Merom apparently works without a hitch in current Intel Mac's

[DeathChill]

According to the guy who posted about upgrading his Mini to a 2.16 GHz Core Duo from a 1.5 GHz Core Solo has apparently put a Merom chip into the Mini without problem. I guess he got preproduction one, as he isn't allowed to post benchmarks or specify anything but the fact that it works.

Kind of neat and it ensures that I shall be upgrading my Mini with a Merom chip.

LINK: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...t=91459&page=5

[skwert]

hot sauce...that should be a pretty nice perk to those who own an already sexy mactel mini.

this swapability could be a foreshawdow of some great new flexibility in apple hardware.

[Mac_Freak]

That will be some "Mighty" Mini

[EricNau]

This should mean that Apple won't have any problems updating their computers when Merom is released, keeping Apple at the top in terms of the technology they use.

[ImAlwaysRight]

I'm hoping the soldered CPU in the MBP is due to the thin size. Hopefully a thicker 1.3" Macbook will allow for a socket CPU so the Macbook can go up to Merom as well.

[skwert]

Originally Posted by ImAlwaysRight

I'm hoping the soldered CPU in the MBP is due to the thin size. Hopefully a thicker 1.3" Macbook will allow for a socket CPU so the Macbook can go up to Merom as well.

that's the first thought that popped into my head as well, allthough it was quickly put the rest by the fact that rumors have pointed to a much thinner form factor for the macbook. i doubt apple is going to make a bulkier book just to have socketed chipsets

[livingfortoday]

This is EXACTLY why I went for the Mini! I already knew that in the future I could upgrade to a faster Core Duo when I felt this machine was starting to lag, but man, I never knew it'd be this upgradeable.

[JonHimself]

I was reading that the virtualization software (from parallel i think the company was) does not work on the Mac Mini as well as it does on the MPB and iMac. Will this processor upgrade help that at all or is there another issue at hand here?

[skwert]

Originally Posted by JonHimself

I was reading that the virtualization software (from parallel i think the company was) does not work on the Mac Mini as well as it does on the MPB and iMac. Will this processor upgrade help that at all or is there another issue at hand here?

this could be. i'm guessing it's the diff b/t the core solo (found in the low end mini) and core duo (found in the mbp, high end mini, and imac). whoever said they weren't having good performance was probably running a core solo mini. so it might be a higher performance chip would greatly help, especially b/c i'm assuming the merom is a dual core chip.

[ImAlwaysRight]

Originally Posted by skwert

i doubt apple is going to make a bulkier book just to have socketed chipsets

Obviously not, but the 12" PB was always bulkier than the 15/17", I presume to aid cooling and get everything to fit. Plus, Apple wouldn't have to go with only a 4x DVD burner w/out DL support if the Macbook were a little thicker. So, like I said, I sure hope the Macbooks come in at slightly over an inch. I'll take my Macbook 1/4-inch thicker to have a better optical drive and a socketed CPU any day.

[Lollypop]

wonder if it was a easy fit and how the heat related to current mini's? I think due to the space constraints we wouldn't be able to upgrade the mini veryfar... the mini truly is the new cube IMO.

[nagromme]

That's great. Here's hoping the new pro towers will use sockets also!

[ibook30]

This could open the Mac community to folks who like to tinker.

[stoid]

This would be even better if you weren't stuck with the GMA950 integrated graphics.

As Reuben said in Ocean's Eleven: "Of course, lest we forget, once you're out the front door, you're still in the middle of the f***ing desert!"

[BlueRevolution]

anybody remember the days when Steve was against upgradeable RAM?

[Lollypop]

Originally Posted by stoid

This would be even better if you weren't stuck with the GMA950 integrated graphics.

As Reuben said in Ocean's Eleven: "Of course, lest we forget, once you're out the front door, you're still in the middle of the f***ing desert!"

Semi off topic, but what im thinking apple is going to keep the processor speeds of the mini where they are for a while, and try to integrate some real graphics, something like the x300 or even the x1300.

The market the mini is targeted at doesnt really require a lot of performance, so apple will rather try to cut cuts and solve problems the mini has than give someone peroformance they wont use. The upgraders that do need performance will very likely be savy enough to be able to upgrade the CPU themselves, so everyone wins in the long run.

[QCassidy352]

damn, that's so awesome! wow, now I want a mini!

[azzurri000]

Originally Posted by ibook30

This could open the Mac community to folks who like to tinker.

Yeah! Customizability seems to be the reason why a lot hard core computer users such as gamers go for machines that run windows... because they can choose all of the important specs.

I hope this is a slippery slope!

[strange days]

put an X... series graphic chip inside it and i'm buying, otherwise no use for Merom here...

[Multimedia]

Well if the mobile Macs don't have any sockets, this capability will be moot.

[Kelmon]

I'm going to echo a few of the other sentiments that this is great and all but if the graphics chipset isn't up to scratch then the performance improvements may be limited. Upgrading PCs in the past consistently demonstrated that the system performance is held back by the slowest component. This rule typically applies to gaming, to be honest, and this isn't something that I'd expect a Mini to be doing anyway, particularly not since I noted MacWorld UK's benchmarks showing the new ones to be slower than the old G4 systems in UT2004. However, what other job would you be performing on a Mini where the graphics chipset wouldn't be a factor but the processor would and a Yonah won't cut the mustard? Open question...

[isgoed]

Originally Posted by skwert

this could be. i'm guessing it's the diff b/t the core solo (found in the low end mini) and core duo (found in the mbp, high end mini, and imac). whoever said they weren't having good performance was probably running a core solo mini. so it might be a higher performance chip would greatly help, especially b/c i'm assuming the merom is a dual core chip.

No all mini's seem to be unable to use the hardware virtualization instructions. It is expected however that at least for OSX 10.5 Leopard, a firmware upgrade for the mac mini will be released. It is of course unclear if merom is supported by the firmware and you can use virtualization on merom.

As posted by a "Parallels" employee on their support forum:

From our expirience Intel VT-x is enabled by Apple on iMac and MacBook Pro and disabled for some reasons on Mac Mini....
(http://forum.parallels.com/showthrea...p=237#post237)

--old news--

I actually knew this already a week ago, but didn't think of it as being significant. Oddly I was the one who brought the story of the original yonah 2.13Ghz swap to macrumors. Arn even copied my exact headline with the term 'upgraded' in it, which was misinterpreted by many people who thought that apple has changed the configuration . It was funny to see that the source's website was completely slashdotted, macrumored and digged .

--64 bit--

I wonder if this means you can run in 64-bit mode. I wouldn't be suprised if you need to upgrade firmware or chipsets for that. At least we can use 16 registers that are in the 64 BIT-implementation also in 32-bit mode, which at least leads to the apparent performance increase

--Graphics--

Originally Posted by Lollypop

Semi off topic, but what im thinking apple is going to keep the processor speeds of the mini where they are for a while, and try to integrate some real graphics, something like the x300 or even the x1300.

I agree that a dedicated graphics card would make it a killer mini (boot in windows and you can even taste something of state of the art games). And while we are wishing: how about a geforce 7300 turbocache, with video-out/in; Now you're talking Home-Theater and adequate gaming power (and it is cheap too ($75 or so), I would even trade in some other features for that (bluetooth, superdrive). However I don't see this happening .

--oh Boy--

When the mini was released there were a lot of whiners about the graphics card. I argued that the mini was a good computer and to back up my claim I promised that I would buy a mini within a month. I actually made good on that promise and today is my mini scheduled for delivery (this must be a great upgrade from a powerbook G4 550mhz):

12 apr 2006 08:02 Rotterdam Out For Delivery

edit: Whoo-ooOOO!!
DELIVERED: 09:26 !!!

[nagromme]

Originally Posted by Kelmon

However, what other job would you be performing on a Mini where the graphics chipset wouldn't be a factor but the processor would and a Yonah won't cut the mustard? Open question...

Tasks where processor speed is a factor, but the integrated graphics are sufficient:

iMovie
GarageBand
iPhoto
3D rendering
sound processing
Photoshop (not yet native)
Vector drawing (Illustrator/Freehand)
Page layout
Folding@Home
64-bit apps (rare for now, but Merom is and Yonah isn't)
Running multiple apps at one time
Running ONE app as apps get more powerful in future
Running multiple OS's at once

Just about anything BUT 3D games really

[Stridder44]

Originally Posted by nagromme

...Just about anything BUT 3D games really

Sums it up right there. You make a good point, no doubt, but still.

[aussie_geek]

sounds great!!

a mini folding at home / seti box!!!


aussie_geek