"Old" iMac 2.16 GHz C2D versus "New" iMac 2.0 GHz C2D Extreme

Discussion in 'iMac' started by rogersmj, Aug 7, 2007.

  1. rogersmj macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #1
    Looking at the previous 20" and the new 20"...the new ones reportedly have a base processor of a 2.0 GHz Core 2 Extreme processor. Would this be faster than the previous 2.16 GHz Code 2 Duo (which was a mobile chip)? Does anyone know the details of cache and what codename these procs are? It wouldn't be *slower*, would it?
     
  2. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #2
  3. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #3
    I've been scouring the net trying to make deductions based on what we know about the new iMacs (2.0-2.4Ghz Core 2 Extreme), and I'm thinking that it must be the new Core 2 Extreme *Mobile* chips, but I can't find any info about any of them except for the 2.6 GHz version (which isn't offered in the new iMac line). That one is 800 MHz FSB though, with 4MB of L2 cache. Any other thoughts?
     
  4. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #4
    The 2.4 GHz model isn't an Extreme processor.
     
  5. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #5
    Thanks. So is the 2.0 base 20" considered to be of the Santa Rosa platform then? The info I'm seeing is still rather disjointed, where did you get fact #1 from?
     
  6. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #6
    This is what Engadget had:

    "What about the inside? Up to 2.4GHz Core 2 Extreme processor, up to 4GB of memory..."
     
  7. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #7
    Check the Merom guide or Intel. It's in my signature.

    Sorry but they're wrong.
     
  8. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #8
    That's a handy table, thanks. However, it doesn't connect any of those processors with their "marketing names". I'm guessing the new iMac has the 2.0 GHz T7300, with 800 MHz FSB and 4MB of cache.
     
  9. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #9
    Now anything beyond 2.4 GHz for a mobile chip would be an Extreme one.
     
  10. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #10
    The iMac's design couldn't run an Extreme processor to it's intended purpose anyway. Neither can it apparently run a GPU worth very much, but that's not really the point of these machines is it.

    I like the look of the refresh. I might pick one up as a new iLife / iWork noodler.
     
  11. suneohair macrumors 68020

    suneohair

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #11
    The Extreme is the Merom XE X7900 @ 2.8Ghz.

    The other CPUs are SR Meroms.
     
  12. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #12
    According to Apple's store, which is now up, the top of the line 24" is a 2.8 GHz Extreme.
     
  13. suneohair macrumors 68020

    suneohair

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2006
    #13
    What? I am assuming you have seen the insides of an iMac to make such a claim?. I doubt they would have stuck it in if it couldn't handle it. It might get hot, but what Apple product doesn't aside from the Mac Pro?
     
  14. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #14
    Because the purpose of the Extreme is as an overclockable processor. It has an unlocked multiplier so you can get far more than the stated processor speed on it. e.g. The 2.66ghz Extreme processor on one of my Dells runs from the factory at 3.2Ghz. So you'd need the enhanced cooling to support that. It'll be a bit bizarre to run it stock, that's all. I see it up now on the specs too... very odd. All the more odder when the GPU is the 2600. I guess for video editors and such...? Seems like a strange combo.
     
  15. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #15
    You should be able to overclock it in Windows. Then again I don't know how to modify the fan speed while there.
     
  16. rogersmj thread starter macrumors 68020

    rogersmj

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2006
    Location:
    Indianapolis, IN
    #16
    I'm guessing the 2.8 GHz Extreme is the new *mobile* version of the Extreme that's pin-compatible with SR Meroms. It would, obviously, run quite a bit cooler than its desktop counterparts.
     
  17. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #17
    Unless they've done some very fancy work, in which case Jobs would have been crowing about it, you're not going to be doing any overclocking at all in the iMac chassis. I suspect they're offering it stock, and it won't run beyond stock as the machine will turn into a toaster.

    Actually, it makes sense thinking about it. Running a processor intended to run hotter at stock speeds gives them more cooling (i.e. lack of it) leeway.

    Absolutely, It'll obviously be completely out of a question to run a desktop Extreme processor in that chassis. You don't even have to guess.
     
  18. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #18
    Correct

    Tell that to the people that overclocked their iMac video cards.
     
  19. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #19
    I will. Congratulations - You returned a card to stock speeds, enjoy shortening your Mac's life in the process :p
     
  20. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #20
    You forget to take into account that you can increase the minimum fan speeds in OS X before you clock up. Stock speeds shorten the life? What about Apple underclocking to make a quieter machine?
     
  21. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #21
    They have to make it quieter since the source of the noise is right in front of you.
     
  22. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #22
    I'm sure that matters when you're using the video card at load.
     
  23. Sesshi macrumors G3

    Sesshi

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2006
    Location:
    One Nation Under Gordon
    #23
    Yes, I think it still matters. Jet engine PC's at any load are so 2003.
     
  24. martin1000 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2005
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    #24
    So does anyone think that the new 2.8 extreme will have the fans running all the time on the new iMac?
     
  25. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #25
    A few more RPM sure are terrible.
     

Share This Page