1920x1200 on a mac mini?

Discussion in 'Buying Tips and Advice' started by kingcrowing, Dec 4, 2005.

  1. kingcrowing macrumors 6502a

    kingcrowing

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
    #1
    According to apple, the mac mini will run an LCD at 1920x1200 through DVI (a 23" ACD or 24" Dell) so I know its possible, but will it run like crap? I know 32Mb isnt much at all, but would be be better to get a mini and run the LCD or an older powermac (or upgraded cube, Cube=$250, 1.7GHz G4=$300+128MB GPU=$100) and If I did get an older machine, what kind of graphics card would I need to do Digital DVI @ 1920x1200?
     
  2. stoid macrumors 601

    stoid

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    So long, and thanks for all the fish!
    #2
    Keep in mind that if you get an old Cube you are also going to want to put in a bigger HD and probably more RAM as well, and that can add another $100-$150 to the price.
     
  3. stevep macrumors 6502a

    stevep

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #3
    No - a 1920 x 1200 screen at 32 bit colour needs 9mB of video memory. You only need to worry about a Mini's video capability if you're a gamer looking for high frame rates, or into 3D apps.
    And the latest minis apparently have 64mB of video memory according to this thread: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=151676
     
  4. kingcrowing thread starter macrumors 6502a

    kingcrowing

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
    #4
    I would be doing no gaming on it at all (I'd be using the display for an xbox 360 as well...) so I just want smooth framerates etc. while in the OS, possibly doing Photoshop, but that would be it, and light use at that. I think I might wait out to see if I can get a 1.5GHz mini+64MB vRAM, thanks a lot for that other thread
     
  5. Jigglelicious macrumors 6502

    Jigglelicious

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2004
    Location:
    NYC
    #5
    That might hold true if you're talking about a 2d rendering. However with Quartz Extreme, the entire desktop is rendered in 3d, with each window using up its own texture. Not to mention that OSX is double buffered, which means twice the VRAM usage. In my experience, 32mb quickly runs out at 1280x1024. Will the mini run 1920x1200? Sure. But you might find something like expose to be more choppy than you'd like. Photoshop won't be affected, though.
     
  6. stevep macrumors 6502a

    stevep

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2004
    Location:
    UK
    #6
    Yep, there are limits. I'd say that a Mini running 10.3.9 (no fancy OS X eye-candy) just for P/shop and Illustrator would be fine. If you want to run more then you're a bit too close to the limit to be comfortable. Its not just about the amount of VRAM, as you quite rightly point out.
     
  7. Dreadnought macrumors 68020

    Dreadnought

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2002
    Location:
    Almere, The Netherlands
    #7
    Half a year ago I saw a mini with a 23"ACD at a local Apple store. It was running very smooth, first time I saw the mini too. Very beautifull machine and was running much faster then I had expected. The Ram was probably maxed out. To make a long story short, it runned the 23" ACD very nice! You could always try one out at your local Apple store.
     
  8. MiserableTurnip macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2005
    Location:
    EU
    #8
    Hmmm, maybe there's something wrong with my mini, but I'm definitely not happy with the Quartz Extreme performance even on 1280x1024. ;) Things like Exposé are smooth, ONLY if I have no icons on the desktop, and when the Dock is set to hide. Making the resolution lower makes a big difference in performance, but who does that with an LCD display. :eek:
     
  9. zen.state macrumors 68020

    zen.state

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    #9
    my 19" crt can do 2048x1536 and when I had it on my mini I was able to get that res. no problem. 19x12 will be no problem. keep in mind though that with a higher res. you will get slower 2D. quartz extreme helps with that anyway.
     
  10. zen.state macrumors 68020

    zen.state

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2005
    #10
    to directly answer your question.. what you should do is get the 599 mini because you are sure to get a 1.5ghz with 64mb vram. resolution and colour depth are most dependant on the amount of vram you have.

    unless you do professional video, graphic or audio work you don't need a powermac.
     
  11. jayscheuerle macrumors 68020

    jayscheuerle

    #11
    Be prepared for some TINY text in applications. You think the palettes in Photoshop are tough to read NOW...
     
  12. nutmac macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2004
    #12
    This would depend on size of the monitor, no? I mean 1920x1200 on 23" LCD and 1680x1080 on 20" have almost exactly the same DPI (and resulting font size).
     
  13. displaced macrumors 65816

    displaced

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Location:
    Gravesend, United Kingdom
    #13
    Hi,

    I run a 1.42GHz / 1GB RAM Mac Mini with a 20.1" widescreen LCD monitor at 1680x1050.

    Exposé is perfectly fine 90% of the time. If I have, say, a dozen windows open, it's sometimes a little stuttery, but I've never had to wait for Exposé to work. It's certainly not noticeably worse than when I used it with a CRT monitor at 1152x864.

    Moving windows around, resizing and minimising, and the dashboard fade in/out are absolutely fine. The quality's gorgeous via DVI too.

    I've read (on macosxhints.com I believe) that having many icons on the desktop can cause a bit of UI slowdown, but that's not something I've experienced -- I keep my desktop tidy :)
     
  14. jayscheuerle macrumors 68020

    jayscheuerle

    #14
    I guess you're right. I'm running 1600x1200 on a 21" Studio Display (20" viewable or so) and I certainly wouldn't want to go any smaller, but it IS readable...
     
  15. Madness macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
    #15
    i know that this is old ... but how about some updates?
     
  16. Father Jack macrumors 68020

    Father Jack

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Location:
    Ireland
    #16
    Mac Mini (1 Gb ram) + 23 ACD at max resolution .... no problem .. :)
     
  17. Madness macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2008
  18. Father Jack macrumors 68020

    Father Jack

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Location:
    Ireland
    #18
    Go for it. The Mini's tiny size belies it's capabilities. It really is a great little computer .. :)
     
  19. frick macrumors member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2006
    #19
    The mini works great at 1900x1200. Expose/dashboard animations are a little laggy, but that's to be expected with the mini's pathetic video controller.
     

Share This Page