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?
Core 2 Duo= 64bit
Core Duo= 32bit
Anyway... I won't be surpriced if Apple will use the slowest Conroes available in the next incarnation of the iMac (Core 2 Duo E6300 and E6400; 1.86Ghz / 2.13Ghz).
They still will be much faster than the same clocked Yonah processor currently used.
If they use faster processors instead, Intels roadmap is much better than i've hoped for.
Wow, those 1.83Ghz Conroes are pretty spiffy for a cheap chip, beating all but the fastest Pentium Extreme. Why on earth would anyone buy a Pentium now?
And I am really still not convinced that it can take a Conroe without sacrificing much of its quiet operation.
Good point, although my G5 iMac is quite noisy, especially running carbon apps. It was quiet when I got it but Apple seem to have ramped up the fans on subsequent OS updates.
Good point, although my G5 iMac is quite noisy, especially running carbon apps. It was quiet when I got it but Apple seem to have ramped up the fans on subsequent OS updates.
This is something not unheard of. Apple did the same thing with older Aluminum Powerbooks because, I presume, they realized that the heat is too much and in the long term would hurt the machine (increasing probably repairs under warranty).
I guess a Conroe would bring the iMac back to the G5 heat and noise era. Only a 23" model has hope to handle well a 60-65 W CPU without being a leaf blower.
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.
Why not? So far they've done it with all intel macs but portables.
Given that when the first intel iMac was released the chip prices were $294 for the 17" (1.83) and $423 for the 20" (2.0) that would make me believe that if they were to again release both 17" and 20" models with the Core 2 duo then we would see the 2.13GHz ($224) in the 17" and the 2.4GHz ($316) in the 20".
Of course this does not take into effect heating issues (of which I am not knowledgable). Also, their is a possibility that (partially) due to the recent 17" education iMac we may see a 23" version using the 2.67GHz ($530) conroe chip and no 17" update.
I could be wrong about the core duo price quotes from the first line but if I am right then it seems there is room for either some other quality upgrades or a small price drop in models. Basically just more flexibility for apple.
Anyway... I won't be surpriced if Apple will use the slowest Conroes available in the next incarnation of the iMac (Core 2 Duo E6300 and E6400; 1.86Ghz / 2.13Ghz).
They still will be much faster than the same clocked Yonah processor currently used.
If they use faster processors instead, Intels roadmap is much better than i've hoped for.
Oh yeah baby!!! it's 64 bit! Since rumor says the MacBook Pro will receive a new casing when it is updated with a Core 2 Duo processor, I hope Ive puts in 4 RAM slots so some hardcore user with a lot of money (not me) can put in 8GBs of RAM!!! Maybe I'll put in 4GBs.....hehehe
The core duo's are turning out to be quite the little over-clockers. They were able to oc the Extreme X6800 from 2.93GHz to 4.0GHz with quality air cooling.
Oh yeah baby!!! it's 64 bit! Since rumor says the MacBook Pro will receive a new casing when it is updated with a Core 2 Duo processor, I hope Ive puts in 4 RAM slots so some hardcore user with a lot of money (not me) can put in 8GBs of RAM!!! Maybe I'll put in 4GBs.....hehehe
The Core 2 Extreme does not exceed 45 °C CPU temperature using the Intel retail cooler in an office environment.............You should care to enable SpeedStep, because it reduces the processor clock speed to 1.6 GHz when idle. This will cause the processor fan to drop its rotation speed to as little as 1,500 RPM. Eventually, we measured an average CPU temperature level of only 25°C (77°F). That's almost room temperature!
The core duo's are turning out to be quite the little over-clockers. They were able to oc the Extreme X6800 from 2.93GHz to 4.0GHz with quality air cooling.
And the xtremesystems.com dudes went up to 5,2 GHz on liquid nitrogen. Any chance of Apple overclocking their chips?
Hmmmm...."more instructions per clock cycle". Sounds an awful like when Apple first went with IBM. Where are you now, Intel doubters?
The "Intel doubters" really haven't been saying much since the actual units were offered for sale. Many of them were basing their arguments on the P4 architecture that was prevailing during the time of the architecture switch.
Different time, comparing with different chips, the difference of three years can mean a lot in the microprocessor world. Core 2 has an additional execution unit and a lot shorter pipeline vs. any of the P4s that the G5 was competing against.
Comments
Originally posted by Cubert
Hmmmm...."more instructions per clock cycle". Sounds an awful like when Apple first went with IBM. Where are you now, Intel doubters?
I'll take lower Mhz and more complete instructions processed per clock cycle any damn day.
Originally posted by wackybit
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?
Core 2 Duo= 64bit
Core Duo= 32bit
Anyway... I won't be surpriced if Apple will use the slowest Conroes available in the next incarnation of the iMac (Core 2 Duo E6300 and E6400; 1.86Ghz / 2.13Ghz).
They still will be much faster than the same clocked Yonah processor currently used.
If they use faster processors instead, Intels roadmap is much better than i've hoped for.
MEROM??? will intel surprise us with Aug release & Availability?
Yonah ...Merom
Conroe
Woodcrest
? (what is the name for new itanium?)
now we got everthing
Originally posted by shanmugam
? (what is the name for new itanium?)
Does anyone even care about Itanium anymore? Isn't it dead?
So, the question is, Conroe iMacs at WWDC too ?
I really can't see Apple using Merom in the iMac.
iMac update as soon as next tuesday?
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I really can't see Apple using Merom in the iMac.
And I am really still not convinced that it can take a Conroe without sacrificing much of its quiet operation.
And other pc manufacturers,excuse me but i want to know what I am buying,I hope apple doesnt take on the ignorant trend. 0.2 cents
once again I am Slightly of topic but just not enough to get flammed.
Originally posted by PB
And I am really still not convinced that it can take a Conroe without sacrificing much of its quiet operation.
Good point, although my G5 iMac is quite noisy, especially running carbon apps. It was quiet when I got it but Apple seem to have ramped up the fans on subsequent OS updates.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Good point, although my G5 iMac is quite noisy, especially running carbon apps. It was quiet when I got it but Apple seem to have ramped up the fans on subsequent OS updates.
This is something not unheard of. Apple did the same thing with older Aluminum Powerbooks because, I presume, they realized that the heat is too much and in the long term would hurt the machine (increasing probably repairs under warranty).
I guess a Conroe would bring the iMac back to the G5 heat and noise era. Only a 23" model has hope to handle well a 60-65 W CPU without being a leaf blower.
Originally posted by Kolchak
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.
Why not? So far they've done it with all intel macs but portables.
Of course this does not take into effect heating issues (of which I am not knowledgable). Also, their is a possibility that (partially) due to the recent 17" education iMac we may see a 23" version using the 2.67GHz ($530) conroe chip and no 17" update.
I could be wrong about the core duo price quotes from the first line but if I am right then it seems there is room for either some other quality upgrades or a small price drop in models. Basically just more flexibility for apple.
Originally posted by gar
Core 2 Duo= 64bit
Core Duo= 32bit
Anyway... I won't be surpriced if Apple will use the slowest Conroes available in the next incarnation of the iMac (Core 2 Duo E6300 and E6400; 1.86Ghz / 2.13Ghz).
They still will be much faster than the same clocked Yonah processor currently used.
If they use faster processors instead, Intels roadmap is much better than i've hoped for.
Oh yeah baby!!! it's 64 bit! Since rumor says the MacBook Pro will receive a new casing when it is updated with a Core 2 Duo processor, I hope Ive puts in 4 RAM slots so some hardcore user with a lot of money (not me) can put in 8GBs of RAM!!! Maybe I'll put in 4GBs.....hehehe
Dare to dream....
Originally posted by Bigc
...what do published Spot Prices for chips have to do with Apple who is buying chips on a daily basis..
Just meant as a comparison
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets...px?i=2795&p=18
I don't know how well the Mac side will be for ocing, but damn...
Originally posted by wackybit
Oh yeah baby!!! it's 64 bit! Since rumor says the MacBook Pro will receive a new casing when it is updated with a Core 2 Duo processor, I hope Ive puts in 4 RAM slots so some hardcore user with a lot of money (not me) can put in 8GBs of RAM!!! Maybe I'll put in 4GBs.....hehehe
Dare to dream....
4 RAM slots? 2 GBs each? For what, $10,000 total?
from
http://www.tomshardware.com/2006/07/..._64/page8.html
Originally posted by opuscroakus
The core duo's are turning out to be quite the little over-clockers. They were able to oc the Extreme X6800 from 2.93GHz to 4.0GHz with quality air cooling.
And the xtremesystems.com dudes went up to 5,2 GHz on liquid nitrogen. Any chance of Apple overclocking their chips?
Originally posted by Cubert
Hmmmm...."more instructions per clock cycle". Sounds an awful like when Apple first went with IBM. Where are you now, Intel doubters?
The "Intel doubters" really haven't been saying much since the actual units were offered for sale. Many of them were basing their arguments on the P4 architecture that was prevailing during the time of the architecture switch.
Different time, comparing with different chips, the difference of three years can mean a lot in the microprocessor world. Core 2 has an additional execution unit and a lot shorter pipeline vs. any of the P4s that the G5 was competing against.