Prev: Ars Technica iPad review
Next: Padding an image in Aperture
From: zoara on 11 Apr 2010 15:27
Gwynne Harper <g.harper(a)gmx.line> wrote:
> zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > Anyone had any experience upgrading a Mac mini CPU? I'm after
> > boosting
> > my Core Solo 1.5GHz to a Core Duo with a bit more oomph.
>
> I was just about to do this when my Mini died. The links I'd found
> were:
>
> <http://www.o0o.it/mini/>
>
> <http://www.ambor.com/public/meromswap/meromswap.html>
>
> <http://www.123macmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=20540&postdays=0&posto
> rder=asc&start=0>
>
> <http://www.hardmac.com/articles/68/>
>
> <http://www.ifixit.com/Guide/Device/Mac_mini_Model_A1176>
>
> A suitable processor:
>
> <http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230456703514>
>

Thanks for that - saved for reference. I've already seen the iFixit
guide - damn good as usual.

-z-



--
email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: zoara on 11 Apr 2010 15:27
David Empson <dempson(a)actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:

> > What purpose are you needing the extra CPU power for?
> >
> > Generally I've found more change putting in a fast hard drive than
> > upping CPU power, but I never used a core solo.
>
> There are some things which simply can't be done on a 1.5 GHz Core
> Solo,
> because it isn't fast enough either due to the clock frequency or the
> lack of a second core, e.g.
>
> - H.264 video playback via EyeTV requires 2 cores.
> - Better video quality in iChat needs a Core Duo (preferably 1.83
> GHz).
> - DVD player needs 1.6 GHz for improved video deinterlacing.
> - Grand Central Dispatch needs 2 cores to be useful.

I'm using it as a server, and my desire for more oomph is just for some
heavy SQL and Perl stuff required by (what I'm doing with) Squeezebox. I
don't think any of the above points apply to me.


> If it was me, I'd rather get a Core 2 Duo Mini to replace it. I'd be
> concerned about likely future Mac OS X support for Core Solo/Duo
> (32-bit) models, limiting the future options for a complex upgrade.
> The
> Core 2 Duo models also have the advantage of being able to install
> more
> memory (at least 3 GB).

That's a point. Even if I drop in a C2D CPU it's likely Apple will cut
off support by model number rather than by actual capabilities.


> Apple's usual pattern with a new version of Mac OS X is to drop
> support
> for models 4 to 6 years after they were superseded, with occasional
> earlier cutoffs. If 10.7 is released about March 2011, that's just
> over
> 3.5 years after the last Core Duo model was superseded (Mac Mini in
> Aug
> 2007), and about 4.5 years after the rest of the Core Duos were
> superseded (Sep-Nov 2006).

Hmmm. Still undecided :(

Maybe I'll just have to look on eBay and work out how much it would cost
me to buy another box and sell mine on, versus just buying the CPU. If
there's a big enough difference it might sway me. If it's about the same
I'll just buy a new one...

-z-

--
email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: zoara on 11 Apr 2010 15:27
Jaimie Vandenbergh <jaimie(a)sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:
> On 7 Apr 2010 11:44:13 GMT, zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote:
>
> >Anyone had any experience upgrading a Mac mini CPU? I'm after
> > boosting
> >my Core Solo 1.5GHz to a Core Duo with a bit more oomph.
>
> Having taken a look into the 1st gen Intel Minis, it should be a
> simple dropin if you can get the right CPU for it.

Yeah, that's how it looked to me. But the "simple drop in" is after an
unknown difficulty of actually getting to the CPU. It looks okay but
getting feedback from someone who has done it is helpful :)

Also, I'm ashamed to say, it's been so long since I've swapped CPUs on
anything that I'm after a bit of reassurance on compatibility. And on
mucking about with thermal paste, which I've never had to do before.

> >I've looked at the guides and the early minis have a ZIF, and besides
> >the usual pig to get anywhere in a mini (I've already upgraded the
> > RAM)
> >it doesn't seem to arduous. And the brief look at replacement CPUs
> >implies they are around sixty quid (I haven't looked at specific
> > models
> >yet).
> >
> >Is this worth doing, or is it not going to be much cheaper or much
> > less
> >effort than simply buying a faster second hand mini and selling my
> > old
> >one?
>
> What purpose are you needing the extra CPU power for?

I've bought a Squeezebox media streamer and am using a plugin which
whacks the CPU to 100% for 5-15 seconds when you select a long list of
music - making the UI on the Squeezebox Controller spin while it waits -
and would like to reduce that time so the selection of music is more
fluid and less frustrating. Sometimes it spends so much CPU generating
the list that it forgets to communicate with the Controller, giving an
error - and I don't want to have to deal with errors on what is supposed
to be a music appliance.

It also uses a lot of CPU when rescanning the library; often you can't
play any music for several minutes. Admittedly there are workarounds for
this (not auto-rescanning at all, or doing it when I know I won't be
listening to music) but if I can alleviate that as a by-product then
it's a bonus.

The processes involved are sqld and perl.

> Generally I've found more change putting in a fast hard drive than
> upping CPU power, but I never used a core solo.

This probably won't benefit as much from a faster drive but it probably
can't hurt. I have one lying around, I think it's faster.

RAM might have a decent effect on it though.

Admittedly the Solo is now very underpowered for what I use it for; but
I knew when I bought it that I was getting a cheap-as-chips device to
find out whether a server in the loft would be useful to me. Turns out
it is, which is why I'm hammering it harder than I expected.

-z-


--
email: nettid1 at fastmail dot fm
From: Pd on 12 Apr 2010 04:36
zoara <me18(a)privacy.net> wrote:

> Also, I'm ashamed to say, it's been so long since I've swapped CPUs on
> anything that I'm after a bit of reassurance on compatibility. And on
> mucking about with thermal paste, which I've never had to do before.

My experience with CPU swaps is about 30 years out of date, but my
experience with thermal paste is more recent - the stuff gets
everywhere. No matter how careful you think you've been, there always
seems to be a tiny bit left on your finger/spudger/chin which then
redistributes itself to your keyboard, mouse, screen, pillow, wife's
cheek, doghouse. And it's hard to get rid of, too.

--
Pd
From: T i m on 12 Apr 2010 06:09
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:36:13 +0100, peterd.news(a)gmail.invalid (Pd)
wrote:

>My experience with CPU swaps is about 30 years out of date, but my
>experience with thermal paste is more recent - the stuff gets
>everywhere.

Not if you use a professional solution it doesn't.

http://www.maplin.co.uk/images/full/n58gu.jpg

T i m
First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Ars Technica iPad review
Next: Padding an image in Aperture