Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Intel Shows Off Conroe (Desktop) Processors

Quad Core are Kentsfield not Conroe

jared_kipe said:
Hey guys, who cares if Conroe is dual processor config ready. There are Conroe chips with 4 cores on them already
http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713
Top chip.

Also, if it isn't a trick, it looks like the chips are hovering a bit. So I think we can assume these aren't LGA775.
Click to expand...
Quad Core are Kentsfield not Conroe. :) Early 2007 delivery.
 
boncellis said:
I'm glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks Apple could introduce an intermediary machine--I would be in the market for it.
Click to expand...

That would be my ideal market as well!
 
backdraft said:
Not impressed by Intel... Same garbage X86 chips with an inferior design...
Click to expand...
Actually, Intel has as much as admitted the marketing-driven, brute force bad direction the Pentium 4 went in. Mobiles forced them to.

That's why Pentium M scrapped that and started fresh building on the Pentium 3 in a different and better direction. That's why Core Duo and all future Intel chips are moving ahead with THAT direction instead of the Pentium 4.

They aren't the same old chips.
 
Quad Owners Will Just Wait For Dual Kentsfield Quad Cores

nagromme said:
Yes, but meanwhile, can two separate Conroes be used together, much like the G5 quad has dual duals?

I've seen some posts here suggesting Conroe can't do that, and I'm wondering if people are just ASSUMING that, or if it's something Intel has actually indicated?
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter to Quad PPC Owners. We'll Just Wait For Dual Kentsfield Quad Cores. :p
 
This is what I think will happen. Apple will have two lines of desktop Macs, or THREE if you include include the Mac mini, or FOUR if you include the iMac (but the iMac is an all-in-one solution, so it doesn't fall into this category).

It will be Mac mini, Mac (yes, simply called the Mac), and Mac Pro. The Mac will just include Conroe processors, and the Mac Pros will include the Woodcrest processors. Maybe this will happen? I don't know, but I'm assuming this will happen, just because I've seen them split the Macbook into two lines. Or rather, they just changed the names of the iBook and PowerBook. Oh well, they've never really had a "mid-level" desktop line.

Also, maybe they'll include the Woodcrest processors in the Xserve lines...Obviously this is just wishful thinking! ^_^
 
Dual Quad Core In 12 Months Is A Certainty

anastasis said:
And this is precisely why Apple jumped ship from IBM. They have nothing to compete with this... And can you imagine a dual quad-core Mac?? :eek:
Click to expand...
I not only imagine it. I EXPECT it. It's called a Dual Kentsfield. And it will be shipping by Spring 2007 FOR SURE. That wil be my first Mac Pro. :p :D
 
I'll Wait For A 17" Merom MBP with Expresscard 54

Electro Funk said:
Agreed... My credit card will take another punishing when me sees a merom macbook pro;)
Click to expand...
I'm with you on that. I'll wait for a 17" Merom MBP with Expresscard 54. :) That will be the first 64-bit portable Mac.
 
DavidCar said:
I would think that Apple would want the first Intel PowerMac to be a big improvement over the quad, and not just "hold its own."
Click to expand...

Oh a Conroe (dual core) will out perform a quad PowerMac in many work flows, only in heavily threaded work flows (optimized for many cores) would the quad PowerMac have a chance of holding its own.

(and I am a happy Quad PowerMac owner)
 
Multimedia said:
Doesn't matter to Quad PPC Owners. We'll Just Wait For Dual Kentsfield Quad Cores. :p
Click to expand...
What about Quad owner wannabes who don't want to wait until 2007?
 
Also people who keep saying Merom will work in current Intel Macs, are wrong. Pin to Pin compatible doesn't mean it will work. The chip set isn't compatible and that is what matters. The current Napa chip set don't support 64 bit processor, but Napa64 will.
 
Quad Intels via Two Dual Core Conroe First Should Be Out This Fall

DavidCar said:
What about Quad owner wannabes who don't want to wait until 2007?
Click to expand...
Should be Intel Quads with two Dual Core Conroes first. Or you can buy a PPC Quad refurb now for only $2799.

Someone mentioned perhaps Dual Core Conroe's can't be paired into a Quad. I don't know. Anyone here know? :confused:
 
Multimedia said:
Should be Intel Quads with two Dual Core Conroes first. Or you can buy a PPC Quad refurb now for only $2799.

Someone mentioned perhaps Dual Core Conroe's can't be paired into a Quad. I don't know. Anyone here know? :confused:
Click to expand...

Conroe doens't support MP configurations, but woodcrest will which is why I think the PowerMacs will use woodcrest.
 
wow the performance is amazing. AMD better start pouring money into the R&D department. I never thought I'd see the day Intel regain the top spot. :) GOod news for Mac geeks!!! :D
 
fiercetiger224 said:
This is what I think will happen. Apple will have two lines of desktop Macs, or THREE if you include include the Mac mini, or FOUR if you include the iMac (but the iMac is an all-in-one solution, so it doesn't fall into this category).

It will be Mac mini, Mac (yes, simply called the Mac), and Mac Pro. The Mac will just include Conroe processors, and the Mac Pros will include the Woodcrest processors. Maybe this will happen? I don't know, but I'm assuming this will happen, just because I've seen them split the Macbook into two lines. Or rather, they just changed the names of the iBook and PowerBook. Oh well, they've never really had a "mid-level" desktop line.

Also, maybe they'll include the Woodcrest processors in the Xserve lines...Obviously this is just wishful thinking! ^_^
Click to expand...
I think you, AidenShaw, and others may be onto something here...

a. Mac mini (no name change) with Yonah then Merom
b. Mac (mini-tower form factor) with Conroe
c. Mac Pro (full tower) with Woodcrest

The 'Mac' as defined in (b) may take significant sales away from the iMac, splitting that demographic, but also luring more buyers because of greater flexibility in configuring a system with their own choice of LCD, graphics card, etc.

Apple has only 2 form factors today for headless Macs: really tiny and really large. They seem to have forgotten all about Goldilocks.

Woodcrest-based Mac Pros could just be priced a notch higher -- even at $850 for Woodcrest in large quantities, putting two of those puppies into one machine means $1700 in costs for the processor alone. Factor in costs for a dual-socket motherboard, other component costs, manufacturing costs, warranty costs, blah blah blah, and you've got a COGS of about $3000. Add in wholesale/retail commissions and leave a gross margin of 20%, and you've got an MSRP around $3700 with a good (but not great) graphics card and 1GB memory. This is not too far from today's quad-core PM, and could be really enticing for those who need the power. (P.S. These figures are all made up. Bash them with better data.)
 
So... if conroe is released around September time, would we see a Conroe iMac shortly thereafter? If thats the case, it might just be enough to prevent me from buying a core duo iMac very soon.... :p
 
jabooth said:
So... if conroe is released around September time, would we see a Conroe iMac shortly thereafter? If thats the case, it might just be enough to prevent me from buying a core duo iMac very soon.... :p
Click to expand...
Conroe has 40% less power consumption than a Pentium D 950. While that is good, it may not be enough to meet cooling and silence requirements of the iMac. Merom, as the successor to Core Duo, is the logical choice for the next iMac.
 
ksz said:
Conroe has 40% less power consumption than a Pentium D 950. While that is good, it may not be enough to meet cooling and silence requirements of the iMac. Merom, as the successor to Core Duo, is the logical choice for the next iMac.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... is it worth waiting out for a Merom iMac? Personally, I don't think the 20% performance increase warrants a wait of 6 months, although waiting for a 64-bit chip could be very beneficial...

I'm obviously talking here of people who are planning on buying an iMac now, yet have seen Conroe/Merom could be out in half a year... :confused:
 
jabooth said:
So... if conroe is released around September time, would we see a Conroe iMac shortly thereafter? If thats the case, it might just be enough to prevent me from buying a core duo iMac very soon.... :p
Click to expand...

This shouldnt stop you from buying an iMac. This is a growing problem amongst us Mac users. We shouldn't be a victim of expecting too much/overhyping. Look at what happened at the Mac Mini announcement. People got really pissed that they didnt get what they expected, a Media Center Mac Mini, because of all the expectations that they built up. I don't think Apple would immediately switch every iMac to Conroe as soon as it gets released. I think this would be reserved for a High-end/BTO iMac or for PowerMacs. It would be safe to say that PowerMacs would definitely get this processor.

ksz said:
Conroe has 40% less power consumption than a Pentium D 950. While that is good, it may not be enough to meet cooling and silence requirements of the iMac. Merom, as the successor to Core Duo, is the logical choice for the next iMac.
Click to expand...

Hmmm... another mobile processor for a desktop machine?:confused:
 
Mikael said:
Check out Anand's benchmarks of Conroe that were just published:

http://anandtech.com/tradeshows/showdoc.aspx?i=2713

They benchmark it against an overclocked Athlon64 FX-60 (@ 2.8GHz). The Conroe CPU runs at 2.66GHz and thoroughly smashes the Athlon64 performance wise. It should also be a good deal cooler.

This sure doesn't look good for AMD.
Click to expand...

Take those benchmarks with HUGE grain of salt. As you mentioned, the test-systems were provided by Intel. There are TONS of things they could do to cripple the AMD-system. They can say that "this has an overclocked A64-CPU in it", but there's simply no knowing how they systems were REALLY configured. Even the apps they were benchmarking were provided by Intel, so they could have simply picked and chosen the benchmarks where they will be faster than the AMD-system.

And it's worth noting that the AMD-CPU they were comparing to is available today (although they did overclock it), whereas Conroe is not. So they are basically telling people that their FUTURE CPU will be faster than their competitors CURRENT CPU. nBy the time Conroe ships, AMD will have new Athlons available as well.
 
backdraft said:
Not impressed by Intel... Same garbage X86 chips with an inferior design...
Click to expand...

Please explain. If they mop the floor with PowerPC, how exactly do they have "inferior design"?
 
nataku said:
This shouldnt stop you from buying an iMac. This is a growing problem amongst us Mac users. We shouldn't be a victim of expecting too much/overhyping. Look at what happened at the Mac Mini announcement. People got really pissed that they didnt get what they expected, a Media Center Mac Mini, because of all the expectations that they built up. I don't think Apple would immediately switch every iMac to Conroe as soon as it gets released. I think this would be reserved for a High-end/BTO iMac or for PowerMacs. It would be safe to say that PowerMacs would definitely get this processor.
Click to expand...

You're right nataku. I have told myself that I won't play the waiting game, but I'm about to buy my first Mac, I don't want it to be outdated in a few months!

I'm not bothered about the increased speed - its the 32/64bit issue that worries me more... :(
 
nataku said:
wow the performance is amazing. AMD better start pouring money into the R&D department. I never thought I'd see the day Intel regain the top spot. :) GOod news for Mac geeks!!! :D
Click to expand...

This was obvious since day one, and the main reason behind Apple's choice...even though AMD chips were seemingly "faster" in the beginning, the company has no scale to compete with Intel; it just got an edge because of its much more streamlined and less bureaucratic structure...

Just remember the Mac clone industry...they had far fewer computers to manufacture and could have quicker access to the latest technology, unlike Apple.

And now that Intel's R&D is completed, AMD will surely suffer a downward spiral run. It is gonna be in the beleaguered league pretty soon, trust me...AMD is history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back