Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

mrcorwin · Jan 26, 2005, 03:51 PM

Has anybody heard of over-clocking the mini yet? I think it should be fairly easy once we find out the position of the resistors? It would make the 1.25 Ghz mini very attractive!

MORT A POTTY · Jan 26, 2005, 05:37 PM

I've not seen anything on it yet.

yikes600 · Jan 27, 2005, 01:26 AM

You'll never overclock it very far (or at all) in that tiny case.

Lateralus · Jan 27, 2005, 01:32 AM

Originally posted by yikes600:
You'll never overclock it very far (or at all) in that tiny case.

You forget: We're Mac heads. ;-)

If the new 7447A processor upgrades are any indication, the 1.42GHz Mini should hold up well towards 1.7GHz~ with a voltage boost. And I'm sure there are Mac heads in hot pursuit of how to do it. After that, they'll be in pursuit of more adequate cooling.

MORT A POTTY · Jan 27, 2005, 01:40 AM

a bit OT, but what size is the processor fan in a Quicksilver? I believe it's 60mm, but thickness...

yikes600 · Jan 27, 2005, 07:43 AM

Originally posted by Lateralus:
After that, they'll be in pursuit of more adequate cooling.

That's the problem right there. There's no room in the mini's case for upgraded cooling.

If/when people do overclock it, it will probably be more limited by the cache speed than the voltage. Anyone know what ratio it uses?

Lateralus · Jan 27, 2005, 11:09 PM

1:1, just like the overclocked 1.73GHz upgrades.

mrcorwin · Jan 28, 2005, 09:21 PM

Yeah its probably not the best candidate for extreme over-clocking but it would be nice to get a 1.4 Ghz mini for the price of a 1.25!

lbodnar · Feb 1, 2005, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by mrcorwin:
Has anybody heard of over-clocking the mini yet? I think it should be fairly easy once we find out the position of the resistors? It would make the 1.25 Ghz mini very attractive!

I write this on 1.42GHz that used to be 1.25GHz this morning. Give me some time I'll try to get higher than that. Can't figure out (=find) the last jumper

Leo
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/eMac/eMac-upgrade.html

lbodnar · Feb 1, 2005, 06:44 PM

Say hello to the new baby!

Leo�s Mac mini
01/02/2005 22:41

Hardware:

Hardware Overview:

Machine Model: Mac mini
CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (1.2)
Number Of CPUs: 1
CPU Speed: 1.5 GHz
L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
Memory: 512 MB
Bus Speed: 167 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 4.8.9f1

Chinasaur · Feb 1, 2005, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by lbodnar:

Hardware Overview:

Machine Model: Mac mini
CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (1.2)
Number Of CPUs: 1
CPU Speed: 1.5 GHz
L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
Memory: 512 MB
Bus Speed: 167 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 4.8.9f1

You listen to this dude because he is a/the prime mover behind the stupendous eMac overclocks from last year..

Way cool ibod!

turtle777 · Feb 2, 2005, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by lbodnar:
Say hello to the new baby!

Leo�s Mac mini
01/02/2005 22:41

Hardware:

Hardware Overview:

Machine Model: Mac mini
CPU Type: PowerPC G4 (1.2)
Number Of CPUs: 1
CPU Speed: 1.5 GHz
L2 Cache (per CPU): 512 KB
Memory: 512 MB
Bus Speed: 167 MHz
Boot ROM Version: 4.8.9f1

Whao !

I wonder how far a 1.42 GHz would go ? Maybe 1.75 GHz is possible...
Are you going to publish a documentation ?

-t

lbodnar · Feb 2, 2005, 11:19 AM

Condensed summary is available here:
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/macmini/

I was only able to get up to 1.42GHz from my 1.25GHz. Maybe 1.42GHz owners can achieve more...

Enjoy!

MORT A POTTY · Feb 2, 2005, 12:45 PM

1.67 would be the most I'd think you could get the 1.42 up to, and that's being pretty generous.

nenarek · 01:02 PM

lbodnar, did you have to replace the thermal pad on the Radeon 9200 or did you just reassemble with the original pad? If you replaced the pad, what did you use?

turtle777 · Feb 2, 2005, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by MORT A POTTY:
1.67 would be the most I'd think you could get the 1.42 up to, and that's being pretty generous.

Anyone bother to try and be the guinea pig for all of us ?

-t

lbodnar · Feb 2, 2005, 01:47 PM

Originally posted by nenarek:
lbodnar, did you have to replace the thermal pad on the Radeon 9200 or did you just reassemble with the original pad? If you replaced the pad, what did you use?

It looks very much like a piece of soft rubber so unless you damage it or pick your fingernails into it there is no need to worry. It is reusable. At least few times.

I was worried that ATI chip will overheat while I was running out of the case but it was just barely warm to touch. It is nice that you can run and test mini without putting the guts back into the shell.

nenarek · Feb 2, 2005, 03:14 PM

Originally posted by lbodnar:
It looks very much like a piece of soft rubber so unless you damage it or pick your fingernails into it there is no need to worry. It is reusable. At least few times.

I was worried that ATI chip will overheat while I was running out of the case but it was just barely warm to touch. It is nice that you can run and test mini without putting the guts back into the shell.

Thanks for the information. I bought the 1.25 knowing that I would probably at least try to overlock to 1.42 or higher. It looks like pretty delicate work but I am glad to see that it is at least possible.

sine -''-..- · Feb 3, 2005, 11:55 AM

w00 you got Slashdotted. And you must have a good host for the site because its not down yet

lbodnar · Feb 3, 2005, 08:58 PM

Originally posted by sine -''-..-:
w00 you got Slashdotted. And you must have a good host for the site because its not down yet

Yeah, 70,000 hits in one day

Looks like people are really interested and I guess Apple will score big time with Mac minis. eMac overclock generated 1/10th of that attention when it was /.ted a year ago. I really hope we will see Apple getting their long deserved place in the industry (not because of OCs of course

)

MORT A POTTY · Feb 3, 2005, 09:26 PM

well, hopefully even 10% of that 70k visitors will buy a Mac mini (be it because of the OC-ability or anything else)

Grrr · Feb 3, 2005, 09:39 PM

Good work lbod

I used your instructions some time ago to overclock my 1ghz emac to great effect. It wasn't happy at 1.33ghz however, but does run just great at 1.2ghz. Which goes to show that perhaps not all CPU's are created equal, and some will stand higher overclock speeds than others. It's luck of the draw to an extent..
I'd not be surprised if many 1.25ghz Mac mini's will take a 1.5ghz over clock with no issues. I'd certainly be willing to give it a shot if I had one.
As for 1.7ghz from the 1.42ghz mini's, personally, im not so sure, as it would not surprise me at all if the CPU's were identical between 1.25 and 1.42ghz models. I'd like to be proved wrong here tho!

HellionNecrosis · Feb 5, 2005, 03:13 AM

Wow, I just crossed over from Pc's to Mac and I tell ya what, I am learning so many new things that can be done with these so called Dreaded hard to work with Macs. What else is waiting out there for me!

Waragainstsleep · Feb 5, 2005, 04:02 AM

They might be slightly harder to work ON, but not WITH. Apple does have a tendancy to make them awkward to mess with. Having said that, I was installing an new HD in a mini ATX PC yesterday, and having just remarked to my colleague that the case was of a reasonable build quality (for a PC), discovered that in order to fit the drive into any of the designated mounts required the removal of the motherboard. (And it was a slimline drive too). Having removed the mobo, I discovered that the drive and/or its IDE cable would foul the mobo anyway if I had put it back in. I had to use a mounting kit to install it in the spare optical bay in the end. Lunacy.

MORT A POTTY · Feb 5, 2005, 06:09 AM

Originally posted by Waragainstsleep:
They might be slightly harder to work ON, but not WITH. Apple does have a tendancy to make them awkward to mess with. Having said that, I was installing an new HD in a mini ATX PC yesterday, and having just remarked to my colleague that the case was of a reasonable build quality (for a PC), discovered that in order to fit the drive into any of the designated mounts required the removal of the motherboard. (And it was a slimline drive too). Having removed the mobo, I discovered that the drive and/or its IDE cable would foul the mobo anyway if I had put it back in. I had to use a mounting kit to install it in the spare optical bay in the end. Lunacy.

and thus is the beauty of a vertically integrated vendor. hardware, OS and Apps.

lbodnar · Feb 5, 2005, 10:51 AM

Mac mini runs stable at 1.58GHz

http://macminiforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178

romeosc · Feb 5, 2005, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by lbodnar:
Mac mini runs stable at 1.58GHz

http://macminiforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178

Here's how!

http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/macmini/

Lateralus · Feb 5, 2005, 06:50 PM

Originally posted by romeosc:
Here's how!

http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/macmini/

...its his web page.

MORT A POTTY · Feb 5, 2005, 06:53 PM

Kudos for both of you

turtle777 · Feb 7, 2005, 10:50 AM

Originally posted by romeosc:
Here's how!
http://www.lbodnar.dsl.pipex.com/macmini/

-t

Grrr · Feb 7, 2005, 09:14 PM

Originally posted by lbodnar:
Mac mini runs stable at 1.58GHz

http://macminiforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=178

Thats great

But the guy prattles on a bit!

Waragainstsleep · Feb 8, 2005, 03:30 AM

I'd prattle on if I could analyse a logic board as quick as he did. Or at all for that matter.

Grrr · Feb 8, 2005, 03:38 PM

Originally posted by Waragainstsleep:
I'd prattle on if I could analyse a logic board as quick as he did. Or at all for that matter.

Well, all this guy has done is follow lbods instructions. So it was lbod really who has put in the hard graft here. Unless I missed something? If you have a steady hand and are handy with a soldering iron, it really isn't too hard to do, given good instructions such as lbods.
Anyway, its all good

And as I said, i'd certainly give it a go if I had one. Im interested in seeing if some 1.25's will stretch to 1.5ghz, as I suspect many will. Plus 1.5ghz should be the easiest to do, as this setting needs no jumpers at all. Its far easier to remove the jumpers in my experience, than it is to add them, or even to add the blobs of solder to bridge the pads.

Captain Egotist · Feb 8, 2005, 07:29 PM

Cool. Another idea that would require a bit more coordination is something I thought of back when I was into modifying my original imac..... instead of soldering and desoldering resistors, remove all of them and solder some really tiny ass wires onto each pad. Then hook those up to a micro dipswitch..... use a dremel to cut a square on the case, and reassemble.

Poof. Instant overclock. Wanna go back down to stock? Just use a pencil and flip a few switches. Wanna try for big numbers? Power down, click to the right PLL config, and turn it on. If it doesn't work, oh well.... just change the switches around!

- Rob

MORT A POTTY · Feb 8, 2005, 08:11 PM

that might be kinda cool.

but, that just makes me glad GigaDesigns puts easy-to-set jumpers on their upgrade boards.

Grrr · Feb 8, 2005, 09:08 PM

Originally posted by Captain Egotist:
Cool. Another idea that would require a bit more coordination is something I thought of back when I was into modifying my original imac..... instead of soldering and desoldering resistors, remove all of them and solder some really tiny ass wires onto each pad. Then hook those up to a micro dipswitch..... use a dremel to cut a square on the case, and reassemble.

Poof. Instant overclock. Wanna go back down to stock? Just use a pencil and flip a few switches. Wanna try for big numbers? Power down, click to the right PLL config, and turn it on. If it doesn't work, oh well.... just change the switches around!

- Rob

This is perfectly possible. Apart from the switch location.. For sensitive electronics like this, you'd really want to keep it as close to the original jumper location as possible.
It would still be a pain in the ass to fit however. You just wont believe how small the jumpers and pad areas are until you see them. I think to do a decent job of it, you'd really need proper surface mount soldering equipment, which most people just don't have, and isn't so readily available either. It's also rather more costly.
So on the whole, its going to be more convenient for most folk to go about their OC'ing in the normal 'mix n match' jumper juggling way. Easier, cheaper, and probably more reliable with it..
Plus, although it seems like a nice idea to be able to switch speeds, once you have found the highest speed it will reliably run at, you are unlikely to ever want to switch it back to anything else anyway.

Just my 2mhz worth..