mini mac and pt le?

[RPhilbeck]

Anyone using the mac mini with PT LE and having success? The size of this thing is really attractive with my space limitations.

My knowledge of computer's internal workings is pretty limited. I currently have a Dell with 3ghz, 512 ram, and two 80 gig hds. It gets everything I need done blazing fast and with zero issues. Is there any reason why the mac mini with 2 ghz, 1 gig ram, 120 gig hd + external hd would cause issues, or be a step back in performance? Thanks for your time.


Robert

[Fatty]

Robert,

This might be one of those times to embrace the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' mantra.

But...

As far as performance, it would probably be a step forward (albeit, not a huge step).

If its a 'size' issue maybe consider one of those mini pc cases, for your existing system.

If it were my system and it "...gets everything I need done blazing fast and with zero issues." I wouldn't fuck with it.

Yes, I know i didn't answer your question, try the DUC I'm sure there are many peeps there running the exact setup in question.

[elroy jetson]

last time i checked 3 ghz is faster than 2 ghz. you would see an improvement from the extra ram, but then why not just buy some ram for your dell? Also mac minis aren't very expandable looking into the future. Then again, you would have the benefit of OSX which i love.

If you want a real space saver why not get an imac?

[RPhilbeck]

Thanks for the feedback Fatty. Although my Dell has been great it is getting a little old. So I am anticipating it's demise in the near future, and doing research now on viable replacements.

[RPhilbeck]

last time i checked 3 ghz is faster than 2 ghz.

I've heard, but don't know that it is true, that the mac OS is more efficient than Windows, and therefore a 2 ghz mac is going to run faster than a PC with 3 or even 4 ghz?

[6x2]

It gets everything I need done blazing fast and with zero issues.

So why change?

End of discussion.

[tamasdragon]

I've heard, but don't know that it is true, that the mac OS is more efficient than Windows, and therefore a 2 ghz mac is going to run faster than a PC with 3 or even 4 ghz?

This is what we call marketing bullshit. This is simply not true.
TD

[Zoesch]

This is what we call marketing bullshit. This is simply not true.
TD

The 3GHz PIV is a single core processor, the Mac Mini has a 2GHz Core 2 Duo dual core processor, with properly optimized code (Pretty much everything these days) it'll smoke the PIV.

I was looking at the Nehalem (Next intel chip) benchmarks, at 2.6GHz it was about 40% faster than a 3.2GHz Core 2 Quad.

As for the actual question, I've heard mixed reports about PT's performance on multi-core rigs on Windows, on Mac OS X there's no penalty, but, if the rig you have already does the job, by all means, stick with it.

[tamasdragon]

I've got some quadcore pecees, works flawless with ptle. I didn't meant that the old pc will be as fast as the new mac, but the question was if they have the same specs? This time the mac won't be faster in my experience.
Tamas Dragon

[RPhilbeck]

To answer the question" why change if it works". I am trying to prepare for the day my current PC will die. The things do wear out. I want to be prepared now.


Thanks for everyone's feedback.

[Brendo]

The 3GHz PIV is a single core processor, the Mac Mini has a 2GHz Core 2 Duo dual core processor, with properly optimized code (Pretty much everything these days) it'll smoke the PIV.

Yup.

[Goes211]

It depends a lot on the version you'll be running.
What are you running right now ?

512Mb of RAM is scary low to run 7.4.xxx and any big plug or soft-synth.

From that, I extrapolate that if your current system does all you need, you don't rely on plugs or soft-synths and use PTLE mainly for recording and/or editing.

Most recent puters with a couple gigs of RAM and a quality hard drive will handle exactly that no sweat.

[Brendo]

keep in mind the mac mini has an external power supply and also needs a screen, keyboard and mouse.

would you be better off with a macbook pro perhaps? although it's not nearly as cheap.

bump up the ram to 2gb, but buy it outside of apple.

[6x2]

512Mb of RAM is scary low to run 7.4.xxx and any big plug or soft-synth.

512Mb will not run ProTools. At least according to thei minimum specs and my personal experience with the Mac Mini.

6x2

[Brendo]

512mb WILL run protools, at least 7.1...

Not well, but it will do it. Friend of mine borrowed my mbox for use with his laptop, and it did in fact work. It sucked, but it did work.

Also, I used to have 512mb ram in this machine and I briefly ran PT once or twice before saying "fuck that" and upgrading, so take that as you will. It's great with 2gb ram.

[6x2]

512mb WILL run protools, at least 7.1...

Not well, but it will do it. Friend of mine borrowed my mbox for use with his laptop, and it did in fact work. It sucked, but it did work.

Also, I used to have 512mb ram in this machine and I briefly ran PT once or twice before saying "fuck that" and upgrading, so take that as you will. It's great with 2gb ram.

Exactly the point. It doesn't REALLY work.

If you need to get any (I mean ANY) work done, 512Mb in a Mac Mini is not enough to run ProTools. Not well enough to do anything. And that's the point.

Dunno if 7.1 had lower requirements, but 7.3 does not work well enough to do any real - or even close to real - work.

6x2

[Brendo]

i have my mbox box right next to me. 6.4 needed 256mb minimum in a windows box, or 256 absolute minimum with a suggested 512mb minimum on a mac.

[RPhilbeck]

PT LE 7.1 runs great with it. I might use a delay, comp, or eq plug sparingly, but I also keep it between 16 to 24 tracks too. Maybe that has something to do with it.

Bottom line is the mini comes with 1 gig, and I can always up it to 2 gig if needed in the future. What concerns me is the 2ghz processor, but it sounds like it should be equal too or faster than what I've got now!


Robert

[MKZ]

i must stress that i'm computer illiterate but i always thought the biggest "problem" with the mac mini was that the hard disks run 5400-rpm, where as a lot of others run at 7200 rpm...

anyhoo,

how much will a mac mini + keyboard/mouse + screen cost ?
how much does an iMac cost? (screen and keyboard, mouse included)
the iMac will be slightly more expensive... but worth some thought i would say

[Brendo]

mkz. thing is you dont record to the built in drive, the system drive.

on ANY computer.

philbeck, 2ghz processor. DUAL CORE. thats two x 2ghz, that's 4ghz. which is higher than your current 3ghz. to put it in really basic, simplified terms.

i have a 1.83ghz macbook pro with 2gb ram and external drives. it works like a charm, even up to 32 track sessions. it starts to die once i start running like 4 or 5 softsynths in a session.

[Zoesch]

mkz. thing is you dont record to the built in drive, the system drive.

on ANY computer.

philbeck, 2ghz processor. DUAL CORE. thats two x 2ghz, that's 4ghz. which is higher than your current 3ghz. to put it in really basic, simplified terms.

i have a 1.83ghz macbook pro with 2gb ram and external drives. it works like a charm, even up to 32 track sessions. it starts to die once i start running like 4 or 5 softsynths in a session.

No, Two 2 GHz cores doesn't mean 4 GHz, it means that you can process twice the number of instructions at a time as a single core processor, provided the code is optimized for it.

[Brendo]

yeah. twice the number of instructions at a time, providing the code is optimized for it.

twice as many = double = effectively kinda double clock speed, assuming the code is optimized.

i did say really basic, simplified terms, right?

my point is - a 2ghz dual core is faster than a 2ghz single core, which is something philbeck wasn't quite registering i think.

[Zoesch]

yeah. twice the number of instructions at a time, providing the code is optimized for it.

twice as many = double = effectively kinda double clock speed, assuming the code is optimized.

i did say really basic, simplified terms, right?

my point is - a 2ghz dual core is faster than a 2ghz single core, which is something philbeck wasn't quite registering i think.

Not exactly, actually a 2GHz Core 2 Solo (Single Core) is faster than a 3GHz PIV due to some architectural enhancements that Intel brought over to the Core 2 line.

The problem with dual core processors is that if by any remote chance a branch happens to fall back to code that was dispatched to the other core you have to flush everything and start over, that's why code needs to be optimized for it, all modern compilers do it remarkably well I might add.

A graphical analogy, you have a 6ft tall athlete competing against a tag team of 2 4tf tall super-cyborg midget athletes, if you stack them together you don't get an 8ft tall super cyborg, you still get 2 4ft tall midgets stacked :P

[Brendo]

Sure - but when you need a little extra at the finishing line, your top midget can make a big leap over the finish line from the top of the stack, beating the 6 footer.

Architectural enhancements? Are we talking bus speed here?

[santeri]

Architectural enhancements? Are we talking bus speed here?

I admit I don't know a shit about the current Intel products because they're crappy pieces of vomit anyway, but architectural enhancements in a next generation processor vs. an older model could be related to e.g. the instruction set optimization, cache handling, or extra scalability achieved with e.g. vector processing.

[radiationroom]

Anyone using the mac mini with PT LE and having success?

Yes. Here is my system.

1.66GHz Intel Dual Core running System 10.4.11 and PTLE 7.3, 1GB RAM, (TWO) LaCie "D2" Quadra drives (each connected to it's own USB port #1 & #2), Mark Of The Unicorn "Midi Express" (connected to USB port #3), DIGI-003 (connected by firewire), Starlogic 17-inch flat panel. Keyboard, mouse, HUI, printer, etc, all connected to USB port #4 via a hub.

With the two LaCie drives I can get any combination of 32-mono, 16 stereo, or combination up to 32 pieces of audio along with a few of the plugs that come with LE. This system is NOT fast enough to run the Korg Legacy softsynths as a plug inside ProTools. It also is limited to one SVGA or DVI display. Otherwise it works great.

[RWC]

I've heard, but don't know that it is true, that the mac OS is more efficient than Windows, and therefore a 2 ghz mac is going to run faster than a PC with 3 or even 4 ghz?

GHz doesn't matter.

This is like saying I can pedal 50 times a minute, vs your 70 times a minute. but if you're on gear 5 and I'm on gear 21... who's moving faster?

The Pentium IV, by all modern standards, is a practical joke. You can run stuff on it, but to compare a P4 of any speed to a core 2 duo, is a joke.

[Zoesch]

Sure - but when you need a little extra at the finishing line, your top midget can make a big leap over the finish line from the top of the stack, beating the 6 footer.

Architectural enhancements? Are we talking bus speed here?

Bus speed, instruction set enhancements (Full 64-bit IA-64 set and SSE3 enhancements), pipeline handling/flushing mechanism, branch detection, memory-prefetch optimization amongst others.

Yes I know too much of this shit, I should put myself down humanely :lol:

[Bob Olhsson]

The new Intel cpus process more data per clock cycle. This is why Jobs had no choice but to go Intel or be left in the dust.

I have one dual core 2.6 gig processor and I've run more than 40 tracks with both WAVES classic console and URS Channelstrip Pro plugs on every track along with three or four convolution reverbs without the machine breaking a sweat. My machine can be upgraded to 3 gig dual quads but so far there's no point.