Filed under: Hardware, Mac mini
Hacker installs Core 2 Duo chip in Mac mini, hangs on for the ride
Macenstein has blogged a Mac mini CPU swap, as a poster in a Taiwanese forum has switched out the Core Duo chip for a Core 2 Duo chip, a next-generation CPU from Intel. The brain upgrade has resulted not only in the Mac mini stomping a PowerMac G5 dual 2.5 GHz in an iTunes MP3-AAC conversion test (remember: Mac minis have slower laptop hard drives than desktop PowerMacs), but it also runs cooler, due to the new architecture of these Core 2 Duo (code name: Merom) Intel chips.
Given reports like this of these new chips, we might as well talk about the elephant in the room: if these reports of cooler running and even more powerful chips so soon from Intel are true, I foresee a lot of criticism of Apple jumping the gun on cramming Intel chips into their present lineup, in light of all these complaints about heat.
[via MacNN]
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
E said 6:09PM on 6-13-2006
GIVE ME A BREAK...FIRST IT'S WHEN ARE THEY COMING OUT WITH IT...NOW IT'S.. OH THEY SHOULD HAVE WAITED.... THEN DONT BUY IT...JEESH..
Reply
Chris said 6:15PM on 6-13-2006
David,
Do you post comments on www.resexcellence.com? Your style of writing sounds familiar.
Just a side note, are we really trying to pick at Apple over putting CPUs to soon in their systems? I mean... New CPUs come out ALL the time... Thats how this works. If you waitned for the next best gen CPU, then you would ALWAYS be waiting.
They run warm, yes, but really, I don't think it runs that much warmer then my G4 PowerBook when I am gaming.
Reply
Aaron said 6:20PM on 6-13-2006
I can't remember, is the chip in the MBP or MB swappable?... if so, would it support this chip? If so, my decision has been made on when I am going to buy..
Reply
Shaun Cooke said 6:25PM on 6-13-2006
I think its got really good benchmarks. Will it be possible to DIY?
Reply
Ricky said 6:38PM on 6-13-2006
I agree with the sentiments of the first poster. Don't forget that the Core Duo is still the best mobile processor Intel's ever had. That can't be so bad, can it? Sure, processors will continue to get better. Should Apple wait indefinitely? Of course not. And don't forget that the Core Duo isn't just used in Macs. There are plenty of happy Core Duo users out there (including Mac users).
Reply
Jon H said 6:39PM on 6-13-2006
The laptops are not socketed.
You can't really blame Apple for shipping what they did - it was pretty common knowledge that Intel was coming out with another batch of dual-core chips in mid-late 2006, so the information was available for people to decide whether to buy or wait.
It's not like the IBM/Motorola days, where Apple's the main customer and the other customers aren't in the personal computer market, so CPU roadmaps were vague and secretive.
Reply
Jon H said 6:46PM on 6-13-2006
I'd have to say, the MBP problem that will bother me most, long-term, is not the heat or the noise, but the limited opening angle of the screen.
Between that and the limited viewing angle of the screen, I find it hard to find a comfortable posture. If I'm sitting up straight, I feel like I need to tilt the screen back a smidgen farther - but I can't. I'm not even tall, I'm only 5'8". I can't see how a tall person would use it without scrunching down or slouching.
The Mac Book doesn't seem to be afflicted with this problem, as far as I could tell at the Apple Store last weekend. The screen appears to tilt back farther.
If the new Core Duo 2s run cooler than the Core Duos, I hope Apple revamps the Mac Book Pro to borrow whatever it is that allows the MB's screen to open so far, and throws in the new Core Duo 2 as the CPU.
That'd definitely be worth an upgrade.
Reply
Joe Jacobs said 6:59PM on 6-13-2006
Yes!!!!! SOOOOOOO glad I waited!!!!!!!
Reply
Zorn said 7:07PM on 6-13-2006
These new Core 2 Duo chips are really exciting, and while some people are quick to point out (for the desktop) that they are only a small amount faster, or roughly the same, as the AMD FX-60 or FX-62, they also cost less than half as much. The 2.66Ghz Core2 Duo with 4MB cache (probably the sweet spot) will cost $500, while a FX-60 or FX-62 chip costs $1,100.
Reply
Sean D. said 7:18PM on 6-13-2006
I'm waiting for the next rev of the 15" MacBook Pro as well. Core 2 Duo 64bit processor, and maybe we'll also see some of the innovations found in the MacBook and the 17" MacBook Pro; such as the magnetic latch, the new-style keyboard, and FW800!
Reply
aaaaa said 7:21PM on 6-13-2006
These are the mobile chips, and only go up to 2.33 ghz. The Conroe chips are the ones that go up to 2.9 ghz, and use more power. Sadly, the MB and the MBP have the cpus soldered to the sockets, so you cannot upgrade them.
Reply
dave said 7:48PM on 6-13-2006
Agreed with first poster too. I am a (fairly) recent switcher, but for those of you that have been locked in the Mac world for several years with your blinders on, get this straight: chips get better all the time, not just one a year like you are used to. You are on board with Intel now, so fasten your seatbelts and get used to frequent speed increases and other upgrades. you may wish to review Moore's Law?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore's_law
Reply
Sir Not Appearing in this Blog said 7:49PM on 6-13-2006
It's a pity about the soldered CPUs, but frankly I'm happy with my MacBook's performance. I don't feel the need to upgrade the CPU. Things that took my old (1.5ghz G4) mini thirty seconds or more happen almost instantly. GraphicConverter is a joy to use now rather than an annoyance. Firefox launches almost instantly.
My only complaint thus far is that 512mb is far too little RAM for my usage needs, and that's easily rectified. It's nice to know what I've got to look forward to with my next Mac though. :)
Reply
Jon H said 8:05PM on 6-13-2006
"maybe we'll also see some of the innovations found in the MacBook and the 17" MacBook Pro; such as the magnetic latch, the new-style keyboard, and FW800!"
And, perhaps most of all, the user-replaceable hard drives on the MacBook.
I'd upgrade to a MBP with that feature in a heartbeat. My 80 gig MBP is already feeling skimpy.
Reply
Silver said 8:09PM on 6-13-2006
"jumping the gun on cramming Intel chips into their present lineup"
Are you serious? That's one of the most ridiculous statements I've heard in awhile. They "crammed Intel chips into their present lineup" because those are the Intel chips "presently" available, and PowerPC had hit a brick wall in portables a long time ago. You would have preferred Apple keep using antiquated G4 chips for another 6 months??? Strange logic.
Well, Apple better not use the Core Duo 2 chips either, because the following generation will be better. Oh wait, they can't go with those either, as the subsequent generation will be better. Oh wait...
Reply
David Chartier said 8:32PM on 6-13-2006
#14: Typically, CPU generations haven't leapt each other in less than a 6-month time span. G4 was around for quite a while, then the G5 landed. The Intel Core Duos have been available for only a few months, and now the TRUE promises of 'lower energy consumption, less heat' are being promised by a new generation that is already available?
My comment was critiquing the fact that these Core Duo chips are turning out to be the exact antithesis of what Apple promised - they're high power (the MB and MBP power supplies are higher wattage) and my MBP runs a helluva lot hotter than my 1.67 GHz PowerBook 15".
I wasn't lamenting obvious technological progress - I was berating Apple for BSing their Mac customers into these chips that are nothing of what they should have been.
Reply
Sam said 8:49PM on 6-13-2006
I think the very fact that the Mac press sees this as rapid chip development shows how much we languished in the PowerPC camp. This is *normal* development. Next year the NEXT generation chips are going to come out, making the Core 2 look slow. Now you see why Intel folks were snickering at the Mac folks the few times in recent history that the PowerPC briefly pulled ahead in speed.
I don't know anyone who owns an Intel Macintosh who will be sorry they bought when they did.
Reply
Stefan Constantinescu said 8:54PM on 6-13-2006
Yet another reason why people shouldn't buy first generation Apple portables.
Frankly I hate the quality checks that these things [Apple portables] go thru.
Yes I have an iMac, but I also have 2 thinkpads currently, and I've owned several thinkpads before these 2 as well.
Not one had an issue, not one. No ball burners, no freezing, no leaking caps, no flaming batteries, no whining, nothing.
If IBM/Lenovo can do it... wtf Apple?
Reply
David Chartier said 9:38PM on 6-13-2006
#16: How long was the Pentium 2 around? How about the AMD K6-2? Pentium 3? P4? How about Centrino?
Chips don't leapfrog their predecessors within a quarter or two.
Reply
icerabbit said 9:40PM on 6-13-2006
Welcome to the world of Intel & AMD: Monthly CPU news.
Roadmaps. Speedbumps. Price drops. ... Many knew that before the MacBook Pro was out that Core 2 would be out in very short order after the Core, because that's how Intel said it would be.
So while I purchased a G4 PB two weeks before the MBP were announced, I'm happy I don't have heat issues & whining fans ... and will not upgrade before Core 2.
Reply