Jump to content


Apple Unveils Mac Mini with Intel Core Duo


  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#41 calroth

calroth

    Fanatic

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 123 posts
  • Location:Canberra, Australia

Posted 01 March 2006 - 03:43 AM

View Postdehulk_9000, on March 1st 2006, 07:42 PM, said:

The integrated Intel has pixel shaders, the 9200 doesn't...
The Radeon 9200 has both pixel and vertex shaders, although only to DirectX 8.1 level. The Intel GMA950 has DirectX 9-class pixel shaders, but its vertex shaders are implemented in software, as is T&L.

View Postdehulk_9000, on March 1st 2006, 07:42 PM, said:

...USB2 instead of USB...
The old Mac mini also had USB2. Although yes, only two ports.

#42 Drinniol

Drinniol

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Location:Perth, Australia
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 04:17 AM

View Postcalroth, on March 1st 2006, 02:43 AM, said:

The Radeon 9200 has both pixel and vertex shaders, although only to DirectX 8.1 level. The Intel GMA950 has DirectX 9-class pixel shaders, but its vertex shaders are implemented in software, as is T&L.

The old Mac mini also had USB2. Although yes, only two ports.

IIRC, there was a bit of hubbub with the 9200 and certain Mac games (KotOR springs to mind) regarding shaders? I did check it out, the 9200 goes up to v1.5 while the GMA950 gets 2.0.

Right you are about the USB2, I was confuzzled by system profiler showing the speed of my peripherals, and not the bus ;)
"If a bunch of actual adults suddenly found themselves trapped in high school, the first thing they'd do is form a union and renegotiate all the rules with the administration." Paul Walker

#43 BAW

BAW

    Fan

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 16 posts
  • Location:Ohio, USA

Posted 01 March 2006 - 05:52 AM

Integrated graphics, price increase. Bah.

#44 Whaleman

Whaleman

    High Priest of Bork

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5632 posts
  • Steam ID:holybork
  • Location:The Land of Bork
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 07:37 AM

While I don't like the integrated graphics, the price increase is warranted. The G4 in the old mini was so old Apple probably almost got paid for using them while this one runs a chip that's so new that all manufacturers are still on their first generation of machines using it. The integrated chip is crud, sure... but the 9200 was no angel of salvation either. Anandtech did a test of the GMA950 and while it's not that good, they actually managed to get any framerates at all out of Doom 3 with high quality settings (even though nobody would say 14FPS is playable... it's not a card I'd expect to get even that from. A 9200 would not make it much better). What matters though is the conclusion:

Quote

For those who truly do not need or care about 3D, integrated graphics are fine. People who are nostalgic about Quake III and earlier 3D games will also be satisfied. If just running something with 3D is important, these solutions will get the job done. But integrated performance has still not reached a level where we can recommend it to anyone who wants to play the current generation titles.

And that ladies and gentlemen is the precise target audience Apple had with the mini from day one.

That being said, now that the mini has optical audio out, I'm tempted to get one and connect to my home theatre. I just wish it would have had component or HDMI support so I could connect it with higher resolution in that case. I can always use VGA I guess...  

But as I'm pretty broke right now it's just pure speculation.
You shouldn't ask yourself such worthless questions. Aim higher. Try this: why am I here? Why do I exist, and what is my purpose in this universe?

(Answers: 'Cause you are. 'Cause you do. 'Cause I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one.)

***END MESSAGE***

#45 Janichsan

Janichsan

    Jugger Bugger

  • Forum Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8075 posts
  • Steam Name:Janichsan
  • Location:over there

Posted 01 March 2006 - 08:31 AM

View Postdehulk_9000, on March 1st 2006, 09:42 AM, said:

Remember, the original Mini used G4 chips when the G5 was standard. Now they've got the same top-end chips as the rest of the Mac line, and for not much more.
Not quite. Okay, the "bigger" mini has a Dual Core, too, but the smaller one only has a Solo Core. And though we still have to wait for benchmarks, it's quite sure that any gain in performance (if any at all) compared to the G4 Mac mini will be far below the four- to fivefold increase stated by Apple for the Dual Core Mac mini.

"We do what we must, because we can."
"Gaming on a Mac is like women on the internet." — "Highly common and totally awesome?"


#46 PeopleLikeFrank

PeopleLikeFrank

    Uberspewer

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2690 posts
  • Location:The Republic of Soviet Canukistan
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 08:40 AM

View PostJanichsan, on March 1st 2006, 09:31 AM, said:

Not quite. Okay, the "bigger" mini has a Dual Core, too, but the smaller one only has a Solo Core. And though we still have to wait for benchmarks, it's quite sure that any gain in performance (if any at all) compared to the G4 Mac mini will be far below the four- to fivefold increase stated by Apple for the Dual Core Mac mini.

Still, at least it's not generations behind, stuck with old bus and memory technology. Apple's speed increases are generally exagerated, but these should be snappy machines for basic home use.
The dork formerly known as nobody
---
MBP: C2D @ 2.66 Ghz | GeForce 9600M GT 256Mb | 8GB RAM | 120GB SSD + 500GB HD | 10.6.2 / W7 x64
PC: Q9550 | 6950 2GB | 8GB RAM | 80GB SSD + 750GB HD | W7 x64

#47 Drinniol

Drinniol

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Location:Perth, Australia
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 09:16 AM

View PostWhaleman, on March 1st 2006, 06:37 AM, said:

That being said, now that the mini has optical audio out, I'm tempted to get one and connect to my home theatre. I just wish it would have had component or HDMI support so I could connect it with higher resolution in that case. I can always use VGA I guess...  

Uh, it does. Mine's running DVI to HDMI with a $40 cable, and you can get component video converters as well ;) Looks a beaut on my sexxable 42" plasma.
"If a bunch of actual adults suddenly found themselves trapped in high school, the first thing they'd do is form a union and renegotiate all the rules with the administration." Paul Walker

#48 Whaleman

Whaleman

    High Priest of Bork

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5632 posts
  • Steam ID:holybork
  • Location:The Land of Bork
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 09:32 AM

View Postdehulk_9000, on March 1st 2006, 04:16 PM, said:

Uh, it does. Mine's running DVI to HDMI with a $40 cable, and you can get component video converters as well ;) Looks a beaut on my sexxable 42" plasma.

Sweet. I have to consider that to run it on my 106" ;) I feel kinda stupid for never considering a DVI to HDMI in that direction... still. My projector swallows a VGA without any problems, so I've always been able to connect one that way. The real showstopper was the analog audio before, and that's redeemed now.

But I can't afford a mini at the moment anyways.
You shouldn't ask yourself such worthless questions. Aim higher. Try this: why am I here? Why do I exist, and what is my purpose in this universe?

(Answers: 'Cause you are. 'Cause you do. 'Cause I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one.)

***END MESSAGE***

#49 LordMac

LordMac

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 01 March 2006 - 10:55 AM

A Mac Mini is not a gaming rig, it is not for Video editing or for heavy graphics manipulation.
This is a consumer intro machine designed to lure Windows/PC folks to Apple.

I strongly suspect that this is going to be angled as a PVR solution. The graphics card is designed around video output. Not 3D rendering.

You can look at the specs for this Intel Graphics Chipset and see for yourself.

An Entertainment Media Center. Video out to your HDTV with iTunes funneling out video content and music. I strongly suspect that this is what is in store for the Mini.

#50 electricdawn

electricdawn

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 959 posts
  • Location:Kaiserslautern, Germany

Posted 01 March 2006 - 11:37 AM

View Postkrex725, on March 1st 2006, 12:21 AM, said:

There were actually a lot of great improvements to the Mini with this release.  Yeah, it won't be a gaming monster, but were you really expecting such with a sub-$1000 Mac?  Would you expect it in a sub-$1000 PC?  

Excuse me? My wifes PC is about 3 years old in June, had cost about 900 Euro (around 1100$), and did beat "teh shyte"™ out of my G5 1.6 GHz back then. It still is a more than decent competitor to my brand spankin' new Intel iMac!

Please get your facts straight, you can easily build a sub 1000$ PC that would totally rock the house in gaming.

v/r, E.

View PostRiscIt, on February 28th 2006, 10:37 PM, said:

1.66GHz Core Duo
1G Ram
120G HD
SuperDrive
$1006.95 after tax.

1GB 667 DDR2 SDRAM - 1x1GB
160GB Serial ATA drive
ATI Radeon X1600/128MB VRAM
SuperDrive 8x (DVD+R DL/DVD+RW/CD-RW)
Keyboard & Mighty Mouse + Mac OS X - U.S. English
Accessory kit
17-inch widescreen LCD
1.83GHz Intel Core Duo
AirPort Extreme
Bluetooth 2.0 + EDR

$1,399

Hm, why do I have the impression that this would be a much better deal?

But hey, that's just me.  ;)

v/r, E.

#51 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 01 March 2006 - 01:20 PM

I can't help but think that Apple put in the intel graphics because they can. When they made the G4 Mac Mini I can bet you there wasn't such a selection of integrated graphics for it's motherboard. Also the intel graphics was the prime candidate because intel had already had some practice with the AOpen mini which is similar. Then people will always find reasons to defend apple no matter what they put in it.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#52 striderdm1

striderdm1

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 773 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 01 March 2006 - 01:28 PM

View PostLordMac, on March 1st 2006, 04:55 PM, said:

A Mac Mini is not a gaming rig, it is not for Video editing or for heavy graphics manipulation.
This is a consumer intro machine designed to lure Windows/PC folks to Apple.
/
An Entertainment Media Center. Video out to your HDTV with iTunes funneling out video content and music. I strongly suspect that this is what is in store for the Mini.

I agree and maybe Apple are rightly so with this decision. We've ordered a 1gig single-core mac mini, not bcos we wanna play games or heavy duty work. But bcos the family will be sharing this among music, internet, college work, business apps, etc, etc.. it's a perfect computer for us!

I don't think any ppl here would ever have considered any model of MacMini a good buy for a games machine. Surely this has always started with the iMac? This is the base machine for a gamer, tho apple do need to start having more ram inside their macs! imho : )

Cannot wait for this MacMini to arrive next week!!!!!!!!!  :happy:

cheers, Strider
AppleCrypt Mods  (as dead as a Dodo!)

#53 Smoke_Tetsu

Smoke_Tetsu

    Uberspewer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3318 posts
  • Steam Name:Tetsu Jutsu
  • Steam ID:smoke_tetsu
  • Location:Cyberspace

Posted 01 March 2006 - 01:39 PM

View Poststriderdm1, on March 1st 2006, 12:28 PM, said:

I don't think any ppl here would ever have considered any model of MacMini a good buy for a games machine. Surely this has always started with the iMac?

This doesn't seem so to me at least before the last G5 iMacs when they upgraded certain things like the GPU. And especially not with the G4 iMacs but there wasn't much of a choice back then. Also some people seem to say that people who want to play a couple of games should be required to get new iMac but not everyone wants everything that comes with it. They might want a small computer that they hook up to whatever peripherals they want. People like me also don't expect top of the line barn burner GPU's either but we do expect more than bottom of the barrel. Especially if we probably would end up paying over 1,200 dollars once we loaded the core duo mac mini up.
--Tetsuo

Alex Delarg, A Clockwork Orange said:

It's funny how the colors of the real world only seem really real when you viddy them on the screen.

the Battle Cat said:

Slower and faster? I'm sorry to hear such good news?

Late 2012 27 inch iMac, Core i7 Quad 3.4GHz, 16GB RAM, Nvidia GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB, 3TB HDD - Mavericks

Late 2009 27 inch iMac, Core i5 2.6GHz, 12GB RAM, ATI Radeon 4850HD 512MB, 1TB HDD - Mavericks

Mac Mini, PowerPC G4 1.4Ghz, 1GB RAM, Radeon 9200 32MB, 256GB HDD - Leopard

Dell Inspiron 1200 Notebook: 1.2GHz Celeron, 1.2GB RAM, Intel GMA915, 75GB HDD - Ubuntu

Generic Black Tower PC, Dual Core 64-bit 2.4GHz, 4GB RAM, GeForce 9600 GT 512MB - Windows 7


#54 striderdm1

striderdm1

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 773 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 01 March 2006 - 02:15 PM

i guess we'll see more so when the benchmarks start to appear and any speed comparisons with games. Surely everything is faster and better about this new model (esp the dual) compared to the previous. So i'm looking forward to seeing some results. Wonder how Doom3 fairs... ;)

Strider
AppleCrypt Mods  (as dead as a Dodo!)

#55 the Battle Cat

the Battle Cat

    Carnage Served Raw

  • Admin
  • 17377 posts
  • Location:Citadel City, Lh'owon
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 01 March 2006 - 03:07 PM

View Poststriderdm1, on March 1st 2006, 12:15 PM, said:

i guess we'll see more so when the benchmarks start to appear and any speed comparisons with games. Surely everything is faster and better about this new model (esp the dual) compared to the previous. So i'm looking forward to seeing some results. Wonder how Doom3 fairs... ;)

Strider
I'm looking forward to seeing some results too... and stop calling me Shirley.
Gary Simmons
the Battle Cat

#56 striderdm1

striderdm1

    Macologist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 773 posts
  • Location:England

Posted 01 March 2006 - 03:21 PM

lol sorry mate i forgot it's not a Friday night...

Strider
AppleCrypt Mods  (as dead as a Dodo!)

#57 WSTE_M

WSTE_M

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1159 posts
  • Location:six feet under

Posted 01 March 2006 - 05:42 PM

Ofcourse anyone who buys a mac mini for gaming is insanse.
WE know that, WE!!!

But new gamers (whose parents bought a mac mini for the living room, and they bought a copy of say... StarWars Battlefront with their allowance) will be hugely disapointed, and with their next allowance, they will save up to buy a Dell.

Are there ANY current games that can run "allright I guess" on a mac mini ?

W
blowing stuff up in the virtual world since 1994

#58 RiscIt

RiscIt

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 596 posts
  • Location:N 44.613588, W 70.201159

Posted 01 March 2006 - 10:19 PM

> Hm, why do I have the impression that this would be a much better deal?

Probably because you seem to think I want to pay $392.05 more than already am for a built in 17" screen I don't need. I do not like the iMacs, and my current 19" flat panel works fine. Maybe you just ignored the rest of my post? The mini is for work. Nothing extra in that more expensive iMac is of use to me.

#59 Drinniol

Drinniol

    Legendary

  • IMG Pro Users
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1153 posts
  • Location:Perth, Australia
  • Pro Member:Yes

Posted 03 March 2006 - 09:02 AM

View PostWSTE_M, on March 1st 2006, 04:42 PM, said:

But new gamers (whose parents bought a mac mini for the living room, and they bought a copy of say... StarWars Battlefront with their allowance) will be hugely disapointed, and with their next allowance, they will save up to buy a Dell.
W

Odds are any 'new gamer' will go with a console, or cheap PC, over a Mini. You're trying to put a bad spin on the issue by applying it to a minutely small percantage of the market. Let me try! Why do ATi continue to rip off people who want to play DVDs instead of games by charging $600 for a video card? Why do shoes come in pairs, leaving amputees out of luck? Why oh why did Apple drop the floppy drive from the iMac?
"If a bunch of actual adults suddenly found themselves trapped in high school, the first thing they'd do is form a union and renegotiate all the rules with the administration." Paul Walker

#60 WSTE_M

WSTE_M

    Legendary

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1159 posts
  • Location:six feet under

Posted 03 March 2006 - 11:41 AM

View Postdehulk_9000, on March 3rd 2006, 04:02 PM, said:

Odds are any 'new gamer' will go with a console, or cheap PC, over a Mini. You're trying to put a bad spin on the issue by applying it to a minutely small percantage of the market. Let me try! Why do ATi continue to rip off people who want to play DVDs instead of games by charging $600 for a video card? Why do shoes come in pairs, leaving amputees out of luck? Why oh why did Apple drop the floppy drive from the iMac?

Yeah whatever.  :whistling:
Cuz putting in a integrated videocard is a step forwards... sure.

W
blowing stuff up in the virtual world since 1994