Intel Core 2 Quad in January

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
49,579
10,893
https://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png

IDG News reported earlier this month that Intel will be launching the Core 2 Quad chip for high-end desktop PCs during the CES expo which takes place Jan 8 - 11, 2007 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Intel will launch the Core 2 Quad chip for high-end desktop PCs during the CES trade show in Las Vegas the week of Jan. 8, industry sources said.
The newest Quad processor chip from Intel follows the Quad-core Xeon 5300 and Quad-core Core 2 Extreme QX6700 launched in November. Unlike the other processors, the "Core 2 Quad" is expected to be aimed at mainstream users.

While there are no known plans for Apple to use the Core 2 Quad, there have been some rumors that Apple may use the Quad-core Xeon 5300 for a future 8-Core Mac Pro.
 

xJulianx

macrumors 6502a
Oct 1, 2006
776
0
Brighton, UK
Can this even be utilized by your average consumers?
Thats what I was wondering, all of these new processors are given the ability to be potentially faster (example, 64bit compatible), but is the average consumer actually going to be making use of these new chips anytime soon?
 

gwangung

macrumors 65816
Apr 9, 2003
1,106
19
Thats what I was wondering, all of these new processors are given the ability to be potentially faster (example, 64bit compatible), but is the average consumer actually going to be making use of these new chips anytime soon?
Whenever software writers figure out how to soak up all that extra horsepower.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,123
4,146
Can this even be utilized by your average consumers?
1. Four cores are not utilised by the average consumer, but not all consumers are average.

2. More importantly, this is missing the point. Apple is already shipping systems with four cores. These systems have two dual core processors, and two processors cost money. If a single four core processor is cheaper than two dual core processors, then Apple can use them to either make more profit or to sell cheaper MacPros or both.
 

gnasher729

Suspended
Nov 25, 2005
17,123
4,146
Thats what I was wondering, all of these new processors are given the ability to be potentially faster (example, 64bit compatible), but is the average consumer actually going to be making use of these new chips anytime soon?
Just install Handbrake and become one of those average consumers who which they had four cores in their Mac.
 

phillipjfry

macrumors 6502a
Dec 12, 2006
847
1
Peace in Plainfield
According to MacWorld,Intel is one of the many companies introducing a new product at this years MWSF.
http://www.macworldexpo.com/live/20/exhibitors///CC743005
After link jumping I saw at http://www.macworldexpo.com/live/20/events/20SFO07A/SN617818
that microsoft will be one of the hosts for party. Just kinda weird to me is all :rolleyes:

Also clicking on the Microsoft icon on the page took me to
http://www.microsoft.com/mac/
First thing in the page shows office 2004 for mac to be 25% off.
Maybe they are tryin to get as much money as possible from 2004 before a possible announcement of office 2007 for mac *crosses fingers*
I know so little of the mac world (and its inclusion of M$ products in it) so I could just as well be babbling about nonsense :)
 

kalisphoenix

macrumors 65816
Jul 26, 2005
1,231
1
Just install Handbrake and become one of those average consumers who which they had four cores in their Mac.
Quoted for truth. With Macs increasingly doing video legwork for the average consumer, these cores can't be added too quickly. H.264 requires a lot of horsepower.
 

echeck

macrumors 68000
Apr 20, 2004
1,814
6
Boise, Idaho
1. Four cores are not utilised by the average consumer, but not all consumers are average.
The article says that unlike the other processors, the C2Q is expected to be aimed at mainstream users. I take mainstream to mean more along the lines of the iMac users, not Mac Pro users. But that's just my take on it.

2. More importantly, this is missing the point. Apple is already shipping systems with four cores. These systems have two dual core processors, and two processors cost money. If a single four core processor is cheaper than two dual core processors, then Apple can use them to either make more profit or to sell cheaper MacPros or both.
Definitely agree with you there. If Apple is able to drop prices a little then that's a good thing. :)
 

weldon

macrumors 6502a
May 22, 2004
642
0
Denver, CO
This would be a great platform to build a prosumer machine for those of us that want more expansion than the iMac, without the price tag of the Mac Pro. Something with a 16x PCIe slot, 3.5" drive bays and 4GB+ RAM.
 

Clive At Five

macrumors 65816
May 26, 2004
1,438
0
St. Paul, MN
Yeah... w00t, I guess... Now I can boot Safari 2x faster, dropping the load time from 2 seconds to 1 second. I will save so much time. MWSF pleasepleasepleasepleaseplease. *rolls eyes*

Until software is coded for this, multicores are irrelevant! Still, if you're looking for a long-term computer, (i.e. 5+ years) this sort of processor would be a good investment. However, with the accellerated turn-around that people around here seem to go through, I'd say wait. Why buy a quad-core (or octo-core) when the software won't catch up by the time you're ready to replace it?

If your software is coded for it, it's your job, whatever, you have my blessing. Buy the damn thing. If not, you're being robbed. Stop falling for this marketing scheme that only amounts to a single-digit percent speed increase.

-Clive
 

MrCrowbar

macrumors 68000
Jan 12, 2006
1,988
123
Just install Handbrake and become one of those average consumers who which they had four cores in their Mac.
Wouldn't make it faster on my Macbook (2GHz Core Duo 1st gen), the bottleneck is the superdrive. It's a whole lot faster when I'm ripping the DVD image from hard drive. But it still saves time ripping the DVD directly, and I still have lots of spare CPU power.

But it's true that encoding video is really CPU-intensive. I encode a lot of 2 minute videos from my camera (Canon Powershot 530 or something) because they are not compressed when recorded (8 minutes fill up th 1GB card). I use quicktime to make a 3000 kbps H2.64 movie out of it and replace the files in the iPhoto library. That's about the only time I really wish I had a little more horsepower. It just takes awfully long if you want the high quality stuff.

I doubt games make good use of dual processors at all, the high end gaming computers only have 1 CPU with 2 cores. Maybe because XP pro does not support more than 2 processors and 4 Gigs of RAM?

PS: Can you still buy Processors with "just" one core?
 

Clive At Five

macrumors 65816
May 26, 2004
1,438
0
St. Paul, MN
This would be a great platform to build a prosumer machine for those of us that want more expansion than the iMac, without the price tag of the Mac Pro. Something with a 16x PCIe slot, 3.5" drive bays and 4GB+ RAM.
Every time the gap between the iMac and the MacPro widens, Apple shoves a pricier iMac inbetween. It's their excuse not to introduce a new model which will inevitably canibalize part of the MacPro sales and a significant portion of iMac sales. Apple doesn't want either of these things to happen because selling MacPros and iMacs mean premium prices for hardware and a built-in display, respectively. They know that if there's a mid-range tower, that cost-cautious prosumers will buy it and, very likely, turn around and buy a third-party display. Apple makes less on cheaper hardware than the MacPro, and nothing on an iMac display.

Both of these mean less $$ for Apple.

-Clive
 

Rocketman

macrumors 603
Does anyone have links to original material on what associated chipsets might go with this new C2Q? Or if they really are pin compatible with existing boards?

There was a long winded thread here on "8-Core Mac Pro with Clovertown..."

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/245836/

The bottom line is the multi-core benefits, but minimal speed benefits, could be immediately realized in an existing MacPro by swapping out the chips (and doing some physical damage in the process), but that the new chipsets expected in 3-07 would be needed to get full value from them, thus requiring a new motherboard design.

Anything from Intel themselves that could shed light on these issues?

Rocketman
 

gloss

macrumors 601
May 9, 2006
4,811
0
around/about
They're pin-compatible. People have been dropping quad core Xeons into Mac Pros for a while now. There's no reason they shouldn't be able to do the same with C2D and C2Qs.

edit: yay for my not adding anything to the conversation.
 

Clive At Five

macrumors 65816
May 26, 2004
1,438
0
St. Paul, MN
PS: Can you still buy Processors with "just" one core?
From AMD: Yes, and they still compete with their dual-core cousins.
From Intel: Yes, but they don't compare to their multi-core offerings. Most of the options are Celeron D and Pentium 4 which are complete crap when compared to the Core lineup. Xeon is still somewhat decent, though.

-Clive
 

Willis

macrumors 68020
Apr 23, 2006
2,259
4
Beds, UK
Ha, thats interesting how CES is the same as Macworld (yes I know it was mentioned this Jan, but I forgot)

Also worth noting is that Intel will have their little announcements on the 8th of Jan and Jobs keynote is on the 9th.

:rolleyes:

EDIT: Even though there is nothing posted that says Intel will announce on the 8th of Jan, its still worth mentioning seeing as Macworld starts on the 8th but the keynote is on the 9th.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.