much more of a multipurpose device. ]]

Apple is never going to outclass their iMac and Mac Pro offerings by putting equivalent CPUs and GPUs into the Mini line.

That's not good from a business standpoint and it simply isn't going to happen.

They will always "keep a lid" on the Mini, just enough so that it won't be chosen over the iMac or Mac Pro by those who "demand the cutting edge".

I bought a late-2012 Mini i7 to replace an older PowerMac g4/1.25 MDD tower that had served me well for 9 years. A very capable replacement, at that.

I have no interest in "computer games", however, absolutely none.
I'll guess that Apple's intended market for the Mini doesn't include gamers, either.

That is certainly not true.

Really? How do you explain the 2012 Mini's i7 processors? They were the default, and faster than the imacs default configuration for the 2012 models.

Only the imac i7 had slighlty better numbers. On the GPU front, the imacs will have a better GPU. But CPU, not really. They might or might not, but if they continue their current setup. With i5 haswell across the board for the imacs, and i5 on the low end mini and i7 with the default mini using haswell. The mini will have a slight edge in the CPU department. As they used the same CPU's as the retina Macbook pro when they were released.

No reason to think that they will not again unless they change the design and go in a different direction.

 

[corvus32]

Having a lower priced Mac outperform a higher priced one's CPU is different than GPU because performance even from low cost CPU's has been good enough now for a long time, but the GPU is that one thing they can still hold over the customer's head and make them jump for.

If grandpa's home movie takes three hours to encode versus two or a photoshop action takes two minutes versus one minute, the average person really doesn't care. But, if some new game they really want to play isn't playable or the science project someone wants to participate in isn't supported, now they have a problem. Want to fix it? Well, you'll need to spend at least $1500 for this mobile GPU that can barely play modern games at 1080p but more like $2000 for this other mobile GPU just to be safe. It's absurd.

The only reason I can think why Apple continues to operate this way and show zero innovation is because they want everyone to get their entertainment from them through an iOS device and the App Store - that's where they make their money.

 

[Ice Dragon]

But, if some new game they really want to play isn't playable or the science project someone wants to participate in isn't supported, now they have a problem. Want to fix it? Well, you'll need to spend at least $1500 for this mobile GPU that can barely play modern games at 1080p but more like $2000 for this other mobile GPU just to be safe. It's absurd.

What do you think of the Razer Blade/Blade Pro? Is it the perfect mix of CPU/GPU power? The CEO of Razer apparently (I forget where I read it) draws a lot of influence from Apple.

It will be interesting to see what goes in the 15" rMBP. The base iMac I am not so concerned with them using Iris Pro on honestly although a 740M with 1 GB of memory would obviously be better maybe even 2 GB. However if Iris Pro is the only option in the rMBP, I will see it as a disappointment. I wonder if there is enough thermal headroom for the 765M with 2 GB and if Apple will use it.

 

[hudson1]

Having a lower priced Mac outperform a higher priced one's CPU is different than GPU because performance even from low cost CPU's has been good enough now for a long time, but the GPU is that one thing they can still hold over the customer's head and make them jump for.

If grandpa's home movie takes three hours to encode versus two or a photoshop action takes two minutes versus one minute, the average person really doesn't care. But, if some new game they really want to play isn't playable or the science project someone wants to participate in isn't supported, now they have a problem. Want to fix it? Well, you'll need to spend at least $1500 for this mobile GPU that can barely play modern games at 1080p but more like $2000 for this other mobile GPU just to be safe. It's absurd.

The only reason I can think why Apple continues to operate this way and show zero innovation is because they want everyone to get their entertainment from them through an iOS device and the App Store - that's where they make their money.

Massive science project -- get a Mac Pro.
Advanced games -- get a console.

For the other 95%, get an iMac or Mac mini.

 

[corvus32]

Massive science project -- get a Mac Pro.
Advanced games -- get a console.

For the other 95%, get an iMac or Mac mini.

Why bother when an iPad Mini does 95% of what an iMac can, plus so much more.

What Apple should do is take the new Mac Pro's design and forget the expensive Xeon processors, dual workstation FirePro GPUs, ecc memory, and crap like that and offer something people can not only afford but also make use of in a whole multitude of ways.

It doesn't have to be exact, but similar to an i5-4670, 8GB RAM, and a GTX 760. If I can build that for less than $1200 at retail pricing through Newegg, I'm pretty sure Apple could do one better.

 

[ioannis2005gr]

Massive science project -- get a Mac Pro.
Advanced games -- get a console.

For the other 95%, get an iMac or Mac mini.

I agree and I will choose a new i7 SSD Mac Mini or a full 21.5'' BTO iMac.