Hacker Upgrades Mac Mini w/ Core 2 Duo

[aegisdesign]

It seems Apple has made their computers very easily upgradable, so hopefully they'll update their lines more often to keep up with other PC manufacturers.

If you think that cracking a case with a palette knife, removing most of the innards before you get to the CPU easy, then yes, they have.

Does it have a better implementation or a new instruction set? I'd be surprised if Apple's shipping libraries had optimizations for a Mermon SSE instruction set such that this modder would have benefited. But if it's just better silicon, then onward.

Better implementations AND better instruction set.

Before, with Yonah and previous chips with SSE, they had a 128bit SSE instruction set but the chip split the 128bit instruction over 2 clock cycles. Altivec performed 1 128bit instruction in 1 cycle. Merom is the first to do that with Intel chips and is therefore pretty much as good as the older G4s.

The later G4s (7448 and 8641D) which Apple didn't use also did them out-of-order for even more speed.

the "Core 2 Dual" is only 20% faster than the "Core Dual" 20% is hard to notice without a stopwatch and is unnoticable for many tasks.

Yes, but the point here is that the mini was upgraded from a 1.5Ghz Core Solo to a 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo. That's not a 20% increase.

 

[2ndPath]

True, but those budget PCs cost far less than $1100 which is the cheapest Mac portable available. So if Apple is gonna be competitive with other PC manufacturers at the $1000-$1500 price point, they need to put in a Core 2 Duo.

True, but Apple can still ask a good premium for their OS and their design. Right now the MacBooks are very competitive in their class.

 

[THX1139]

Actually i dont own an Intel Mac.

Im trying to make people realize that Merom really wont make that much of a difference. From reading a lot of people on here that say to wait to buy a macbook pro until they have Merom in them, and from reading the specs (like this original post by macrumors) of Merom, i dont think that its as big of a deal as people make it out to be.

Like i said in my other post, 80% (about) of the people who buy a mac are NOT going to care. Why not? because they're not Pro-consumers. As you said, Pros will want that extra 10 seconds for rendering or encoding, and if they really need it, they should wait, sure. But i could also say that they should wait until the Mac Pros come out with Woodcrest, as most pros that ive seen use Power Macs in the lab or studio. Merom is a consumer chip, meant to replace/run alongside the Yonah. Everyone on here is saying 'wait until merom comes out!', and the people that are listening are, im taking an educated guess here, not Pros who will actually benefit from that 20% speed increase. Now we have a ton of people saying 'im waiting until merom comes out to get my Macbook', and it frustrates me that people dont look past the numbers to see that just maybe, it wont matter that much. And i certainly dont have to remind you that waiting is a fool's game in the computer world.

Okay, yeah I agree. If people are waiting for Merom before they buy their mini or macbook or macbookpro so that they can surf the web faster. Well, that's just stupid. What I was talking about is that Merom is going to be a nicer chip than the Yonah for a lot of reasons than a 10-20% bump in speed. Those reasons don't necessarly translate to the average user as has been mentioned in other posts. I for one, need a Merom for a portable solution. Sure the Conroe/Woodcrest desktops are going to be waaay faster then Merom, but you can't haul a desktop into Starbucks or use it on an airplane or hotel when you have business out of town. Looks like we agree, so that's pretty cool.

Merom is a quality upgrade from the Yonah. But installing one in a Mac mini seems really stupid. Spending 3-500 to upgrade a $800 computer to get a ~20% speed boost is a waste of money imo. ..

Okay, but if you go back and read my post, you will notice that I was talking about the MacbookPro - not the mini. Sorry if my off topic reply to a post confused you. In summary, I simply said that waiting for Merom before buying a MBP was a good idea. Least that is what I meant to say.

 

[THX1139]

o really..its a nightmare for me..
i bought a Quad G5 a month ago........
when will apple drop support on PowerPC.........afraid........

I talked to them yesterday. They told me to tell you that you have exactly two years from tomorrow. Once PPC support is gone, all pre-Intel Apple computers will suddenly stop working.

 

[MacSA]

Merom is a quality upgrade from the Yonah. But installing one in a Mac mini seems really stupid. Spending 3-500 to upgrade a $800 computer to get a ~20% speed boost is a waste of money imo.

A 20% speed boost over a 1.5ghz Core Solo?

 

[ezekielrage_99]

This gives the Mac Mini some more good selling points because lets face it Macs in the past haven't always been upgrade friendly. Being able the upgrade the CPU, RAM and HDD would appeal to quite a few people out there.

 

[BOOMBA]

Yea, but the G5 has higher Mhz.

Didn't you hear?
steve told us years ago Megahertz was a myth!

 

[BornAgainMac]

Since I already have a Core 1, I'll wait for the Core 3. I'll stick with odd numbered cores. Core 1 gave me the biggest jump from the G4 compared to Core 2 vs Core 1 so it made sense to start with Core 1.

I think the naming is going to be like G3, G4, G5. You will get use to it.

 

[BOOMBA]

It seems Apple has made their computers very easily upgradable, so hopefully they'll update their lines more often to keep up with other PC manufacturers.

that doesn't sound like Apple....
I think they would rather you buy a new Mac every 2 years than upgrade the processor. although I guess most people wouldn't. For the price of a new processor and the latest graphics card, you are more than half way to the cost of a new Mac already.

 

[Dunepilot]

Yes, but the point here is that the mini was upgraded from a 1.5Ghz Core Solo to a 2.16Ghz Core 2 Duo. That's not a 20% increase.

And that is why this thread is interesting for me. I bought a Core Solo Mini because I couldn't afford the extra for the Core Duo and I wanted an Intel Mini to tinker with (and for Front Row use through my TV, actually).

As soon as the dual-core Meroms are affordable, I'll stick one in my Mini.

 

[ImNoSuperMan]

if the core 2 duo chip doesn't make much of a difference in the real world, then i guess i won't wait.. i'll get a macbook this week then

You`ve got that absolutely right mate.

Man this makes my wait even more worth it. Bring me that MBP with merom baby!

Yup. You too are correct my friend.


I hope everyone got my point.
And the point really is buying a yonah MB now is a complete no brainer. They`ve just launched and wont be upgraded before Nov at least. And Though Merom might be better / faster than Yonah; It simply isnt big enough difference worth the wait for most MB buyers.

But MBP will definitely be upgraded(hopefully) as soon as Intel ships Merom. And if someone is splurging for a pro NoteBook then he/she can definitely make that extra 15-20% increase in performance really count. So unless you do need to have an MBP before this Aug/Sept and cant do without it anymore, there should be no reason for not waiting till Merom MPBs. You`ll be getting a newer next gen processor for the same price but for extra two months wait. And you can also hope that these Merom MBP will actually be cooler than the current ones.

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

G5 has allways been overblown Apple hype, They never were all that Apple was saying and the U.K. forced Apple to stop spinning lies on G5. So here we have a Mini that can outdo a Quad Thats funny but whats even more funny is my 2 yr old AMD 3500+ can still spank any G5 in Gaming, you can use 1,2 even 4 G5s and they still get spanked by 1 Athlon 64. Please G5 was nothing more then feeding the fan club. Anyone buying a G5 machine the past few months just isnt paying attention.

 

[Mord]

thats a dual 2.5GHz G5, not a quad.

anywho it's not all that surpassing seeing as a 2.66GHz core 2 duo outpaces an FX 62 by some 30% according to some quick maths that puts the core2duo 36% odd percent faster clock for clock than your beloved K8

now if this 2.16 beats the dual 2.5GHz G5 by 10% that means that it's about 27% faster clock for clock.


yes i know the fsb is double with the conroe and that pretty much makes up the difference but by bashing the g5 you bash your own cpu of choice.

 

[ImNoSuperMan]

maybe someone should figure out how to add a dedicated Graphics card to the mac mini and macbook, and then everyone can stop whining about how their cheap computer isnt as good as the expensive models.

That someone can be Apple only. I dont know why but apple hasn`t yet realized that there is definitely a BIG market for Minis with Dedicated GPUs. Whatddya say. Will you pay bout 900$ for a Merom Mini with 128MB(or at least 64MB) GPU.

 

[Mord]

theirs not enough room, the ppc mini did it because ppc parts are designed to be small as they are used in embedded environments most of the time, intel chipsets and cpu's use giant packages and you need a cpu northbridge and southbridge, once intel drops the fsb and makes some kind of hypertransport equivalent hopefully their will be enough room for a proper gpu in the macbook and mini.

 

[psycho bob]

Does the "About this Mac" screen call current Intel chips "Genuine"? That struck me as a little too much -- like the old saw about a fake coin dated "50 B.C."

I'm voting this as positive, because any ability to keep your computer working better longer is a good thing. I'm just surprised that the only talk about Photoshop was how well it runs on Rosetta....

Windows does the same thing, pre production samples of Intel chips do not have the name embedded in to the chips firmware so simple show up as 'Genuine'. I have no doubt the person has indeed done this but quite where they sourced the chip from is a little more dubious.

 

[Macaholic G5]

If this is true then GREAT!!!! There will be good business swapping chips for people if the specs are true.

but if it's all a hoax or false numbers....

No hoax. What you see on my .Mac homepage is what you get. Benches under both Xbench and SiSoft Sandra. Power consumption numbers have been posted as well. Next up... 20" iMeromac!

 

[psycho bob]

G5 has allways been overblown Apple hype, They never were all that Apple was saying and the U.K. forced Apple to stop spinning lies on G5. So here we have a Mini that can outdo a Quad Thats funny but whats even more funny is my 2 yr old AMD 3500+ can still spank any G5 in Gaming, you can use 1,2 even 4 G5s and they still get spanked by 1 Athlon 64. Please G5 was nothing more then feeding the fan club. Anyone buying a G5 machine the past few months just isnt paying attention.

Do we have to have this bull everytime. First off as previously posted these results are not compared to a Quad G5. Secondly just about all PC processors of the time will beat PPC when it comes to games but this has far more to do with the OS, GPU and Open GL than anything else. Yes you AMD is a good chip but the difference between it and equivalent x86 products was nothing to shout about. The new Intel Core 2 chips will sweep all before them at least initially, AM2 will not put AMD back to the fore so we await the quad core battle.

The G5 was a good chip but much like the Power 4 on which it was based it was a speciallity product, more scientific server CPU then outright desktop chip. What it did it did well but when you don't set out specifically to build for a specific market you are bound to have problems. The G5 was introduced in 2003 but Power 4 arrived around 2000, as such it is very old. The G5 got Apple back in the game and gained a lot of respect in the scientific and creative fields. Hell I love my G5 but time changes things especially in technology.

Right now it is Intel across the board, when the Core 2 family is complete they will have the fastest mobile, desktop and server chips. We await a response from AMD so the battle can really heat up

 

[Dont Hurt Me]

Its good for Apple to have CPU's moving forward when for so long with G4 and G5 things were just stagnate. Intel stuff will be sweet. Just look at the Apple line, everyone has a decent CPU in my view minus the old G5s

 

[Paranoidmarvin]

Wow, with stats like those, I'm going to be switching to Intel very very soon...
Looks down on his iMac G5.

Grrr, why did I buy a Powerbook in September, knowing I would have to keep it for 5 years!!

 

[DrFrankTM]

If you want a Mini now, there is absolutely no reason to wait...

Ok. Just a quick thing. If you are in the market for a laptop, it might make sense to wait for a Merom chip... or not, depending on whether you need a new computer now or can afford to wait a while.

If you want a super fast Mini, though, buying now and upgrading later makes a lot of sense. For one thing, since the first generation of Merom is a drop-in replacement, I'd be surprised if Apple changes anything else when (and if) they put the Merom in the Mini. Secondly, if Apple puts a Merom chip in the Mini at some point in the future, they will most likely not go with the fastest chip available, for price considerations. I don't recall the speed of the slowest Merom chips, but if you want the fastest, I think your best bet is to buy a Mini now and then buy the (first-generation) Merom chip that you want. I think someone in this thread said the first-gen tops at 2.33 GHz, which isn't bad at all!!! If you need - or want - a Mini now, I don't really see any reason to wait. Get a Core Duo if you want a fast machine now, and you can get a significant upgrade when going to a 2.33 Merom chip when they become cheaper (maybe a year from now?). As was mentioned before, going from a Core Duo 1.66 to a Core 2 Duo 2.33 is a noticeable upgrade:

(2.33/1.66)x1.2=1.684

So the upgrade would make the processor roughly 70% faster. I said "the processor" because the rest of your computer stays the same, obviously, so you would not get a 70% performance increase in real-world tests. If you wait for Apple to ship a Mini with a Merom chip, you might wait quite a while to get a Merom 1.83 (if Intel offers one - as I said, I'm not sure about the speed of the slowest Merom), which would be quite a wait for "only" a 32% increase.

Anyways, that's my take on it.

 

[thogs_cave]

G5 has allways been overblown Apple hype, They never were all that Apple was saying and the U.K. forced Apple to stop spinning lies on G5. So here we have a Mini that can outdo a Quad Thats funny but whats even more funny is my 2 yr old AMD 3500+ can still spank any G5 in Gaming, you can use 1,2 even 4 G5s and they still get spanked by 1 Athlon 64. Please G5 was nothing more then feeding the fan club. Anyone buying a G5 machine the past few months just isnt paying attention.

Phew. Good thing I use my computers for work and not gaming then.

It always amazes me how much attention is paid to gaming. Doesn't anybody do anything useful with their multi-thousand-dollar machines?

 

[thogs_cave]

The G5 was a good chip but much like the Power 4 on which it was based it was a speciallity product, more scientific server CPU then outright desktop chip. What it did it did well but when you don't set out specifically to build for a specific market you are bound to have problems. The G5 was introduced in 2003 but Power 4 arrived around 2000, as such it is very old.

Unlike the x86 architecture, which is only how old? Oh, that's right: It dates back to the 1970's! (I just couldn't resisit. Yes, I know there have beern many changes, but if we're going to date the architecture, let's be accurate, shall we?)

 

[bbrosemer]

I want a pic then maybe I believe.

 

[kingtj]

For multi-thousands of dollars, I want gaming too!

I don't think there's anything wrong with people giving computer gaming a lot of attention. The fact is, the latest games always push the limits of a given machine in practically all areas - so they tend to be really good indicators of absolute performance.

The main reason Macs have been excellent choices for many "work related" tasks has much more to do with the applications offered for the platform and the benefits of the underlying OS. Pure "performance" has almost never been Apple's strongest point.

I do lots of productive things with my PowerMac, including web site development and the occasional video editing/DVD making task. I made some flyers for my home-based business with it last year too, and it keeps track of my finances. Nonetheless, a game like Doom 3 demands much more of the system in terms of CPU, video and hard disk performance than those other tasks. (Well, video editing comes close.)

Phew. Good thing I use my computers for work and not gaming then.

It always amazes me how much attention is paid to gaming. Doesn't anybody do anything useful with their multi-thousand-dollar machines?