Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Having trouble identifying my "early 2006" iMac CPU model

smirk

smirk

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jul 18, 2002
694
56
Orange County, CA
I have an "early 2006" iMac, model iMac4,1. What's odd is that OS X says the CPU is a Core Duo but Intel's documentation says it is a Core Solo. I'm trying to figure out what I actually have.

Here's how it breaks down:

System Profiler says it's an Intel Core Duo @ 1.83 GHz, 1 processor with 2 cores.

MacCPUID (Intel's utility), says it is a model 1400 @ 1.83 GHZ, Family 6, Model 14, Stepping 8.

However, Intel's site doesn't list a Core Duo model 1400. It does list a Core Duo T2400 which seems to fit the description:
http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=22731

And Intel's site does list a Core Solo model 1400:
http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=18995

I'm pretty sure I don't have a Core Solo, because Activity Monitor shows two CPUs.

Can anyone shed some light on what's going on here? It seems likely that this iMac is using a T2400 Core Duo, but that doesn't explain why Intel's own utility would misidentify it as a 1400. I'm thinking of upgrading the CPU and so I'm trying to figure out what is currently in there and what features it has.

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • System Profiler.png
    System Profiler.png
    51.4 KB · Views: 180
  • MacCPUID.png
    MacCPUID.png
    36.6 KB · Views: 159
But doesn't it seem odd that the CPUID utility would identify it as a T1400? And I didn't mention this before but Geekbench also identifies it as a T1400. And yet I can see that it has more than one core. I did buy this computer used so I suppose there's always a chance that the previous owner swapped CPUs.

@MacHamster68, you seem to have the same iMac. If you have Geekbench or Mac CPUID handy (http://software.intel.com/file/31128) does it also show up as "1400" on your system?
 
Last edited:
Honestly if you plan on upgrading your iMac's CPU it would benefit you to clean yours up and sell it on eBay. You'll get about $400-500 depending on the luck of eBay. You can then buy the exact same iMac that is a Late 2006 model with a 2.16 GHz CPU, with up to 3GB of RAM for about the same price once again on eBay. You'll end up paying about $40 in eBay fees in the end. It's cheaper and easier than ripping yours apart and still being limited to a 2GB max RAM.
 
smirk said:
But doesn't it seem odd that the CPUID utility would identify it as a T1400? And I didn't mention this before but Geekbench also identifies it as a T1400. And yet I can see that it has more than one core. I did buy this computer used so I suppose there's always a chance that the previous owner swapped CPUs.

@MacHamster68, you seem to have the same iMac. If you have Geekbench or Mac CPUID handy (http://software.intel.com/file/31128) does it also show up as "1400" on your system?
Click to expand...

yes it does ,show as T1400 , they all do , i searched around some time now ,but there was never a core duo 1.83 ghz T1400 build by intel
the only T1400 is a core solo, unless ...
apple ordered the core solo which is in fact identical with the core duo , but one core is made inaktive to sell cheaper if one core doesnt work but apple could demand to get this processor with a activated second core, it would fit in apples strategy to get cheap parts for their iMac's

Intel Core Solo[5] (product code 80538) uses the same two-core die as the Core Duo, but features only one active core. This allows Intel to sell dies that have a manufacturing defect in one but not both of the cores. Depending on demand, Intel may also simply disable one of the cores to sell the chip at the Core Solo price—this requires less effort than launching and maintaining a separate line of CPUs that physically only have one core. Intel used the same strategy previously

but if that would be true apple would have deliberately ordered second rate quality processors... so what sounds better a proper t2400 inside or a second rate quality T1400 with both cores active..i mean a T1400 with two active cores is a core duo processor just made on order , that would explain why it shows up everywhere as T1400, so i guess the T2400 was a bit to expensive for apple and intel had lots of T1400 lying around waiting for cores to be disabled..mo that sounds not right , better say intel had to many of T1400 lying around where it was not necessary to disable one core and apple was so kind to take them
 
Last edited:
Cool, thanks everyone for taking the time to reply. It sounds like something is making these tools think it's a 1400 instead of a 2400, like DewGuy1999 suggested, although MacHamster68's idea of an unlocked Core Solo is very interesting.

@MacHamster68: thanks for verifying the 1400 vs. 2400 for me. This issue has been semi-bugging me for almost three years now. :)

@chris98vf: You're right, I could just replace it with a later iMac. I've already previously taken it apart to replace the 160 GB drive with a 640 GB one, and it's all set up and running great, not sure I'd want to undergo the risk and effort of setting up a new machine. I kinda figured if I could get a Core 2 Duo for ~$50 and get a 20-25% boost it might be worth it. But good suggestion.
 
you can upgrade like the mini up to a 2.33ghz core 2 duo T2700 if i am not completely wrong there, only watch for the right pins or so as there are 2 different ones available , but if you search for the mini upgrade you should find exactly what you need

hint hint ..if you do it dont throw the old processor away it fits nicely in a cheap mini core solo 1.5 ghz
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back