Merom to launch July 23rd according to the latest Intel roadmap from this site :
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837
http://www.hkepc.com/bbs/itnews.php?tid=631837
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
mid-sized towers don't sell!
Adding a mid-sized tower would be a bad move for Apple. They tried this before and the Cube lasted less than a year. Yes, the Cube was Apple's mid-sized tower. Apple knows that a mid-sized tower would either cannibalize their other lines (iMac, Mini and Pro) or suffer the same fate as the Cube.jdechko said:
If it's July 23rd, that would be SEXY! Because then if it's annouced (MBP) at WWDC, I can order it and it will ship fast.Eidorian said:
1 Questoin. If i got a Rev B Week 1 MBP, will there be problems like heating, moos...?
Thanks.
New rumors on theregister
www.theregister.com quotes a chinese language website which apparently has leaked price information for the Merom chips. This is what it looks like: Merom will supposedly come in variants with 2.33, 2.16, 2.00, 1.83 and 1.66GHz. The versions with 2.00 or more GHz have four MB L2 cache, the slower ones have two MB L2 cache. Prices up to 2.16 are exactly the same as the current Yonah chips in the latest intel price list ($209, $241, $294 and $423 when buying 1000 chips), and the 2.33 GHz is supposed to cost $637.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
www.theregister.com quotes a chinese language website which apparently has leaked price information for the Merom chips. This is what it looks like: Merom will supposedly come in variants with 2.33, 2.16, 2.00, 1.83 and 1.66GHz. The versions with 2.00 or more GHz have four MB L2 cache, the slower ones have two MB L2 cache. Prices up to 2.16 are exactly the same as the current Yonah chips in the latest intel price list ($209, $241, $294 and $423 when buying 1000 chips), and the 2.33 GHz is supposed to cost $637.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
whatever said:
The only reason the cube flopped was that it was horrible bang for buck. It was a great box, it just was about triple what it should have cost. The cube was extremely expensive, it cost almost as much as a tower. In this case we're talking about a box that would allow expandability for hundreds less than the "pro" towers. The same argument was used why apple would never ship a mini, and it was wrong then.
And cannibalizing other lines doesn't matter, a mac sold is a mac sold. There's no reason a mid tower couldn't be as profitable as any other mac.
whatever said:
The cube was NOT a mid-sized tower. Heck it wasn't even a tower. The upgradability of the thing was partly what killed it but also the price and the funky design. All Apple has to do is take the G5, decrease it's size down to that of something the size of Dell's small form factors...
and vola. You have a winner. The G5 design is there because of heat dist reasons. There is no reason that Apple can't have a high end dual CPU dual core design in the current G5 form factor and a single CPU dual core in in a smaller one that can still accom. 2 hard drives and an optical drive. We just replaced all the systems in our office with the above from factor. There is not a single person out of the 180 systems upgraded that doesn't love the extra desk space. Smaller is better when it comes to computers.
Tuesday September 12 Paris Apple Expo Debut Of Merom Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros
tintub said:
I'm expecting a reprise of September 2003 when Steve Jobs personally introduced the Aluminum 15" PowerBook G4 at the Paris Apple Expo. This year it starts on Tuesday September 12 which would be perfect timing for the release and "shipping today" Debut Of Merom Core 2 Duo MacBook Pros.Silentwave said:
I'd bet it all that the iMac gets an Allendale with maybe a Conroe top-end option.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
Multimedia said:
That's horrible news for me. I Don't know how much longer I will be able to use my iMac for. But I don't want to order a MBP and 3 weeks later, a new one comes out.
Meanwhile Buy A Refurb MacBook To Tide You Over
Alternative temporary plan is buy the refurb 1.83 GHz MacBook for $949 now then sell it for about the same when the 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pros ships. I would think any almost new MacBook will sell for the same price as refurb or worst case $50 less until the Merom MacBooks ship - which could be at the same time as the MBP but more likely by November.DJMastaWes said:
Multimedia said:Alternative temporary plan is buy the refurb 1.83 GHz MacBook for $949 now then sell it for about the same when the 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pros ships. I would think any almost new MacBook will sell for the same price as refurb or worst case $50 less until the Merom MacBooks ship - which could be at the same time as the MBP but more likely by November.
I don't want to buy and sell for a month use.
If the chip is comeing out on staurday (23rd) doesnt that mean that they MBPs will chip the 7th? seeing as how the chip would already be out...
"Coming Out" Day Doesn't Mean Shipping In Quantity On That Day
Seems like the Mac Pro and Leopard will be more than enough for August 7th. September 12th seems like a more logical time to spotlight Merom in MacBook Pros in Paris like they did with the 15" Aluminum 1.25GHz PowerBook G4 three years ago. That's when USB 2 and FW 800 ports were added to the line as well. At the time it was a very big power shift-up among the mobile Macs.
I have that three year old model PB so I am like you waiting for a 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pro to ship. I'm OK with my old mobile though. 'Cause I'm hooked on my Quad at home all the time now.
Not sure if introduction will mean shipping in quantity by then. Think Apple may need time to build invintory 'til September so they can fill orders upon announcement. I would love to see it happen for everyone August 7th. I just don't think it's wise to get your hopes up for that to be the day.DJMastaWes said:
Seems like the Mac Pro and Leopard will be more than enough for August 7th. September 12th seems like a more logical time to spotlight Merom in MacBook Pros in Paris like they did with the 15" Aluminum 1.25GHz PowerBook G4 three years ago. That's when USB 2 and FW 800 ports were added to the line as well. At the time it was a very big power shift-up among the mobile Macs.
I have that three year old model PB so I am like you waiting for a 2.33 GHz Merom MacBook Pro to ship. I'm OK with my old mobile though. 'Cause I'm hooked on my Quad at home all the time now.
greenstork said:
I'd actually say they'd be more likely to go straight Conroe, TDP is the same, has speedstep so it throttles back, and the Conroe has a bigger L2 Cache- just like the Meroms that would be most likely for the iMac.
Well, the main thing here is its a desktop chip not a server/workstation chip. Woodcrest is the same microarchitecture and all that. Just a 1333 FSB and slightly different clocks. The woodcrest's additional costs however would be a totally different MB/Chipset, and FB-DIMM RAM.
I suppose it may depend on how the game is written to take advantage of the cores.
MacSA said:
Its a matter of availability. Intel supposedly just bumped the announce date to the same as Conroe later this month, but the availability is apparently unchangd from August.
However now that the chip 'exists' prior to WWDC, I would not think that Steve would hesitate to put it in ASAP.
So I think we may see the entire line get a revamp: mac mini gets faster chips (still Yonah), perhaps same with MB, though that may just get a price drop. MBPs/iMacs get new processors, and we get the new MPs.
DJMastaWes said:
With the bumped up date for Merom, it is all possible. Since core duo is going to see a price drop the mac mini may get speed bumped, the MB may see a price drop or speed bump, merom MBPs *may* be released, iMac may get updated, and the MPs will come uot.
Silentwave said:
I think this is all the more reason why they'll go with an Allendale, it's not as high of a performace chip but it does exceed the performace of the Meroms. It's a desktop chip, designed for lower end desktops, not a mobile chip without as much power.
All i can say is that i will buy a Core 2 Duo iMac when they come out and my parents will be buying a Core 2 Duo tower if such a thing is introduced (not mac pro)
greenstork said:
Why wouldn't they just use Conroe? It's not like the chips are expensive, they have the same thermal output and a bigger L2 cache. I'm expecting a 2.4Ghz 17' and a 2.66Ghz 20'. Which would work out cheaper than using 2.16Ghz and 2.33Ghz Meroms.
Manic Mouse said:
The only problem with Conroe vs. Merom in an iMac is the heat production. I am sure it is possible to keep an iMac with a Conroe cool enough. What I think is very hard to achieve is to keep it cool and quiet at the same time. I have never, ever _heard_ the iMac in my office, and that is really nice.
Of course it would be possible to put something into the Energy Saver Preferences like a "Keep Quiet" option. If selected, processing power could be cut down when the iMac gets too hot to be cooled down without making much noise. You would still have the potential to get full performance if you choose so.