So I've received a few emails since my post (I also sent out a few emails last night when I first started worrying about the issue) and here's what I've got so far:
1) In the latest build of Tiger released to developers (8A351) the Mac mini does not offer support for Core Image or Quartz Extreme 2D.
2) ATI has written me and explicitly stated that the Radeon 9200 was not designed with support for Core Image in mind.
Visually OS X Tiger should look identical on the mini as it would on any platform with Core Image support, the difference is that Tiger will continue to task the CPU for the rendering of all GUI elements instead of offloading it to the GPU. It appears that Core Image does require full fp support and it doesn't look like there are any plans to extend support down to DX8 class cards.
From what I have gathered, performance of the Mac mini under current beta Tiger builds is quite similar to performance under Panther, which is good to know, especially considering the beta status of Tiger. I did receive some reports saying that Exposé was choppier but that could be a result of a number of things. Dashboard performance is supposedly pretty solid as well.
More info as I get it...
1) In the latest build of Tiger released to developers (8A351) the Mac mini does not offer support for Core Image or Quartz Extreme 2D.
2) ATI has written me and explicitly stated that the Radeon 9200 was not designed with support for Core Image in mind.
Visually OS X Tiger should look identical on the mini as it would on any platform with Core Image support, the difference is that Tiger will continue to task the CPU for the rendering of all GUI elements instead of offloading it to the GPU. It appears that Core Image does require full fp support and it doesn't look like there are any plans to extend support down to DX8 class cards.
From what I have gathered, performance of the Mac mini under current beta Tiger builds is quite similar to performance under Panther, which is good to know, especially considering the beta status of Tiger. I did receive some reports saying that Exposé was choppier but that could be a result of a number of things. Dashboard performance is supposedly pretty solid as well.
More info as I get it...
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
18 Comments
View All Comments
MadB - Thursday, April 21, 2005 - link
Does anyone know if the lack of 64 mb video card in the mini mac will affect the speed of ichat av in Tiger? I'm just buying mine for email, dvds, and internet, and hopefully for full use of the ichat AV. That footage of the apple ceo plugging Tiger's new features is so tempting.blckgrffn - Friday, February 4, 2005 - link
Will putting a dx9 video card in my 400mhz G4 alleaviate the 100% cpu use when scrolling over the dock and scrolling in windows? That is what I want to know.Mini PC - Monday, January 31, 2005 - link
I've owned a pIII-1000MHz Cappuccino since 2001 (I now have a second one) and most noticeable difference to the Mac Mini is the fan noise. There is a very small fan that cools a copper heatsink over the desktop processor mounted inside the Cappuccino. Due to the size constraints of the case, they move the required volume of air to cool the desktop CPU by having a fan with high rpms. High rpms of the fan make it sound like a hairdryer going off on your desk.The sound really gets to you after a while, it's a very high-pitched whine that carries and is hard to drown out. I ended up hiding the unit behind a couch and making a sound baffle for it because it was so loud. Eventually I got a laptop that is way quieter. I'm still glad I got the Cappuccino because it was perfect for what I needed it for: using with my monitor at home, chucking in my courier bag for my bike ride to work, and then using with my monitor there. Also, at the time it was way faster than any laptop available and had the added bonus of being cheaper.
I just wish they'd included the earplugs.
msva124 - Saturday, January 29, 2005 - link
"Visually OS X Tiger should look identical on the mini as it would on any platform with Core Image support, the difference is that Tiger will continue to task the CPU for the rendering of all GUI elements instead of offloading it to the GPU."Isn't this a bit like saying Doom 3 will look identical at 5FPS or 30FPS?
Luposian - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
"Visually OS X Tiger should look identical on the mini as it would on any platform with Core Image support, the difference is that Tiger will continue to task the CPU for the rendering of all GUI elements instead of offloading it to the GPU."-----
As far as I am aware, both Jaguar and Panther offer GPU-assisted graphical processing (with nVidia GeForce 2MX (or greater) and ATi Radeon-series video cards). I had assumed it was all-inclusive (all graphical aspects accounted for), but it may only be for windows and not everything else. Tiger may increase this attribute, if so.
I gotta get me a faster video card for my 466MHz G4 DA, in anticipation for Tiger! :-)
japtor - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
tiger should be faster on any supported computer. that includes my old ass 500mhz g3 pismo with rage 128 mobility 8mb (which currently has an older tiger beta.core image support itself probably wont be a big deal for most people, other than if a gpu supports it, it means the gpu supports quartz 2d extreme. q2de is the big thing, thats the 'cool label for a gpu rendered ui' in the last entry, not core image. core image/video will probably be thrown into the ilife apps and get the most use there for most people. otherwise it might just be used for some flashiness here and there, and even then that probably isnt exactly 'core image' in use as much as apple just using ps2.0.
i read somewhere else that apparently the application itself can decide whether to use the cpu or not when a ci/cv capable gpu isnt available. so they can have whatever effect be cpu rendered, or not at all.
and about mini performance, my friend got one yesterday and i played around with it while helping him set it up. running 1280x1024, i noticed exposé was a little choppy. doesnt make it any less useful though (shitloads smoother than on my pismo, still useful there too). by comparison, my ibook at 1024x768 (w/r9200) is pretty smooth.
Eug - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
P.S. Forgot to add in the last post:#10, Well, the RAM upgrade to 512 MB is $75. I suspect the 2nd edition will NOT have 512 MB. They even sell dual Power Macs with 256 MB. Lame but true, and it doesn't bode well for a stock 512 MB mini.
Anonymous - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
#6, the compilers are xlc and xlf and are already out for OS X. The autovectorizing versions of them should be out soon for OS X. (They goal was apparently the end of 2004, but obviously that didn't happen.) However, speedups will be very variable depending on the app. A 300% speedup is crazy talk except in very rare instances.#8, If you try to play a presentation with Burn and Flash in Keynote 2 on a machine that can't display them, the presentation, just without those transitions. In fact IIRC it substitutes Motion Dissolve, which looks better (and more professional) than Burn and Flash anyway. Also, I believe Burn and Flash work fine on Panther, since the functionality is built into to the app and does not require Tiger, but I would probably never use them anyway, cuz like I said they don't look all that great. I do think the new Grid and Droplet transitions are kinda cool, and they work fine on the 9200 (and even my GeForce2 MX).
#9, I've heard Exposé on Tiger runs fine on a 1280x1024 LCD. Dunno about 1600x1200 though.
#2, From what I have been told, Tiger on CoreImage capable (DX9 class) GPUs will see a noticeable speedup in many things. Tiger on older GPUs should be at least as fast as Panther, but also may be faster in some areas, but the speedup won't be anywhere near as much as with CoreImage capable GPUs.
cOrvvin - Friday, January 28, 2005 - link
OK, that does it for me. I will wait for the Mac Mini "Second Edition" with pre-installed Tiger (suppose Apple will do it sooner or later). Hopefully it will have a corresponding graphics card and come with at least 512 MB of pre-installed RAM. Those are really "the" two issues I have with the Mini right now.RMSistight - Thursday, January 27, 2005 - link
Good update Anand. Your article reviews will determine if I want to get the Mac Mini or not. The part with Expose getting choppy with resolutions over 1280 x 900 is a HUGE turn off for me. Of course, I can just run it AT 1280 x 900. But, I think as long as OS X Tiger runs, I'm happy.