What is Digg?Sponsored by Rockstar Games
Grand Theft Auto: Episodes from Liberty City view!
rockstargames.com - Out Now on Disc for Xbox 360. Includes The Lost and Damned plus the all-new The Ballad of Gay Tony.
77 Comments
- MauMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4@gotamd
So you're saying that since an X300 board (more recent than a radeon 9200) trounces a Intel 900 (Older than a Intel 950) that the Intel 950 is inferior to the Radeon 9200? I don't think you can make that leap... - OrangeTide, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well a Core Duo chip costs $260. But the faster Mac Mini is only $200 more. So you'd be wasting $60 and voiding your warranty in the process.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"What's the use of putting an ultra-fast processor in a machine with integrated Intel graphics and laptop parts?"
It is better than a radeon 9200 with 32 MB vram
http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=158732&doc2=146457
A Mac mini is not for games. It is for hooking up to your DLP/LCD/Plasma through dvi (The Integrated graphics is capable of high-def output, with built in MPEG-2 decompression and motion compensation). Also the optical audio out and in are a nice touch for a home theater. The mini belongs in the living room. Plus Core Image is supported so you get all the eye candy.
Plus who plays games on a Mac?
Posted from an iBook. - bedouin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3CPUs in desktop Macs have been upgradable for close to 15 years now. Just a note to all those whining about Macs not allowing upgrades.
A 1.4ghz G4 is in my PowerMac that shipped with an 800mhz G4. Sonnet still sells upgrades for 68k Macs, either to run at faster speeds or switch entirely to PPC. - oboreruhito, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3If people are going to prop the 950's better performance in every thread, I'll bitch about the 950 eating 64MB-80MB of system RAM on a system that ships with 512MB of RAM in every thread, and how yes, people play games like WoW and Halo on a G4 mini just like Apple advertised them to, and how a stock Intel mini's memory-sharing video unit, while pushing plenty of polygons and having more advanced features, will make some games unplayable because they'll have almost 100MB less RAM available to them between Tiger's extra overhead and the memory stolen by the GPU, and how paying $700-$900 for a mini with 1GB of RAM negates the point of a budget system with no screen when you can get a low-end Intel iMac that ships with a decent dedicated-memory GPU with a nice screen, better specs and the same remote control for the extra cost of a nice LCD monitor.
The old mini was a budget general-purpose computer that was good - not great, but good - a several things, including being a media center. This mini is an excellent media center that sucks at games unless you pour money into Apple installing an extra 512MB of RAM for a retarded $100 premium, on top of the $100 baseline price hike.
That makes for a narrower target market, fewer sales, and a worse product for most people. Believe it or not, most people game on computers with bare-minimum specs, with the detail turned down at low resolution, because they don't care. Most people play old games on integrated graphics with slapped-together sticks of RAM and a prayer. They didn't buy the G4 mini to game, but games worked with its 512MB of RAM because it had dedicated video RAM. Those same games wouldn't have run throwing away even 10% of that RAM away. Deal with it, nerds.
But since everyone on digg needs to accessorize their 40" HDTVs, nobody's gonna give a crap about this now, then act surprised if the Intel mini undersells the easier-to-upgrade G4 mini because Mr. Jones calls up his neighbor Mr. Smith upset that his new Intel mini he has hooked up to his living room theater plays video real well, but crashes going into Ironforge every time he tries to play his level 30 night elf priestess that he's been working on for 6 months.
"I mean, it's 4 times faster than the old one, but it suddenly can't handle World of Warcraft anymore? And I have to bring it into the Apple Store and fork over a hundred MORE bucks to bump the RAM to 1GB? The old one didn't need 1GB to run the exact same game! I just spent $600 to put a box on top of my TiVo, and it can't even record television or play WoW. What a rip-off. I'll sell it to you for $500 so I can buy my old one back." - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"this was obvious but mobile processors are way more expensive"
The Core Duo/Solo, believe it or not, are actually the Desktop versions of the Pentium M, which is a mobile archetecure. While the chip is built like a mobile chip, it is decidedly (by Intel), a desktop chip.
"Well a Core Duo chip costs $260. But the faster Mac Mini is only $200 more. So you'd be wasting $60 and voiding your warranty in the process."
You're right in that it's more expensive (as you don't get the trade-in value for the processor), but it doesn't void your warranty to upgrade any component. Also, this might become more important in the future when 2.4 and 2.6 Core Duo chips become available.
"Believe me, if Apple didnt have to pay Intel an extra premium for making special BGA chips just tailored for them to solder mount, you'd have them like the G4/5's."
And you have no evidence to back this up. Especially since the boards they use have been pretty standard issue for quite a while; the G5s are all upgradeable. The previous Mac Mini had a soldered chip because the laptops using that same board had soldered chips, and Freescale/IBM decided not to offer the G4 in a standard ZIF configuration. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2"An old AMD chip eh?
Mine idles at 40C, overclocked with stock cooling."
Look at the size of your stock cooling block. Then, look at the Mac Mini. And 40C in a box the size of the Mac Mini is practically certain death; we're aiming for as low as possible. - chevyorange, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"The old Mac mini shipped with an 85W power supply... That's nearly 30% more power being consumed using Intel."
But if you are using a Duo, you are powering TWO cores instead of one G4. - KillerTarget, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"Newer ZIF sockets like this one don't work with the offset pinch method as they used to. Simply pluging it into the socket should suffice. The tensioner is mostly an artifact of legacy, though it is a bit more important in systems where the heatsink is leveraged on as a function of the socket, and the processor is sitting sideways (like in a Desktop computer, for example)."
Acutally if you look at the image the grey little dot on the right middle side of the socket is the tensioner. It isn't a level actuated, but a small flathead screwdriver or a dime will fit and let you lock and unlock. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"And they want to reduce heat and power consumption with an intel chip. It's an oxymoron."
Only its not. I can understand not being an Intel fan, but there really isn't anything out there in competition with the Pentium M and the Core Duo; these chips are incredibly low heat and their performance is at least as good as their previous generation, if not a bit better. This is the huge thing to take away from it. Certainly, AMDs current generation is winning out in overall Power (they're damned fast chips), but at the cost of a lot of wattage being pulled (below the Pentium 4, but still in the 100s of Watts).
Meanwhile the whole Mac Mini's energy use is 110W.
I love both Intel and AMD (and Freescale and IBM), because any competition means lower prices for me, but I will be realistic in judging which chips go into the platform. Apple has very firmly stated that they want their machines to be effecient, it's prevalent in their design and their core philosophy. So when AMDs next generation chips come out to compete with the incredibly low power profiles Intel is currently offering, I could definitely see Apple making the switch, especially as it will be trivial to do so at that point. But for now, Intel produces the best solution for their product sector. It's only logical. - coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1> Apple processor upgrade have usually been crappy pci slot upgrades. Nothing like having your processor run off of your pci slot.
Untrue. There have been SOME PCI-slot CPUs, but they were in a very small minority, and were back in the days of machines where ANY kind of CPU upgrade would help, such as the awful PowerMac 7200. The vast majority of upgrades were daughter-card replacements, which just drop in in place of the original CPU. Some PCI CPUs were pretty cool - there was one manufacturer that built an entire system on a PCI card hosting 4 604e CPUs - given that you could plug that into a system with a crummy single 601, that's a hell of an upgrade. You could also mix processors - Apple even sold a Pentium PC on a PCI card for a while. - jicon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@geminitojanus
"Meanwhile the whole Mac Mini's energy use is 110W."
Goes to show how well the PPC G4s work for mobile applications.
The old Mac mini shipped with an 85W power supply... That's nearly 30% more power being consumed using Intel. - matt.rubin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1There is some improvement in the hard drive:
http://www.apple.com/macmini/whatsinside.html
It is now 5400rpm.
Still 5400 RPM is pretty sad compared to the 7200 RPM on dekstop HDDs and 10000 RPM for the obsessive - panique, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4@OrangeTide - Apple permits it's users to open their computers and upgrade them without voiding the warranty. Yes, this include the Mac Mini too. So take your FUD and stuff it where the sun don't shine you Wintel fanboy.
@mwales - you do it the old school way with either a chip puller, small screwdriver, long needlenose or any combination thereof. - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"But that's what I meant. Is the architecture set up for a faster chip?"
I would probably say not. There have been some instances of overclocking the old G4 in the Mac Minis, and some reports of smells of melted plastic afterwards. But, you could always do a mod like the Nintendo mod and stick a 80mm fan on the top of its heatsink.
"Plus who plays games on a Mac?"
I played WoW a little when it first came out. Ran quite well (iBook here as well). - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"That CPU socket doesn't look like it has a lever to close it. How do you release/pinch the CPU pins on that socket?"
Newer ZIF sockets like this one don't work with the offset pinch method as they used to. Simply pluging it into the socket should suffice. The tensioner is mostly an artifact of legacy, though it is a bit more important in systems where the heatsink is leveraged on as a function of the socket, and the processor is sitting sideways (like in a Desktop computer, for example). - cavemonkey50, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The MacBook Pro uses the same heatsink for all Core Duo chips. The only thing is that the Core Solo might have a different heatsink than the Core Duo. But if the aftermarket mac industry jumps on this, we could be seeing some nicer, better performing heatsinks that can take all the heat it can dish out.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Goes to show how well the PPC G4s work for mobile applications. The old Mac mini shipped with an 85W power supply... That's nearly 30% more power being consumed using Intel."
Aye, completely agree with you there. But the G4 is so old and so slow now. It was really at its wits end as a desktop processor. Now it'll find homes in all kinds of set-top boxes of the future.
"I'd say AMD is almost already there. My iMac Core Duo (2GHz) pulls 75W at idle and 105W with both cores pegged. My AMD 4800+ X2 system (2.41GHz) pulls 95W at idle and 147W with both cores pegged and all three hard drives spun up."
Oh yeah, I agree here too. AMD is close, but not close enough. The problem is your iMac Core Duo has a (frankly quite) large LCD in the front that eats up roughly 1/3 of the power coming in. Meanwhile on a Mac Mini, you're seeing idling around 40W, with a 110W power supply. So while AMD is right for a desktop, it just doesn't work so well when you put it in a box the size of a Mac Mini. But I do give it to AMD, they're doing everything right on the desktop and mid-range server realm. Once they come up with a good laptop solution, they'll be a 1:1 competitor with Intel. And I'm sure they're cooking up something.
"no firewire???? whats the hell is up with that MAC is movin all USB or what??"
The Mini has 1 Firewire 400 port. Most likely for your set-top digital cable box which is required by standard to have one Firewire 400 out.
"Does replacing the CPU with a faster one void the warranty?"
Nope. Same goes for RAM and Hard Disk. Mess with that motherboard though and Apple will have nothing to do with you.
"Still 5400 RPM is pretty sad compared to the 7200 RPM on dekstop HDDs and 10000 RPM for the obsessive"
Yep, it's very sad. But you've gotta cut corners somewhere, and I'd rather have them cut corners on an optical drive and hard drive than WiFi/Bluetooth or motherboards (since Apple engineers their own).
"Intel's Duo Cores and Single Cores are NOT compatible. Putting in a Core Duo would require a different northbridge on the motherboard. With AMD, well, that's another story, but not with Intel."
-1, Inaccurate. The 945G chipset supports single and dual core chips. This is one of the advantages of having a socket in the first place; you can use one motherboard for two different processors on two different computer lines. What this will NOT allow you to do is plug in a Pentium 4, since they changed the pin layout around a bit so that the Pentium M's and Pentium 4s can't plug into the same board. - borntobedown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0What about heating issues?
- spikes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Believe me, if Apple didnt have to pay Intel an extra premium for making special BGA chips just tailored for them to solder mount, you'd have them like the G4/5's.
- geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3"What's the point if you can't put an AMD chip in there?"
Touche. But then again any current AMD chip would probably melt the shroud and burn through the optical drive above it when revved up to full momentum. - gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0hardran3 said ""What's the use of putting an ultra-fast processor in a machine with integrated Intel graphics and laptop parts?"
It is better than a radeon 9200 with 32 MB vram
http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=158732&doc2=146457
A Mac mini is not for games. It is for hooking up to your DLP/LCD/Plasma through dvi (The Integrated graphics is capable of high-def output, with built in MPEG-2 decompression and motion compensation). Also the optical audio out and in are a nice touch for a home theater. The mini belongs in the living room. Plus Core Image is supported so you get all the eye candy.
Plus who plays games on a Mac?
Posted from an iBook."
That's *****. Read a real review: http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=2143&p=1
The Intel graphics get killed by the Radeon X300. You shouldn't compare PPC to x86 when benchmarking *video* cards. Keep all other components the same. If you have more than one variable, you can't know what caused the difference in performance. A well-done benchmark of the two graphics chips clearly shows that the Intel solution sucks. In some cases it's even 50% slower than the X300SE (ie, ATI's lowest of the low-end card)! - geminitojanus, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"This is a ZIF socket still, thats what the little slot screw is there for, you lock and release it with a flat screwdriver."
Ah I stand corrected. I thought it was like the new sockets on the Pentium 4s where the processor just floats on the socket. Mea culpa. - diggnationdevon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I am very impressed with it except for the intel integrated graphics.
- spikes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"The cpu's in the mac book pro is soldered in. So the statement quoted holds no weight."
I stand corrected. - spikes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0^^ :-D
I got beat! - jonapete2001, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Believe me, if Apple didnt have to pay Intel an extra premium for making special BGA chips just tailored for them to solder mount, you'd have them like the G4/5's."
The cpu's in the mac book pro or soldered in. So the statedment quoted holds no weight. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0well obviously you'd have to consider that if you are going to upgrade the processor
- spikes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is a ZIF socket still, thats what the little slot screw is there for, you lock and release it with a flat screwdriver.
- borntobedown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0But that's what I meant. Is the architecture set up for a faster chip?
- kalisphoenix, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"A sign that Apple is moving itself forward. Of course, the PC has had this ability for practically forever, but still it is good Apple is swallowing its pride and taking some steps."
It's not "new" that Macs can have processor upgrades. There are, believe it or not, entire companies (Sonnet, Powerlogix, et cetera) dedicated to marketing processor upgrades for Macs. I have a 1GHz G3 sitting in my old Blue & White right now. The iMac CD sitting on my desk is also upgradeable...
I think this was posted merely as a point of interest -- as in, "hey -- this tiny ass computer can be upgraded. It's not as bad an idea as it might seem." Not that I'd be getting it, since I loathe integraded vid cards, but it does make the machine a bit more versatile. - gotamd, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0MauMan said "@gotamd
So you're saying that since an X300 board (more recent than a radeon 9200) trounces a Intel 900 (Older than a Intel 950) that the Intel 950 is inferior to the Radeon 9200? I don't think you can make that leap..."
The Radeon 9200 is out of production and doesn't even support PCI-Express. You can hardly find them if you tried, and they're no less expensive than the X300's (in fact, they're more expensive from what I've seen). You can't even find benchmarks comparing the two. You could also say that the Intel graphics are faster than a Voodoo 2, but nobody cares. - MauMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@geminitojanus said:
So when AMDs next generation chips come out to compete with the incredibly low power profiles Intel is currently offering, I could definitely see Apple making the switch, especially as it will be trivial to do so at that point. But for now, Intel produces the best solution for their product sector. It's only logical.
I'd say AMD is almost already there. My iMac Core Duo (2GHz) pulls 75W at idle and 105W with both cores pegged. My AMD 4800+ X2 system (2.41GHz) pulls 95W at idle and 147W with both cores pegged and all three hard drives spun up. - dvdcr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0is it so great? shoulnt be this something normal since it is a PC? (personal computer for the morons that say that its not a PC but a MAc.)
- Maverick83, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"Look at the size of your stock cooling block. Then, look at the Mac Mini. And 40C in a box the size of the Mac Mini is practically certain death; we're aiming for as low as possible."
And they want to reduce heat and power consumption with an intel chip. It's an oxymoron. - MauMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@gotamd
That came out harsher than interned. I understand your point that to compare graphics solutions you need to make things as same as possible put to compare two cards that are not the same as the first two cards is no good either. Remember the Radeon 9700 and 9700 Pro? Despite their numbering they were not even the same chip and the 9700Pro was much faster than the 9700.
With that being said the only review of an Intel 950 I've seen shows that it's not a very good 3D chipset but a capable 2D-3D desktop one. Which sounds about right for a Mac Mini. - MauMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0GMA950 review: http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1697,1821808,00.asp
- Elranzer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I guess the point is that those who buy the Rev A models of this do not have to buy a whole new Mini when 2.5Ghz+ versions come out. They can just pay about $200 - $250 to upgrade rather than $800 for a whole new one.
Unless the Rev B+ models have some sort of ATi chip, it's not worth the hassle of trying to sell your old Mini on eBay to save up for a new model when the only difference is a faster CPU. - ynggrsshppr, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A sign that Apple is moving itself forward. Of course, the PC has had this ability for practically forever, but still it is good Apple is swallowing its pride and taking some steps.
- HeavyMetaler, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0"Intel's Duo Cores and Single Cores are NOT compatible. Putting in a Core Duo would require a different northbridge on the motherboard. With AMD, well, that's another story, but not with Intel."
Do you honestly think they have 2 different motherboards in the new mini's??? I doubt it, it would cost to much to use different ones for mass production. I would be willing to bet that the northbridge that supports the core duo also supports the solo core, which is why they would use the 945G(core duo support) in both production versions of the mini. - matt.rubin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0It s 478 socket...................
so because of that someone needs to slap one of these in there
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116169
yeeeah u might want to water cool or something like drill a hole into the case and have a external one cause that thing gets hot
can someone do that mod who wants to be on bleeding edge?!?! - johnboyholmes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0There is some improvement in the hard drive:
http://www.apple.com/macmini/whatsinside.html
It is now 5400rpm. - wilsonics, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I believe, for one, that the thing that will hold this platform back is the 4200rpm hard drive....correct me if i'm wrong, but that's what i last saw was the spin on the drive. Sure it's SATA, but damn....give us some spin rate people!
- coolbru, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0> APPLE HOW STUPID ARE YOU U CONTROLL THE OS AND THE HARDWARE AND STILL HAVEN"T BOTHERED ON SWICHING TO 64 BIT WTF!!!!!
Erm, because Intel don't make an appropriate 64-bit CPU? Could this conceivably be why the G5 is still their CPU of choice on the desktop? Intel's 64-bit offering is due later this year, so I'd expect that to be used then. You should perhaps be asking why Intel hasn't kept up with AMD and IBM, both of whom have had 64-bit desktop CPUs for quite some time (though neither of them have a low-power offering either). It's got nothing to do with Apple - they had to pull the 64-bit stuff for these CPUs, which is why they're not high-end boxes. - inkswamp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wonder how much Apple makes of people just buying things to tear them apart like this.
- Ultim8Fury, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0http://www.reezle.com/gallery/view.php?currImage=17
To all the people bitching about integrated graphics. Would you care to point out where a separate graphics chip and supporting circuitry would sit on this motherboard becase it looks to me like there is NO ROOM.
Secondly if you're buying a Mac Mini with the intention of playing games on it. You're a moron. Seriously it's not meant for that. If you want to play games then you're better off building a PC or buying a console.
I'm not gonna sit here and defend the integrated graphics chip because at the end of the day it does what it's supposed to do. Provides all the eye candy for the OS and works well with video.
The Mini is clearly Apples first real step towards a streaming HTPC. The ability to record shows is not an issue. Apple know full well that there is a demand for TV downloads and, that demand will only increase. For the content they don't provide there are "other" ways of aquiring it and I have no doubt you're aware of what they are. With internet speeds increasing the traditional ( if that word applies) PVR/DVR/HTPC is going to be phased out. The future is TV on demand not selected recording of broadcast. The New Mini is a huge step in the right direction. This weeks keynote brought me exactly what I was after. A headless small form factor Mac with some decent power behind it. That the prcosessor is probably upgradable in the future is a bonus and not one I was expecting. Still, at the prices that 2.0Ghz chips are right now I wouldn't want to be upgrading it any time soon.
- easygoing, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Does replacing the CPU with a faster one void the warranty?
- matt.rubin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0coolbru what the hell you talking about of course intel has released their 64 bit cpus ever heard of the pentium D?
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.asp?Item=N82E16819116212
thats not even top of the line - mwales, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0That CPU socket doesn't look like it has a lever to close it. How do you release/pinch the CPU pins on that socket?
- CRASSPUNXTEXHTV, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0and the core duo is socket 479 not 478 (478 is quite old) for evidance read the spec sheet
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/centrino/Core%20Duo%20White%20Paper.pdf -
Show 51 - 77 of 77 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is