123Macmini.com
FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   GalleryPhoto Gallery   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Mac mini: 1.42GHz G4 vs. 1.66GHz Core Duo
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    123Macmini.com - Forums Forum Index -> 123Macmini.com News and Reviews
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
hangtown
Junior Member
Junior Member


Joined: 23 Dec 2005
Posts: 36

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:57 am    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

bsnoel wrote:
Most folks here will most likely go ahead and max out the new Mac mini with 2GB of RAM. So that 80MB of shared RAM will account for a whopping 4% of system memory. Shocked (Well actually a little less than 4%.) That's hardly something I would lose sleep over.


Yeah, in my case that's exactly what I did. I was running the G4 mini with 1 gig which seems to work great. But the more I thought about running the Core Duo system with 1 gig, the more I decided to go to 2 gig instead for several reasons.

Obviously cost wasn't one of them. Mad Shocked Laughing

I've also heard (I think it was anandtech) that the Intel macs use more memory than the PPC macs. Personally, I wonder if they are more efficient in keeping things in memory rather than dumping stuff to disk (which would help performance rather than hinder it). As long as memory is available, this is potentially a good thing unless they somehow need more memory for some other reason.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:26 am    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

hangtown wrote:
I've also heard (I think it was anandtech) that the Intel macs use more memory than the PPC macs.
That's correct. You have to run a fairly large extra program (Rosetta) and you have part of the memory allocated to the video
Quote:
Personally, I wonder if they are more efficient in keeping things in memory rather than dumping stuff to disk
Why on earth would you think that? It's the exact same operating system, the code is identical except for some device drivers. Both computers allocate memory the same way and use it with equal efficiency.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
g5g5
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 2767
Location: Virginia

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:13 am    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

resuna wrote:
That's correct. You have to run a fairly large extra program (Rosetta) and you have part of the memory allocated to the video

If you max out the mini to 2GB, you probably won't even notice the memory being put aside for video. I think 512MB is the new 256MB when it comes to the mini. You are going to need more.
_________________
1.25GHz Mac Mini / 1.8GHz iMac G5 / 2.0GHz C2D Mac mini (2009)
4GB iPod mini / 2G iPod shuffle / 16GB iPhone 3G
Apple TV 2
iLife's a Bitch!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SOCOMRAIDER
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 2869
Location: Minneapolis

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:13 am    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

g5g5 wrote:
resuna wrote:
That's correct. You have to run a fairly large extra program (Rosetta) and you have part of the memory allocated to the video

If you max out the mini to 2GB, you probably won't even notice the memory being put aside for video. I think 512MB is the new 256MB when it comes to the mini. You are going to need more.

And in that case I think there's no reason not to go 2GB. What resuna said is true, at least for now with Rosetta. 1GB will be perfect in the future for basic apps in multitasking, but 2GB will help with Rosetta now (until everything is Universal), and especially with the syphoning integrated graphics on the Mini. Plus it's 2GB, why not? lol
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
picaman
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 16 Aug 2005
Posts: 1444
Location: NYC

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:42 pm    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

SOCOMRAIDER wrote:
And in that case I think there's no reason not to go 2GB.


I agree, if you can afford it up front. Especially when you consider that to upgrade from 1GB to 2GB, you'll have a pair of chips on your hands to deal with.

Smile

Jamie
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:50 pm    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

g5g5 wrote:
resuna wrote:
That's correct. You have to run a fairly large extra program (Rosetta) and you have part of the memory allocated to the video

If you max out the mini to 2GB, you probably won't even notice the memory being put aside for video. I think 512MB is the new 256MB when it comes to the mini. You are going to need more.
*sigh*

Yes, I think that's my point. I was just verifying that the requirements for the new OS are higher, and the Mini itself needs more memory, and these requirements are real. Speculation about a "more efficient OS" are just bunk... there's no "new OS", it's just new drivers.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SOCOMRAIDER
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 2869
Location: Minneapolis

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:35 pm    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

resuna wrote:
*sigh*

Yes, I think that's my point. I was just verifying that the requirements for the new OS are higher, and the Mini itself needs more memory, and these requirements are real. Speculation about a "more efficient OS" are just bunk... there's no "new OS", it's just new drivers.

It's not the drivers, it's the integrated graphics that makes the Mini basically need more RAM.
And it is a more efficient OS, especially in the fact how it manages hard drives and the file system.
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:02 pm    Post subject: Re: 512MB vs 1GB? Reply with quote

SOCOMRAIDER wrote:
It's not the drivers, it's the integrated graphics that makes the Mini basically need more RAM.
I didn't say the drivers made it need more ram.

I said the drivers were the only difference between the source tree for Tiger on PPC and Tiger on Intel.
Quote:
And it is a more efficient OS, especially in the fact how it manages hard drives and the file system.
It's the same OS. Tiger on PPC and Tiger on Intel are the same OS.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SOCOMRAIDER
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 26 Oct 2005
Posts: 2869
Location: Minneapolis

PostPosted: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm always defending OS X always on CNET for some dumb reason. I did read your post wrong, I read it as compared to XP. My mistake, so disregard more efficient OS, because it's the same OS. Still performs wonders.

But still it's not the requirements for the OS on the Intel machines that need more RAM, it's the integrated graphics on the Mini.
Maybe just a slight amount for Rosetta if you are running non-universal programs. Otherwise when everything turns universal you won't need as much RAM, because it will all be the same.
No different from a iMac G5 to a iMac Core Duo with memory usage (at least with universal apps).
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
resuna
Member
Member


Joined: 15 May 2005
Posts: 215

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

SOCOMRAIDER wrote:
Otherwise when everything turns universal you won't need as much RAM, because it will all be the same.
Since everything isn't universal yet, Rosetta's still part of the problem. Smile

I'm talking about now. By the time everything's Universal (including Photoshop), you may be able to buy a Mini with a Radeon x1300. Smile

(PS: compared to FreeBSD, Mac OS X is still pretty bloated and inefficient)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
James T Kirk
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 23 Aug 2005
Posts: 757
Location: The Netherlands, Europe

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:24 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

resuna wrote:

I'm talking about now. By the time everything's Universal (including Photoshop), you may be able to buy a Mini with a Radeon x1300. Smile


So I might wait another year or so, sell my mini to one of my (by Garageband and iPhoto impressed) friends and buy one of the newest mini's! Actually I'm quite happy with my G4 1.5 mini, which I don't think is sluggish at all, I don't even need my external FW disk for booting from. The 1 GB stick helps of course! Wink
_________________
___________________Jimę
Now on Hackintosh in G5 case!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Fox
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 01 Feb 2006
Posts: 2672
Location: Peterborough, Ontario, Canada

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have looked at reviews, examined the benchmarks and asked a number of questions on forums like these to try to help me come to a conclusion about buying now or later, and if now, which Mini. I'm inclined to buy now, but I want to play with one first. Fortunately, I'm taking a trip that will bring me near an Apple store in Virginia. I'll play with the Minis there and make my decision from that. But like others have said, it isn't a must-have. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with my current 1.42 Mini setup (with 1 gig of RAM and the external miniStack drive as startup). Smile
_________________
Mini 1 (2011): 2.3 ghz Core i5; 8 gb RAM, Corsair 240gb SSD, 500 gb Seagate XT
Mini 2 (2009): 2.26 ghz Core 2 duo, 8 gb RAM, 500 gb Seagate used as HTPC
Also a Cube, 13" MacBook Air, 20" 2.66 ghz iMac & 11.6" Acer 1810TZ running Ubuntu & Crunchbang
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ack_mac
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 04 Oct 2005
Posts: 605
Location: Northern VA (DC)

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Fox wrote:
I have looked at reviews, examined the benchmarks and asked a number of questions on forums like these to try to help me come to a conclusion about buying now or later, and if now, which Mini. I'm inclined to buy now, but I want to play with one first. Fortunately, I'm taking a trip that will bring me near an Apple store in Virginia. I'll play with the Minis there and make my decision from that. But like others have said, it isn't a must-have. There is nothing whatsoever wrong with my current 1.42 Mini setup (with 1 gig of RAM and the external miniStack drive as startup). Smile


Fox, I take it you will be in Northern Virginia? We have several Apple Stores here (Tyson's Corner, Arlington)..

Will you mostly be using universal apps, or will you need to use Rosetta? I am planning on waiting about 1 more year (I have the 1.5GHZ stealth mini with 1GB of RAM and boot off an external drive as well) before I consider buying. I am just not sure that there will be a big enough performance gain to justify the Intel Mini. I guess you cannot really go wrong either way...
_________________
Vote for me, and your wildest dreams will come true.. - Pedro Sanchez, "Napoleon Dynamite"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jbstingray
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 677
Location: In a Mac.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Would it really be a major benefit to the processor and the system as a whole to have 2GB of RAM? Seems like 1GB would do the job.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger
blazer
Veteran Member
Veteran Member


Joined: 23 Mar 2005
Posts: 1117
Location: San Ramon, California

PostPosted: Fri Mar 10, 2006 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jbstingray wrote:
Would it really be a major benefit to the processor and the system as a whole to have 2GB of RAM? Seems like 1GB would do the job.


1GB should be enough for most tasks, but I'm inclined to say max it out while you're doing the upgrade. Don't forget, some of that memory is going to the dedicated video.
_________________
1.42GHz Mac mini
2.0GHz Core 2 Duo Mac mini
2.0GHz Core 2 Duo Mac mini (2009)
2.5GHz Core i5 Mac mini (2011)
24" Dell LCD & 42" Sharp TV
EyeTV 250 Plus
1G, 2G, 3G, 4G and 5G iPod nanos
16GB 3G iPhone
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    123Macmini.com - Forums Forum Index -> 123Macmini.com News and Reviews All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



      

Shop:  Apple Store  |  Refurbished Macs  |  Refurbished iPads  |  MacConnection  |  Mac Mini Vault  |  Other World Computing

MK 1 Studio Mac mini Racks  |  Crucial Mac Memory  |  Top Free Mac Apps  |  Top Paid Mac Apps



123Macmini.com is an independent publication and has not been authorized, sponsored, or approved by Apple Computer, Inc.
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owners.
Copyright © 2011 123Macmini.com. All Rights Reserved.