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

C2D 3.06 vs i5 ?

M

macchiato2009

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Aug 14, 2009
1,258
1
now that i'm done hesitating between 21.5 and 27"

(i'm going for the 27")

my choice is between C2D 3.06 and the i5

my impression is that no software is really optimized so far for most consumers

and i think that the i5 will be powerful but compared to the C2D, Snow Leopard and most softwares will not exploit it to its max capacity

it might be a better choice to get the 27" C2D 3.06 and invest into the optional video card: the ati 4850 to have the best video card

what do you think ?
 
If you believe in such a thing as future proofing - then the i5 is the better choice.
 
You really only need the Quad if you plan to edit video or some other heavy lifting like that. Remember though that the Quad i5/i7 have Turbo Boost (which goes up to 3.2/3.46), and they are faster than the 3.06/3.33.
 
as i'm just a normal user, i don't edit videos

that's why i'm asking

will i notice a huge difference for doing multitasking, watching HD video (without any lag or freeze), doing some little photoshop, reencoding mp3 & videos for my iphone (which takes quite some time...)

but at the same time quad core is the future... if i want to resell my imac next year or later...

i don't know

it's not about money i can afford it but i hate wasting money
 
macchiato2009 said:
as i'm just a normal user, i don't edit videos

that's why i'm asking

will i notice a huge difference for doing multitasking, watching HD video (without any lag or freeze), doing some little photoshop, reencoding mp3 & videos for my iphone (which takes quite some time...)

but at the same time quad core is the future... if i want to resell my imac next year or later...

i don't know

it's not about money i can afford it but i hate wasting money
Click to expand...

The C2D is fine..Though, if you're going for 27", I'd get the i5. 27" too big for me, so I can't get the i5, otherwise I would.
 
Also remember that the i5 is a desktop cpu vs the iMacs C2D which is a laptop cpu. If I remember correctly, desktop processors are a more powerful than their laptop counterparts.

So not only do you get extra speed thanks to the quad, but it's also a full desktop processor.

Then again I could be completely wrong about the whole desktop/laptop processor thing in relation to the iMac.... :p
 
Since I am in the same dilemma, let me ask you all this. Is the 3.06 strong enough to handle moderate use of Photoshop, music (downloading, creating, etc), minor gaming, and the rest for email, browsing, etc, etc? I was thinking of buying the 3.06 and upgrading the ram in the future. I can afford the 3.06 but the i5 would take me longer to get...And I'm getting impatient =(
 
JPT said:
Also remember that the i5 is a desktop cpu vs the iMacs C2D which is a laptop cpu. If I remember correctly, desktop processors are a more powerful than their laptop counterparts.

So not only do you get extra speed thanks to the quad, but it's also a full desktop processor.

Then again I could be completely wrong about the whole desktop/laptop processor thing in relation to the iMac.... :p
Click to expand...

I think someone in one of the other threads posted the C2D is desktop not mobile...?
 
JPT said:
Also remember that the i5 is a desktop cpu vs the iMacs C2D which is a laptop cpu. If I remember correctly, desktop processors are a more powerful than their laptop counterparts.

So not only do you get extra speed thanks to the quad, but it's also a full desktop processor.

Then again I could be completely wrong about the whole desktop/laptop processor thing in relation to the iMac.... :p
Click to expand...

That's perfectly true, but if you're environmentally conscious, you know that laptop processors suck way less power than desktop class processors do. Unless the OP needs the extra power, I suggest a laptop processor. My 2.66GHz processor in my uMBP M09 doesn't lag in HD video, it just lags in the beginning transitioning from the default SD video option to HD. There is no playback lag however.

I suggest investing the GPU because that's the direction developers are moving towards with CUDA and OpenCL programming languages that focus on utilizing the GPU. Also, there is very negligible performance between the i5 and C2D, at least for your uses.
 
Fozzybadfeet said:
Since I am in the same dilemma, let me ask you all this. Is the 3.06 strong enough to handle moderate use of Photoshop, music (downloading, creating, etc), minor gaming, and the rest for email, browsing, etc, etc? (
Click to expand...

Absolutely. And honestly, so is the lowest model too.

Bryan
 
JPT said:
Also remember that the i5 is a desktop cpu vs the iMacs C2D which is a laptop cpu. If I remember correctly, desktop processors are a more powerful than their laptop counterparts.

So not only do you get extra speed thanks to the quad, but it's also a full desktop processor.

Then again I could be completely wrong about the whole desktop/laptop processor thing in relation to the iMac.... :p
Click to expand...
Intel's notebook processor line is just power optimized bins off of their standard Penryn or Lynnfield wafer. Clock per clock they're the same processors otherwise. You're going to pay for lower voltage and tighter thermals on mobile processors.

It's tough to find direct comparison benchmarks between the E7600 and the Core i5 750. The E7600 is a ~$130 mainstream dual core. $190 gets you the Core i5 750 which is the value quad core champion right now.

The best I can do right now is an overall benchmark.

http://www.behardware.com/news/lire/20-10-2009/#10495

With the index being the Q6600 at 100 points, the E7600 comes in at 80.3. The Core i5 750 is at 142.5. You're looking at only $50 in the price difference between the processors though. That's chump change.
 
Clock for clock the i5 is faster than E7600 on single thread applications.

Basically, an i5 running on only two cores is faster than the E7600 on both it's two cores. The same should be true on only one core. Not to mention the fact that the i5 can be boosted to 3.2ghz which only increases it's advantage.
 
For a person who does video editing, photography, movies, web surfing programming and NO games, would I see a a noticable difference with the i5 rather than going for the 3.06??
 
GadgetAddicted said:
For a person who does video editing, photography, movies, web surfing programming and NO games, would I see a a noticable difference with the i5 rather than going for the 3.06??
Click to expand...
You want the quad core. There's no reason to be buying a dual core on machines this expensive to begin with. Raw clock speed becomes less relevant when you have Turbo Boost.
 
Eidorian said:
You want the quad core. There's no reason to be buying a dual core on machines this expensive to begin with. Raw clock speed becomes less relevant when you have Turbo Boost.
Click to expand...

Hmm...is $320 justifiable for upgrading just the processor from 3.06 to i5??
 
I was wondering the same thing, i do alot of Importing of DVDs and also converting some to Handbrake/iSquint to iTunes etc.

i think the c2d would be fine and im upgrading to the 512 GPU
 
The i5 upgrade is really worth the $300. Not only with the processor but for the graphics card. The 27" monitor is huge and has a resolution almost as big as the 30". You'll want that extra power. Quad core and the graphics upgrade will make a big deal 4 years from now. The base 27" is basically outdated today. Don't spend so much money on a outdated processor and graphics card.
 
actually, my choice for the i5 is more based on getting the best video card rather than the i5 itself

but still, this combo will be only available in november :(
 
In getting the 3.06 C2D. It's a $500 difference (from 21.5 to high end 27). So it's not petty cash that's for sure. Coming from a MBP running at 2.4 w/2gb ram, the 3.06 C2D w/4gb will be a beast for everything you through at it. Sure the i5 would be faster and better. But there is always something faster and better unless you get the absolute top of the line.

I think about it like this: in a year or two tops there will be bluray, USB 3, lightpeak all on the iMacs. So will the c2d last 2 years until then when I upgrade? I say without a doubt yes. Because u will want to upgrade when USB 3 bluray and lightpeak are out. So no point in buying a i5 if you won't use it as such until more apps take advantage of it. That's why I saved $500.
 
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