First , thanks to everyone who took the clip to read parts one , two and three of my “ mini serial ” this week . The treatment around the articles was very interesting , and some good questions were inquire . Today I bump the random memory in the mini to 2 GB ( after a brief wrong good turn ) , so I thought I ’d take a few minutes to revisit some of the test that may have been RAM dependent . I also attempt to address the one major area my original report did n’t tint on — how well do things like printer and scanners work , as well as looking at a couple of other games .
Application launching
The first matter I thought I ’d look at was the coating launch times examination . I suspected that , particularly for the big apps , the modified RAM available might be causing some issue . For both Photoshop CS2 and Keynote , the two largest apps I in the beginning quiz , I saw striking improvements in initial launch times ( 2nd launches were essentially indistinguishable ) .
Beyond the big apps , though , I also see small-scale improvements in initial launch times for all the other syllabus . These differences were’t large enough , however , to be relevant given the hired hand timing I was doing .
ROB’S LAUNCH TESTS – REVISITED
Rosetta applications initalics .
Testing by Rob Griffiths .
Word document scrolling
I opened the same trial text file as before and scroll from top to bottom . This time , the unconscious process accept 21 second instead of 23 , which is technically a 10 percent betterment . However , move over I was hired man - timing this test as well , I do n’t feel it ’s important , so I ’m shout out scroll velocity “ unchanged . ”
Folder opening test
The results here really surprised me . With more RAM , the miniskirt was much more adept at opening 200 folder at once . On the 512 MB machine , this necessitate 50 seconds . With 2 GB installed , that time plummeted to only 28 seconds , which is really quick than the Dual G5 . It take 17 seconds to fill up all 200 folders , also down dramatically from the original 50 seconds ( though still slower than the G5 ) . I had think my results in this mental testing were set by the RAM usable for the video card , but that does n’t seem to be the pillowcase .
Other revisited topics
For the fun of it , I again try out to diddle two HD clips at once . Still no go ; QuickTime bail just as it did before . I also essay Front Row ’s movie trailers sport , and still received the ‘ flick trailer waiter is not responding ’ content .
The big departure , manifestly , is how the machine puzzle out with a issue of apps heart-to-heart . The deviation is dramatic , since there ’s no practical retentiveness being used . I opened 10 applications programme at once , which call for about 13 moment entire ( that was impressive all by itself ) , and then put to work in each of them , switching rapidly back and forward . Activity Monitor express 1 GB of motionless tup along with 410 MB of completely free RAM … and no varlet outs ! you could never have too much RAM .
Games
Someone asked how well MacMAME works . ground on some longer testing tonight , it seems to process just o.k. . The software package renderer is notably quicker than the OpenGL option , and the games looked fine that way to me . It is , however , playable using OpenGL mode , but matter seem just a bit slower . In software render style , though , I noticed no such slowdowns ; everything worked perfectly .
Someone else ask about Wolfenstein : Enemey Territory . I catch the game charge and moved around an empty map for a routine . I was seeing form rates below 20 , even with nothing on the map , at 1024×768 . I suspect that , with a number of hoi polloi onscreen at once , the game will become unplayable . A worldwide rendering may solve that trouble , but I have no thought who , if anyone , would be work on such a affair .
Finally , a bit of a treat . Jedi Knight II ( JK2 ) was another fave game of mine from the yesteryear , and as it turns out , there ’s a Universal patch in the whole caboodle . Through Macworld ’s Peter Cohen , I was able to get a beta build for some basic comparison testing . The results were impressive , and I ’ve been yield the okay to share some basic resolution .
Testing by Rob Griffiths.
JK2 includes a built - in benchmarking tool;this pageat Inside Mac Games explains how to prepare it up , as it ’s far from obvious . I ran the bench mark on all three machines , at 1024×768 solving with the nonpayment mise en scene for all the other selection , and EAX sound recording disabled . First , the non - general answer :
Even in Rosetta mode , JK2 runs quite well , scoring an norm of 30fps . With that issue , however , hail a caveat . I also recorded 30fps when testing in Rosetta at 800×600 and 640×480 , which make no sense whatsoever . All three results were monovular , at 30.1fps . That ’s just not realistic , and seems to inculpate there ’s some sort of clipper in Rosetta for the OpenGL framerate ( which also makes no gumption ) . The JK2 computer programmer is inquiring with Apple about these curious results . Since both binaries use the same stage set of prefs , there ’s no way some in - game setting was responsible for this boundary , otherwise the Universal version would have been similarly capped .
In actual gameplay , big firefights can slow Rosetta JK2 down to the 15fps or so range , make up things just a act crafty , but still playable . Then I installed the genus Beta Universal chassis , and re - start the benchmark . This time , JK2 rack up a whopping90fps . Wow . Even when I cranked JK2 up to 1280×1024 , I still got a very respectable 67fps out of the benchmark . In gameplay at 1280×1024 , everything was smooth , with the instantaneous framerate display variegate between 45fps and 90+fps . This is good hooey ; I ’m now actually working my room through JK2 again on the miniskirt to see how it hold up as the game come on .
Please keep in mind I ’m using an unreleased beta build , so these figures are far from official , but I suppose people will be inebriate with this Universal version when it ’s released .
Peripherals
Despite the length of the original part , I somehow managed to all overlook the topic of how well things like printer and scanners might work with the Intel Macs . I try out gaming computer peripheral , but not workaday usage peripherals . So tonight , I plugged in my key peripherals to see how they fared .
FireWire : Someone inquired about FireWire drive performance , so I test it on all three Macs . I have both a portable 80 GB ( 4200RPM ) FireWire drive that I use when travelling , and a gravid powered 200 GB ( 7200RPM ) drive that I expend for primal backups on the G5 . I hook each parkway up to each machine , and then timed the copy of a 1 GB folder contain 562 files to and from the FireWire thrust . Since there are two drives in the G5 , I tested with both of them . The resultant were fundamentally as gestate , with a notable exclusion :
FIREWIRE PERFORMANCE
BEST RESULTS INBOLD .
80 GB FireWire drive : SmartDisk Firelite , 4200RPM , 2 MB polisher , FW interface power 200 GB FireWire drive : Maxtor 5000DV , 7200RPM , 8 M buffer , wall power
Intel Core Duo mini : 80 GB Seagate ST98823AS , 5400RPM SATA , 8 MiB buffer
12″ PowerBook G4 : 60 GB Toshiba MK6025GAS , 4200RPM ATA , 8 M buffer
Dual G5 # 1 : 160 GB Seagate ST3160023AS , 7200RPM SATA , 8 Bachelor of Medicine buffer
Dual G5 # 2 : 300 GB Maxtor 6B300S0 , 7200RPM SATA , 16 M buffer
With the slow portable thrust , the results were similar for all three machines , since the portable cause ’s speed was the determine factor . As you’re able to see , the miniskirt did just hunky-dory in comparison to the other automobile . With the truehearted drive , the G5 ’s faster drive let it move quicker , with the notable exclusion of copying from the G5 to the FireWire drive , where it basically tied the mini . ( Also as remark elsewhere in my mini writeup , there ’s something about my Dual G5 ’s arduous drive execution that seems out of ancestry . Investigating that progeny is a project for next hebdomad . )
Overall , FireWire performance seemed right in product line with what I would have expected .
Printers : I have two printer , an Ethernet - connect Brother HL-1270N and a USB - connected Epson Stylus Photo 890 . Both worked exactly as carry , in both Rosetta and Universal applications . The Brother prints via a cup driver , and setting it up was identical to the process on my PowerPC Macs . The Epson was detect immediately when I link up the USB cable , and no manual setup was necessasry . In scant , printing bread and butter seems perfect , at least with my small-scale sample size of two .
Scanners : I have an Epson Perfection 1660 Photo , and I tried two different methods of using it on the miniskirt . First , I just plug it in and then give the axe upVueScan , my image scanner software of option . It work perfectly . Then , just for kicks , I head over to Epson ’s web site , where I was surprised to find they have a Universal number one wood uncommitted . After installation , the button on the front of the electronic scanner worked to pop out a scan , and the Epson Scan software seemed to operate just hunky-dory . The only limitation on the Universal drivers is that they do n’t presently affirm USB2 . I ’m not sure , but I envisage VueScan does , since it ’s just communicating natively over the USB cable system ( that ’s a shot , though , as I have no empiric evidence to support it ) .
Tablets : Now for the material surprisal of my examination . I plug in my Wacom Intuos 2 graphics pad of paper , and as expected , it did n’t do much more than oeuvre as a mouse . I went to Wacom ’s site , and there was no reference of a Universal equipment driver . So I downloaded the belated one I could discover , 4.9.4 , and put in that . I was really surprise it installed , but it did . I was evenmoresurprised when I was able to do this :
Yep , it ferment absolutely . As seen in the screenshot , the sketchpad work fine , include the pressure sensitivity . When I enable hand recognition , I was again surprised — it worked great in not only Universal apps like TextEdit and BBEdit , but also in Rosetta apps such as Word and Excel . However Rosetta works , it plainly works at a fairly modest story , as it seems to interact just fine with system - provided serving such as handwriting recognition .
Wrap up
More RAM definitely makes using the miniskirt more enjoyable , and more like the experience I have on the G5 . I do n’t think 2 GB is required , by any means , but 1 GB should probably be look at a starting point .
Although specify in compass , I think my slight experimentation with peripherals shows that the Rosetta to Universal conversion may not be nearly as complex as was the Classic to OS ecstasy transition . My FireWire drives , printer , scanner , and even the drawing tablet all worked perfectly well on the Intel miniskirt . Even better , no special trickery was required to make everything shape . It either worked automatically , or work after instal a driver package . Very impressive . The combining of Rosetta and the Intel mini seems to operate quite well , from the app level all the way down to the hardware level .
