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

rogersmj

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 10, 2006
2,158
0
Indianapolis, IN
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?
 

rogersmj

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 10, 2006
2,158
0
Indianapolis, IN
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?
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
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?
The 2.4 GHz model isn't an Extreme processor.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
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?
Check the Merom guide or Intel. It's in my signature.

This is what Engadget had:

"What about the inside? Up to 2.4GHz Core 2 Extreme processor, up to 4GB of memory..."
Sorry but they're wrong.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
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.
Now anything beyond 2.4 GHz for a mobile chip would be an Extreme one.
 

Sesshi

macrumors G3
Jun 3, 2006
8,116
1
One Nation Under Gordon
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.
 

rogersmj

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 10, 2006
2,158
0
Indianapolis, IN
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 an iLife / iWork noodler.
According to Apple's store, which is now up, the top of the line 24" is a 2.8 GHz Extreme.
 

suneohair

macrumors 68020
Aug 27, 2006
2,137
0
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.
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?
 

Sesshi

macrumors G3
Jun 3, 2006
8,116
1
One Nation Under Gordon
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?
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.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
Because the purpose of the Extreme is as an overclockable processor. It has an unlocked multiplier. So you'd need the enhanced cooling to support that. It'll be a bit bizarre, that's all. I see it up now on the specs too... very odd.
You should be able to overclock it in Windows. Then again I don't know how to modify the fan speed while there.
 

rogersmj

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Sep 10, 2006
2,158
0
Indianapolis, IN
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.
 

Sesshi

macrumors G3
Jun 3, 2006
8,116
1
One Nation Under Gordon
You should be able to overclock it in Windows. Then again I don't know how to modify the fan speed while there.
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.

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.
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.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
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.
Correct

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.
Tell that to the people that overclocked their iMac video cards.
 

Eidorian

macrumors Penryn
Mar 23, 2005
29,081
287
Indianapolis
I will. Congratulations - You returned a card to stock speeds, enjoy shortening your Mac's life in the process.
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?