Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Intel Announces Core 2 Duo and Core 2 Extreme
- Thread starter hyperpasta
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I can't wait for the PowerMac replacement/update announcement. I've been sitting on a line item in the budget at work for a Mac desktop for a couple of months now...
Honestly,
I could care less if Intel called there chip Core XP or WinCore XP now shipping in Apple Computers. It's a stupid name for a processor. As long as I'm getting better performance I don't give a rats @$$. Be thankful microsoft did not purchase Intel out and call them Core XP's.
I think the name Core Duo is much better then a P4 or Xeon.
I could care less if Intel called there chip Core XP or WinCore XP now shipping in Apple Computers. It's a stupid name for a processor. As long as I'm getting better performance I don't give a rats @$$. Be thankful microsoft did not purchase Intel out and call them Core XP's.
I think the name Core Duo is much better then a P4 or Xeon.
The name reminds me of the movie "2 Fast, 2 Furious". Probably took a whole 2 neurons to come up with, too 
.
.
Hopefully you be able to replace the existing Core Duo Chips with the new Core 2 chips!!!
Since the Intel IMac Processor isnt Sautered to the Motherboard it should be replaceable!! NICE
Since the Intel IMac Processor isnt Sautered to the Motherboard it should be replaceable!!
NICE
Catfish_Man said:
I would imagine that the single-core chip will end up being the new Celeron. Wether they continue the Celeron name for low-end chips, or just can the Celeron name and use Core Solo (or Core 2 Solo) instead, I can't predict. But I imagine that the 'Core 2 Solo' will fill the same product slot as the current Celerons. (Of course, if it follows previous Celerons, it will take a few months to a year for the new architecture to get the 'Celeron' name.)
Catfish_Man said:
Yes, it has already been announced by Intel that only Woodcrest (the Xeon replacement,) will support multiple sockets. Core 2 Duo (neé Conroe,) will be one socket only.
gman71882 said:Hopefully you be able to replace the existing Core Duo Chips with the new Core 2 chips!!!
Since the Intel IMac Processor isnt Sautered to the Motherboard it should be replaceable!!
There has been some talk that Merom (The mobile Core 2 Duo) will be drop-in replacable for Yonah (the current Core Duo.) With one report of a beta Merom even working in an existing Intel Mac mini!
But... We won't know for sure until Intel officially states. They have officially stated that Merom will work with the same CHIPSET as Yonah, but I haven't yet seen confirmation that no other changes will be needed. For example, if Merom bumps up to an 800 MHz bus, (from the current 667,) it would require at least a firmware update to support the new bus speed.
P.S. it's "soldered", not "sautered". I'm not going to complain about your other grammar errors individually, but that one just bugs me, sorry.
Our processors are EXTREME Dawg!
Seriously, unless you are promoting a product called Mountain Dew you have no reason to use the world extreme (yes, this includes airport extreme)
Seriously, unless you are promoting a product called Mountain Dew you have no reason to use the world extreme (yes, this includes airport extreme)
AidenShaw said:
The iMac, mini and MBP both use laptop memory, if your right shouldnt the mini not only have a upgradeable processor as well as the ability to address 4gigs of memory.. sweet!
I dont like the names either, Pentuim was ok, but there is a bit of confusion with the duo part, why not core2 for the normal duo part, core2 solo and core2 extreme, drop the duo asap!
OK, I'll chime in and agree that "Extreme" is silly and painful
And I'll agree that I don't care, as long as it delivers.
If you look at ALL the specs, and the software bundle, you'll usually find configuring a NAME-brand PC that comes close actually gets you around the same price as the Mac. Sometimes higher.
Now, you can get a generic-brand PC with cheap parts, or build your own, and those are options Mac buyers don't have. Macs also don't come in rock-bottom models that are really stripped down. But if you compare a Mac with a truly equivalent PC, you'll find that "paying more for Macs" is a myth. (It once was true--but not in recent years.)
Of course, if the two are actually similar in price, you still end up with the Mac being CHEAPER in TCO. Support costs aside, Macs stay useful longer and so you end up buying fewer.
And I'll agree that I don't care, as long as it delivers.
Only if you ignore some specs and use just one or two numbers to say a Mac and PC are "the same." But the reality is usually that the cheaper PC is missing some things.dwd3885 said:
If you look at ALL the specs, and the software bundle, you'll usually find configuring a NAME-brand PC that comes close actually gets you around the same price as the Mac. Sometimes higher.
Now, you can get a generic-brand PC with cheap parts, or build your own, and those are options Mac buyers don't have. Macs also don't come in rock-bottom models that are really stripped down. But if you compare a Mac with a truly equivalent PC, you'll find that "paying more for Macs" is a myth. (It once was true--but not in recent years.)
Of course, if the two are actually similar in price, you still end up with the Mac being CHEAPER in TCO. Support costs aside, Macs stay useful longer and so you end up buying fewer.
Core 2 Extreme
Announced here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1958543,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532
hyperpasta said:
Announced here:
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1958543,00.asp?kc=ETRSS02129TX1K0000532
What's so confusing about the naming scheme? They're just following the naming scheme of their Pentium line.
Core is the microarchitecture being used in these new processors, and that's what Intel are calling these now. So instead of calling them Pentium, they're calling them Core. Pretty simple, right?
The number 2 just refers to the generation, like Pentium II, Pentium III, and Pentium 4.
Duo refers to how many cores the processor has. In this case, it has two cores.
So, Core 2 Duo is a processor that uses the Core microarchitecture, is the second generation of the Core processor (think Pentium II) and has two processor cores.
If it was a Core 2 Solo it would be a processor that uses the Core microarchitecture, is the second generation of the Core processor, and has only one processing core.
For example, when/if Intel puts out quad core chips and they stick to this naming scheme, they'll probably call the first generation Core Quad.... the second generation would be called Core 2 Quad... etc.
The 3rd generation of the Core chip would be called Core 3. If it's a duo core chip, it'll be Core 3 Duo. If it's a single core chip, it will be Core 3 Solo. If it's a quad core chip, it'll be Core 3 Quad.
Not so confusing now is it?
Core is the microarchitecture being used in these new processors, and that's what Intel are calling these now. So instead of calling them Pentium, they're calling them Core. Pretty simple, right?
The number 2 just refers to the generation, like Pentium II, Pentium III, and Pentium 4.
Duo refers to how many cores the processor has. In this case, it has two cores.
So, Core 2 Duo is a processor that uses the Core microarchitecture, is the second generation of the Core processor (think Pentium II) and has two processor cores.
If it was a Core 2 Solo it would be a processor that uses the Core microarchitecture, is the second generation of the Core processor, and has only one processing core.
For example, when/if Intel puts out quad core chips and they stick to this naming scheme, they'll probably call the first generation Core Quad.... the second generation would be called Core 2 Quad... etc.
The 3rd generation of the Core chip would be called Core 3. If it's a duo core chip, it'll be Core 3 Duo. If it's a single core chip, it will be Core 3 Solo. If it's a quad core chip, it'll be Core 3 Quad.
Not so confusing now is it?
GFLPraxis said:
So when they release a 2 die design to get four cores, they can name it the...
wait for it now...
Bi-Core 2 Duo
The Two Core Two-Two!
Would it be "stupid" of me to buy a macbook (intel ibook) if it is announced during the next couple a days. I don't believe there will be Core 2 Duo/Solo in them very soon, perhaps first mid-2007. I don't care much for the extra power. If I just buy a maxed out one now, it will last a logn time. By the time the MacBooks have Core 2 Duo, the others will probably have something else.
Arguing about how fast apple will be using new and faster CPU's is such a refreshing change. I have a soft spot for big blue, but the heat and speedlimits on the G5 were really a sad thing.
Now we can join the rest of the world in the never ending 18 month product cycle of faster/cooler/better chips in out computers.
Freaking awesome. Heck, Freaking awesome - extreme!
Now we can join the rest of the world in the never ending 18 month product cycle of faster/cooler/better chips in out computers.
Freaking awesome. Heck, Freaking awesome - extreme!
thebassist said:
no i would not call it LAZY.
i would call it pc marketing guys being pc users, non-creative beige box peecee users, thinking up a name for a chip.
this is btw imo the reason, why no window$ pc name became a household name. i mean e.g. dell megatron 3213x core 2 dual duo (or something).
Somehow, I think you might never be happy with the new chip names!Benjamindaines said:
Maybe Intel is thinking of going like the Pentium family:
- Pentium
- Pentium II
- Pentium III
- Pentium 4
So the Core family will be:
- Core
- Core 2
- Core 3
- Core 4
- etc.
The average customer probably does not know what it all means but thinks hey, a Core 2 has to be better than a Core processor. Likewise the Core 3 would be better than the Core 2 processor.
Afterall, isn't that what Apple did with the G processors?
- G3
- G4
- G5
BTW, one buys a Mac for the overall Mac experience. Almost anyone these days can go out and build their own computer for less, or buy a Dell box for reasonable price.
nagromme said:
Of course when configuring a NAME-BRAND PC you can make the case that it will be as expensive as a mac. However, you can't argue that macs aren't more expensive. I've been able to build my own PC from eBayed parts and newegg for around $300-400.
If I had $1000 I could build something that rivals (or at least comes close to) Dual G5's in processing capabilities. My friend's Dell laptop ran pretty much as fast as my 17" Powerbook, and albeit his is much uglier, heavier, etc. it was also less than half the price. A Mac might last longer than a PC, but a PC is very easy and fairly cheap to upgrade.
boncellis said:I agree the name leaves something to be desired. However, it's not without precedent--if I'm not mistaken, Intel wanted to ditch the "x86" naming when it went to "Pentium," which was the next generation or "5th." So, pentium II, III, IV are all 5-II, 5-III, et al.
Nice to see Intel hasn't learned much since those days.
I'll keep calling them Merom and Conroe and hope that the people I talk to are smart enough to know what the hell I'm talking about. And yes, I'm prepared to be disappointed.
they ditched the x86 naming conventions because of the ongoing battle with AMD. the inability to trademark numbers made them move to naming their chips.
AidenShaw said:
So my next gen iMac or the mythic Multimedia Mac (what I would prefer) should be 25%-50% faster at same clock...nice... Worth the wait - 3-6 months to go I guess.