I'm about to pull the trigger on a new imac. I really want a 27 incher but I am worried that the C2D 3.06 is getting a bit old and wouldn't be as relevant in a year or two as the i5 or i7. I've read many threads on those two and understand them well. Will I see a big speed increase from a 2.0ghz C2D to a 3.06????
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.
Intel C2D 3.06Ghz getting old?
- Thread starter SOLLERBOY
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I had a Pentium 4 3Ghz for about three years which retired because of viruses and spyware in August '09. Lasted fine; well into the C2D era and browsed youtube and the internet fine. Had it been an iMac I probably wouldn't have even needed to ditch it. I expect my current C2D 2.93Ghz imac to last much longer.
This is what I am weighing up.
I have i7core PC and want to connect that to 27 imac (getting a graphics card with a display port out) so anything majorly heavily i.e. games and video file reformatting will be done on that; leaving the imac for less stressful surfing; iTunes; photos etc?
Thinking I could save myself £250 and get the C2D 3.06 as they should be more than enough right??? Hmmm decision
Or you could wait awhile. But I know about lusting after one of these new 27's
myself. But your machine isn't that old or out of date.
myself. But your machine isn't that old or out of date.
true...i know i could wait and still might but its the money saving that is attracting me!? anyways food for thought...i wish they had a fixed time in Nov
If you plan to crunch a lot of mp3's, video or the like, a newer quad could suit your needs better than a C2D. If you don't then I would not lose any sleep over it. Even if you have a sizable music collection to convert, once you do it then it's done. I would only upgrade if you think you are going to crunch a lot of those kinds of files on a regular basis.
As for your question of the C2D getting old, well, technically yes it is getting old. A good comparison would be a CD vs. your C2D; the C2D is the new CD and is not as fast as the new processors.
Considering there is the i5 (socket 1156), i7 (socket 1156) and the i7 (socket 1366) the C2D is getting long in the tooth but don't let that scare you into upgrading unless you need it.
When I bought my dual processor 2.7 G5 LC it was the fastest I could get. It crunched a LOT of data back then for me but these days I don't really have the need for a MacPro. Unfortunately, for me, there is a huge jump from most of the iMac line to the MacPro. IMO the top iMac is overpriced, for what it is, and is not an option for me.
Hackintosh? Perhaps.
As for your question of the C2D getting old, well, technically yes it is getting old. A good comparison would be a CD vs. your C2D; the C2D is the new CD and is not as fast as the new processors.
Considering there is the i5 (socket 1156), i7 (socket 1156) and the i7 (socket 1366) the C2D is getting long in the tooth but don't let that scare you into upgrading unless you need it.
When I bought my dual processor 2.7 G5 LC it was the fastest I could get. It crunched a LOT of data back then for me but these days I don't really have the need for a MacPro. Unfortunately, for me, there is a huge jump from most of the iMac line to the MacPro. IMO the top iMac is overpriced, for what it is, and is not an option for me.
Hackintosh? Perhaps.
my only concern would be with the cpu companies going core crazy, we may have 32 core cpu's in 3 or 4 years. This could push software developers to start writing there software to perform with a 4 plus core setup or better. I think by going dual core you shorten the life of your imac's relevance by about 1 or 2 years. I realize with so many older pc's and mac's out there they would definably make the software run on dual core and single for that matter but it may run with poor performance.
Just my thoughts on the matter. A good example to support this theory is when 3d accelerators came out. Once they were out for a year or 2 you could still play games without them but they ran like crap. When the pentium came out apps still ran on the 486 but not very good.
I am probably older than you so maybe I have been burned in the past lol but I am going i7 for sure. I need this to last 4 solid years ok..... maybe 3 years
Just my thoughts on the matter. A good example to support this theory is when 3d accelerators came out. Once they were out for a year or 2 you could still play games without them but they ran like crap. When the pentium came out apps still ran on the 486 but not very good.
I am probably older than you so maybe I have been burned in the past lol but I am going i7 for sure. I need this to last 4 solid years ok..... maybe 3 years