So you think its gonna be hotter than the 2.0Ghz G5?
Probably about the same. I'm really not sure but have heard from others that it is. With Merom, no need to worry about cooling and should get performance that exceeds a g5. It is a close call however. If Conroe doesn't go in the entry level powermac then probably will go in iMac.
I just meant that because they are running faster (3.0 and 3.33Ghz on a 1333FSB) there is going to be more heat, I thought they had a 80w or more TDP? Which isn't far off the G5...
Probably about the same. I'm really not sure but have heard from others that it is. With Merom, no need to worry about cooling and should get performance that exceeds a g5. It is a close call however. If Conroe doesn't go in the entry level powermac then probably will go in iMac.
The Conroe will use about the same power as a 2GHz G5. Unless Apple redesigned the case for LESS ventilation, it should work fine.
Of course, both the Yonah and Merom use considerably less power than either. About 34 watts for them vs about 65 watts for the G5 and Conroe. But, I believe the dual core 2GHz G5 doesn't use much more than 65 watts either.
Of course, there's always the fact that IBM doesn't give the total power but average power, so it's difficult to make a direct comparison. THe G5's likely use more, therefor.
I don't know if anyone has already pointed this out, but "Conroe LV" and "Merom" are basically the same chip, with the same power consumption. So I don't think it matters which one we get in the iMac.
Since it is a Mac Pro thread, I thought we were talking about Woodcrest CPUs?
;^p
Well, sure, be we kind of meander around.
I'm really just interested in the tower now, because I passed up the Quad when it was announced that we would be getting the Intel models by the end of this year, instead of the end of next year.
But, people are always asking me about the other models, so it's good to get input from other people here on those as well.
I don't know if MacRonin is saying that, but I've been pushing that idea for months.
Remember, the Cube is still 'on ice'?
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), with room for two HDDs & two graphics/expansion slots?
If said slots were SLI/CrossFire capable, all the better?
(most folks who purchase a unit with good expansion capabilities rarely use said expandability?)
While the larger Mac Pro chassis holds the fire-breathing dual Woodcrest (dual-core/quad-core) CPUs, four HDDs & more expansion slots? And SLI/CrossFire capable?
We will save the rackmount/deskside model for the Quad Woodcrest (quad-core) CPUs, and quad SLI goodness?!
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), with room for two HDDs & two graphics/expansion slots?
If said slots were SLI/CrossFire capable, all the better?
(most folks who purchase a unit with good expansion capabilities rarely use said expandability?)
While the larger Mac Pro chassis holds the fire-breathing dual Woodcrest (dual-core/quad-core) CPUs, four HDDs & more expansion slots? And SLI/CrossFire capable?
We will save the rackmount/deskside model for the Quad Woodcrest (quad-core) CPUs, and quad SLI goodness?!
;^p
Please don't get my heart pounding too much, I'm 56, I could end up on the floor.
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), ...
What you're describing is not a Cube but a Shuttle, but perhaps a bit larger for two HDDs and two graphics card slots. The Shuttle form-factor is great - I've got two of them. As for the dual HDDs and SLI, very few consumers use more than one HDD, and SLI is of interest to virtually nobody (fewer than .001% of computer users). Shuttle's been making machines for years, and they don't appear to have had much demand for either feature.
I doubt Apple will make such a machine. They are concentrating on what sells right now, and that's notebooks and iMacs. They do need a headless machine, and far and away the most popular type of headless machine these days is a standard minitower, so that's what I'd expect.
Comments
Originally posted by onlooker
[B]One of many resources say that woodcrest is only 80 watts.
todays XEON's are 110 watts. Paxville is 170 watts, Woodcrest is 40% less than Paxville.
Sorry onlooker, I don't mean to nitpick here, but I thought you ought to know that the Woodcrest is approx 112.5% less than Paxville
Math for it: ((A -
I know, I know, now I am just nitpicking.... But hey, which sounds better??
Originally posted by kim kap sol
And you're not.
Please be quiet. Thank you.
Originally posted by MacSuperiority
So nobody thinks Conroe is going into the next iMac?
Not me. I think heat may be an issue. I look for Merom to go in when it is available.
Originally posted by backtomac
Not me. I think heat may be an issue. I look for Merom to go in when it is available.
So you think its gonna be hotter than the 2.0Ghz G5?
Originally posted by MacSuperiority
So you think its gonna be hotter than the 2.0Ghz G5?
Probably about the same. I'm really not sure but have heard from others that it is. With Merom, no need to worry about cooling and should get performance that exceeds a g5. It is a close call however. If Conroe doesn't go in the entry level powermac then probably will go in iMac.
Originally posted by Placebo
Please be quiet. Thank you.
Ditto.
Originally posted by Thereubster
I just meant that because they are running faster (3.0 and 3.33Ghz on a 1333FSB) there is going to be more heat, I thought they had a 80w or more TDP? Which isn't far off the G5...
AT LAST!!
3ghz by summer 2007!!
Originally posted by backtomac
Probably about the same. I'm really not sure but have heard from others that it is. With Merom, no need to worry about cooling and should get performance that exceeds a g5. It is a close call however. If Conroe doesn't go in the entry level powermac then probably will go in iMac.
The Conroe will use about the same power as a 2GHz G5. Unless Apple redesigned the case for LESS ventilation, it should work fine.
Of course, both the Yonah and Merom use considerably less power than either. About 34 watts for them vs about 65 watts for the G5 and Conroe. But, I believe the dual core 2GHz G5 doesn't use much more than 65 watts either.
Of course, there's always the fact that IBM doesn't give the total power but average power, so it's difficult to make a direct comparison. THe G5's likely use more, therefor.
Originally posted by MacSuperiority
Are we talking about conroeLV? I thought we were talking about the standard conroe chip??
Since it is a Mac Pro thread, I thought we were talking about Woodcrest CPUs?
;^p
Originally posted by MacRonin
Since it is a Mac Pro thread, I thought we were talking about Woodcrest CPUs?
;^p
So are you saying that the woodcrest is going in the Mac Pros and the conroe is going in something else??
This is what i was saying...
Originally posted by MacRonin
Since it is a Mac Pro thread, I thought we were talking about Woodcrest CPUs?
;^p
Well, sure, be we kind of meander around.
I'm really just interested in the tower now, because I passed up the Quad when it was announced that we would be getting the Intel models by the end of this year, instead of the end of next year.
But, people are always asking me about the other models, so it's good to get input from other people here on those as well.
Originally posted by MacSuperiority
So are you saying that the woodcrest is going in the Mac Pros and the conroe is going in something else??
This is what i was saying...
I don't know if MacRonin is saying that, but I've been pushing that idea for months.
Originally posted by melgross
I don't know if MacRonin is saying that, but I've been pushing that idea for months.
Remember, the Cube is still 'on ice'?
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), with room for two HDDs & two graphics/expansion slots?
If said slots were SLI/CrossFire capable, all the better?
Perfect mid-range headless hobbiest DCC/gaming/'expandable' Mac?
(most folks who purchase a unit with good expansion capabilities rarely use said expandability?)
While the larger Mac Pro chassis holds the fire-breathing dual Woodcrest (dual-core/quad-core) CPUs, four HDDs & more expansion slots? And SLI/CrossFire capable?
We will save the rackmount/deskside model for the Quad Woodcrest (quad-core) CPUs, and quad SLI goodness?!
;^p
Originally posted by MacRonin
Remember, the Cube is still 'on ice'?
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), with room for two HDDs & two graphics/expansion slots?
If said slots were SLI/CrossFire capable, all the better?
Perfect mid-range headless hobbiest DCC/gaming/'expandable' Mac?
(most folks who purchase a unit with good expansion capabilities rarely use said expandability?)
While the larger Mac Pro chassis holds the fire-breathing dual Woodcrest (dual-core/quad-core) CPUs, four HDDs & more expansion slots? And SLI/CrossFire capable?
We will save the rackmount/deskside model for the Quad Woodcrest (quad-core) CPUs, and quad SLI goodness?!
;^p
Please don't get my heart pounding too much, I'm 56, I could end up on the floor.
Originally posted by MacSuperiority
So nobody thinks Conroe is going into the next iMac?
I think a conroe, or conroe LV will go into one of them, but it wont be real soon or anything. The iMac is still too new AFAIAC.
Originally posted by MacRonin
Remember, the Cube is still 'on ice'?
If they could pack a dual-core Conroe into the same basic volume (venting out the back, thereby allowing the usage of the space originally lost by the clear plexi skirt?), ...
What you're describing is not a Cube but a Shuttle, but perhaps a bit larger for two HDDs and two graphics card slots. The Shuttle form-factor is great - I've got two of them. As for the dual HDDs and SLI, very few consumers use more than one HDD, and SLI is of interest to virtually nobody (fewer than .001% of computer users). Shuttle's been making machines for years, and they don't appear to have had much demand for either feature.
I doubt Apple will make such a machine. They are concentrating on what sells right now, and that's notebooks and iMacs. They do need a headless machine, and far and away the most popular type of headless machine these days is a standard minitower, so that's what I'd expect.