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.
i5 vs i7 - What are they?
- Thread starter Oskar1921
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
i5 and i7 are quad core processors of intel's newest nehalem architecture, which is a newer and improved cpu architecture compared to the core2duos.
Nehalem provides on average 20% more cpu prowess per clock speed compared to older architecture, and also has other features such as hyperthreading and turboboosting-- which is essentially the cpu overclocking itself if not all cores are being used.
i5 is a quad core and supports turbo boost, but no hyperthreading.
i7 is a quad core and supports both turbo boost and hyperthreading, it also has a slightly higher clock than i5.
A lot of programs don't support hyperthreading right now, but for stuff like video encoding, you will really see a difference.
Nehalem provides on average 20% more cpu prowess per clock speed compared to older architecture, and also has other features such as hyperthreading and turboboosting-- which is essentially the cpu overclocking itself if not all cores are being used.
i5 is a quad core and supports turbo boost, but no hyperthreading.
i7 is a quad core and supports both turbo boost and hyperthreading, it also has a slightly higher clock than i5.
A lot of programs don't support hyperthreading right now, but for stuff like video encoding, you will really see a difference.
They are both Intel's CPUs. They are just code names for different products. The main difference is that i5 has Hyper-Threading disabled while i7 has it enabled. i7 also runs at higher clock speeds.
The difference between the i5 and i7 iMacs and the older C2D iMacs is that the i5/i7 models use quad core processors from a much newer architecture then C2D (dual-core). You can tell by going into System Profiler and looking at the processor.
The difference between i5 and an i7 processor is that the i7 model is a slightly higher clock speed and hyperthreads as compared to the i5.
EDIT - next time Hellhammer I won't take a couple extra minutes to post
You owned me
Was thinking about iMacs but you're right. In Clarkdale and Arrandale it only stands for mid-level and high-end (i3 being the low-end).
Yeah, you can think like it is:
i3 = Celeron
i5 = Pentium
i7 = Core 2 Duo
It may not be the "right" way of thinking it because Core 2 Duo and Core ix are the same Core family so... I would think that:
i3 = E7xxx
i5 = E8xxx, Q8xxx
i7 = E8xxx, Q9xxx
I doubt there's a "right" way of seeing this as Intel naming system is so confusing
the difference is bragging rights to say you have the i7!
i've yet to see a single instance that i can tell the difference in speed between the 2. i had the i5 for 3 weeks and now the i7 for a week. either one is a winner!
iMacs didn't before the last update. All 32nm CPUs are dual-core for now but Gulftown is coming in few weeks and it's six-core and Lynnfield might go 32nm later on this year. Maybe Intel had problems making a 32nm quad core CPU so they decided to kept all consumer CPUs dual core and gave Hyper-Threading a try as well or something like that.
Bootleneck
Coming from a Mac Pro and bought an iMac (i5+8GB ram) for the wife and kids one I did notice a few observations.
- Great machine for its price
- Handy to have everything "on the table" without cables
- Fast CPUs
- Relatively "cheap" ram upgrades
But the bottleneck with this machine is the HD. Yes it is 1TB 7'000 rpm etc etc,
but it is the slowest thing on the machine. Using Aperture 3 or iMovie, one does wait for the HD quite often to react. Unfortunately, the new iMacs have a new thermal heat sensor plugged in to the HD, which makes it very difficult to uppgrade to SSD or "non" compatible HD's.
http://blog.macsales.com/2751-proprietary-cable-can-put-the-brakes-on-upgrading-late-09-imacs
Again, the choise of CPU will be in fact secondary to the overall speed of the machine IMHO.
Jack
Coming from a Mac Pro and bought an iMac (i5+8GB ram) for the wife and kids one I did notice a few observations.
- Great machine for its price
- Handy to have everything "on the table" without cables
- Fast CPUs
- Relatively "cheap" ram upgrades
But the bottleneck with this machine is the HD. Yes it is 1TB 7'000 rpm etc etc,
but it is the slowest thing on the machine. Using Aperture 3 or iMovie, one does wait for the HD quite often to react. Unfortunately, the new iMacs have a new thermal heat sensor plugged in to the HD, which makes it very difficult to uppgrade to SSD or "non" compatible HD's.
http://blog.macsales.com/2751-proprietary-cable-can-put-the-brakes-on-upgrading-late-09-imacs
Again, the choise of CPU will be in fact secondary to the overall speed of the machine IMHO.
Jack
So then put a SSD in the optical bay?
http://www.mcetech.com/optibay/
or https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/8942262/
I rarely use my optical drive in my iMac. Got a perfectly good (and much faster) external.
Optibay
Badger^2,
On MCE site they mention MacBook Pro as compatible systems.
I did not see the new iMac's. I guess you tried it out and it worked?
Jack
Badger^2,
On MCE site they mention MacBook Pro as compatible systems.
I did not see the new iMac's. I guess you tried it out and it worked?
Jack
I think not. There aren't many games that supports quad-core so I doubt they support HT yet. New games supports quad-core though and I think in future they support HT as well. Game industry is always little behind other software industry
it works fine although you can find other ones for half that price that do the same thing!
I checked this out after you replied, you're right, and there's even a lot of articles on the net about games performing Worse with HT turned on (due to some sort of latency).
Think I won't lose sleep if the new MBPs come with i5 only