Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is the mac mini supposed to be this SLOW?
- Thread starter mrzeve
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
bousozoku
Moderator emeritus
mmmdreg said:
After an unspecified (to the user) amount of time, the inactive memory is released. This changed in 10.3.6 and the VM system is much more aggressive at holding on to anything it gets.
I've never run out of memory, but I've had something less than 50 MB in a system with 1.5 GB and the paging was horrendous...as if the system had 64 MB total.
Jigglelicious
macrumors 6502
Something sounds wrong to me. Even my iMac G3 500mhz with 256mb RAM doesn't get beachballs in OSX unless a program crashes or locks up. There might be a hardware problem, or a corrupt OSX installation. I suggest formatting the HDD and reinstalling a clean copy of OSX to see if it fixes the issue.
crap freakboy
macrumors 6502a
I'm running a G4 400mhz with over a gig of ram and only have had a beach ball say twice in the last 6 months. On those two occasions I had Safari, iTunes, iPhoto, iView Media, Quicktime, Mail plus few others open....bottom line is get as much RAM as possible. If you still have issues I'd do a clean install of OSX...oh and make sure FileValut isnt on, major system hog in my experience.
Mitthrawnuruodo
Moderator emeritus
I got an iBook G4@800MHz with 640MB RAM, which has a BTO 60 BG 4200 HD.
Even though I got a fair amount of RAM I get 'beachballed' quite often while running the usual programs: Mail, Firefox and iTunes (also have a couple of 'extras' running, like Konfabulator), quite often also running Adium X, iCal, etc...
I found that iTunes is most often to blame: Using Airtunes, to listen to music on my hifi, really strains the machine, as on-the-fly AES encrypting of the music is quite a resource hog...
Even though I got a fair amount of RAM I get 'beachballed' quite often while running the usual programs: Mail, Firefox and iTunes (also have a couple of 'extras' running, like Konfabulator), quite often also running Adium X, iCal, etc...
I found that iTunes is most often to blame: Using Airtunes, to listen to music on my hifi, really strains the machine, as on-the-fly AES encrypting of the music is quite a resource hog...
maxterpiece
macrumors 6502a
I have a 1.6 ghz G5 tower and a 1.5ghz g4 powerbook. I also recently sold a 800mhz g3 ibook. The tower has 1 gig ram, the powerbook has 512 ram and the ibook had 640 ram. Running a few relatively low mem apps (say mail.app, safari and ichat), the three perform pretty similarly. The slower processor machines had fraction of second longer pauses between typical actions because of the difference in processor, but there are no "hang-ups" or beachballs. Now if I open another app, say iphoto, on each of these comps and I am switching between all 4 apps relatively regularly, the powerbook, despite the fact that has twice the clock speed of the ibook, will start to feel slower than the other 2 machines. Some actions it is still faster, but the long HD swapping hangups on the powerbook take a second or two. That is painful compared the fraction of a second difference in what i'm doing w/ the processor.
Most normal apps these days AREN'T PROCESSOR INTENSIVE. Only pro level apps like photoshop, and hardcore gaming apps will make a difference in processor speed noticeable. Even a game will be more dependent on the quality of the video card than the processor. This is why I always recommend to all my PC and Mac buying friends that they give up the processor bumps in exchange for RAM upgrades.
As long as you aren't running iphoto with 5,000 photos, 512 RAM should minimize the beach balls. A 1.25 ghz g4 is a solid processor, but the 4200rpm HD in the mini exacerbates the problem when there is a shortage of ram.
That being said, OS X performs well in a different way than XP. The overall GUI is a little prettier and a little laggier, but the multi tasking capabilities of OS X make switching from app to app a dream. Right now I am typing at work on a 1ghz celeron processor w/ XP. If a leave a web page open background for 10+ minutes and then i try to bring back to the front, the machine lags for several seconds while it rerenders the website. In OS X it would be instantaneous.
In conclusion, upgrade your ram and, unless you have defective hardware, your problem will disappear.
Most normal apps these days AREN'T PROCESSOR INTENSIVE. Only pro level apps like photoshop, and hardcore gaming apps will make a difference in processor speed noticeable. Even a game will be more dependent on the quality of the video card than the processor. This is why I always recommend to all my PC and Mac buying friends that they give up the processor bumps in exchange for RAM upgrades.
As long as you aren't running iphoto with 5,000 photos, 512 RAM should minimize the beach balls. A 1.25 ghz g4 is a solid processor, but the 4200rpm HD in the mini exacerbates the problem when there is a shortage of ram.
That being said, OS X performs well in a different way than XP. The overall GUI is a little prettier and a little laggier, but the multi tasking capabilities of OS X make switching from app to app a dream. Right now I am typing at work on a 1ghz celeron processor w/ XP. If a leave a web page open background for 10+ minutes and then i try to bring back to the front, the machine lags for several seconds while it rerenders the website. In OS X it would be instantaneous.
In conclusion, upgrade your ram and, unless you have defective hardware, your problem will disappear.
Yes, exactly. There has been a lot said in this thread, but that's the bottom line and all he needs to do. (As long as there's no hardware problem.) 🙂maxterpiece said:
BakedBeans
macrumors 68040
sorry to chime in so late!
i am using an emac (in between powerbook sale and powermac purchase) and it had the same problems as you - like everyone else says - its the ram, i got 512 and its pretty darn quick
i am using an emac (in between powerbook sale and powermac purchase) and it had the same problems as you - like everyone else says - its the ram, i got 512 and its pretty darn quick
SteveC said:
Thanks for the overwhelming response guys.
Is there any way to be sure of no faulty hardware before I go ahead and purchase some ram? I dont want to be stuck with a burping mini and unused ram =\
Well, I don't want be too "simple sounding" but let me humor you...mrzeve said:
Here's how you can tell if it's the RAM that's the problem: If you only have 256MB of RAM, it's the RAM. 😉
I don't know of any other way to say it than to say "there's no doubt in the world." 🙂
Besides, IF (and this is a spectacularly HUGE "if") you upgrade the RAM and it's still slow, and it ends up being a hardware problem, Apple is going to fix it for you for FREE because it's covered by AppleCare.
bousozoku
Moderator emeritus
mrzeve said:
You should have a hardware diagnostics disk. I would suggest booting from that and running all the diagnostics you can find that apply.
After that, you can apply the RAM fix. 😉 If possible, maybe you could find someone with the appropriate RAM stick you need, just to test.
bousozoku said:
That's the best advice for him. I have a 1.42 mini and had beachballs. Upgraded to 1GB no beachballs. He can run the hardware diagnostics disk but in the end he'll need to upgrade the memory.
bousozoku
Moderator emeritus
ram obviously helps, but... the rotational speed of the hard drive contributes to the spinning beach ball. the mac mini uses a laptop hard drive, and all of apple's powerbooks get the spinning beach ball as well because they use 4200rpm or 5400rpm drives.
i have upgraded 3 of my clients powerbooks with a 7200rpm 60gb laptop hard drive from hitachi. almost all of the spinning beach balls have disappeared and the praise from my clients hasnt stopped yet. they claim it feels more responsive and "zippy".
i think the mini is underpowered. sure, yeah, the price is right blah blah blah. i'm not buying one.
i have upgraded 3 of my clients powerbooks with a 7200rpm 60gb laptop hard drive from hitachi. almost all of the spinning beach balls have disappeared and the praise from my clients hasnt stopped yet. they claim it feels more responsive and "zippy".
i think the mini is underpowered. sure, yeah, the price is right blah blah blah. i'm not buying one.
All of this RAM talk has me worried. My mother will be purchasing a Mini for her own personal use in a few months, and with everyone saying that 512MB is barely efficent...that only leaves 1GB. And I'm not all to confident of my ability to open the mini without cracking the casing..
bousozoku
Moderator emeritus
neoelectronaut said:
My experience says that 512 MB is good for Mac OS X. You can run software on a machine with 256 MB but don't expect a pleasant experience. I have a recent PowerBook and have run it with 256, 512, and 768 MB recently. There is a definite difference but it depends on how busy the machine is. Obviously, running Photoshop or Final Cut Pro is going to be a lot worse than running a web browser.
Lord Blackadder
macrumors P6
I've been playing around with my brother's Mac mini (1.42GHz, 512MB, all the other BTO options), and I have gotten excellent performance with the iApps, iTunes,MS Office, internet browsing, a little messing around in the GIMP, and Warcraft 3 (and some other older games).
You'd probably want to go with the 1GB stick if you are going to screw around with pro applications on a regular basis, but 512 seems more than adaquate for your average suite of applications.
You'd probably want to go with the 1GB stick if you are going to screw around with pro applications on a regular basis, but 512 seems more than adaquate for your average suite of applications.
This is one mistake Apple made with the Mini. They have an operating system that is fantastic at using RAM, a computer that is very hard to expand RAM in, and a computer that is aimed at giving people the Mac experience. They also have a computer with a slow HD, which is going to cause even more slowdown when RAM runs low.
A simple bump to 512MB default would have been so much nicer. At the bulk prices Apple buys in, it would be so inexpensive to do, too.
I reccomend you download the tiny program "Do I need more memory?"
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/18229
Leave it on for a day of normal computing, and watch what it tells you. I am betting it suggests at least 400-500MB RAM.
On my G4 with 1gig of RAM, I still was reported as needing an extra 150 for optimal performance, and I believe it. I don't run a whole lot more on average than you do, either.
A simple bump to 512MB default would have been so much nicer. At the bulk prices Apple buys in, it would be so inexpensive to do, too.
I reccomend you download the tiny program "Do I need more memory?"
http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/18229
Leave it on for a day of normal computing, and watch what it tells you. I am betting it suggests at least 400-500MB RAM.
On my G4 with 1gig of RAM, I still was reported as needing an extra 150 for optimal performance, and I believe it. I don't run a whole lot more on average than you do, either.
Get 1G its worth it
When I got my ibook G4 it was SO SLOW. I hated it too and wondered why I switched. Within a week I had bought 512 to add to the standard 250. It made all the difference. If you have the cash go for 1G its worth saving yourself the aggravation.
When I got my ibook G4 it was SO SLOW. I hated it too and wondered why I switched. Within a week I had bought 512 to add to the standard 250. It made all the difference. If you have the cash go for 1G its worth saving yourself the aggravation.