Apple Releases Core 2 Duo iMac, Adds 24" Model

[manu chao]

In case you have not read it elsewhere already, the 3GB limit is for real, you can put it 4GB but the OS and the apps will see only 3GB:

http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304284

 

[javierbds]

This is all nonsense, a 1.83 Conroe is NOT on par with a 2.33 Merom, it is way slower. A 2.33 Merom is almost as fast as a 2.33 Conroe.

I think you forgot the word System ... (like a system built around a Conroe , or a system built around a Merom).

Take a look at this NONSENSE, please :

MEROM 2.33 : 260 SYSMARK

"The ASUS Z96Js is outfitted with a 15.4" widescreen display with a 1280 x 800 native resolution, driven by a 256MB ATI Mobility Radeon X1600. Our test system was outfitted with two 512MB DDR2-667 memory modules. Unfortunately the ASUS notebook doesn't allow adjustment of memory timings so they were left at the SPD defaults of 5-5-5-15. We installed a 7200RPM Hitachi Travelstar 7K100 (60GB SATA) hard drive in the notebook, but regardless of what we use, 2.5" disk speeds are still nowhere near what's available on today's 3.5" desktop drives.

The motherboard in the Z96Js features Intel's 945PM chipset and a 479-pin Socket-M interface. Since both of our test CPUs were Socket-M processors, all we had to do was get a BIOS update to support Merom and swap the CPUs to compare the two. "



CONROE 1.83 : 255 SYSMARK


CPU: AMD Athlon 64 FX-62 (2.8GHz/1MBx2)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 5000+ (2.6GHz/512KBx2)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4600+ (2.4GHz/512KBx2)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4200+ (2.2GHz/512KBx2)
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ (2.0GHz/512KBx2)
Intel Pentium Extreme Edition 965 (3.73GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 960 (3.6GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 950 (3.4GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 940 (3.2GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 930 (3.0GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 920 (2.8GHz/2MBx2)
Intel Pentium D 820 (2.8GHz/1MBx2)
Intel Core 2 Extreme X6800 (2.93GHz/4MB)
Intel Core 2 Duo E6700 (2.66GHz/4MB)
Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 (2.40GHz/4MB)
Intel Core 2 Duo E6300 (1.86GHz/2MB)
Motherboard: MSI K9A Platinum (Socket AM2)
Intel D975XBX (LGA-775)
Chipset: ATI RD580
Intel 975X
Chipset Drivers: Catalyst 6.6 (ATI)
Intel 7.2.2.1007 (Intel)
Hard Disk: Seagate 7200.9 300GB SATA
Memory: Corsair XMS2 DDR2-800 4-4-4-12 (1GB x 2)
Video Card: 2 x ATI Radeon X1900 XT CrossFire
Video Drivers: ATI Catalyst 6.6
Desktop Resolution: 1280 x 1024 - 32-bit @ 60Hz (1600 x 1200 for games)
OS: Windows XP Professional SP2


Source : http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/

 

[Anonymous Freak]

JVC has a 50in LCD annouced for $10k, that is 4k res., not sure what you use to drive it to full res though.

Not sure what you mean by "4k res", but $10,000 for a 50" LCD isn't that terribly out of line for a standard high definition TV LCD. Again, 32 MB is plenty for a display with four times as many pixels as Apple's 23" Cinema HD Display (and the new 24" iMac.) For Apple's 30" display, 16 MB would be plenty. Even if you had a display with four times as many pixels as the 30" display (and four dual-link DVI ports to run it,) 64 MB of RAM would be sufficient. For these monster displays, it's the dual-link DVI that's the deal-breaker for cheap video cards. Nobody wants to put such a 'high end' feature on a cheap video card.

So by implication then- the 2.16Ghz 15in MBP (GPU underclocked on the 15 presumably for heat reasons, but not on the 17) & 17in MBP have 256MB of vid mem. for gameboys? ...seeing that the 128MB GPU has dual link support for the 30in CD. Bameboy xSTLx will be really happy to know that.
So then I could plug in my MBP to a 50in JVC 4k res, LCD; if I had deep pockets, and had the right adapter connectors...cool!

Not quite. Video RAM is used by OS X for lots of things now that we have Quartz Extreme. And if Apple would enable Quartz 2D Extreme, we'd see even more use. So in OS X, the OS itself is a big user of video RAM. (In Windows XP, if all you do is 2D work, you won't be able to tell the difference between a 32 MB card and a 1 GB card, assuming the quality of the chips is even; even on the monster quad-HD display I mentioned earlier.)

But, for the most part, yeah. Anything more than 64 MB of video RAM is only truly useful for gamers and people who use a few graphics apps that actually take advantage of it. (Aperture is one.) Although I imagine with Leopard, more apps will start taking advantage of it. (Since Core Animation effects look like they will be a big video RAM hog.)

 

[Anonymous Freak]

I think you forgot the word System ... (like a system built around a Conroe , or a system built around a Merom).

Take a look at this NONSENSE, please :

Yup, a Merom system would almost guaranteed be slower than an equal GHz Conroe system.

But, the chips themselves... Assuming chipset bandwidth isn't the limiting factor (aka the fact that Merom is only 667 MHz while Conroe is 1066 MHz,) the two should perform identically on CPU tasks. (SPEC benchmarks, for example.)

 

[AidenShaw]

Well, I have heard from a personally-known developer source that HP scanner 32-bit PowerPC drivers run just fine in the Leopard Preview on a Mac Pro. So not only are they 32-bit, but they're emulated, at that. (32-bit Intel-native printer drivers work, too.)

Printer/scanner drivers, and some others (like some USB device drivers) don't really need to touch hardware.

For example, the job that a scanner driver does is "I got this stream of bits from the USB or 1394 port, and here's the bitmap image that they represent". The native USB driver is doing the hardware handling, and passing bits up and down.

What about my dual-port InfiniBand card (40 Gbps per port), or the quad port Fibre Channel card driver? Will the 32-bit IB driver know that the 4 GiB datagram needs to be put in physical memory starting at 21.375 GiB?

...they will thunk ONE (or more, if you try to run multithreaded 32-bit apps on a 4 core system,) core to 32-bit mode as needed, while running the other core(s) at 64-bit.

Dedicating any CPU in an SMP system for specific tasks is almost always a mistake.

The process state will include whether the thread/process is 32-bit or 64-bit, and part of the context switch will be to place the CPU in the proper mode.

Much better to dynamically schedule tasks as load changes, and not do static allocations.

 

[MacinDoc]

I think you forgot the word System ... (like a system built around a Conroe , or a system built around a Merom).

OK, take a look at this extensive set of benchmarks comparing a 2.16 GHz Merom system with a 2.13 GHz Conroe system. Results are almost identical in most tests (and OpenGL results favor the Merom system, although this may reflect a difference in GPUs).

 

[AidenShaw]

Assuming chipset bandwidth isn't the limiting factor (aka the fact that Merom is only 667 MHz while Conroe is 1066 MHz,) the two should perform identically on CPU tasks. (SPEC benchmarks, for example.)

Actually no.

SPECfp is very sensitive to memory bandwidth - many of the components of SPECfp are doing huge array computations.

If your memory system sucks, so will your SPECfp numbers.

 

[kreesto]

This looks not so promising

The Inquirer is reporting that Apple will delay C2D MBP's until 2007!

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34222

 

[DakotaGuy]

I notice on the Apple site they are showing the speed improvement using a SPECint_rate_base2000 test. The Integer performance appears to be 1.5X better and the Floating-point test shows it to be 1.4X better. Here is the kicker though. They are comparing a Core Duo at 2Ghz and a Core 2 Duo at 2.33 Ghz. So really Ghz for Ghz is there a huge difference? I mean enough to lay down cash for the new model? My iMac is 4 months old and I really like it...for what I do it seems really fast, but do you think I would be blown away by the new processor? I don't really do anything that intense but it is always nice to have something fast, not that the Core Duo is slow.

I guess my question is this upgrade worth it to someone with an almost new Core Duo 2Ghz model?

 

[MacinDoc]

Actually no.

SPECfp is very sensitive to memory bandwidth - many of the components of SPECfp are doing huge array computations.

If your memory system sucks, so will your SPECfp numbers.

Agreed. And the tests I quoted above showed that memory tests were the one area where the 2.16 GHz Merom fell behind the 2.13 GHz Conroe, with a performance hit of about 10%. Still, I feel that this is a small price to pay in the iMac for what should be a much quieter processor.

Of course, that doesn't mean that Apple shouldn't still release that Conroe mini-tower you've been predicting (yes, I'm ducking to avoid flames from those who are tired of hearing this speculation).

 

[MacinDoc]

I notice on the Apple site they are showing the speed improvement using a SPECint_rate_base2000 test. The Integer performance appears to be 1.5X better and the Floating-point test shows it to be 1.4X better. Here is the kicker though. They are comparing a Core Duo at 2Ghz and a Core 2 Duo at 2.33 Ghz. So really Ghz for Ghz is there a huge difference? I mean enough to lay down cash for the new model? My iMac is 4 months old and I really like it...for what I do it seems really fast, but do you think I would be blown away by the new processor? I don't really do anything that intense but it is always nice to have something fast, not that the Core Duo is slow.

I guess my question is this upgrade worth it to someone with an almost new Core Duo 2Ghz model?

Unless you really "need" the 24 incher, no.

 

[DakotaGuy]

Unless you really "need" the 24 incher, no.

That is what I was thinking myself after looking at all the tests and specifications. The 24" must be HUGE! I remember when I got the new 20" iMac Core Duo to replace my first generation 17" iMac G5 it seemed much larger. I can't imagine what the 24" would look like on my desk. I am really happy with this computer so I am going to pass on this update.

 

[Reep]

The Inquirer is reporting that Apple will delay C2D MBP's until 2007!

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=34222

Wow. This is huge, and probably deserves a thread and MacRumors section of it's own if true. I'm glad I'm not one of the ones waiting. My condolenses to those of you (many) who are.

 

[Erasmus]

just a question, and I may be wrong, but how so we know that the imacs are using merom and not conroe? I couldn't find anywhere on the apple site that gave processor numbers, only speeds...

Simply, there is no 2.33 Conroe.
If iMacs had Conroe, we would without doubt be seeing 2.4 and 2.67Ghz processors. Which we don't.

 

[Josephkyles]

I just ordered my 24 inch!!!

I am super ecstatic about my new iMac!

Mine is a 24 inch, 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB Ram, 500GB HDD, NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB SDRAM.

Along with that I got the promotional 2GB iPod nano, and HP all in one printer. Both are free with mail in rebate. I figure I'll sell the iPod on Ebay.

 

[DrFrankTM]

esp if it has a xeon in their

Yep! A Xeon, 30-inch iMac would be a pretty strange bird, but wow! I don't know if anyone would actually buy it, but I guess some would as some people do prefer an AIO to a separate tower and screen.

EDIT: "Some" might not be enough to make it commercially viable, but somehow I really like the idea anyways.

 

[nagromme]

I am super ecstatic about my new iMac!

Mine is a 24 inch, 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB Ram, 500GB HDD, NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB SDRAM.

Along with that I got the promotional 2GB iPod nano, and HP all in one printer. Both are free with mail in rebate. I figure I'll sell the iPod on Ebay.

Congrats! Another option: you could apply the nano price towards a larger iPod--one large enough to make a very useful backup and transfer drive. The 30 GB is very cheap once you subtract the savings.

Also, I think the terms of the iPod and printer deals BOTH require your original barcode. But if you call Apple, they should tell you how to get both rebates anyway. (In my similar case I included a copy, plus a note, with one of the rebates--and I got my money just fine.)

 

[Evangelion]

Thanks, Nagromme...I was going to post roughly the same stuff, but the wine I drunk tonight with friends blocked me from doing that...the funniest thing is to see Mr. Shaw and the Windows fanclub trying to debunk what cannot be debunked

I'll grant you 64bitness, although I haven't kept tabs on Vista since I'm not interested in it really. But even that "bitness" does not mean that your argument was true overall.

And what exactly is this "Windows fanclub" you are talking about? Elaborate please. Are you lumping me in to that "fanclub", even though I own no Windows-machines?

You seem to have the idea that everyone who does not unconditionally love everything Apple does, is automatically "Windows fanboy". Let's just say that that viewpoint is.... misguided.

 

[yojitani]

Congrats! Another option: you could apply the nano price towards a larger iPod--one large enough to make a very useful backup and transfer drive. The 30 GB is very cheap once you subtract the savings.

Also, I think the terms of the iPod and printer deals BOTH require your original barcode. But if you call Apple, they should tell you how to get both rebates anyway. (In my similar case I included a copy, plus a note, with one of the rebates--and I got my money just fine.)

You can buy the 30GB and still get the rebate ($179). I mean, there's no need to sell the ipod and then buy another one - so the 30GB ends up costing you $90 - not bad, eh?

 

[Evangelion]

@ehurtley: I think I recall that under Gentoo Linux you could run a 64 bit system, with parts of the system compiled under 32 bit too, so you could run 32 bit apps? Don't know if that makes sense though.

You sure can. In fact, I think just about all Linuxes do that. Reason being that sometimes 32bits is faster than 64bits. And sometimes there are no 64bit apps available.

 

[swingerofbirch]

So hold on......you CAN'T get the iPod/printer deal with the new iMac?

 

[Alfpog]

I am super ecstatic about my new iMac!

Mine is a 24 inch, 2.33GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 GB Ram, 500GB HDD, NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT 256MB SDRAM.

Along with that I got the promotional 2GB iPod nano, and HP all in one printer. Both are free with mail in rebate. I figure I'll sell the iPod on Ebay.

Unfortunately I don't think that Apple included the new iMacs in the iPod Nano give away.

 

[bousozoku]

I notice on the Apple site they are showing the speed improvement using a SPECint_rate_base2000 test. The Integer performance appears to be 1.5X better and the Floating-point test shows it to be 1.4X better. Here is the kicker though. They are comparing a Core Duo at 2Ghz and a Core 2 Duo at 2.33 Ghz. So really Ghz for Ghz is there a huge difference? I mean enough to lay down cash for the new model? My iMac is 4 months old and I really like it...for what I do it seems really fast, but do you think I would be blown away by the new processor? I don't really do anything that intense but it is always nice to have something fast, not that the Core Duo is slow.

I guess my question is this upgrade worth it to someone with an almost new Core Duo 2Ghz model?

Why would it be? Only fanatics are going to jump from a 20 inch to the latest 20 inch. You've got a good machine. I really don't think anyone is going to notice the modest gains in performance or power savings until they're in a laptop computer. Of course, the 24 inch is another matter entirely.

 

[nagromme]

Unfortunately I don't think that Apple included the new iMacs in the iPod Nano give away.

That's too bad--I didn't think of that. I hope Josephkyles checks with Apple in time to change his order if that's the case.

Then again, there are worse fates than accidentally buying an iPod Nano (One of which is accidentally buying an iPod Nano which arrives 3 days after new models came out!)

 

[generik]

Unfortunately I don't think that Apple included the new iMacs in the iPod Nano give away.

It seems like only American students are screwed, the brits still have the new iMacs included in their promo