core 2 duo faster than i5/i7?

Discussion in 'iMac' started by TDHXXX, Nov 9, 2009.

  1. TDHXXX macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    #1
    I was in the apple store today and overheard a customer talking to a staff member, her son wanted the quadcore but after some discussion the staff member said that the core2duo will be much faster than the quadcore processors?

    Can anyone confirm this? I was planning on getting an i7 but now I don't know...
     
  2. Chundles macrumors G4

    Chundles

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2005
    #2
    Not really, the Core i5 will be faster than the Core 2 Duo but why spend the cash if you don't need it?

    Maybe the kid was just doing internet, word etc. and loved the screen size for looking at photos and watching videos. Don't need to spend the extra cash for that. May as well get the C2D and AppleCare or some software.
     
  3. TDHXXX thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2009
    #3
    He was planning on using it for video editing.

    I'll be using mine for the adobe suite (primarily photoshop, illustrator and flash) and games, would I benefit from the quadcore?
     
  4. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #4
    Right now maybe for old apps, but as apps are upgraded to take advantage of the better thread handling, the quads will shine.

    If you plan on keeping the machine 3 years, the quad would be worth the expense as apps beyond the Apple OS and their iWork/Life/Pro apps take advantage of the more powerful resources.
     
  5. kroeks macrumors regular

    #5
    + almost every product from Adobe (also pretty early ones) make use of all the cores avaible.

    I think today most programs run just a bit faster on Duo, but in a year Quad will be faster. Like he said, you'll be better prepared when you go for the Q
     
  6. itommyboy macrumors 6502a

    itommyboy

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2009
    Location:
    Titletown USA
    #6

    Thanks to turbo boost, essentially the i7 is the fastest duo core available until apps start using more cores. ;) If you have the money ready for the i7 pull the trigger it's the biggest baddest fastest iMac available (for now) and will last you a good long while.
     
  7. robotkiller macrumors 6502

    robotkiller

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #7
    Sounds like someone is trying to unload some dual cores.

    As others have mentioned, turbo-boost will increase clock speed of a single core to 3.46 and the i7 has an 8M L3 cache vs the 6M L2 cache(?) of the C2D. Because of that (and probably numerous other reasons), the Quad should be faster under all circumstances, at least theoretically. Saying a C2D is "much faster" is just straight BS.
     
  8. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #8
    The sales rep may not have been malicious at all; simply misinformed. Too many folks still buy into the megahertz myth, believing that clock speed is the sole determinant to performance.
     
  9. UrFatMom macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    #9
    How can someone at the App store say such BS...? Unless they wanna get rid of their c2d. Last time I heard crap like that was at Best Buy :)
     
  10. Kronie macrumors 6502a

    Kronie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    #10
    Sounds like that Apple salesperson just wanted to "make a sale"

    "Why wait for the lesser i7 when you can have a C2D today" LOL
     
  11. gr81mgbgt macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    #11
    Core 2 Duo. For Today's Applications YES. Most Application only need 2 cores, You only need the core 2 duo if it for home use + more,

    GET the Quad Core if your editing and doing Graphic Design, more intense multiple programs running simultaneously.

    You are throwing money away if you get an i5 or i7 if it for home use, internet, music, videos, Movies,word, ect...
     
  12. Kronie macrumors 6502a

    Kronie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    #12
    What about two or three years from now?
     
  13. unamused macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    #13
    Agreed... Its very similar with cars and horsepower... People think that because a car has more HP it is by default faster when in truth, torque is a HUGE factor especially when comparing 0-60 times. Obviously their are other large factors like weight and gearing, but its essentially the same thing with computers and CPU's. You have to look at all the specs, not just one. "Torque wins races but horsepower sells cars"
     
  14. fa8362 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #14
    What about it? In 1994, some folks were recommending dual processor computers at significantly greater expense. See how that turned out.
     
  15. gr81mgbgt macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    #15
    3 years from now? You will be purchasing a new computer. There is no such thing as future proofing. Whats new today, is old tomorrow.
     
  16. negatv1 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2005
    Location:
    MI
    #16
    Exactly! People act like they are buying for Armageddon, when these same people are likely they will be running out to upgrade to the next released revision. And I'm guilty as charged. ;)
     
  17. UrFatMom macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2009
    #17
    The question is more like, why not put the 200$ in now and never regret it, or buy C2D and keep telling yourself, what if I had the quad..?

    Both processors are already outdated anyway, but I'm pretty sure next year i'll be happy I put the 200$ more in the i5...
     
  18. gr81mgbgt macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2008
    #18
    Its a question if you need it or not, and if your going to utilize the extra power. There shouldent be any questioning after you buy either or.
     
  19. 53x12 macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #19
    What about the fact that the i5/i7 are based on the 1156 socket which, along with the 1366 socket, seem to be the way of the future. At least with the i5/i7, you theoretically could update the CPU to something new/faster if it fits the 1156 and won't melt the computer. I would definitely say the i5/i7 are worth the money for 2009 technology rather than the C2D (2006 technology). If you keep the computer 3-4 years, you are looking at the difference of the technology being 3-4yrs old vs. 6-7yrs old. That is fairly significant.
     
  20. Kronie macrumors 6502a

    Kronie

    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2008
    #20

    Actually I will probably be buying a new computer next year :D. As I'm sure my i7 iMac (whenever Apple can manage to ship the damn thing) will be ready for a nice new owner and I can own the top of the line again........for about three months.....

    And I'm sorry but there IS such a thing as future proofing. Lets compare the base 27" with a 27" i7 quad in three years and see which one runs better with current software of the time. Any guesses?;)
     
  21. 53x12 macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #21

    Ding, ding, ding, we have a winner.
     
  22. fa8362 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #22
    I bet there will be an insignificant difference for most users. Same as today.
     
  23. 53x12 macrumors 68000

    53x12

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2009
    #23
    I beg to differ. Once developers start taking advantage of GCD, multiple cores, and HT you will see a significant difference. At this point you are right, the difference is insignificant since developers haven't really taken advantage of them yet. However that will not be the case in the next couple of years. Sorry, I believe you are wrong on this one.
     
  24. fa8362 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    #24
    Well, I obviously think you're wrong, so I guess we're even. Personally, I think it's inadvisable to spend money on what might or might not happen. Wait until it does.
     
  25. 300D macrumors 65816

    300D

    Joined:
    May 2, 2009
    Location:
    Tulsa
    #25
    Which was about 4 years ago.
     

Share This Page