rxse7en said:
Um. Most laptops are not overclockable or swappable. So you are asking a bit much there.
Also, Professionals don't overclock, children do. Buy accordingly.
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 Core 2 Duo (Conroe) Performance
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Um. Most laptops are not overclockable or swappable. So you are asking a bit much there.
Also, Professionals don't overclock, children do. Buy accordingly.
Well, OK!
In fact, I think "Chinese Wispers" might be more appropriate!
Yeah, OK, "rumored" then.... but there are more "rumors" that it'll be Xeon (Woodcrest) rather than Core 2 Duo (Conroe).dr_lha said:
In fact, I think "Chinese Wispers" might be more appropriate!
Eidorian said:
Why isn't the PM G5 a good example? True, most of those were duals, but even the single 1.6 and 1.8 G5s in the first generation drew more power than Conroe, and the G5 imacs got up to 2.1 Ghz! A resdesign would be fine by me too.
I'm definitely no expert on this issue, but the numbers I've seen on Conroe so far don't look all that bad. Yeah, it will be hot, but not substantially, or perhaps at all, more so than the G5.
It just seems to me that if apple wants to sell the imac as a mid-range desktop, it needs to have a competitive desktop processor. The mini can use laptop components, but the imac is both bigger and more expensive; it should compete with similarly priced PC desktops.
No, Yonah is a variant of Socket 479. The Pentium-M used it too. Yonah has the same number of pins but there placement is slightly different.4God said:I thought the Yonah was Socket 775. It's not?
No, the Sockets aren't compatible.CANEHDN said:
TangoCharlie said:Yeah, OK, "rumored" then.... but there are more "rumors" that it'll be Xeon (Woodcrest) rather than Core 2 Duo (Conroe).
In fact, I think "Chinese Wispers" might be more appropriate!
MacPro will have Woodcrest in dual configs, but i'd expect to see Conroe in the low end.
MacPro's: Now with Intel Core 2 and Xeon Processors.
Merom in the iMac. If there is not a big difference between the Merom and Conroe(which I doubt there will be) it would make sense to go with the chip with lower power consumption for better temps.
rxse7en said:
I am glad you have enough knowledge to tell me why it is silly, instead of making a silly comment yourself.
What's up with the personal insults? If you want to pay top dollar for incremental increases that's your choice. Most of us "professionals" would prefer the fastest systems available, because as we all know, time is money!kevin.rivers said:
Eidorian said:
You're right, just went to Intel's site. How 'bout Merom? I thought I
heard (or read) that one of Intel's next generation cpu's would be
pin compatable with the current Yonah's.
EDIT: went to the Merom link in your sig. I hope to see a BIOS/EFI updater so I can upgrade the cpu in my iMac.
rxse7en said:
1: Where is this personal insult you speak of? You could have said this in the original post, instead you decided to call my comment "silly" with no reasoning. That is a personal insult, not to mention childish.
2: I don't pay top dollar for incremental increase. Why the assumption?
3: Professionals may upgrade processors, but they don't overclock. Overclocking causes instability and decreases the life of the chip. And take time to do it correctly. If time is money, then a professional doesn't have time to tinker with the FSB and multipliers for hours, then stability test at every change.
4: The poster was saying he wouldn't buy a MBP unless it was swappable or overclockable, which since the dawn of time there have only been a few laptops where this was possible. I simply stated that he was asking too much for laptops. MacPro's and other Intel iMacs of course will more than likely be swappable, which the poster stated and is true.
Wow. Are all these features actually on an Intel chip? It's not obvious or anythingMacrumors said:
Merom is socket compatible with Yonah. Some users have already put in the new chips in current machines.4God said:
ksz said:
There is no connection , just ignorant people who can't handle the fact that someone just saved alot of money buying a lower end cpu and overclocking it to a point where it stomps their $999 cpu. I would never spend over $350 for a CPU or Video Card.
ksz said:
You are right, there is nothing wrong with it. However, expecting to buy a Pro machine seemingly to do "work" with it and expecting to overclock it is childish.
I don't the servers that make this website and forum work are overclocked. They seem to be doing just fine as well.
I have overclocked and will in the future, however overclocking a machine to do "work" is childish.
ksz said:
that was just noise.
Either way I'll wait until the imac gets a desktop chip rather than a Laptop one.
jiggie2g said:
Yeah I can't handle it...
I have overclocked. My point is that someone buying a Professional Workstation and trying to overclock it is childish.
If you want to overclock, head over to newegg and buy some parts and do it.
Also, overclocking take a lot of work. And most don't take the time to do it right. They pop it in, rail up the multi and/or fsb and say "oh, look at me, I overclocked to 3.0Ghz!"
Overclocking has its uses, but I tend to agree that for most business applications, overclocking is frowned upon. I will not overclock a processor on a system I am spec'ing for a customer because it is a form of gambling. When you have to meet MTBF requirements, you tend to be conservative and cautious.kevin.rivers said:
I anticipated reading some of the same vitriol contained within the Mac Pro confirmed with Woodcrest thread. I hate to admit it, but I'm a little disappointed so far...
I didn't expect Conroe to have the 1066 MHz FSB, so that's a plus.
I didn't expect Conroe to have the 1066 MHz FSB, so that's a plus.