What is the Core2Duo equivalent?

[Macaday]

Hi,

I'm looking at getting an 11" MBA 1.6 Core i5, but I need it to run some music software that has system requirements of a 2.0ghz Core2Duo.

Can any tell me if it's fast enough? What are the new Core i5's equivalent to in Core2Duo terms?

Thanks...

 

[aziatiklover]

Yea it's more than equivalent!

 

[Hellhammer]

The i5 is much faster than a 2GHz C2D so you will be fine.

 

[KPOM]

Double the rated speed of a Core i5 to get its approximate Core 2 Duo equivalent. There are several factors here. First, the 1.6GHz Core i5 can turbo boost (to 2.1GHz when running both cores). Second, the Core i5 architecture is much more efficient than the Core 2 Duo (it can process roughly 50% more at the same clock speed).

 

[surjavarman]

No, Apple is the only company in the world that would actually use slower processors in their laptops than their previous versions. There is absolutely no run on old MBAs at all and consumers are stupid enough to buy these inferior new products

 

[KPOM]

You'll be fine with any of the new MacBook Airs.

 

[futbalguy]

No, Apple is the only company in the world that would actually use slower processors in their laptops than their previous versions. There is absolutely no run on old MBAs at all and consumers are stupid enough to buy these inferior new products

Wow, not everyone follows computers for a hobby. Im sure hes thinking its a laptop with a low voltage CPU and hes not sure how it compares since the Ghz listed is much lower than the older Core 2 Duos.

Anyways, to answer the original posters question, Yes the new processors are much faster than a 2.0 ghz Core 2 Duo.

 

[mopatops]

Yes you'll be fine! Out of interest, what software are you talking about? I recently made the switch to Apple and bought an i5 1.7ghz MBA. I run Ableton and although it was a small set, my CPU usage was 4% on the Air in comparison to the ~25% I used to get on my quad core PC. I was pleasantly shocked to say the least!

 

[sktaka22381]

No, Apple is the only company in the world that would actually use slower processors in their laptops than their previous versions. There is absolutely no run on old MBAs at all and consumers are stupid enough to buy these inferior new products

Don't listen to what he said. He is ignorant and doesn't know what he's talking about.

(it can process roughly 50% more at the same clock speed).

^That. Clock speed isn't everything, it's just a number people wrap their heads around.

 

[ybz90]

No, Apple is the only company in the world that would actually use slower processors in their laptops than their previous versions. There is absolutely no run on old MBAs at all and consumers are stupid enough to buy these inferior new products

Why all the downranks? Come on people, clearly sarcasm. I LOL-ed.

 

[Stetrain]

Why all the downranks? Come on people, clearly sarcasm. I LOL-ed.

Yes it's sarcasm, but it's a bit harsh in response to a genuine question.

 

[xraydoc]

Don't listen to what he said. He is ignorant and doesn't know what he's talking about.


^That. Clock speed isn't everything, it's just a number people wrap their heads around.

Sarcasm missed.

 

[Macaday]

Looks like surjavarman's got the grumps! Didn't catch his reply before the 'insults' were removed but thanks to the rest for the straight answers.

@mopatops - It's Avid Torq, Ableton Live & possibly Logic Pro if I have enough space left. It's gonna be pretty cool having all that going on such a small laptop for live stuff!

 

[mopatops]

Chicks will dig your Air! 😉

 

[Daveoc64]

No, Apple is the only company in the world that would actually use slower processors in their laptops than their previous versions. There is absolutely no run on old MBAs at all and consumers are stupid enough to buy these inferior new products

Ignoring your sarcasm - Apple is quite happy to do that with GPUs, so I don't see why it's that far fetched.

 

[KPOM]

Ignoring your sarcasm - Apple is quite happy to do that with GPUs, so I don't see why it's that far fetched.

I don't know if "happy" is the right word. They were the last major holdout to use Core 2 Duo chips when everyone else had switched to the earlier generation Core i3/i5/i7, specifically because of the poor performance of the graphics. The HD 3000 is nearly a lateral move in terms of graphics, while the Sandy Bridge processors offer twice the processing speed, so on the whole it was an improvement.