Intel to drop "Conroe" embargo this Friday

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Intel Corp. on Friday will release more details on its long awaited Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme desktop processors, formerly code-named "Conroe," according to DailyTech.



The chips made a public appearance earlier this year at the Spring Intel Developer Forum, where they were shown beating out some of the fastest offerings from rival AMD, including the high end Athlon 64 X2 and gaming-oriented Athlon 64 FX.



With the new Core 2 processors, the world's largest chip maker is backing away from the "megahertz war," and is instead focusing on chips with more instructions per clock cycle and improved power efficiency.



Both Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme processors will sport a plethora of new features, including Intel Wide Dynamic Execution, Intel Smart Memory Access, Intel Advanced Smart Cache and Intel Advanced Digital Media Boost.



"While the performance NDA lifts later tonight, availability isn?t expected until July 23rd, 2006," according to DailyTech "Intel will officially announce availability on July 27, 2006."



A 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme (Conroe) with a 4MB L2 cache and 1066MHz front-side bus (FSB) will reportedly retail for around $1000, or about $150 more than a 3.0GHz Xeon 5160 (Woodcrest), which features a 4MB L2 cache and 1333MHz FSB.



Intel will also offer Core 2 Duo chips at 2.67GHz ($530), 2.4GHz ($316), 2.13GHz ($224) and 1.86GHz ($183).



Later this year, the chip maker will roll out a 3.2GHz Core 2 Extreme processor. It will follow up early next year with and a quad-core Core 2 Extreme (Kentsfield).



Core 2 Duo chips are expected to make their way into Apple's Mac product line slightly later this year.
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 86
    bageljoeybageljoey Posts: 1,941member
    Holy guacamole!



    (apologies to wilco)
  • Reply 2 of 86
    wilcowilco Posts: 985member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Bageljoey

    Holy guacamole!



    (apologies to wilco)




    dude!
  • Reply 3 of 86
    backtomacbacktomac Posts: 4,579member
    "A 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme (Conroe) with a 4MB L2 cache and 1066MHz front-side bus (FSB) will reportedly retail for around $1000, or about $150 more than a 3.0GHz Xeon 5160 (Woodcrest), which features a 4MB L2 cache and 1333MHz FSB."





  • Reply 4 of 86
    nathan22tnathan22t Posts: 317member
    good. know what to expect at WWDC
  • Reply 5 of 86
    irelandireland Posts: 17,771member
    What do you guys expect in iMac's next Jan & later this year?
  • Reply 6 of 86
    shroudshroud Posts: 30member
    Yeah, that pricing seems odd to me as well. Appleinsider must have that wrong because why on earth would intel sell the faster (say what you wan't about not being able to saturate the bus) woodcrest than they would the overclocked core 2 duo. It is simple, they won't.



    I am interested to see what the comments will be on the core 2 though because if it is as close in performance to the woodcrest as all of the reports indicate then either the new pro desktop line had better be all dual woodcrests or the feature sets had better be well worth the money considering an iMac would be close to it in performance on most tasks (unless the Mac Pro line was all dual woodcrests and even then the difference would only be significant on certain apps - law of diminishing returns might show his ugly head)



    Regardless of how Apple decides to distinguish the lines and even regardless of whether or not the next Apple I buy is obsolete in a few months, I am happy with the speed at which intel has been delivering new technology.
  • Reply 7 of 86
    westwest Posts: 34member
    I can't wait to get my hands on a dual-processor kentsfield machine next year. With 8 cores, that thing will be a beast.
  • Reply 8 of 86
    emig647emig647 Posts: 2,440member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Ireland

    What do you guys expect in iMac's next Jan & later this year?



    Definitely e6400 in bottom line and e6600 in the highend... 2.16 and 2.4 in the high end.
  • Reply 9 of 86
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shroud

    Yeah, that pricing seems odd to me as well.



    Well, not so odd if you look at the heat/dissipated power numbers. All Conroe chips are rated 65W or less while the 3.0GHz Woodcrest is rated at 80W. I think it's easier to get a 3GHz chip burning 80W than a 2.93GHz one burning "only" 65W, I think that's why the Core 2 Extreme chip will cost more than the 3GHz Woodcrest. If you look at the list price for the other models, you'll see that Conroe is cheaper than Woodcrest at a similar speed but a faster FSB:

    ***Conroe** - ***Woodcrest**

    2.93GHz $999 - 3.00Ghz $851 (80W)

    2.67GHz $530 - 2.66Ghz $690

    2.40GHz $316 - 2.33GHz $455

    2.13GHz $224 - 2.00Ghz $315

    It's the same with LV model (they cost more):

    Woodcrest 2.33GHz 65W $455

    Woodcrest 2.33GHz 40W $520
  • Reply 10 of 86
    cubertcubert Posts: 728member
    Hmmmm...."more instructions per clock cycle". Sounds an awful like when Apple first went with IBM. Where are you now, Intel doubters?
  • Reply 11 of 86
    and how hot will these puppies run?
  • Reply 12 of 86
    the reason that core 2 extreme is more is because it has an unlocked multiplier which means absolutly nuthing to apple
  • Reply 13 of 86
    shanmugamshanmugam Posts: 1,200member
    http://www.hardwarezone.com.sg/artic...?cid=2&id=1980



    some benchmarks on Core 2 Duo Conroe,



    Conroe in iMac will kick ass!
  • Reply 14 of 86
    kolchakkolchak Posts: 1,398member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by shroud

    Regardless of how Apple decides to distinguish the lines and even regardless of whether or not the next Apple I buy is obsolete in a few months, I am happy with the speed at which intel has been delivering new technology.



    Now if only Apple would include upgradable CPUs in their mobos, then 3 months from introduction to obsolescence wouldn't be a threat anymore. But of course, we all know with Apple that that ain't gonna happen.
  • Reply 15 of 86
    pbpb Posts: 4,237member
    Do we have exact power figures for Conroe, especially compared to today's Core Duo in the iMac?
  • Reply 16 of 86
    nowayout11nowayout11 Posts: 326member
    Embargo has been lifted. Reviews are going up. Core 2 Duo kicks. serious. ass. This is the biggest one-step leap in years.



    Anandtech review



    Power consumption and performance comparisons included.
  • Reply 17 of 86
    netdognetdog Posts: 244member
    What tools do I need to get inside my iMac? The Merom is the only chip that I can upgrade to, correct?
  • Reply 18 of 86
    1337_5l4xx0r1337_5l4xx0r Posts: 1,558member
    I think so, but the Merom is a Core 2 Duo, just with (initially) a 667mhz bus.
  • Reply 19 of 86
    mr. hmr. h Posts: 4,822member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Cubert

    Where are you now, Intel doubters?



    How does a Core 2 Duo being better than the closest equivalent PPC (G5) prevent the Pentium x being worse than the equivalent PPC?
  • Reply 20 of 86
    wackybitwackybit Posts: 11member
    Is the Core 2 Duo a 64bit processor or is it still a 32bit like core duo??? (but I heard that core duo was actually a 64bit but intel wouldn't say it)

    Any ideas?
Sign In or Register to comment.