Performance of the Core 2 Duo
I'm really confused.....
II have been reading that the performance differences of the new merom chip vs the yohan one are really small
When you look at the benchmark of the new IMac in the apple site you feel that the gain you would get is much higher, for ex. t shows 1.5 faster performance when using Final Cut Pro!!
To me that look more than a little improvement
Can some one explain me where is the true?
Thanks to all
Ettore
II have been reading that the performance differences of the new merom chip vs the yohan one are really small
When you look at the benchmark of the new IMac in the apple site you feel that the gain you would get is much higher, for ex. t shows 1.5 faster performance when using Final Cut Pro!!
To me that look more than a little improvement
Can some one explain me where is the true?
Thanks to all
Ettore
Comments
And Final Cut Pro would surely make use of the 64-bit stuff on the chip?
I doubt it. They probably won't start using the 64-bit "stuff" until at least OSX 10.5 when the GUI frameworks are 64-bit compatible.
The Core 2 Duo chips are faster due to various increases in internal capability (more cache, wider instruction dispatch, etc). How much faster depends on what you are doing. As for the SSE3... the Core Duo had a fairly capable SSE2 unit so I don't think the difference is that substantial between the two.
I guess for this to happen the motherboards need to be the same, so are they, or do the current merom 20" imacs have redesigned motherboards??
Anybody have any reliable info on this?
I'm really confused.....
II have been reading that the performance differences of the new merom chip vs the yohan one are really small
When you look at the benchmark of the new IMac in the apple site you feel that the gain you would get is much higher, for ex. t shows 1.5 faster performance when using Final Cut Pro!!
To me that look more than a little improvement
Can some one explain me where is the true?
Thanks to all
Ettore
Not to rain on its parade, but they are actually comparing a 2.0 GHz Core Duo to a 2,33 GHz Core 2 Duo, so it really is about 1,3 times as fast per clock. A little more in line for the other benchmarks perhaps.
At stuff which doesn't need to go over the FSB all the time, it should be a fair bit faster too.
Not to rain on its parade, but they are actually comparing a 2.0 GHz Core Duo to a 2,33 GHz Core 2 Duo, so it really is about 1,3 times faster per clock. A little more in line for the other benchmarks perhaps.
At stuff which doesn't need to go over the FSB all the time, it should be a fair bit faster too.
I laughed when I saw that on Apple's site too. [sarcasm]Wow! A higher clocked chip is faster! Wowee![/sarcasm]
(BTW, the wording should be "1.3 times as fast" not "1.3 times faster"; the latter implies a 130% speed boost.)
Also, I posted this in another thread, but people were too busy flaming each other to respond:
I thought the C2Ds were supposed to use the 965 "Broadwater" chipset, but the current iMac uses the old 950 mobos. Isn't Broadwater out yet?
Won't Broadwater help C2D speeds, compared to Yonah?
I thought the C2Ds were supposed to use the 965 "Broadwater" chipset, but the current iMac uses the old 950 mobos. Isn't Broadwater out yet?
Won't Broadwater help C2D speeds, compared to Yonah?
Keep in mind that the iMac uses mobile components. The 965GM does not come out until 2007, so the iMac is still using the 945GM. A newer chipset is usually better, but don't expect much; in benchmarks different chipsets only make about a 5% performance difference. The GMA X3000 graphics should be quite a bit better than GMA 950, though.
As for the SSE3... the Core Duo had a fairly capable SSE2 unit so I don't think the difference is that substantial between the two.
2 x 64bit SSE unit vs 3 x 128bit SSE unit.
I think we can call that substantial.