- Core 2 Extreme X6800
- Core 2 Extreme QX6850
- Core 2 Extreme QX9650
The E7500 (2.93 GHz) comes out soon as well and I have some hope for an E7600 (3.06 GHz) too. Not to mention overclocking slower processors past 3.0 GHz.
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 Launches Low Cost Quad-Core Mobile Processor and New Core 2 Duos
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Core 2 Extreme X6800
- Core 2 Extreme QX6850
- Core 2 Extreme QX9650
The E7500 (2.93 GHz) comes out soon as well and I have some hope for an E7600 (3.06 GHz) too. Not to mention overclocking slower processors past 3.0 GHz.
A 2GHz Core 2 Duo is about 3 times as fast as a 2GHz P4 on single threaded applications. Clock speed is only relevent for comparison between processors of the same generation.
If you want to go 4GHz+ you can by overclocking, but it's not worth it for Intel to offer such speeds directly.
3x is too high for Core2
A Core 2 is about 80% faster at floating point, and about twice as fast at integer, not three times faster.
A Core i7 is about three times faster at both floating and integer.
http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/cint2006.html
http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/cfp2006.html
3.0 GHz P4 9.85 Int 10.7 FP
3.0 GHz C2 18.9 Int 18.7 FP
2.93 GHz Ci7 27.8 Int 29.5 FP
A Core 2 is about 80% faster at floating point, and about twice as fast at integer, not three times faster.
A Core i7 is about three times faster at both floating and integer.
http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/cint2006.html
http://www.specbench.org/cpu2006/results/cfp2006.html
3.0 GHz P4 9.85 Int 10.7 FP
3.0 GHz C2 18.9 Int 18.7 FP
2.93 GHz Ci7 27.8 Int 29.5 FP
Lovely but as much as I do love i7, I can't see it's benefits for personal computing unless I plan on encoding video 24/7.
8 threads will be nice for P55 and Lynnfield but how much better will it be over current Core 2 Quad owners?
Because around that point, the heat goes up a lot for a small clock speed increase compared to lower clock speeds, so it's better to go with more cores. Plus higher-end CPUs are more likely to be used on multithreaded applications.
I'm not sure I totally agree about the heat being an issue. I built myself a high end PC 2 years ago with an Intel E6600 Core 2 Duo and with the same heatsink/fan (and specific thermal paste), I overclocked it from 2.4GHz to 3.4GHz and the temperature remained at ~40 degrees.
Couldn't apple trawl out the old "mhz myth" spin they put on the dual 500Mhz G4s they were selling years ago while PCs were zipping along at over 1Ghz?
It wouldn't be anything resembling desperate these days. The improvements promised in Snow Leopard combined with the higher performance of the Ci7 processors on a Ghz for Ghz basis would make a lower clocked system faster across the board.
Some graphs showing the performance difference would dispel any "myths" and they could finally have a line up like this:
"Top" iMac Model 3Ghz Core 2 Quad
"Entry" Tower: 4 RAM slots, 3.2Ghz Core 2 Quad
Mac Pro: Ci7 cpus at the current clock speeds of 2.8 - 3.2Ghz with more RAM as standard, but higher performance
It wouldn't be anything resembling desperate these days. The improvements promised in Snow Leopard combined with the higher performance of the Ci7 processors on a Ghz for Ghz basis would make a lower clocked system faster across the board.
Some graphs showing the performance difference would dispel any "myths" and they could finally have a line up like this:
"Top" iMac Model 3Ghz Core 2 Quad
"Entry" Tower: 4 RAM slots, 3.2Ghz Core 2 Quad
Mac Pro: Ci7 cpus at the current clock speeds of 2.8 - 3.2Ghz with more RAM as standard, but higher performance
That results in a confusing product line, something which Apple has gone to great lengths to avoid.
Also a 3.2GHz core 2 Quad costs $1,400 and a similarly performing 2.66GHz i7 costs $284. Not really value for the customer.
When will the quad core chips be in the mac laptops.
Hello, I am a pro web designer, looking to buy another mac book, I check this site often and it is very useful and most the time correct. I was thinking about buying the new mac book pro. If the mac pro is going to use the quad cores soon, I'd like to wait to buy my computer. Does any one know how long it will be until they adopt a new processor? I doubt it will be soon, they just updated but i need a new laptop soon for work. I need as much power i can get, my job is demanding and I have multiple programs open at once. If any one has an idea when there will be the quad core mac book, please let me know.
Hello, I am a pro web designer, looking to buy another mac book, I check this site often and it is very useful and most the time correct. I was thinking about buying the new mac book pro. If the mac pro is going to use the quad cores soon, I'd like to wait to buy my computer. Does any one know how long it will be until they adopt a new processor? I doubt it will be soon, they just updated but i need a new laptop soon for work. I need as much power i can get, my job is demanding and I have multiple programs open at once. If any one has an idea when there will be the quad core mac book, please let me know.
It could be months, if not a year before they update the MacBook Pro again with the new processor. I would definitely buy one right away and not worry about waiting. The resale value of MacBooks Pros is very good and they usually retain their value over a long period of time. By the time the new processor comes out, you could sale your MacBook Pro and buy the new one by probably only spending a few hundred dollars out of your pocket to cover the cost, and you get to use a great machine in the mean time!