😍Come to the UK, we still use DVB-T alongside DVB-T2.
Actually on second thoughts, perhaps not - you'd have to contend with Brexit instead...
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.
What have you done with an early Intel recently?
- Thread starter Project Alice
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thanks for taking the time.
That's good to know.
That's possible — I assumed dual-link would automatically kick in over 165 MHz on DVI.
I'd expect dual-link DVI to do up to 540 MHz on non-GK110 Keplers just like DisplayPort. It would be interesting to check how far dual-link DVI on Maxwell and Pascal can be pushed.
The Asus MG24UQ can go as low as 10 Hz via DisplayPort. Values below 10 Hz are rejected by SwitchResX.
Thanks again for testing.
I've played around with two older GPUs — not that Kepler is bleeding edge or anything LOL — today to find their resolution limits.
First, the venerable GeForce 8600M GT in my 2007 MacBook Pro.
On Tiger and Snow Leopard, widths up to 4088 pixels are possible. Anything higher is rejected by SwitchResX or not showing in the resolution list if I create the override on a more modern version of Mac OS X and copy it over. However, “Bertha” displays corruption at widths higher than 4064. So for the time being, here's a screenshot of Tiger running at 4064×3840 (height determined by 10 Hz refresh rate and 165 MHz pixel clock constraints):
On Mavericks, widths up to 4096 are possible. 4097, 4098 and 4100 are accepted but result in either
WindowServer or the whole system crashing. However, I did have 4016×984 HiDPI working just once and “Bertha” confirmed she was indeed trying to cope with 8032×1968 (this mode was still present from my experiments with Kepler). I also got heavy corruption on both the MBP's internal display and Bertha at a width of 4096 at one point.Next, the Radeon HD 6870 as eGPU. Same Mac.
On Snow Leopard, widths up to 4094 are possible and need to be even. 4096 and higher are rejected.
On Mavericks or El Capitan however, widths are capped at 3840. And when I hooked up the Asus MG24UQ in DP 1.2 (4K60) mode, the OSD said 3840×2160 60 Hz which the 6870 isn't capable of via SST and the display flickered and glitched heavily. It also did this at 2560×1440 and 1920×1080. The only way I could get it stable with the 6870 was to switch to DP 1.1 (4K30) mode. I could then push it to 40.8 Hz at 360 MHz pixel clock. The GPU should be able to do 400 MHz pixel clock though.
Waiting for a Radeon HD 7770 to arrive for more testing
Last edited:
sounds good...thank you.
..as for 'external-usb2 is great for testing, but I wouldn't have the patience to use it..'
odd thing is it seems quicker running from the external SSD than from the HD. Maybe just my imagination but I'll do some timing tests to see.
Maybe my HD is packing up???
Ive two external SSDs - the other has snow leopard on it that I set up using my 17 inch iMac 5,1 before installing unsupported Mavericks on it. The fun thing is I can use that SSD on either of my two iMacs to start up snow leopard. (Think I used SuperDuper to make that.)
Today I got Picasa 3.0.1.321 to run on Mojave without any error messages and finally to show all my iphone pics. Recently discovered 'Image Capture' was the way to go to get them from the iPhone.
Ok Picasa is dead...but I miss the way it works..and edits seem so easy to do.
One snag - everything is in the one folder..grrr!!
Ok Picasa is dead...but I miss the way it works..and edits seem so easy to do.
One snag - everything is in the one folder..grrr!!
I stay with 32bit mainly because I want to keep iPhoto/Aperture3 and my pictures locally instead of using Fotos and Cloud-storage. Same for Office'08 - not to mention the hassle with annual subscription for all the newer stuff.
Maybe in (a far) future there will be newer Mx Mac(Book) to stay connected - but that's not now.
Oh, that might be possible. I found Mojave running from a spinning drive to be really challenging ...
(Like with the Cube-G4: it's faster booting from an SSD in an external FW400 housing than from the internal spinning drive.)
Last edited:
Agreed. I wouldn’t call them a “piece of ****” at all. There were FAR worse screens back then. Even to this day, they don’t look THAT bad.
Thanks for taking the time.
That's good to know.
That's possible - I had just assumed that dual-link would automatically kick in over 165 MHz on DVI no matter what.
I'd expect dual-link DVI to do up to 540 MHz on non-GK110 Keplers - just like DisplayPort. It would be interesting to check how far dual-link DVI on Maxwell and Pascal can be pushed.
The Asus MG24UQ can go as low as 10 Hz via DP (I haven't tested DVI/HDMI yet). Values below 10 Hz are rejected by SwitchResX so I couldn't test them.
Thanks again for testing.
---------- ----------
I've played around with two older GPUs (not that Kepler is bleeding edge or anything LOL) today in an attempt to find their resolution limits.
First, the venerable GeForce 8600M GT in my 2007 MacBook Pro.
On Tiger and Snow Leopard, widths up to 4088 pixels are possible. Anything higher (4089, 4090, 4092, 4094, 4096) is rejected by SwitchResX or not showing in the resolution list if I create the override on a more modern version of OS X and copy it over. However, Bertha displays corruption at widths higher than 4064.
So, for the time being, here's a screenshot of Tiger running at 4064×3840 (height determined by 10 Hz refresh rate and 165 MHz pixel clock constraints):
On Mavericks, widths up to 4096 are possible. 4097, 4098 and 4100 are accepted but result in either WindowServer or the whole system crashing. However, I did have 4016×984 HiDPI working just once and Bertha confirmed she was indeed trying to wrestle with 8032×1968 (this mode was still present from my experiments with Kepler). I also got heavy corruption on both the MBP's internal display and Bertha at a width of 4096 at one point.
Next, the Radeon HD 6870 as eGPU. Same Mac.
On Snow Leopard, widths up to 4094 are possible (and need to be even). 4096 and higher are rejected.
On Mavericks or El Capitan however, widths are capped at 3840. 3842, 3844, 3846, 3848, 3856, etc. - no go. No wonder I didn't get anywhere with the UltraFine.
Waiting for a Radeon HD 7770 to arrive for more testing...
That screencap is completely bananas. Don’t give @eyoungren ideas…
I have recently used my Mac Mini 2009 with Snow Leopard to capture old video camera tapes, quick edited them with iMovie '09 and burn the DVDs (one of my uncles wanted to have them in DVD ...)
As per my understanding the old iMovie '09 / '11 only works properly up to to Yosemite.
As per my understanding the old iMovie '09 / '11 only works properly up to to Yosemite.
Waiting for a Radeon HD 7770 to arrive for more testing...
It was dropped off today.
Update: On Mountain Lion, with the Asus MG24UQ in 60 Hz (DisplayPort 1.2) mode, it just repeatedly tries to initialise the display but it remains black. 30 Hz (DisplayPort 1.1) mode works.
On Mavericks, with the Asus MG24UQ, 3840×2160 at 60 Hz (533 MHz pixel clock) works fine. My hopes of being able to attain higher pixel clocks than the Kepler were shattered as SwitchResX shows the same 540 MHz maximum on Mavericks.
Next up, scaled resolutions.
Kepler can go up to 8192×4096.
Can the 7770 at least beat that?
Nope.
The maximum is 8000×4032.
Actual resolutions wider than 4096 pixels don't work either (this has already been determined). This is what happens at 4098×2304:
Can it get worse? Yep. The 7770 totally refuses to play ball with Yosemite and El Capitan. Booting up with a display connected results in a hang. If I boot with nothing connected to the 7770 I can get to the desktop but plugging in a display results in things going haywire again (but this is also a known issue).
Last edited:
Today I used my late 2006 iMac (17-inch, 2GHz Core 2 Duo, Ati Radeon X1600) how I use it everyday:
I checked the news, browsed the web, watched some YouTube, looked up a lot of things on the internet about some projects I've been working on (that's the beauty of this small iMac, it takes up so little desk space, so enough room to work on stuff)
Yesterday I watched some Star Trek TNG (S5E4, started watching TNG for the first time last year) and a few days ago I watched Tim Burton's Ed Wood. This is my go-to movie and series watching machine because it plays all of my formats easily and conveniently (h.265 is a bit troublesome, although it does work with the occasional hiccups)
I have done a lot of serious work on this machine in the past when I was still in school and I think it's even better now then it was years ago. Mavericks runs great with all of my applications. YouTube's better than it has ever been.
What a great machine, I hope I'm able to keep using it for years to come!
I checked the news, browsed the web, watched some YouTube, looked up a lot of things on the internet about some projects I've been working on (that's the beauty of this small iMac, it takes up so little desk space, so enough room to work on stuff)
Yesterday I watched some Star Trek TNG (S5E4, started watching TNG for the first time last year) and a few days ago I watched Tim Burton's Ed Wood. This is my go-to movie and series watching machine because it plays all of my formats easily and conveniently (h.265 is a bit troublesome, although it does work with the occasional hiccups)
I have done a lot of serious work on this machine in the past when I was still in school and I think it's even better now then it was years ago. Mavericks runs great with all of my applications. YouTube's better than it has ever been.
What a great machine, I hope I'm able to keep using it for years to come!
You still get the occasional beachball with maxed out ram, but that‘s to be expected for a 15 year old computer haha. I will be faster with more than 2gb though, so I do recommend it!
I’m not even using an SSD because I did some tests a few years ago and the speed difference wasn’t that great for some reason. But maybe that would help more in Mavericks.
Good luck!
This Mac 8.1 of mine is 13 years old and still doing everything. I don't play games. The only danger is the end of the browsers, and for that I am already prepared. I have Parallells with Windoze 8.1 that has extended support until 2023. When I need security, I open it and with the latest version of Chrome, Firefox or Edge I do the steps. I make books and Mavericks on an external HDD. I do not like the SSD in this system you lose more than you gain. I have recorded the screen with QickTime and as it absorbs all the hardware acceleration it looks slow but without the screen recording Parallels runs fast. This Imac is very clean and greased so it is still alive . I have put all the dude1 patches for Mojave and Catalina but I got them out fast even though it works fine. I don't feel safe and they don't walk like Mavericks. Manufacturers like Apple are not interested in you using these machines that meet your needs. They force you to buy new machines for € 2,000 every year and if you don't, they blackmail you and force you to cut off elementary services such as navigators, etc. And so we fill the beaches of Nigeria, Cameroon, etc with ships full of technological "junk" to further brutalize the seas, the beaches, the sand, for being "more handsome" with the new Imac of lavish colors that are only used to do what same as these from 15 years ago. The "cool wonderful people" **** has a price tag and millions of profit
Cheers
. I have put all the dude1 patches for Mojave and Catalina but I got them out fast even though it works fine. I don't feel safe and they don't walk like Mavericks. Manufacturers like Apple are not interested in you using these machines that meet your needs. They force you to buy new machines for € 2,000 every year and if you don't, they blackmail you and force you to cut off elementary services such as navigators, etc. And so we fill the beaches of Nigeria, Cameroon, etc with ships full of technological "junk" to further brutalize the seas, the beaches, the sand, for being "more handsome" with the new Imac of lavish colors that are only used to do what same as these from 15 years ago. The "cool wonderful people" **** has a price tag and millions of profitCheers
How so? You could put Mavericks on the internal SSD and have it run much faster than from an external HDD.
Internal I do have an SSD with El Capitan, but external there is not much difference between an SSD and a good HDD at 7200rpm. It is a matter of touch and "feeling", and also practical. An SSD dies immediately and leaves lying. An HDD always warns you and gives you time to save your neck
Really? That certainly hasn't been my experience. There was one occasion where I booted up a Wintel laptop and immediately received the SMART warning of an imminent hard disk failure and this prompted me to use what time was remaining to create a Ghost image to be restored on a new HDD.
On nearly every other occasion, my HDD's have died without any warning and I only became aware after the fact when I attempted to use the drive and discovered that it was non-functional. If I was lucky, I might receive the infamous clicking sound to officially signify its demise.
Well, it may have been your case, but maybe 50% of the HDD warn. SSDs none. For example, this HDD that I have in Mavericks has already warned me. It is this "raw error rate" that I have voluntarily disabled. But he has already warned me, and I work under my entire "responsibility"
Attachments
That hasn’t really been my experience, either. I’ve lost 9-month-old HDDs with zero warning whilst the machine was idling for a couple of hours, and others which failed suddenly presenting spinning beach balls when attempting a r/w function. The difference between HDD failure in these cases and an SSD failure (which I’ve had happen with an OEM retina MBP) is I know there’s no chance any of the SSD data is recoverable, whereas HDD data may be recoverable, but it is going to cost a lot for a specialist in a clean room to extract useful data from the platters.
Possibly you mean 'warns you' in the sense that weird things start happening that clue you into the fact that your drive is dying? Or did you just mean a SMART warning?
In any case, I've been the victim of one or two HDDs suddenly dying on me. And in situations where I knew the drive was on the way out before it truly died, saving my work sometimes was a problem. Where are you saving to? The dying drive? If you are saving somewhere else that requires a read action, and if the problem with the drive is it can't be read you either have an incomplete save (corruption) or no save at all.
I have yet to experience an immediate SSD failure (God forbid), but I do have daily and weekly backups that go off. I've never actually been at the computer trying to work and save when a drive has completely failed.
Of course, Apple's "disk utility" will never endorse you at all. I've had Appe hdd drives that were "cool as rose" for disk utility and were actually completely trashed. There are programs, third-party utilities, that issue alerts, but except for rare exceptions I have always been able to take precautions before the disaster, like now. In an SSD it is impossible, the cells are not recoverable. You always copy!
I use SMARTreporter on my spinning rust, and even full SMART test reports aren’t necessarily indicative of imminent device failure.
For example, a pair of WD Black 1TB drives I have set up in a softRAID on my G5 both show they’re “old” (in terms of hours of being powered, even if spun down), but this doesn’t distinguish between the wear on these HDDs and similarly-aged WD Green 1TB HDDs, whose MTBF ratings are lower than the Black series. Put another way, I’m generally more concerned over when the WD Greens might near failure.
It would appear that you have access to a superior type of HDDs that are not available to the general public. You must share this source with us so that we can all benefit.
Western Digital Sagittarius Orange HDDs.It would appear that you have access to a superior type of HDDs that are not available to the general public. You must share this source with us so that we can all benefit.