Intel Mac mini CPU madness - how (s)low can you go?

[AshleyPomeroy]

They are great. I had a few of them I got for pretty cheap.

View attachment 925336

Whenever I look at that machine I wonder if Sony really, really wanted to use the SpiderMan / PlayStation 3 font on the keys - it came out in the same year as the PS3, and Sony was mad keen on co-branding - but someone with taste and sense decided that it would have been naff, and yet he or she only managed to tone the font down a bit.

Was there any way to put a Pentium M in the Mac Mini? From what I remember the Pentium M and Core CPUs used a similar socket but were incompatible, but perhaps there was an adapter. The slowest Pentium M was 900mhz.

 

[Amethyst1]

Was there any way to put a Pentium M in the Mac Mini

No.
[automerge]1592865635[/automerge]

The slowest Pentium M was 900mhz.

There was a Celeron M that ran at just 600 MHz; it was a cut-down Pentium M.

 

[Intell]

But you can run 10.5 and 10.6 on the Apple TV's Pentium M at 1Ghz with 256MB of memory

 

[retta283]

But you can run 10.5 and 10.6 on the Apple TV's Pentium M at 1Ghz with 256MB of memory

Is the install procedure similar to the Tiger one? Wasn't aware that you could install anything new than Tiger on the Apple TV.

 

[Intell]

It's been a few years, but I think so. I remember finding kexts and a modified kernel for it. Still have all the stuff and I think a disk image of it in my archives

 

[LightBulbFun]

But you can run 10.5 and 10.6 on the Apple TV's Pentium M at 1Ghz with 256MB of memory

been there done that

I also tried 10.6.8 and while it works the SSE2 emulator the only SSE2 10.6.8 kernel I can find does not work fully/had a bug which means the picture is a bit funky! still the only person to run GB3 on one tho AFAIK! https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/6048025

 

[MultiFinder17]

Man, I love those old OG AppleTVs. I put an SSD in mine, put Leopard on it, and ran that as my home media server for years serving iTunes music and movies. I’ve still got it in my closet. I never tried 10.6.8 on it; I should give that a go one of these days!

 

[rampancy]

not sure if I ever posted it here, but I did just that a little while ago LOL (now @dosdude1 and @parrotgeek1 got 10.7.5 booting on 32bit only machines I should try hack Lion onto it for maximum misery)

I'd imahine that Lion on an Atom Netbook would indeed be a miserable experience. When I was teaching in Korea I played around with an Acer Aspire One Atom netbook that I picked up that ran Windows 7, and it was awful, even after I upgraded the RAM to 2 GB. It was still awful even after I wiped it and installed Ubuntu and Ubuntu Netbook Remix Edition. It was only after I installed Lubuntu on it that I got anything even close to a usable device.

 

[weckart]

I'd imahine that Lion on an Atom Netbook would indeed be a miserable experience. When I was teaching in Korea I played around with an Acer Aspire One Atom netbook that I picked up that ran Windows 7, and it was awful, even after I upgraded the RAM to 2 GB. It was still awful even after I wiped it and installed Ubuntu and Ubuntu Netbook Remix Edition. It was only after I installed Lubuntu on it that I got anything even close to a usable device.

I have an MSI UW100 that was very hackintoshable in the end but being a lowly 32 bit Atom topped out at 10.6.8. I still have SL on it and it worked very well dual booting with the WinXP it came with. Even sleep worked. Managed the same on an Acer 3610 nettop and after futzing around with the DSDT got sleep to work on that, which was the holy grail at the time.

 

[Amethyst1]

The Eagle has landed

Macmini1,1 - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a Macmini1,1 with an Intel Core Duo T2700 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

 

[sanfrancisofont1984]

I’ve always been curious as to how a Core Solo fairs against a PPC. You should run some tests. Lol

How fast is the Mac mini "Core Solo/Core Duo" compared to the Mac mini G4?: EveryMac.com

Compares the speed of the Intel-based Mac mini Core Solo and Core Duo to the PowerPC-based Mac mini G4 using benchmarks, application tests, and more.

everymac.com

Given that (if I understand correctly) all early Intel minis use 110W adapter (now it is like 150W?) instead of 85W one might say this is not a fair comparison.

 

[Amethyst1]

Given that (if I understand correctly) all early Intel minis use 110W adapter (now it is like 150W?) instead of 85W one might say this is not a fair comparison.

It's about performance, not performance per watt

 

[sanfrancisofont1984]

It's about performance, not performance per watt

I would assume a not-faster than predecessor machine wouldn't be shipped. Looking at my minis again I noticed that the G4s have slightly bigger rear vent.

 

[Amethyst1]

I would assume a not-faster than predecessor machine wouldn't be shipped.

Yes but how is this related to the power adapter's rating?

 

[timidpimpin]

There certainly is a level of pleasure I get from running older hardware. But all of my current Intel Macs have soldered CPU's, and I'm not @dosdude1

 

[Amethyst1]

But all of my current Intel Macs have soldered CPU's, and I'm not @dosdude1

Yanno, I'd love to have a 3.06 GHz T9900 in my 2009 Mini. But you name it.

 

[timidpimpin]

Yanno, I'd love to have a 3.06 GHz T9900 in my 2009 Mini. But you name it.

As would I. I actually offered to buy that mini off Greg in the YouTube comments, but he never replied. The 09 mini's are easily my favourite Intel Macs. Perfect Snow Leopard machines on the cheap, which also makes them a great system for people like us that use both Intel and PowerPC. SL is so seamless with PowerPC software for me that it seems just like running Leopard on a G4, only faster.

 

[Amethyst1]

I actually offered to buy that mini off Greg in the YouTube comments, but he never replied.

Presumably @dosdude1 could make another one for you?

 

[timidpimpin]

Presumably @dosdude1 could make another one for you?

I wonder if the VRM on the 09 mini's could handle a C2 Quad. Even the already low 110 watt brick is already more than enough, since the C2D 7550 only has a 25 watt TDP.

 

[sanfrancisofont1984]

Yes but how is this related to the power adapter's rating?

It suggests that Intel isn't a clear winner over PPC in 2005-2006 yet? I remember they just recovered from the NetBurst (Pentium 4) dead end.

 

[sanfrancisofont1984]

Intel was a clear winner on fab process though. Core vs G4 was like 65nm vs 130nm (2 generations ahead) if I read correctly.

 

[Project Alice]

I wonder if the VRM on the 09 mini's could handle a C2 Quad. Even the already low 110 watt brick is already more than enough, since the C2D 7550 only has a 25 watt TDP.

Collin already tried this, none of the C2Qs work. He actually soldered a socket onto a mini for easy testing of which CPUs worked.

 

[swamprock]

As would I. I actually offered to buy that mini off Greg in the YouTube comments, but he never replied. The 09 mini's are easily my favourite Intel Macs. Perfect Snow Leopard machines on the cheap, which also makes them a great system for people like us that use both Intel and PowerPC. SL is so seamless with PowerPC software for me that it seems just like running Leopard on a G4, only faster.

My home media and backup server runs on a 2009 Mac Mini, running 10.13.6. Great machine. I'm looking to get another down the road.

 

[timidpimpin]

My home media and backup server runs on a 2009 Mac Mini, running 10.13.6. Great machine. I'm looking to get another down the road.

Yep. great machines. I have dual SSD's in mine, and dual boot Snow Leopard and High Sierra. And I also bought a second identical 2.26GHz. Just to have a spare. I use mine on a 32" LCD for media also, as well as playing most of my older PowerPC games.

 

[Amethyst1]

Intel was a clear winner on fab process though

And also on IPC.

---​

Coming back to the 2006 mini, there's a variant of the C2D T7600 with an unlocked multiplier - I'd be interested in seeing how far that can be pushed in the mini. But is there even software to modify the multiplier in OS X?