I'm with you there. I wonder how the i5 scores in 64bit? This i7 is a killer! I thought ~8400 was impressive for the i7!! 9656 is awesome!!
i havent seen a 64-bit i5 result yet
i imagine around 7300 or so. i7 = awsomeness 
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Geekbench results - iMac Quad Core w/ i7
- Thread starter nicroma
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i havent seen a 64-bit i5 result yet
i imagine around 7300 or so. i7 = awsomeness 
But is this really true? There were bench tests for gaming that actually showed the i5 being faster than the i7.
I'm confused
But is this really true? There were bench tests for gaming that actually showed the i5 being faster than the i7.
I'm confused
there are so many variables when gaming though, res AA etc. its hard to tell.
never been called T9 before haha! thats a new one
have you ordered yet? a few days for me..
These are the temps after letting iTunes play music for 10 minutes. Only iTunes was open, and all other programs were quit. However, I didn't reboot to do this test. I was using Safari and copying a few files over before I decided to do this.
I should also note that the screen was on full brightness which may effect temps to a certain extent. My other PC is an i7@4ghz gaming rig which constantly hits 84C under load. It's overvolted and overclocked. It has been running absolutely great without any BSODs or lock ups. Intels chips can take quite a bit of heat, it's very rare that you hear the CPU burning out, but usually the logic board failing or the hard drive going bad. CPU chips are tough little suckers.
I should also note that the screen was on full brightness which may effect temps to a certain extent. My other PC is an i7@4ghz gaming rig which constantly hits 84C under load. It's overvolted and overclocked. It has been running absolutely great without any BSODs or lock ups. Intels chips can take quite a bit of heat, it's very rare that you hear the CPU burning out, but usually the logic board failing or the hard drive going bad. CPU chips are tough little suckers.
Darn you all! I was ready to be blown away by the i5 (I'm sure I will be), but since I keep my desktops for a long time I'm now having second thoughts and may want the i7! Of course it's easy to spend a mint by looking at "It's only $XX more" going from the 21.5" to 27" entry-level, or from that to boosting the video card, and from there just a bit more to get the i5...
But then again, I'll also be getting a new Canon MX860 printer, and since I'm coming from a PC I plan to get some Mac-specific software too. Oh, and a Snowball USB mic to play my acoustic guitar into Garage Band. Hmm, maybe I will just stick with that i5 after all...
But then again, I'll also be getting a new Canon MX860 printer, and since I'm coming from a PC I plan to get some Mac-specific software too. Oh, and a Snowball USB mic to play my acoustic guitar into Garage Band. Hmm, maybe I will just stick with that i5 after all...
But is this really true? There were bench tests for gaming that actually showed the i5 being faster than the i7.
I'm confused
Case in point:
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3641&p=7
There appears to be basically no difference between the i5 and i7 when it comes to gaming.
Dude, these numbers are ill...
Just for fun I ran the 64 Bit Geekbench on my work machine (a 1st gen MacPro Quad 2.66ghz, with 12GB of RAM) and got a 6104.
When I get home I'll do the same for the machine I'm replacing with my i7 27" (a 8 core late 2008 3.2Ghz MacPro with 4GB RAM) and see how it does.
Just for fun I ran the 64 Bit Geekbench on my work machine (a 1st gen MacPro Quad 2.66ghz, with 12GB of RAM) and got a 6104.
When I get home I'll do the same for the machine I'm replacing with my i7 27" (a 8 core late 2008 3.2Ghz MacPro with 4GB RAM) and see how it does.
never been called T9 before haha! thats a new one
have you ordered yet? a few days for me..
Sorry, I got lazy and thought I would shorten your name.
Haven't ordered yet. A few more days for me as well.
These are the temps after letting iTunes play music for 10 minutes. Only iTunes was open, and all other programs were quit. However, I didn't reboot to do this test. I was using Safari and copying a few files over before I decided to do this.
I should also note that the screen was on full brightness which may effect temps to a certain extent. My other PC is an i7@4ghz gaming rig which constantly hit 84C underload. It's overvolted and overclocked. It has been running absolutely great without any BSODs or lock ups. Intels chips can take quite a bit of heat, it's very rare that you hear the CPU burning out, but usually the logic board failing or the hard drive going bad. CPU chips are tough little suckers.
hhhmmm.... the temperatures are high. but the fact that you had other things on make it hard to tell. coudl you possibly try with a cold boot?
53x12, you are now named 53
ill wait too cant get my machine until after i finish uni exams anyway otherwise i shall fail!.
I also just ran it in 64-bit. I held down 64 at boot, not sure if it worked or not.
Anyway here are my results.
Hmm.....9656
I'll be coming from a 24 inch Imac at 3240. Yeah, I'm excited.
These benchmarks aren't always an absolute indicator of performance, so you can't necessarily say that b/c one computer has a BM that's three times as large it will function three times as fast. That being said, these numbers are why I switched my order from i5 to i7. I just knew it would drive me nuts.
EDIT: sorry about the monster sized quote
Good point.
Ran the test on my late 2006 MacBook 2.0GHz/2GB and it scores 2772. So the i5 is about 2.3-2.5 times faster, i7: 3-3.5 times faster. Since this machine should last me a while and looking at the price, I'm starting to like the latter a lot more.
Other reasoning: work a bit more now, no regrets for not buying the i7 for 3+ years
Exactly. So how do I bridge the benchtests in this thread and the gaming benchtests (which are not on iMacs)? I don't think its as black and white as saying "the i7 is 30% faster than the i5". For a gamer, will the i7 really be much better?
the gaming benchmarks across the C2D, i5 and i7 should be around the same. the C2D 3.33GHz will most likely score the highest FPS.
havent you bought one yet?
the quad core iMacs have sufficiently larger heatsinks, as seen at MacFixit.com, to get more heat out. so they do generate more heat than the dual core iMac, but hopefully the heat is exhausted better.
Keep in mind it's the last generation MacPro, not the current one.
I figure in day to day use it'll be faster, it takes up less space, has a much nicer monitor than my current 23" cinema display, draws half as much power, and for what I use it for (Logic, Creative Suite) I don't need 4 bays or PCI-E slots.
Plus when I sell the old tower and monitor, I pay for the iMac and get $1000 cash back
nope waiting for initial results.
have you seen the thread on the MPs heating up when just playing itunes? there is a software/hardware problem. trying to figure out if its a problem with the i5/i7 imacs too as they are basically the same computer.
I don't think that the difference will be like 30% more fps. Most games only use 1 or 2 cores. In that case the i5 will run at 3.2 GHz while the i7 will run at 3.46 GHz (correct me on the numbers if I'm wrong). I do even think that a 3.33 GHz (E8600) combined with an ATi 4850 will do a pretty good job when it comes to gaming. Hell, I can't wait to see some real world benchmarks!
Sorry, I got lazy and thought I would shorten your name.
Haven't ordered yet. A few more days for me as well.
You haven't ordered, yet you are the top poster in the waiting to ship thread. LOL
DoFoT9, who also hasn't ordered is the 2nd top poster. LMAO