The new MacBook Pro impresses with its performance

As I mentioned in my previous article, I decided to buy the 13″ Core i5 (base model) MacBook Pro. It meets my needs as a travel workstation, but how does it perform? I decided to benchmark it against my other Macs to see how it stands up.

Benchmark Details

The following benchmarks were performed using Xbench and Geekbench, running on a freshly-booted machine. Xbench is outdated but solid and universally-accepted as the standard Mac benchmark. Plus, I had historical data from all of my machines. Geekbench is a great cross-platform CPU test, but it doesn’t measure as wide a variety of system parameters as Xbench.

Each Xbench test was normalized against the new MacBook Pro, which always shows as “100%” in these charts. This should help get a feel for how much slower or faster it is than the other machines.

The test subjects are as follows:

This probably seems like an odd and motley assortment, but they all have one thing in common: I own them. Although everyone’s performance baseline will be different, I was interested in how the new MacBook Pro compares to my other machines, and my 15″ machine in particular. So there you have it!

The CPU, graphics, and memory tests were performed running the latest version of Mac OS X “Snow Leopard”, version 10.6.6.

The disk tests, however, were run under either 10.6.6 (in the case of the 13″ MacBook Pro and iMac) or the version of Mac OS X that came with the machine originally (in the case of the 15″ Santa Rosa MacBook Pro and the Mac Mini). Since I am a storage guy, I have long-since upgraded the hard disk drives in both machines, and felt it was unfair to compare the OEM drive in the new MacBook Pro to these upgraded drives. So I used the original Xbench tests I performed when the machines were new.

Performance Overview

The new 13" MacBook Pro performance admirably

As others have reported, overall performance is solid. Even though it is the absolute base model in the line, the new MacBook Pro matches or bests my old machine in every respect. It clobbers the Santa Rosa MacBook pro in CPU, Thread, Memory, Quartz, UI, and disk tests, and ties in OpenGL performance. It even matches the high-end desktop in most tests, only falling behind when it comes to Disk, Thread and OpenGL graphics performance.

The fact that it achieves all this with a base price $600 less than my old MacBook Pro and runs for almost 7 hours on a charge is simply amazing. Moore’s law ought to allow new machines to outperform old ones, but one is still surprised to see it so flamboyantly displayed.

Performance Details

Now let’s dig a little deeper into these performance numbers!

CPU Performance Details

The base-model 13″ MacBook Pro uses a 2.3 GHz dual-core CPU, which hardly sounds better than the 2.2 GHz Core 2 Duo chip used in my old MacBook Pro. And it shouldn’t hold a candle to the mighty 2.66 GHz quad-core “Nehalem” Core i5 in my iMac.

The "Sandy Bridge" Core i5 performs very well - it's nearly twice as fast as the old Core 2 Duo!

The detailed CPU tests tell a different tale, however. The architectural improvements made between Merom/Penryn and Sandy Bridge are evident, with the new chip almost doubling the old in floating point math and (thanks to hyperthreading) solidly throttling it in thread tests.

The most impressive feat is its performance relative to the quad-core Nehalem Core i5 in the iMac, however. Looking past the thread tests, which are greatly helped by two more full cores, we see nearly equal performance between laptop and desktop. This suggests that the Sandy Bridge architecture does a solid job of reducing electrical demands without sacrificing performance. The quad-core desktop CPUs in this family are shockingly strong, as we will see in a moment!

Geekbench Results

Since it is a cross-platform benchmark, I was able to add a ringer to the Geekbench test: My new lab workstation. Built around a Sandy Bridge Core i5-2400, Asus P8H67-M PRO motherboard, and speedy OCZ memory, this is a seriously-fast desktop for very little money. All in, we’re talking about under $500 for this guy!

The Core i5 and i7 processors walk all over the old Core 2 Duos

The two Sandy Bridge Core i5 CPUs are neck and neck in most of the tests, which is really shocking given that the desktop has two more cores, can ramp to 95 Watts, and runs at 3.1 GHz. It is also impressive that the older Nehalem Core i5-750 can keep up in Geekbench tests. Unsurprisingly, the old Core 2 Duo machines aren’t in the same league, not managing even half the performance of these three.

I previously talked about the performance-per-dollar ratio of the various MacBook Pro machines, noting that the base models were much more attractive by this metric. Although it’s definitely not an apples-to-apples comparison (for starters, my desktop is harder to use on a plane…) I will admit that one can get roughly three times the Geekbench score by building a Sandy Bridge system at home. With a score of 7350, my desktop delivers almost 15 Geekbench points per dollar, compared to 3.5 to 5 points from the new MacBook Pro line.

Memory Performance Details

Both the MacBook pros sport 4 GB of RAM, while the Mini still has just 2 GB and the iMac has been upgraded with 8 GB. The old MacBook Pro uses 667 MHz PC-5300 RAM, while the Mac Mini and iMac use 1066 MHz PC-8500 SODIMMs. The new machine steps up to 1333 MHz PC-10600 memory.

The "Sandy Bridge" platform really shines when it comes to memory performance

The Nehalem series integrated the memory controller with the CPU, and this is continued in Sandy Bridge. This allows really amazing memory performance across the board – the old CPUs are stuck with 30% to 40% of the new machine’s memory access capabilities.

The new chipset even manages to beat the iMac in many tests, with only the thread-sensitive System Copy test showing a real loss.

Graphics Performance Details

Graphics performance is the one area I was most concerned about. All three older machines use discrete graphics controllers of various sorts, from the wimpy Nvidia GeForce 9400M in the Mac Mini to the Nvidia 8600M GT in the Santa Rosa MacBook Pro to the more-impressive ATI Radeon HD 4850 in the iMac.

Intel's integrated HD 3000 graphics do a fine job, generally keeping up with the discrete GPUs found in the other machines

As expected, the discrete graphics cards are much more competitive with the new HD 3000 engine integrated into the Sandy Bridge Core i5. Yet once again, the new machine is able to match or beat the old machines in nearly every test.

OpenGL performance seems to be an issue for Intel’s new chip. Perhaps a driver update might improve the situation? But it’s still solid – matching the older machines and only throttled by the big desktop. Most of the Quartz graphics tests show the iMac and new MacBook Pro tied with the old machines trailing far behind. Perhaps they are CPU-bound?

Hard Disk Performance Details

Finally we turn our attention to the question of storage. Hard disk drive performance depends on many factors, and Apple’s machines have historically varied quite a bit. Every one of the new MacBook Pros come standard with a mundane 5400 rpm Hitachi hard disk drive, so one cannot expect it to match the performance of the full-size 7200 rpm desktop drive in the iMac.

Although it's nothing to write home about, the 320 GB Hitachi drive performs adequately

Density improvements should give the new MacBook Pro a leg up on the old Mini and ‘Pro and, our tests bear this out. None of the disks are really all that impressive (sequential reads and writes in the 65 MB/s range aren’t impressive) but it’s not bad.

Stephen’s Stance

The Sandy Bridge MacBook pro really shines in terms of performance. It soundly beats my old laptop in nearly every test, and even gives the desktop a run in some tests. In all, I’d say the hard disk drive ought to be the first thing to get an upgrade. Throw in a speedy SSD and we’ll be looking at some really earth-shattering performance and battery life. And yet, we’d still be looking at a sub-$2000 machine!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2011. | Benchmarking the 2011 13″ Core i5 MacBook Pro
This post was categorized as Apple, Everything, Personal. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Would you run VMware ESX on SATA? You might in a lab environment! Here's what to look for.

The VMware ESX hardware compatibility list is awesome but it’s kind of hard to wade through. It’s super-detailed, but difficult to navigate if one is browsing for compatible hardware. Although SATA and especially PATA aren’t exactly mainstream in enterprise datacenters, they’re the most-likely storage attachment for labs and tinkerers like me.

So I decided to put together a “cheat sheet” listing the compatible SATA and PATA chipsets. In the spirit of openness, I’m presenting this data here for all to see, and I welcome corrections and updates. Indeed, I’ll try to keep this page up to date as new hardware is added!

PATA Drivers for ESX

Parallel ATA isn’t widely available anymore, but those desiring to run ESX on older hardware will want to make sure it uses one of the following controllers. Sadly, there aren’t many of them, and not many “hobbyist” motherboards use these specific chipsets. But that’s the fact of it.

• AMD SB700/SP5100 and AMD SB800 series
• Intel ICH7

That’s it. Three chipsets from two vendors. Both are server-oriented, too, so they’re harder to find in cheaper desktop motherboards.

You’re likely safe if you use an Intel ICH7 server board, but most use other-brand controllers that won’t work without some hacking. And you might not want to hack on your storage drivers…

SATA Drivers for ESX

The situation is a little brighter for the new SATA standard. Although lots of serial ATA controllers remain unsupported, there are enough here that an average shopper ought to be able to spot one of them on a motherboard.

Again, buying an Intel board is preferred, though the latest Sandy Bridge chipsets (P67/H67) are notably absent. I’ve heard that the controllers may function fine, however.

• AMD SB700/SP5100
• Broadcom BCM HT1000, HT1100 (aka ServerWorks)
• Intel ESB2 (ICH6), ICH7, ICH9, ICH10 (X58)
• nVidia MCP55

Stephen’s Stance

No enterprise will probably use non-RAID SATA for a production VMware ESX server, but it’s interesting to know what’s supported. Although most of these are fairly dated (the latest platforms are notably absent), they may be backwards-compatible with the items on this list. I’d love to hear from folks who have successfully run ESX 4 on Intel’s new PCH controller found in the P67, or H67 boards specifically!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2011. | VMware ESX SATA and PATA Compatibility Cheat Sheet
This post was categorized as Enterprise storage, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

The nVidia 8600M GT graphics in my late-2007 MacBook Pro seem to have gone missing!

The nVidia 8600M GT graphics chip in my late-2007 (Merom/Santa Rosa) MacBook Pro has failed. I knew it might happen, noting it back in August of 2008, and it was one reason I bought an AppleCare warranty. Apple has promised to repair affected machines for three years regardless of warranty status, but that doesn’t make it any easier to live with. Let’s hope everything goes smoothly and my trusty notebook is back in action quickly! I’ll be updating this post with the status of my nVidia repair adventure, too.

December 4

I am returning from the Gartner Data Center conference in Las Vegas. I put my MacBook to sleep and slip into its snug resting place in my backpack. Later, before getting on the plane, I open it up again. Odd, there’s no video. The screen is completely black – not even the backlight is on! I try a sleep and wake and a hard reboot – still no video. The “bong” still sounds, and I can hear the hard disk drive making its normal noises, but there’s no video. I buy a copy of Cormack McCarthy’s “The Road” to occupy my flight home, though I still keep the Mac with me at my seat.

December 5

Troubleshooting time shows trouble: The DVI connector doesn’t work either. But the worst of it is the System Profiler output: The nVidia graphics chip is just gone. The (non-functional) Intel GMA x3100 is listed, but no display connector appears. Monty Python would call this “Sir Not-Appearing-In-This-Film.”

Let’s check Apple’s support docs. There it is: TS2377, “MacBook Pro: Distorted video or no video issues”. Gotta love these listed symptoms:

• “Distorted or scrambled video on the computer screen
• No video on the computer screen (or external display) even though the computer is on”

I hear Jamie Hyneman saying “there’s your problem” and read on. Apple will cover it free for three years regardless of warranty. They’ll reimburse self-paid repairs. Whew! I just have to hand it over at an Apple Store and wait a week, apparently. Watch this space!

December 6

I made an appointment at a Cleveland-area Apple Store for “The nVidia Test”, the first step in getting the logic board replaced. I decided to clean up the fingerprints and grime a bit, then decided to swap the original 120 GB hard disk drive back in. Some folks have reported that Apple replaced much of their computer, including the hard disk drive, and I didn’t want to lose my 320 GB upgrade.

Swapped the drives and powered on the MacBook to make sure everything works. Well there’s a surprise: Everything including the video now works! I didn’t go near the graphics chip (which is on the underside of the logic board) or connector (on the right near the optical drive) so my open-and-shut case didn’t “fix” it. No, it’s just a flaky chip that decided to come back to life.

Whoa! The nVidia graphics chip magically reappeared. Now I have a flaky MacBook Pro instead of a dead one...

This is not as great as it sounds. These things don’t fix themselves, so I definitely expect it to fail again in the future. I’ll still take it to the Apple store for the nVidia test, but I suspect they’ll balk at repairing something that works fine - or at least appears to. We shall see.

December 7

And it failed again. I’m typing this from the Cambridgeside Apple store in Boston. We shall see what they say…

The “GPT Test” disk verified that the nVidia chip has failed. Matt and Nick at the Cambridgeside Genius Bar were very friendly – they’ll send it off to “the depot” for repair and it will be mailed back to my home address. Adieu, MacBook Pro!

Weird: Even though Matt entered my correct (new) address, the Apple computer spit out my old one. He says it’ll be shipped to the right address. I believe him.

December 9

The MacBook Pro arrived at Apple’s Houston depot and was repaired and shipped back to me today. Wow, they must be pretty good at this repair to get them turned around that quickly. FedEx says I’ll have it in my hands tomorrow by 10:30 AM!

December 10

Ding dong! The MacBook Pro was indeed in my hands this morning, cold but fixed. Everything seems perfect – the video works fine, the (upgraded) RAM and hard drive are intact, and all of my data is in place. They even put the SD card reader that I left in the ExpressCard slot in a special envelope and returned it. Everything was done for free, too. I couldn’t be happier with Apple’s support!

Note: Some of these links include affiliate codes that help pay for this blog. For example, buying an Amazon Kindle with this link sends a few bucks my way! But I don't write this blog to make money, and am happy to link to sites and stores that don't pay anything. I like Amazon and buy tons from them, but you're free to buy whatever and wherever you want.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Not Good: My MacBook Pro’s nVidia 8600M Video Failed
This post was categorized as Apple, Personal. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Here’s the scoop: Apple’s Mac mini EFI Firmware Update 1.2, released back at the end of August, claimed to improve “compatibility with the latest Apple memory kits on Mac mini computers”, but in typical Apple fashion, no one quite knew what that meant. Some brave soul must have tried installing two 4 GB PC3-8500 SO-DIMM modules in the Mini’s two RAM slots, and must have been awfully happy when they did, because it works! All 2009 Mac Minis are supported, including the recently-released Mac Mini Server and the earlier March-era machine.

This is now confirmed by Mac Mini Colo, a more reliable source than Macrumors forum posters, so I’m finally confident in posting this. Being a cheapskate, I’m not going to run out and spend $510.98 at Amazon on two Crucial SO-DIMMs for my $599 computer. But I’m eager to hear from you if you have the inclination, and will be watching as prices fall in the box at right. An 8 GB Mac Mini ought to perform amazingly when running VMware Fusion or VirtualBox!

Note: Some of these links include affiliate codes that help pay for this blog. For example, buying an Amazon Kindle with this link sends a few bucks my way! But I don't write this blog to make money, and am happy to link to sites and stores that don't pay anything. I like Amazon and buy tons from them, but you're free to buy whatever and wherever you want.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Got Excess Money? Upgrade Your 2009 Mac Mini RAM To 8 GB!
This post was categorized as Apple, Terabyte home. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Mac OS X 10.6 "Snow Leopard" deliveries begin on August 28!

Although Apple’s web site clearly states that Snow Leopard “Delivers on August 28th,” it is unclear if other sources will be so punctual. We definitely expect Apple Stores to have plenty of stock on Friday morning, but what of Amazon.com pre-orders? Will they also deliver on Friday, or will those of us who pre-ordered there have to wait a few days for this undercover upgrade?

Who Gets What

Snow Leopard is really a major jump forward in terms of advanced hardware and software integration. It brings Grand Central, OpenCL, full 64-bit mode, and QuickTime X along with Exchange support and many tweaks. But many of these features are highly hardware-dependent, so not all Mac users will get everything.

Here’s a cheat sheet I put together based on Apple’s documentation:

This table is based on the following facts:

1. Snow Leopard only supports Intel-based Macs. PowerPC Macs need not apply.
2. Booting Snow Leopard in 64-bit mode requires 64-bit EFI, and many pre-2007 Macs have only a 32-bit EFI. You can check your Mac (and help me fix my table) by typing “ioreg -l -p IODeviceTree | grep firmware-abi” in a Terminal window. If it says “EFI64″, your system is capable of running 64-bit Snow Leopard (though it can still run 64-bit apps). But Snow Leopard defaults to 32-bit mode on ALL Macs other than the Xserve at this point, and no one is sure why!
3. Grand Central Dispatch requires a multi-core CPU. This eliminates the original base-model 2006 Mac Mini, since it used a single-core CPU.
4. OpenCL requires newer Nvidia or the ATI graphics chips. This leaves out many pre-2008 models and some iMac and Mac Pro configurations. Check Apple’s list if you’re not sure.
5. QuickTime H.264 Hardware Acceleration only works with the Nvidia 9400M chipset. This leaves out many pre-2008 machines and even the latest Mac Pros, though they probably have enough horsepower on their own.

Finally, if you’re excited about the new Microsoft Exchange support in Mail.app, iCal, and the Address Book be warned! In order for any of this to work, your server must be running Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 Service Pack 1 Update Rollup 4. And most companies still aren’t updated that far!

Update: Check my follow-up post on 64-bit Snow Leopard for more about this controversial aspect!

I’m Updating!

I held off on Amazon and placed my own order this morning with Apple. I’m with Mark Twomey:Upgrading to Snow Leopard is a safe day-1 activity. Most of the updates amount to new under-the-hood features and the OS has been through round after round of testing. Unlike the massive shift from Tiger to Leopard (which I missed, being a late switcher), Snow Leopard ought to be a lesser upgrade.

Why make the update at all? Here are a few of my reasons:

1. It’s cheap: Just $29 to update a single Mac, or $49 for up to five. Compared to Microsoft’s (expired) “limited-time-only” (and incredibly complicated) Windows 7 upgrade, Apple sets out a red velvet carpet.
2. It’s easy: There’s just one version of Mac OS X, and any system running OS X 10.5 “Leopard” can update to full-on Snow Leopard. There are no editions and no conflicts updating from 32-bit to 64-bit (like Windows 7).
3. It future-proofs your (Intel) Mac: Mac developers have a long history of quickly leveraging new OS X features since Mac users have a long history of quickly upgrading. Snow Leopard adds cool stuff like Grand Central and OpenCL that my Intel- and Nvidia-based Macs ought to be able to leverage. See below if your Mac can use these, too!

Sure, there aren’t any amazing features like Time Machine to set the world on fire. But the Snow Leopard update is still a slam-dunk for any Intel-based Mac user! My Late-2007 MacBook Pro will get everything but H.264 acceleration and my 2009 Mac Mini is all set to go!

Updated with Mac Mini and Xserve information. Keep the suggestions coming and test that EFI! Picked up, colorized, and reused (with permission) by the excellent Ed Bott in his ZDNet column!

Note: Some of these links include affiliate codes that help pay for this blog. For example, buying an Amazon Kindle with this link sends a few bucks my way! But I don't write this blog to make money, and am happy to link to sites and stores that don't pay anything. I like Amazon and buy tons from them, but you're free to buy whatever and wherever you want.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Mac OS X 10.6 “Snow Leopard”: In Our Hands August 28!
This post was categorized as Apple, Personal. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

This last point has always been debatable as well. Apple tends to select higher-end x86 parts for their Macs and has led the way with innovative chassis, screen, and trackpad technology. But PC makers have quickly followed, offering part-for-part Apple clones at 80% of the cost. This week, however, I stumbled onto a concrete difference between Mac and PC hardware that has real-world impact: Across the board, Apple uses exclusive Intel CPUs with enhanced capabilities to support virtualization of 64-bit operating systems, including Windows 7′s special XP compatibility mode.

Virtualization-Ready

Virtualization hypervisors have become very widespread and popular, especially in the Apple world. Mac users regularly list Parallels Desktop and VMware Fusion among their favorite applications, since they open up the wide world of Windows applications running in a virtual machine. Although most daily tasks can be performed with native OS X applications, some apps just aren’t available.

Personally, I use Fusion on OS X with Windows Vista to occasionally run Microsoft’s Visio and Outlook, both of which aren’t available as native applications. I also use a 2009 Mac Mini as a server and virtual computer lab, mainly relying on Sun’s lightweight and free VirtualBox hypervisor. Although it isn’t impressive as the physical lab Dennis Martin described to me last week, I am able to run a variety of servers (Linux, Windows, and OS X) and other virtual gear (Windows Storage Server and FreeNAS) to simulate enterprise IT environments.

Windows users have less need to run virtualization applications: When your operating system commands over 90% of the market, a whole world of applications is at your fingertips! But enthusiasts and corporate IT types love virtualization, and VMware Server and Microsoft Hyper-V are commonly found on their Windows machines.

64-Bit Road Block

These popular virtualization packages support a wide range of modern hardware, but not everything works perfectly. Hypervisors had trouble with many tasks, particularly running 64-bit operating systems, until Intel and AMD introduced special hardware-assisted virtualization capabilities in their CPUs. The latest hypervisors and CPUs can now even virtualize 64-bit operating systems on top of 32-bit hosts!

But not all CPUs include this technology. Intel has a long history of artificially segmenting their product line by disabling certain features in low-end parts. For their Core 2 Duo “Merom” and “Penryn” lines, Intel decided that their VT virtualization technology would be the differentiator. Therefore, a lack of VT support is one of the main differences between low-end and high-end Intel Core 2 Duo CPUs.

Many of the latest portable and compact desktop systems use Intel’s Penryn-3M line, including Apple’s MacBook, MacBook Pro, and Mac Mini systems. See the issue here? Intel’s lower-end 2.0 GHz and 2.133 GHz CPUs (P7350 and P7450, respectively) don’t support VT, which means that systems using them don’t have the latest VT hardware virtualization capability and thus can’t run 64-bit virtual machines!

This is an issue for users of popular Sony Vaio, Dell Inspiron, and HP Pavilion PCs, and is likely to become much more important soon. See, Windows 7 includes a special XP compatibility mode, which is really just a virtual machine running XP under 7. But XP mode will not work without Intel VT or AMD-V. This means that XP mode in Windows 7 won’t work on the very mass-market machines that would benefit most from it!

Apple’s Different

This sounds terrible: The latest machines won’t run increasingly-popular virtualization software. But there is a very good reason that buyers of the latest Apple machines aren’t up in arms. It seems that Apple made a deal with Intel to get a special version of the Penryn-3M Core 2 Duo CPUs that do support Intel VT!

Apple’s latest Mac Mini, MacBook, and MacBook Pro all sport P7350 and P7450 CPUs, just like competing Dell, Sony, and HP machines. But the Apple CPUs have VT and the PCs lack it. The VT support is gone, and cannot be enabled in the PC BIOS.

So even a PC and Mac sporting the exact same CPU part numbers aren’t equal: Every recent Mac will run 64-bit Windows and XP mode in Windows 7 and many PCs won’t. And I can run anything I want on my Mac Mini virtual lab!

Update - Let me be very, very clear on the facts here:

• Most hypervisors now require Intel VT or AMD-V in order to virtualize 64-bit operating systems
• Microsoft requires this technology to use XP mode in Windows 7
• All current Apple Macs (including those that use P7350 and P7450 CPUs) have Intel VT support in their CPUs regardless of what Intel says on the model spec sheets
• Many PCs use high-end Intel and AMD CPUs that support VT or AMD-V, though some have this turned off in the BIOS
• No PC with an Intel P7350 or P7450 CPU has Intel VT support at all. It cannot be enabled in the BIOS because it does not exist.

I am not an Apple fanboy. I am a virtualization fanboy who is glad I bought a Mac Mini instead of a Dell Studio, HP TouchSmart, or Sony Vaio.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | A Concrete Reason Macs Beat PCs: Intel VT
This post was categorized as Apple, Computer History, Terabyte home, Virtual Storage. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

The Tortoise and the Hare: Upgrading my new Mac Mini's hard drive and RAM made all the difference!

It may seem odd to buy a computer intending to upgrade it right out of the box, but so it was with me when I snapped up a new 2009 Nvidia-powered Mac Mini. I had been waiting for Apple to update the aged Mini line, saving up my pennies, but the out-of-box specs for RAM and hard drive space were underwhelming.

Out-Of-Box Upgrade

Unlike the old Mini, where the $799 model netted a SuperDrive as well as additional memory and disk, the new Mini’s $200 upmarket model was seriously overpriced. So I decided to pick up a base model and upgrade it myself right away.

Now that my upgrade is complete, I’m pleased to say that my Mac Mini is a whole new animal! Where the spec base Mini was sluggish, exhausting its meager 1 GB of RAM and swapping to a crazy slow hard drive, my Mini is now snappy and quick. Launching iTunes (with 13,000 songs) took upwards of 30 seconds before, but the song list is now visible before the dock icon bounces twice!

Desktop computer performance is a product of four variables:

1. CPU speed
2. RAM capacity
3. Hard drive performance
4. Graphics capabilities

Other things matter a great deal, but only these four can be changed in a given system. In other words, although the chipset, memory speed, and system bus all have a massive impact on overall performance, you can’t swap these things out! The majority of computers are limited to upgrades in the four areas listed (CPU, RAM, hard drive, graphics), and each must be balanced for satisfying system performance.

Apple designed the Mac Mini as an integrated unit, however, so the graphics and CPU are not upgradable. But these are the system’s strong suits: The Nvidia 9400M chipset gives solid graphics performance, matching or beating the integrated Nvidia 8600M GT graphics in my late-2007 MacBook Pro, and the Intel Core 2 Duo CPU is easily quick enough for general computing tasks. Frustratingly, Apple ships the Mac Mini with inadequate RAM and a very, very slow disk. So upgrading both is a sure-fire way to an excellent system!

Good Memories

Update: The 2009 Mac Minis can now accept 8 GB of RAM!

Killer Storage

The Nvidia chipset is up to date as far as RAM goes. The Mini uses fast 1,066 MHz DDR3-8500 memory and has two SO-DIMM slots. These chips are still hard to find in stores (Fry’s doesn’t carry them!) but they aren’t expensive. Thankfully, rather than filling up both slots with useless 512 MB parts, Apple uses a single 1 GB SO-DIMM in base Minis. I was lucky enough to find another Mini upgrader on Twitter who sent me his leftover RAM for the cost of shipping after taking his Mac all the way to 4 GB (thanks, Joe!) and I bet that most folks could do the same. Otherwise, Other World Computing sells leftover 1 GB DDR3-8500 SO-DIMMs from aluminum MacBooks and Mac Minis for just $12.95! They also have upgrade instructions.

The new Mac Mini performs well in CPU and RAM tests, but 1 GB is insufficient and upgrading to 2 GB gives a noticeable boost

As of Friday, my Mini was rocking 2 GB of RAM, enough for general desktop computing. One side benefit of upgrading was graphics performance: The Mini will use 256 MB of system RAM as a frame buffer if at least 2 GB of RAM is installed, speeding up user interface windowing operations by about 20%, according to Xbench. Overall memory performance also improved with two SO-DIMMs installed, with streaming operations up by 20% to 25%.

Driving It Home

The Mini’s hard drive performance was especially disappointing. The stock 120 GB Hitachi TravelStar 5K320 was a special Apple OEM unit with a single platter and 8 MB of cache. Its slow 1.5 Gb SATA interface wasn’t the bottleneck, though – this drive just poked along, maxing out at about 35 MB/s in sequential operations. This compares favorably to previous-generation drives, but can’t hold a candle to the latest disk drive mechanisms. Apple’s upgrade option for the new Mac Mini is a 320 GB 2-platter version of this same drive. I expect it will perform only slightly better than the 120 GB unit. The stock 320 GB drive seems to perform much, much better than the 120 GB unit in sequential operations!

I decided to upgrade my Mini to a 7200 rpm high-performance drive, and my research led me to Hitachi’s 7k320 series. With just two platters, this 9.5 mm high drive unit remains slim enough for the Mini (or any laptop), and the power specs look great! Hitachi claims only a half-Watt difference between the 7k320 and miserly 5k320 in spin-up and negligible differences in most other operations. Comparison tests showed that the Hitachi was a solid performer against competing offerings from Western Digital, Seagate, and Samsung, and ZipZoomFly listed the 320 GB drive for just $59 after rebate!

The 7200 rpm Hitachi is almost twice as fast as the stock Mac Mini hard disk in random I/O operation

I couldn’t be happier with the 7200 rpm Hitachi drive’s performance. It blows away the stock drive, delivering 32 MB/s in large random write operations, and even beats the solid 5400 rpm Western Digital Scorpio Blue drive I use in my MacBook Pro.

The 7200 rpm Hitachi is easily the fastest drive I've tested in sequential reads and writes

The new Hitachi blows everything else away in sequential operations, too. It delivers a solid 80 MB/s while reading and writing large files while the stock unit could barely reach 35 MB/s! These differences are magnified by the 7k320′s large 16 MB cache, which makes the most of its 3 Gb SATA interface.

Although it doesn’t have to conserve battery power like a laptop, heat is a major concern in a small computer like a Mac Mini, and disk drive power requirements translate directly into heat generation. It turns out that the Mini has such an excellent cooling system that I thought Bjango’s iStat Server was broken: It almost always reported 1,500 rpm fan speed and 120-130° F temperatures. Under sustained load, the Mini’s fan never reached 2,000 rpm and no sensor reported greater than 150° F. The 7200 rpm Hitachi drive has had no impact on in-box temperature or noise levels.

The Mac Mini: Transformed!

Apple delivered a solidly-designed general-purpose desktop computer with the new 2009 Mac Mini, but crippled its performance with too little RAM and a too-slow hard drive. In short, Apple failed to balance the four key pillars of computer performance!

The relatively simple task of upgrading the RAM and hard disk drive transforms the Mac Mini: In normal operations, the upgraded Mini is easily two or three times as responsive as the stock machine! My total cost (for the Mini, the RAM, and the hard drive) was $701. Apple’s $799 2 GB RAM/320 GB disk Mac Mini may look similar on paper, but it won’t touch mine in terms of disk performance. I could have gone all the way to 4 GB of RAM for less than the remaining $98 price difference.

One final word: Apple assured MacWorld that they will continue to honor their warranty on upgraded machines as long as nothing is damaged in the process. The Mac Mini is not that difficult to work on, as long as you have proper tools. Use a static strap, be careful with internal the wires and connectors, and take your time. Once upgraded, the Mac Mini is a satisfying desktop or home server.

Interested in building a home server with Apple’s Mac Mini? Watch my blog over the coming months for detailed reports like this one covering setting up iTunes for whole-house audio, integrating Roku’s SoundBridge music systems, serving video to a TiVo, and configuring Mac OS X as a home server. I’ll also be experimenting with Microsoft’s Windows Home Server and VMware ESX on the new Mini!

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | Upgrades Give New Mac Mini a Whole New Attitude
This post was categorized as Apple, Terabyte home. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

After a very, very long wait, Apple has finally updated the Mac Mini, their entry-level “bridge” Mac. It’s amazing that, after 19 months without an update, Apple’s new Mini looks exactly the same as the old Mini. But what’s under the hood matters, and Apple delivered a mixed bag there. The new Mini is an excellent home server, which is how mine will be used, but some poor choices limit its abilities out of the box.

You might also be interested in my initial Mac Mini review, or my post on upgrading the RAM and hard disk drive in my Mac Mini!

Out With the Old

Apple completely redesigned the innards of the Mini for 2009. It has always been a laptop in a box, so we were not surprised to see the updated MacBook’s specs duplicated here. The Mini includes that machine’s efficient and current Intel Core 2 Duo mobile CPUs, Nvidia chipset and graphics, 1066 MHz RAM, 802.11n and gigabit Ethernet networking, DVD SuperDrive, and 2.5″ hard drive.

A few welcome additions were made relative to the MacBook’s specs. The new Mini features five USB ports. It also brings joy to the hearts of the Apple faithful in the form of a FireWire port, albeit sporting the square 9-pin S800 socket rather than the old familiar 6-pin 400 spec. But the most interesting addition on the little Apple desktop is its two independent video ports: A Mini-DVI and a Mini DisplayPort. Each of these additions squarely focuses the Mac Mini at the desktop market, and each is welcome.

USB Madness

When the array of five USB ports was spotted in pre-release spy photos, Mac fans went nuts. Why would the new Mini add yet another port? And who needs five USB ports anyway? I, for one, was very glad to see this change. I’ve lamented the reduction in the number of USB ports found in laptops lately, and I think most end users would agree that more USB ports are needed. Witness two consumer phenomena to support this proliferation of USB ports:

1. One of the hottest-selling peripherals for the old Mac Mini was the Mini-shaped USB hub, and many of the other accessories targeted at the Mini included built-in hubs
2. Despite Seagate’s sagging numbers, USB hard drives continue selling like hotcakes, with an insider recently telling me that they’ve reached a 2:1 attach rate (meaning most computers have two of them!)

A disturbing trend in parallel with the disappearance of USB ports is the hobbling of those that remain. My MacBook Pro has just two ports and both are limited: One is low on electrical power and the other is shared with internal peripherals.

I assumed that the Mini merely included an internal hub, limiting the value of those five ports. I am pleased to report that this is not the case! The Mini actually has four separate internal USB busses and the five ports are spread among three of these:

So if you’re adding high(er)-performance devices to your New Mini, let me suggest this strategy:

1. Connect your most-important device to port 2 and it will have a bus all to itself (except when you use an IR remote, which isn’t often)
2. If you have only one other high-performance USB device, connect it to port 1 or 5 and connect your keyboard and mouse to ports 3 and 4, or vice-versa
3. If you have two more high-performance USB devices, don’t connect them to ports 1 and 5 or ports 3 and 4 – spread them out on 1 and 3 or 4 and 5!

The new Mac Mini's five USB ports share three USB busses

Or just use the handy FireWire port and grin smugly as only a Mac user can!

Square Pegs

We’ve heard a hundred times that the Mac Mini was designed to a philosophy of “bring your own keyboard, mouse, and display”. In other words, it’s optimized for what people already have rather than being bundled with a keyboard, mouse, and display like the iMac or forcing people to buy all new peripherals. But Apple’s relentless push to move their hardware platform forward has gotten in the way of this goal when it comes to the new Mini.

Although the inclusion of a FireWire port alongside the multitude of standard USB ports is welcome, Apple chose to use the 9-pin S800 port style rather than the more-familiar 6-pin port. FireWire peripherals aren’t common as it is, and S800 devices and cables are far less familiar. Although it is backward-compatible, thus the “bilingual” name often used by Apple, the much-faster S800 port requires the purchase of adapter cables to use older 400 Mb FireWire devices. Although I’m a storage geek and do own a few FireWire peripherals, none are compatible with the port on my new Mini. I have a “bilingual cable” in the mail to me as we speak, and there is a port adapter dongle, but this port stands in the way of the “bring your own” ethos.

The same can be said of Apple’s choice of video ports. It’s nice that Apple’s Mini DisplayPort is offered royalty-free, but this hasn’t made adapters any more common. Their VGA and DVI adapters are priced at $29 each, and third-party cables haven’t appeared yet, though Monoprice promises them this month. So one of the two video ports is of limited use, unless you dropped over $800 on the gorgeous Apple 24-inch LED Cinema Display. Let’s not even mention the troublesome $99 dual DVI adapter!

Then there’s the Mini-DVI port. Apple bundles a Mini-DVI to DVI-I adapter with the Mac Mini, so those of you who own a DVI monitor (and cable!) are all set. But this adapter lacks the VGA pins, so you can’t use a DVI to VGA adapter to hook up to your older VGA monitor or KVM. For that, you need to order a special Mini-DVI to VGA adapter (also in the mail).

So let’s get this straight: If you want to actually hook your pre-existing peripherals to the new Mac Mini, you had better hope they’re USB or DVI-I. Otherwise, you’re looking at spending $20 to $30 each for FireWire, Mini-DVI, and Mini DisplayPort adapters. The lack of a VGA solution is especially annoying, since it would have been simple for Apple just to include the VGA pins in their Mini-DVI adapter, allowing folks to use the DVI-to-VGA adapter they probably already own.

Inner Weakness

Although the new Mini is solidly engineered and built, Apple made two major sacrifices in internal specs in the interests of profit margins: The base Mini ships with too little RAM and a too-slow and too-small internal hard drive. I knew this going in, and was happy to buy the base model anyway, since I intended to upgrade it rather than spend $200 extra for a little more RAM and drive space or wait for a build-to-order custom Mini.

There is simply no excuse for Apple to ship the base mini with 1 GB of RAM. OS X Leopard is a full-featured 64-bit operating system, and 1 GB is too little to do much of anything with these days. RAM prices keep falling fast, so even the fancy DDR3-8500 SO-DIMMs used by the Mini cost just a few dollars. At least the company used a single 1 GB stick instead of two useless 512 MB units like the old Mini! I was lucky enough to find a fellow buyer who upgraded his RAM and is sending me his leftovers, but I may spend $50 in the next few months for a matched pair of 2 GB sticks.

Then there is the hard drive. The Mac Mini uses Hitachi’s base-model TravelStar 5K320 (HTS543212L9SA02) drive unit, easily the slowest hard drive I’ve used recently. It’s limited to 1.5 Gb SATA, and its single platter may help in the power and heat department but it gives a poor performance show. Xbench (not the best measure to be sure) shows this little drive  trailing the 120 GB Fujitsu MH2120BH drive that came in my (late 2007) MacBook Pro by about 30%, and almost 50% slower than the 320 GB Western Digital Scorpio Blue WD3200BEVT that I now use! Note that Apple apparently uses larger-capacity versions of this same drive in the bigger Minis and MacBooks. I wonder if the performance is any better?

The Mac Mini's internal 120 GB Hitachi hard disk drive lags its contemporaries and drags overall system performance way down, especially with just 1 GB of RAM

Although I was surprised by just how slow the hard drive was, especially when the limited RAM leads to swapping, I always planned to upgrade both. As I mentioned, there’s a second 1 GB stick on the way, and I ordered a blazing 320 GB 7200 rpm Hitachi TravelStar 7K320 at ZipZoomFly for $59 (after rebate). These should turn the Mini’s performance around!

Despite the shortcomings of the base Mac Mini, I would not recommend buying the upscale or build-to-order models if you’re open to upgrading it on your own. You can upgrade a Mini to 2 GB and 320 GB/7200 rpm for under $100 instead of spending $200 from Apple for the same RAM and a slower drive. However, if you’re hesitant to open the case, do not buy the base Mac Mini! Get at least the 2 GB model from Apple – 1 GB just isn’t enough!

I’ll be documenting my evolving home server environment, based around this little Mac, here on the site. Subscribe to my Apple feed (or stick with Everything) to keep up to date!

Note: Some of these links include affiliate codes that help pay for this blog. For example, buying an Amazon Kindle with this link sends a few bucks my way! But I don't write this blog to make money, and am happy to link to sites and stores that don't pay anything. I like Amazon and buy tons from them, but you're free to buy whatever and wherever you want.

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2009. | New Mac Mini Is A Diamond In The Rough
This post was categorized as Apple, Everything, Terabyte home. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.

Although some shortcomings have appeared, I’m pleased with the Mac overall. It definitely met my expectations and continues to meet my needs, mixing portability and performance in an excellent package.  I am impressed by Apple’s hardware design and component choices, especially when compared to other computers with similar specifications that I have used.  And, as noted by Tom’s Hardware, the specification of the machine was reasonably priced, especially since I purchased it at a substantial discount and upgraded it myself.

This post is part of my series focused on switching from PC to Mac.

• How To Buy Discount Apple Computers
• Got Some AppleCare For Cheap
• Switch! or How the Mac (Finally) Won Me Over
• Switch Day 1: This Mac is Hot!
• Switch Day 58: Ten Pros and Cons of the MacBook Pro

1. The Value Quotient is High

The value of a computer system is determined by two elements: Its specification, in terms of the components used, and the net price.  Macs are known to be pricey but often include high-end components and materials in their construction.  Focusing solely on the core interchangeable components of my Mac, evaluating it as a generic PC, the overall value for the money is very high.

My MacBook Pro contains a high-spec NVIDIA 8600M GT graphics card with 128 MB of dedicated GDDR3 video memory, an Intel Core 2 Duo T7500 “Merom” CPU, Intel’s “Santa Rosa” PM965 chipset, built-in FireWire S800 and USB, a slot-loading 8x DVD-RW drive, gigabit Ethernet, Wireless-N Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, webcam, and slick features like an LED-backlit display and keyboard and infrared remote control.  My system’s MSRP was $2000, but I purchased it for $1524 (after receiving the rebate check).

Although PCs are available for less (I bought a family knockabout laptop for $435 recently!), a similar spec laptop from any major manufacturer would cost at least this much, even a year after this model MacBook Pro came out.  In my case, I am comparing the Mac to the Dell XPS M1330 laptop I use for work, which arrived the day before the Mac.  The Dell is a “thin and light” model with a 13″ screen, but feels almost the same weight as the Mac and is actually somewhat fatter with its 9-cell battery. The Dell retailed for $1700, including the inferior 8400M GS graphics and no gigabit ethernet.

Judging by these objective observations, the Mac was clearly a good value and features a strong set of components.  Note that both machines feature the flawed NVIDIA graphics chips, as do nearly all high-end notebooks, so I can’t fault anyone for that particular component choice.

2. Performance rocks

Even though my MacBook features the Merom CPU clocked at a modest (by 2008 standards) 2.2 GHz rather than the latest 2.4 GHz or more Penryn, the system as a whole just flies.  Mine is packed with 4 GB or RAM instead of the stock 2 GB, and my upgraded 320 GB hard drive is slightly quicker than the stock, both of which improve overall performance somewhat.  But even tasks that aren’t memory-intensive are super-quick, thanks to the 800 MHz front-side bus and solid system design.  The system is snappy in OS X, encodes video with ease, and is subjectively faster than my similar Dell when using Windows Vista Ultimate in Boot Camp.  The Dell has the same chipset and CPU, but is clocked at 2.0 rather than 2.2 GHz and has only 2 GB of RAM, so comparisons are not exactly apples-to-apples, but the Dell is noticeably slower.  

3. The Display is Gorgeous

The wide, LED-backlit 15″ screen is just gorgeous.  The off-angle performance is so good, even with the backlight turned all the way down, that the Mac suffers from serious over-the-shoulder “eavesviewing” issues.  My Dell is pretty much invisible off-angle, even without the privacy screen supplied by my company, but the Mac shows your photos and documents even at extreme angles. Not that I’m complaining, though – this performance just makes it that much more beautiful when I’m alone. There’s no need to constantly adjust the screen angle for optimal viewing.

4. The Chassis is Sturdy

The Mac really shines when one compares its sturdiness to the competition.  The Dell is flexy and plasticky, as is just about every non-ThinkPad PC notebook I’ve used recently.  But the Mac raises the bar even compared to my favorite laptop of all time, the brick-strong HP OmniBook 800.

The only poor spot is the nifty magnetic latch.  Although it works well most of the time (and exists – the Dell has no latch at all), it doesn’t lock closed as cleanly as I would like.  There is a gap around the edges, and lifting the closed Mac from one side tends to make the latch disengage.

5. Input is Solid

I’m a stickler for a good keyboard and can’t fault the Mac here.  It’s not exactly a Model M, but the keys feel good and are arranged and sized reasonably.  Even adjusting to the Mac keyboard layout hasn’t been much of an issue, since most functions remain in similar positions between Mac and Windows.

The trackpad is especially strong. PC notebooks normally have perplexingly tiny trackpads, so I’m always running out of space, but the Mac’s is generously sized and highly usable. It’s easily four times larger than the Dell’s!  I do wish there were two ”mouse” buttons, though.  Although OS X and Windows in Fusion supports two-finger-tap as a right-click, Boot Camp frustratingly does not!

6. The Apple Remote Could Be Improved

Let’s start by stating that I have never owned a PC that came with a remote control, so the Mac deserves kudos for even including one, though the 2008 models don’t. But the remote is just odd. Although it’s usable enough, it’s not integrated, hardware-wise, with the system. It’s clearly a throwback to the glossy white plastic Apple look of a half-decade ago, so like the power brick and DVI adapter it seems totally out of place next to the brushed aluminum MacBook Pro. And, judging from its size and shape, I expected it to dock in the ExpressCard slot of the Mac like a MoGo mouse, but it’s slightly too fat for that. Also, an IR remote seems out of date in these Bluetooth days. So, Apple, how about a dockable, Bluetooth, matching remote next time?

7. Battery Life Isn’t Great

Battery life has been about three hours in my hands, which isn’t terrible, but isn’t as good as I hoped. I ended up buying a second battery for the Mac for transcontinental flights. I did the same for my last Dell, of course, so this isn’t news. On the bright side, the Mac battery was cheaper and far more readily available than the Dell – I just dropped by the bright, cheery Apple store in Palo Alto during my last trip and picked one up instead of waiting for Dell to deliver one to my home. I still can’t get hot-swap to work, though, since my Mac refuses to suspend to disk.

8. Upgradability is Mixed

Upgrading the RAM on a MacBook Pro is just right, but swapping out the hard drive was much more difficult than it should have been. Disks should be user-replaceable, even in laptops, and the regular MacBook gets this right. The Mac also has poorer expandability than most PC laptops, since its Wi-Fi (sorry, “AirPort Extreme”) card is buried inside and it lacks a slot and antenna wiring for a 3G cell card. The fact that the Pro only has an ExpressCard slot isn’t that novel in today’s world, however, but the regular MacBook’s lack of one was a major factor in my choosing the Pro.

9. It’s Hot and Loud

My first impression was that the fan was deafening and the bottom was toasty. After using it for a few months, I have either gotten used to both or they aren’t as bad anymore. The machine still gets pretty hot on the bottom under heavy use, and the fan still makes a loud “whoosh”, but neither is unbearable or unusual when compared to other PCs, like my previous Dell XPS M1210.

10. Light Sensors are Confounding

I was intrigued by the idea of the MacBook Pro’s ambient light sensor, which would dim the display backlight and unique keyboard backlight under changing light conditions. But this was the first feature I disabled after actually using it. The sensor is located under your left pinky when typing, so the display suddenly dims and brightens as your hand passes over it. So I just adjust the backlight manually.

Then there is the keyboard backlight. The key cap markings are dark enough to be difficult to see in bright light, but the sensor won’t let the light come on, even when you press the hotkey to turn it on manually! I ended up installing Lab Tick to turn it on manually within OS X, but I expected more from Apple engineering. The light sensor is worse than useless.

11. USB is a Disappointment

As I noted in another post, the lack of a full-power dedicated USB port is a special disappointment. The 15″ MacBook Pro has just two ports, like most modern PC notebooks, but both are compromised. The one on the left lacks the power to spin up an external hard drive, and the one on the right is shared with the internal iSight camera. At least the FireWire is blazing fast and fully-powered! But I expected a better design from Apple.

12. The AC Adapter Is Obnoxious
    My biggest complaint is the “elegant” MagSafe AC adapter. Count the flaws:
    • The poor strain relief on the thin cable is known to fray and burn
    • Third-party replacements and alternatives are not available thanks to Apple patents
    • The cord-wrap “ears” aren’t large enough to actually hold the entire wrapped cord
    • The fact that there are three different identical-looking adapters with different wattage outputs is a nightmare waiting to strike the unwary
    • The iPod-like on-brick plug just barely hangs on when the weight of the brick is hung from a vertical wall outlet
    • Glossy white?!?

The AC adapter is a perfect example of the form-over-function flaws always cited by Apple critics. I expected better, and Apple refuses to admit the defects even as these things spark and burn.

Again, I’m happy overall with the Mac and would definitely buy one again. In fact, I think it’s about the best computer purchase I’ve ever made, even including the iPhone and my beloved OmniBook 800 and Portege 3010 subnotebooks. The flaws are minor compared to the overall strengths!

(Ok, there are twelve pros and cons, but ten rolls off the tongue better!)

© sfoskett for Stephen Foskett, Pack Rat, 2008. | Switch Day 58: Ten Pros and Cons of the MacBook Pro
This post was categorized as Apple, Personal, Terabyte home. Each of my categories has its own feed if you'd like to filter out or focus on posts like this.