Just wondering what the least powerful mac is that apple will say supports tiger (assuming ram is aplenty).
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Anyone know the least powerful machine supported for tiger?
- Thread starter rdhatfield3
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Do you mean "supported" as in Core Image and all of the "goodies"? Or just run? Every g4 will run Tiger, even my 450mhz cube. I bet that will be the last major upgrade it will see. I only really see the g3 ibook lappy's to be the lowest of the low.rdhatfield3 said:
kyle
Tiger will run happily on a Blue and White G3 or later - I was running an early build on a G3-400 with 512mb and it worked pretty well.
Basically the system requirements are G3 or better, built-in USB and Firewire (unlike Panther, which required b/i USB only).
Basically the system requirements are G3 or better, built-in USB and Firewire (unlike Panther, which required b/i USB only).
tersono said:
Not sure what b/i means? I'm Wondering if it will run (and when i say run i mean, won't bog the machine down, b/c as it is it runs pretty nice for the age) on my 400 Mhz iMac G3 w/320 MB ram and 2x AGP with 8mb vram.
rdhatfield3 said:
b/i = built-in (as opposed to add-on cards etc).
If I recall correctly, the 400mhz iMac had firewire, so you should be fine.
I ran some of the earlier Tiger builds on a Blue & White G3-400 with the stock video card and 512mb ram and it ran perfectly happily. Tiger should give similar performance to Panther on your machine - maybe even marginally better - although I'd recommend more RAM if your iMac will handle it. 512mb seems to be the 'comfort zone'.
tersono said:
Do you know the memory minimum? I've got a cube running as a music server -- it doesn't need to be "snappy," so I'd rather not bother upgrading the RAM if it's not essential.
Historically, OSX has required a G3 that had USB or later. I guess Tiger will be in that ballpark since Apple needs to support its older established base since it is dramatically bigger than those who have purchased machines in the past few machines. (A sad side effective of the low "market share" numbers.)
With that said, parts of Tiger will not be available to folks with older machines. I guess that is the compromise Apple has to make, and a gentle way of inspiring folks to upgrade.
With that said, parts of Tiger will not be available to folks with older machines. I guess that is the compromise Apple has to make, and a gentle way of inspiring folks to upgrade.
My guess as to a reasonable cutoff for Macs capable of running Tiger:
10 GB hard disk
Built-in DVD-ROM (Tiger will only be distributed on DVD, I'd guess, since it's so large)
The supported systems would thus be:
2001 iBook G3 or later with built-in DVD-ROM drive (yes, that's right - iBooks will be the only G3-class systems supported)
Any G4 with built-in DVD-ROM drive
Any G5
10 GB hard disk
Built-in DVD-ROM (Tiger will only be distributed on DVD, I'd guess, since it's so large)
The supported systems would thus be:
2001 iBook G3 or later with built-in DVD-ROM drive (yes, that's right - iBooks will be the only G3-class systems supported)
Any G4 with built-in DVD-ROM drive
Any G5
Do you say this because someone has run a pre-release version of Tiger on an earlier system than the ones I included? If that's true, then take my list of systems as my recommended minimum (not Apple's recommendation nor the absolute minimum Apple supports).tersono said:
So you say it will run on a iBook G3, but not on a PowerBook G3 Firewire (i.e. Pismo) with a G3@400MHz with DVD-ROM and 2 Firewire and 2 USB ports built in...?wrldwzrd89 said:
Why...?
Just FYI but I've gotten a Beta version of Tiger to run on a 400 MHz G3 iMac DV with Firewire and a DVD-ROM, and a separate 400 MHz G3 iMac with Firewire with only a CD-ROM if I recall correctly. (though Tiger was booting off an external FW 400 drive both times)wrldwzrd89 said:
musicpyrite said:
Thats pretty low speced. How much ram does it actually function usefully with as a minimuim?
We always hear about OS X getting faster with each release, but is there a certain level of computer (say 400 MHz G3 or lower) where it would actually get slower? My mom's computer is a 400 MHz iMac DV, currently running Panther (kind of slow but I guess it's okay). Would Tiger be more likely to run faster or slower on it? It currently has only 256 MB of RAM but I'm looking to increase it to 512.
aswitcher said:
It's hard for me to answer a question like "how 'useful' is it?"
Well, define useful. All those two computers are used for are interweb browsing, email, TurboTax, Word and Excel. Don't even think about Garageband, iPhoto, iDVD, Azureus/Limewire/AnythingJava, epically with the slow internal disk speed of the G3 iMacs. Typing in Word or in iChat was fine, but the computer started to lag when when I got 3 or more applications open like Netscape, Word and Terminal/iChat. The DVD-ROM iMac had 192 MB RAM and the CD-ROM iMac had 256, and there was a small, but noticeable between the 256 MB iMac and the 192.
And this is coming from someone who has 256 MB RAM installed on their main machine.
I like simple sayings, so I'll say "If you have built-in Firewire, you're fine. If you don't... time to upgrade."
Simple, no?
Simple, no?