Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Sep 20, 2006, 10:03 AM   #1
MacBytes
macrumors bot
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Mac mini (1.66GHz and 1.83GHz) benchmarks




Category: Benchmarks
Link: Mac mini (1.66GHz and 1.83GHz) benchmarks
Description:: Geek Patrol compares the old high-end Mac mini against the new high-end Mac mini.

Posted on MacBytes.com
Approved by Mudbug
MacBytes is offline   0
Old Sep 20, 2006, 10:35 AM   #2
QCassidy352
macrumors G3
 
QCassidy352's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: San Francisco
it's a shame they didn't have equal RAM in the two machines (they had 2 GB in the 1.83 and 1 GB in the 1.66). Woulda been so easy, and then the machines would have been perfectly equal.

Results are basically as expected... you see about a 10% boost when processor is the limiting factor.

The real benefit to the last mini update was making the low-end mini a very viable choice by going from 1.5 solo to 1.66 duo.
__________________
"If Jesus Himself came back to earth and turned water to wine, half of MacRumors would say 'meh, this is red. I wanted white.'"
QCassidy352 is offline   0
Old Sep 20, 2006, 10:39 AM   #3
MacSA
macrumors 68000
 
MacSA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: UK
If you could find the old 1.6dual core superdrive Mini going cheap, that would be a better deal.
MacSA is offline   0
Old Sep 20, 2006, 10:52 AM   #4
7on
macrumors 601
 
7on's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Punk Hazard
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacSA
If you could find the old 1.6dual core superdrive Mini going cheap, that would be a better deal.
The refurb store had them a while back for $649. The roommate got one.
__________________
jonshipman.com
7on is offline   0
Old Sep 20, 2006, 02:58 PM   #5
Chealion
macrumors regular
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Calgary, Alberta
Quote:
Originally Posted by QCassidy352
it's a shame they didn't have equal RAM in the two machines (they had 2 GB in the 1.83 and 1 GB in the 1.66). Woulda been so easy, and then the machines would have been perfectly equal.

Results are basically as expected... you see about a 10% boost when processor is the limiting factor.

The real benefit to the last mini update was making the low-end mini a very viable choice by going from 1.5 solo to 1.66 duo.
Geekbench needs only 100MB of RAM, so that so long as 100MB are free you can compare computers more easily.
__________________
Chealion, the one and only =)
Chealion is offline   0
Old Sep 20, 2006, 03:13 PM   #6
Dont Hurt Me
macrumors 603
 
Dont Hurt Me's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Yahooville S.C.
Cool indeed and it makes me happy that I just ordered a 1.66 A dual 1.66 in a mini is just terrific if you ask me. GMA950 Im not thrilled about but it will have to do. We have a 1.42 now for 1.5 yrs and its been a great little machine. Its my womans and since lightning took out my crappy PC.....

Mini's are just cool As much cpu horsepower as a dual 2.0 G5! yeah baby yeah!
__________________
Those that give up Liberty to have temporary Security deserve Neither......Benjamin Franklin.
Dont Hurt Me is offline   0


 
MacRumors Forums > Archive > Archives of Old Posts > MacBytes.com News Discussion

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How's 1080p playback on 1.83GHz Core Duo Mac Mini? Hellhammer Mac mini 21 Dec 3, 2013 12:54 AM
Upgrading 1.83GHz Mac mini to run lion. jklondon Mac mini 8 Apr 5, 2013 04:51 AM
A new Mac Mini to replace 2.66ghz 2009 iMac Iwan Mac mini 5 Oct 31, 2012 10:55 AM
Opinions on old style Mac Mini (1.83Ghz) for HTPC blizeH Mac mini 17 Jun 22, 2012 04:34 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:04 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC