Info about Merom and Woodcrest chips

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
According to the French site PC INpact, here is a list of model numbers and frequencies (and even some prices, I assume 'per 1000 units') for the upcoming mobile chip Merom and the server & workstation variant Woodcrest, from cheapest to best :



MEROM

- T5600 @ 1.83 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (single-core)

- T7200 @ 2.00 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)

- T7400 @ 2.16 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)

- T7600 @ 2.33 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)



WOODCREST (all SMP dual-core)

- 5110 @ 1.60 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $230

- 5120 @ 1.86 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $270

- 5130 @ 2.00 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $330

- 5140 @ 2.33 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $470

- 5150 @ 2.66 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $700

- 5160 @ 3.00 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $850



Wow, the Woodcrest 5160 will be quite expensive! I can't imagine the price of a quad 3GHz Woodcrest Mac Pro (packing two of these)...



No information about the desktop chip Conroe however, despite the fact that current chipsets will be incompatible with these new processors.



As for current Yonah versions, think the number "2" into "Core Duo T2500" refers to "dualcore" (ie Core Duo), and the number "1" into "T1300" refers to a Core Solo.

Now, assuming that the new notation links in the same way another number "7" with dualcore and "5" with single-core, I think Merom chips will also be called "Core Solo" and "Core Duo", perhaps with "64" appended to them.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 38
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Wow 3 ghz by summer at last!!
  • Reply 2 of 38
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    Wow 3 ghz by summer at last!!



    8)
  • Reply 3 of 38
    Quote:

    Originally posted by TednDi

    Wow 3 ghz by summer at last!!



    Hopefully Steve won't make that promise (forever putting a curse on Intel.)
  • Reply 4 of 38
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,166member
    The lowend Woodcrest chips aren't priced too bad.



    Give me a quad 2 gigahurts Powermac model. I'll be happy.
  • Reply 5 of 38
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    The lowend Woodcrest chips aren't priced too bad.



    Give me a quad 2 gigahurts Powermac model. I'll be happy.




    2x dualcore 2 Ghz powermac?

    do you think the woodcrest is that sucky that you hope for another powermac G5 revision or did you mean quad 2Ghz mac pro?
  • Reply 6 of 38
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,166member
    I meant even a two socket Woodcrest 2Ghz system would be decent. I like the G5 but it's time to move on.
  • Reply 7 of 38
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    The information above was taken from the inquirer web site.

    I found some details on Conroe as well:

    CHIP GIANT Intel has told its server customers of a range of processors in Q3...

    E6700 2.67GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 4MB of cache, $529

    E6600 2.40GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 4MB of cache, $315

    E6400 2.13GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 2MB of cache, $240

    E6300 1.86GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 2MB of cache, $210



    I have to say that I like the Woodcrest line-up for Pro Macs:

    we could have:

    dual-core 2.33 $1999

    dual-core 3.00 $2499

    quad-core 3.00 $3299

    And Steve saying: "we couldn't get a single 3GHz processor from IBM, now we have four!... from Intel".
  • Reply 8 of 38
    pbpb Posts: 4,232member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kim kap sol

    Hopefully Steve won't make that promise (forever putting a curse on Intel.)







    Don't worry, he won't do it.
  • Reply 9 of 38
    pbpb Posts: 4,232member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cosmos 1999

    According to the French site PC INpact, here is a list of model numbers and frequencies (and even some prices, I assume 'per 1000 units') for the upcoming mobile chip Merom and the server & workstation variant Woodcrest, from cheapest to best :



    MEROM

    - T5600 @ 1.83 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (single-core)

    - T7200 @ 2.00 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)

    - T7400 @ 2.16 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)

    - T7600 @ 2.33 GHz, FSB 667 MHz, 4 MB L2 (dual-core)





    So, this is what will go in the second, or perhaps third, generation Intel iMacs. Not bad at all.
  • Reply 10 of 38
    Quote:

    Originally posted by mjteix

    The information above was taken from the inquirer web site.

    I found some details on Conroe as well:

    CHIP GIANT Intel has told its server customers of a range of processors in Q3...

    E6700 2.67GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 4MB of cache, $529

    E6600 2.40GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 4MB of cache, $315

    E6400 2.13GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 2MB of cache, $240

    E6300 1.86GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 2MB of cache, $210







    So Conroe is for iMacs and not Powermacs? Isn't Woodcrest pretty pricey even for the Powermac? These things have low multipliers, the fastest Conroe is only 10x.. even the G4 can improve on that... and the Athlon64 is up to what, 14x? Not really that impressive.
  • Reply 11 of 38
    Aw... I want a release date and prices on merom... :/
  • Reply 12 of 38
    zandroszandros Posts: 537member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    So Conroe is for iMacs and not Powermacs? Isn't Woodcrest pretty pricey even for the Powermac? These things have low multipliers, the fastest Conroe is only 10x.. even the G4 can improve on that... and the Athlon64 is up to what, 14x? Not really that impressive.



    Mac Pros/Powermacs have to get Woodcrest if they want multiple CPUs in the same box. And what do multipliers have to do with it? I'd prefer a high frequency FSB over a high multiplier.
  • Reply 13 of 38
    zandroszandros Posts: 537member
    Dammit. Someone delete this, I accidentally hit quote instead of edit.
  • Reply 14 of 38
    smalmsmalm Posts: 654member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Thereubster

    These things have low multipliers, the fastest Conroe is only 10x.. even the G4 can improve on that... and the Athlon64 is up to what, 14x? Not really that impressive.





    What nonsense are you talking about?
  • Reply 15 of 38
    gargar Posts: 1,201member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch

    Aw... I want a release date and prices on merom... :/



    Ik... i don't care about release dates and prices of that chip.

    i want a release date on the merom powered mbp...

    maybe october/november (?)
  • Reply 16 of 38
    elixirelixir Posts: 782member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gar

    Ik... i don't care about release dates and prices of that chip.

    i want a release date on the merom powered mbp...

    maybe october/november (?)




    i hope its not that soon. =(



    my macbook pro better not be outdated that quickly
  • Reply 17 of 38
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:



    And Steve saying: "we couldn't get a single 3GHz processor from IBM, now we have four!... from Intel".







    What an awesome line! (above, and below)





    CONROE

    -E6700 2.67GHz dual core, 1066 FSB, 4MB of cache, $529



    WOODCREST

    - 5150 @ 2.66 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $700



    - 5160 @ 3.00 GHz, FSB 1333 MHz, 4 MB L2: $850



    I was just looking up intel processor history prices, and It appears this is a great price for Dual core XEON MP processors. I was also looking at speeds on 3.2 GHZ P4 Extremes vs. Dual 2.8 GHz XEONS. The dual processor performance boost of the XEON is phenomenal, and the additional higher pricing is understandable. I don't think it's that much. $170.00 more for the same Hz, but the benefits seem fair, and reasonable for that price. What can you say? It's a XEON.



    I love it when a plan comes together.
  • Reply 18 of 38
    macroninmacronin Posts: 1,136member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Elixir

    i hope its not that soon. =(



    my macbook pro better not be outdated that quickly




    Are you kidding?!?



    I would LOVE to see Apple able to update at least twice a year across the product range...



    Be a refreshing change from once every 12 to 18 months...
  • Reply 19 of 38
    onlookeronlooker Posts: 5,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by MacRonin

    Are you kidding?!?



    I would LOVE to see Apple able to update at least twice a year across the product range...



    Be a refreshing change from once every 12 to 18 months...




    But totally unreasonable with less than 6% of over all computer sales. Most of your inventory would be sold at reduced prices because the majority of your buyers would wait the 6 months, or longer for the drops on old equipment.



    It wouldn't happen until Apple hit's at least 15% of consumer sales, or more. They would also have to have a much bigger share of the business market, or their bottom line would hit rock bottom.
  • Reply 20 of 38
    gsxrboygsxrboy Posts: 565member
    Why? If intel released new chip speeds every 3 months, (which they could unlike motorola or ibm), Apple would almost be forced to update the same time as the pc manufacturers otherwise they would be 3-6 mths continuously behind them. Not really something they should strive for now they have 'equipment equality'.
Sign In or Register to comment.