Intel Core 2 Duo (Conroe) Performance

[Hunts121]

iMac = Socket 479 (Yonah)
Conroe = Socket 775

So, no.

since the iMac uses a laptop chip this should be no surprise (its practically a laptop)

however merom (the mobile version of conroe or core 2 whatever) will drop in, so many people say 😉

 

[Eidorian]

since the iMac uses a laptop chip this should be no surprise (its practically a laptop)

however merom (the mobile version of conroe or core 2 whatever) will drop in, so many people say 😉

It's a mess to open up the iMac and take the heatsink/CPU assembly off. Even I think it's scary. 😱

 

[dr_lha]

Der. No! The Woodcrest CPU is widely expected to make its debut in Apple's PowerMac replacement computer (widely expected to be called Mac Pro) on
August 7th 2006 at the World Wide Developers' Conference.

Rumored maybe, but not "widely expected". I only expect the high end Mac Pros to have Woodcrest, I can see the low end having Conroe easily.

 

[Hunts121]

Right except iMac.... it'll go to Merom which is a drop-in replacement for Yonah (Core Duo)

Although I agree that eventually Mac mini and MacBook will be Merom, I think it may be many months later..... I think the mini with the Core Solo might get upgraded to Core Duo tho' ... so that Apple can boast to be the _only_ major manufacturer to use dual-core across the whole product range!

Note that if I'm right (trust me!), then there's a gap.... no Apple box with a Conroe? I don't think so.... Apple will introduce a new system with support for a single Conroe. Hopefully it won't be the MacPro with a different mobo, but a completely new box (fingers crossed).

Oh.... the recently released educational iMac won't get Merom at first either... it'll get left behind so as to make the proper iMacs better value and worth splashing out for! 🙂

I really think the iMac should use Conroe now. I think the reason they used the Yonah chip is that they had no desktop "Core" architecture chips available. While using Merom is the easy thing to do, I hope they don't do it. The iMac is supposedly a desktop, it should use a desktop chip.

 

[DeVizardofOZ]

Wwdc....

This is good to see. High performance chips from Intel and a great design from Apple, this will be fun to see what is announced at WWDC.

I wonder if JOBS is acknowledging the hardware quality issues. APPLEs have deteriorated to hardware lemons. No better or even worse than any other quality laptop. I am not talking about those who got lucky... To me luck is not something I connect with exchanging my money with any product. We are consumers and should tell JOBS loud and clear, that we expect quality, especially from APPLE!😡

If and when APPLE will offer a new product, new design, new casing (material) we must be careful. Magnesium disintegrates in connection with heat, haha. Just kidding.

 

[arn]

wait, now conroe is "widely expected" in the powermacs? I thought woodcrest was... I still think it will be:

mac pro - woodcrest
xserve - woodcrest
imac - conroe
macbook pro - merom
macbook - merom (but months later)
mini - merom (but months later)

We shall know soon! 🙂

sorry about that. story updated.

arn

 

[Hunts121]

It's a mess to open up the iMac and take the heatsink/CPU assembly off. Even I think it's scary. 😱

haha I never said I'd attempt it, just that its possible 😀

 

[Eidorian]

I really think the iMac should use Conroe now. I think the reason they used the Yonah chip is that they had no desktop "Core" architecture chips available. While using Merom is the easy thing to do, I hope they don't do it. The iMac is supposedly a desktop, it should use a desktop chip.

Did anyone pay attention to the power and thermal requirements of Conroe?

 

[TangoCharlie]

Here's hoping...

Perhaps some kind of high performance consumer-oriented/gaming-oriented tower?

(Just pure speculation...)

-Terry

Exactly!!! Here's hoping! 😀

 

[jiggie2g]

Why does the high-end Conroe cost more than the high-end Woodcrest?

Because the mulitplier is unlocked , making it very easy to overclock.

 

[JackSYi]

[whine]I want my MacBook Pro Core 2!!![/whine].

Me too.

 

[ksz]

I'm not so sure that 4GHz is a given. Doesn't that pesky speed of light put a practical cap on clock frequency? At 4GHz a signal doesn't have time to cross the chip in one clock, so is there any point to such high frequencies?

You can already overclock 3.6GHz and 3.8GHz Pentiums to 4.0 GHz.

Remember that the pulse width is the reciprocal of frequency. At 4 GHz, the pulse width is 250 picoseconds. Light travels 0.000075 km in 250 picoseconds. There are 1 million mm in a km, hence light travels about 75mm in that time.

The size of the Core 2 chip is 143 square mm, or about 12mm x 12mm and getting smaller with each new process generation. At 4GHz, a single pulse can go back and forth across the chip at least 6 times.

In practice, propagation delays of this type are analyzed by CAD tools and the chip's physical layout is designed to minimize the signal path.

 

[Eidorian]

Because the mulitplier is unlocked , making it very easy to overclock.

Yeah, otherwise it's FSB antics.

The goal was to reach the highest possible speed that was benchmark stable. Super Pi, 3DMarks, and several game benchmarks were run to test stability. The 2.93GHz chip reached 4.0GHz on air cooling in these overclocking tests. That represents a 36% overclock on air with what will likely be the least overclockable Core 2 processor - the top line X6800.

To provide some idea of overclocking abilities with other Core 2 Duo processors, we ran quick tests with E6700 (2.67GHz), and E6600 (2.4GHz). The test E6700 reached a stable 3.4GHz at default voltage and topped out at 3.9GHz with the Tuniq Cooler. The 2.4GHz E6600 turned out to be quite an overclocker in our tests. Even though it was hard-locked at a 9 multiplier it reached an amazing 4GHz in the overclocking tests. That represents a 67% overclock.

Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18

 

[jiggie2g]

Yeah, otherwise it's FSB antics.

Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18

That freakin' Tuniq Tower 120 is an abosolute Beast , I may have to look into purchasing one if my Artic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 isn't up to the task. I am hoping for atleast 3.6ghz from an E6600. Can't wait till Aug.

 

[TangoCharlie]

Conroe for iMac?

I really think the iMac should use Conroe now. I think the reason they used the Yonah chip is that they had no desktop "Core" architecture chips available. While using Merom is the easy thing to do, I hope they don't do it. The iMac is supposedly a desktop, it should use a desktop chip.

I know what you mean, and I agree, but Apple has had to work to a pretty tight schedule. I doubt they've had time to redesign the iMac from scratch. Merom will be pretty good performance wise.... especially near the top end. The heat contraints of the iMac might infact force Apple to go the "mobile" route. The Conroes might be good, but they still produce a fair amount of heat.

I'm hoping they'll plonk a bog standard Intel mobo into a nice pretty box and stick the Apple logo on the side for a Conroe based "MacPC". 😕

 

[GFLPraxis]

Awesome!

Why 2 negatives over 1 positive? Wow.

Is there a way you can upgrade this new chip on previous intel mac? Just wondering. This is new to me.

No, but when Merom comes out (the laptop version of Conroe/Core 2 Duo), you can upgrade the iMac to that.


Conroe and Merom are 64-bit, right?

I know what you mean, and I agree, but Apple has had to work to a pretty tight schedule. I doubt they've had time to redesign the iMac from scratch. Merom will be pretty good performance wise.... especially near the top end. The heat contraints of the iMac might infact force Apple to go the "mobile" route. The Conroes might be good, but they still produce a fair amount of heat.

I'm hoping they'll plonk a bog standard Intel mobo into a nice pretty box and stick the Apple logo on the side for a Conroe based "MacPC". 😕

I'm really hoping for a Conroe iMac. It's not a huge redesign, they'll just need a motherboard of the same form factor with a different socket.

 

[rxse7en]

I'm not so sure that 4GHz is a given. Doesn't that pesky speed of light put a practical cap on clock frequency? At 4GHz a signal doesn't have time to cross the chip in one clock, so is there any point to such high frequencies?

As I said in the last post, Core 2 Duo has already been easily clocked to 4ghz 😀 http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18

 

[QCassidy352]

I'm working with Arn on that one... Woodcrest is pretty much slated towards the PowerMacs. We may have to update the story...

sorry about that. story updated.

arn

yay, I feel special now. 😉 Thanks guys. 🙂

I really think the iMac should use Conroe now. I think the reason they used the Yonah chip is that they had no desktop "Core" architecture chips available. While using Merom is the easy thing to do, I hope they don't do it. The iMac is supposedly a desktop, it should use a desktop chip.

My thoughts exactly. Now that intel has a real desktop processor, why shouldn't apple's desktop computer use it?

Did anyone pay attention to the power and thermal requirements of Conroe?

The 2.40 and 2.66 (which would be great for the imacs) use 114 Watts at idle and 158-162 at load. Here's info on power draw for original G5s, early 2005 G5s, and late 2005 G5s. I fail to see the problem. I'm not being flip - I really fail to see the problem. They fit G5s in to imacs, and those power draw numbers look worse than conroe's, unless I'm missing something.

 

[Eidorian]

The 2.40 and 2.66 (which would be great for the imacs) use 114 Watts at idle and 158-162 at load. Here's info on power draw for original G5s, early 2005 G5s, and late 2005 G5s. I fail to see the problem. I'm not being flip - I really fail to see the problem. They fit G5s in to imacs, and those power draw numbers look worse than conroe's, unless I'm missing something.

Thanks for the additional research. Still, you're taxing the current 180w power supply. I don't think the Power Mac G5 is a good example either. Are we expecting a redesign for Conroe? Not that I don't WANT Conroe in the iMac. It just seems a bit much.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/12/ibm_90nm_g5_chip/

http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-powerenv/

 

[Infinity]

Does anyone think we should be hitting 4ghz about now?

I mean weve been stuck on 2.x for ages. Whats the deal? A 4ghz quad would be frickin awesome. 😕

Would you rather a Pentium D @ 4Ghz or, Core 2 Extreme @ 2.93Ghz or even Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz?

Granted, the Pentium D example was a little bad and although its been hammered a billion times already, let me just say, Gigaherz is only a part of the equation when it comes to speed of modern CPU's.

According to Anadtech, Conroe blows eveything else out of the water in regards to sheer performance. Give me a Core 2 Architecture anyday.

 

[rxse7en]

Please! Let the Merom be overclockable in the next MBP or at least make it a CPU-swappable socket! If not, I may consider just getting a new Mac Pro that will be. Would hate to spend $3k on a new 17" with a stagnant (yet potent) CPU when every other Mac system out there will be overclockable or swappable. Any thoughts?

B

 

[zero2dash]

Conroe benchmarks posted on AnandTech are really good.

The overclocking features are even more impressive.
The $316 E6600 with a 2.4ghz cpu clock speed was air overclocked to 4ghz stable. ON AIR. I shudder to think of what they could do with liquid cooling.

This brings me to think another thing - conceivably Apple could forego the whole "Quad Woodcrest" setup (which will undoubtedly cost a boatload) and they could simply take a Core 2 and (with Intel's help) overclock it with the current air flow setup of the G5 case, and probably double cpu clock speed at a cheaper price.

But they won't do it. 🙁 a) retail systems (save for the overpriced Dell XPS lineup) aren't usually overclocked and b) it would screw up their whole price scheme. It does bring up another interesting point though...people could coincidentally *possibly* overclock their [Core 2] Macs (since the technology is there in the cpu itself)...for the first time ever? We could see iMacs potentially being overclocked to outperform a Mac Pro. (if someone figures out how to do it that is)

 

[DHUK]

If Apple put a proper desktop processor in the iMac, then I'll buy. I want desktop specs not laptop specs if it's going to sit on my desk.

 

[iAlan]

Remember that the pulse width is the reciprocal of frequency. At 4 GHz, the pulse width is 250 picoseconds. Light travels 0.000075 km in 250 picoseconds. There are 1 million mm in a km, hence light travels about 75mm in that time...

...In practice, propagation delays of this type are analyzed by CAD tools and the chip's physical layout is designed to minimize the signal path.

Posts like the one from ksz above just remind me how computer-illiterate I am

Reciprocal of frequency

No idea what that means

At 4 GHz, the pulse width is 250 picoseconds

Isn't picoseconds a character from one of those Japanese card games?

Propagation delays

Isn't that something about people not having children till later in life, thus an aging population?


Anyway, let's hope Apple can bring something to market that is leaps above Windows boxes (and not the ones you put flowes in outside your house) and in a nice new enclosure

Fingers crossed

😀 😀 😛 😀 😀

 

[jiggie2g]

The overclocking features are even more impressive.
The $316 E6600 with a 2.4ghz cpu clock speed was air overclocked to 4ghz stable. ON AIR. I shudder to think of what they could do with liquid cooling.

This brings me to think another thing - conceivably Apple could forego the whole "Quad Woodcrest" setup (which will undoubtedly cost a boatload) and they could simply take a Core 2 and (with Intel's help) overclock it with the current air flow setup of the G5 case, and probably double cpu clock speed at a cheaper price.

But they won't do it. 🙁 a) retail systems (save for the overpriced Dell XPS lineup) aren't usually overclocked and b) it would screw up their whole price scheme. It does bring up another interesting point though...people could coincidentally *possibly* overclock their [Core 2] Macs (since the technology is there in the cpu itself)...for the first time ever? We could see iMacs potentially being overclocked to outperform a Mac Pro. (if someone figures out how to do it that is)

Dude you mac guy should really look into Xtremeforums if u want to see the full potential of Conroe , I saw Coolaler hit 5.2ghz on Phase when he broke the 1M Super Pi World Record by being the 1st to hit 9.2sec's , then He hit 4.0ghz on a Kentsfierld(yes people already have ES chips) CPU scoring over 2000 in 11sec Cinebench rendering.