Whats the difference between Core Duo and Pentium D?

Discussion in 'Mac Pro' started by xJus10x, Apr 10, 2006.

  1. xJus10x macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #1
    Can someone just give me a quick explantion on what the difference is between Core Duos and Pentium D (Intel Viiv or whatever)? Are Core Duos a lot better?
     
  2. StealthRider macrumors 65816

    StealthRider

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Location:
    Yokosuka, Japan
    #2
    A Core Duo is based on the Pentium III/Pentium M architecture. It is quiet, runs cool, and is very efficient. It's made for mobile machines.

    The Pentium D is none of the above. Power draw is ridiculous, the "NetBurst" architecture, based on the Pentium 4, is incredibly inefficient, and the thing runs HOT! You'd melt the screen if you tried to put it in an iMac.

    The good news is that the Core Duo at 2GHz can outperform a 3GHz Pentium D in many cases. Also, when "Conroe" comes out this summer, the P-D will die.\

    So yes, the Core Duo is much much better.
     
  3. xJus10x thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #3
    What's Conroe? Are they putting it in the iMacs? I'm buying an iMac, but I'm trying to figure out when I should buy it. With this new article saying there will be price drops on the Core Duo I think I'm gonna hold off buying my iMac, is this a good idea?
     
  4. menziep macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2006
    #4
    Conroe is coming out in the 3Q

    The iMacs are probily going to stick with the mobile processer for better heat efficency

    As For price drops then apple will probily not drop there prices till the next revision.

    If you want a Intel iMac then get it. There wont be an major updates/pricedrops to it soon..


    Hope This Helps :cool:
     
  5. SC68Cal macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    #5
    Basically the P4 had a built in fuction that would try to predict in which way the instruction set would go and try to execute the work flow out of order, the problem was that if the logic tree that it created was the wrong one and the code ended up going in a different direction, the processor would flush the cache of instructions and go back to square one.

    In theory, it was a great idea. In practice, it just didn't work out. I believe a lot of the processor was wasted dumping bad code predictions and starting over again.

    With the new Intel chips, I think they've done away with the extensive attempts at out of order execution that was used in P4 because it was just too inefeccient and I think they hit a glass ceiling in performance
     
  6. xJus10x thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #6
    Yeah, that helped. Thanks man.
     
  7. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #7
    Conroe is Intel's next-gen desktop CPU - essentially the archictecture that will replace the Pentium 4, Pentium D and Celeron series.
     
  8. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #8
    64-bit? For next gen PowerMacs?
     
  9. xJus10x thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #9
    So I'm guessing that will be used in the PowerMacs, which are way out of my price range. lol
     
  10. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #10
    I doubt so.

    The current G5s are the equivalence of Xeons for instance.. but Conroes are going to be Intel's "budget" processors. If Apple prices their own personal computers as workstations it is going to look really ridiculous on the marketplace.
     
  11. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #11
    Of course there's no guarantee that Conroe will be used - or even that the Power Mac line will be restricted to one type of CPU in the future.
     
  12. spencecb macrumors 6502a

    spencecb

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    #12
    I would assume that the PowerMac would continue to be "restricted" to one type of processor. Apple has never been about making their offerings confusing to the consumer, as is often the case in the PC world.

    Apple has a product line that focuses on specific groups of users. It would be silly for them to complicate this.

    But then again, you never know what might happen. That's just what I have seen in the past, and with the new Intel Macs, things have not departed from that business model.
     
  13. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #13
    Well, if you look at Apple hardware from the past, there have been times, like back in the days of the Performa, where Apple sold two desktop lines: PowerMacs (with a 604/604e processor) for pros and Performas (with a 603/603e) for consumers. Some of the cheaper PowerMacs (like the 6400/6500) also had 603 series CPUs.

    Perhaps Apple will do the same in the future. Granted, the iMac/Mac Mini already fill the consumer slot, but there could be a market for a cheaper tower that offers more expandability than the iMac/Mini, but isn't as expensive at the low end as the PowerMacs are now. Not everyone wants a built-in screen, and many people would like an upgradeable video card.

    In my opinion, Apple will probably go with a single type of CPU for the next "PowerMac" line, but who knows?
     
  14. bah-bah'd macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2006
    #14
    Which is why I would not be suprised to see G6 PowerMacs, (flame on, I don't care...) Isn't there going to be lots of G6 consoles out there?
     
  15. Cabbit macrumors 68020

    Cabbit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    Location:
    Scotland
    #16
    imacs had a g5 in them, i think they will get conroe for heat/price/preformance. whats with everyone wanting the imac to have bargen basement preformance when you can get faster preformance for less money from conroe.
     
  16. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #17
    Bad idea.

    theinquirer.net is once again very late. The price drops have been announced in January already - a few days after Apple announced that all MacBook Pros would ship with the next faster processor, so Apple has already been buying chips at the lower prices since January.

    However, if you planned to buy a Dell or other PC with a Core Duo processor, you should definitely wait until June. And I don't mean June 2006, I mean June 2016 or later.
     
  17. gnasher729 macrumors P6

    gnasher729

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    #18
    The major problem was that in their effort to reduce the length of a clock cycle, Intel reduced the amount of work that could be done per clock cycle to a ridiculously small amount. As an example, a shift instruction takes four cycles on P4 and one cycle on Core Duo, an integer multiplication takes 15 cycles on P4 and four on a Core Duo, and so on. I recently wrote some code that ran on a 200 MHz ARM chip and a 2.5 GHz P4, and the P4 executed exactly the same code at less than three times the speed (at a twelve times higher clock speed).
     
  18. Kingsly macrumors 68040

    Kingsly

    #19
    So, what processors get to go into the Xserves?

    Also, as for CD vs PD, I think "Core Duo" sounds cooler, and therefore is superior.
     
  19. howesey macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    #20
    Just do not worry about it all.

    Intel's road map follows Moore's law, and they are sticking to it. When I visited Intel last year they have already designed and developed processors for the next ten years. There problem is with tooling, and releasing them slowly to keep to Moore's law. AMD are similar but a few years behind on the development.

    You'll see a doubling in speed and capacity every 18-21 months as it always has been.
     
  20. generik macrumors 601

    generik

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2005
    Location:
    Minitrue
    #21
    I doubt so, if anything that's only hypothesized.

    What I think really happened is that Apple's marketheads already felt the big consumer backlash ahead when the expected specs and pricing went out into the wild, and to sweeten up the deal they upped the specs.

    1.66Ghz for US$2000? I don't know what you're smoking bud, but Mercedes of computing or not that $250 chip deserves to be in a $799 computer, not a $2000 one.
     
  21. Kaiser Phoenix macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 12, 2005
    Location:
    London
    #22
    So much for the "cool" MBPs!
     
  22. SC68Cal macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    #23
    Very interesting. I know I read a whitepaper somewhere that mentioned Intel was using more pipelines compared to AMD, and it was explained using a metaphor that the AMD processors used bigger buckets to fill from the spigot before taking it back, and the Intel processor just used lots of very little buckets to fill from the spigot and would move back and forth between the well and the house quicker than the AMD.

    Both got the task done about the same time, it just seems that the author was more interested in the effeciency of the AMD versus the Intel processor
     
  23. spencecb macrumors 6502a

    spencecb

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2003
    #24
    Hahahaha.
     
  24. BlizzardBomb macrumors 68030

    BlizzardBomb

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2005
    Location:
    England
    #25
    Sossaman Core Duo is Intel's current "Xeon" (based on Yonah). They are still calling it the Xeon by the looks of it.
     

Share This Page