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.
Merom vs. Conroe in iMac
- Thread starter Zwhaler
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
They are reffered to as Logic Board's you cant upgrade the Circuts. Also think a little if they have differnet power consumption then they WILL need different LOGIC BOARDS in the Imac which is not going to happen so there will be the Merom not the Conroe
ooo i use the term motherboard, and i was speaking about pc's where i'm used to changing the motherboard to whoever i want. my mistake
DevilsRejection said:
What difference would a thinner iMac make? The aluminium foot is its footprint.
merom best for us
a merom chip will be quieter and.. cheaper in the long run, cause you will pay a much lighter electricity bill!!
Anf IF apple put a conroe in there, the cheaper initial cost won't be for us bur fot their pocket...
a merom chip will be quieter and.. cheaper in the long run, cause you will pay a much lighter electricity bill!!
Anf IF apple put a conroe in there, the cheaper initial cost won't be for us bur fot their pocket...
Why does everyone here think Merom is the processor of choice? Merom is for NOTEBOOKS. Always was and always will. It's the new version in the pentium M line (M for Mobile).
Now, Apple had to put Yonahs in every computer they had up to this point because the didn't want to have anything to do with the dying technology of Pentium 4 and its netburst architecture. The second Conroes will be avaliable, iMacs will get one. Conroes are desktop CPUs, the iMac is a desktop computer. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it definetly can hold a Conroe.
Apple are in a new territory. They no longer have the luxury of deciding which chip is "good enough" for their desktop. They compete with all other manufacturers who will ALL have concoes in their desktop machine, definetly in high-end machines like the iMac.
Now, Apple had to put Yonahs in every computer they had up to this point because the didn't want to have anything to do with the dying technology of Pentium 4 and its netburst architecture. The second Conroes will be avaliable, iMacs will get one. Conroes are desktop CPUs, the iMac is a desktop computer. If the iMac could hold a G5 in it, it definetly can hold a Conroe.
Apple are in a new territory. They no longer have the luxury of deciding which chip is "good enough" for their desktop. They compete with all other manufacturers who will ALL have concoes in their desktop machine, definetly in high-end machines like the iMac.
That was one of the better arguments for the Conroe ultimately no one really knows what is going to be put into these computers and everything is just speculation, however I just think that even though the Conroe is going to offer better performance it will not be that far off from the performance that you see in the Merom, ultimaltely the MBP will get the Merom no question, however the iMac may see the Conroe or the Merom that is all up to apple, however what I do think has become clear is that the Woodcrest will end up in the MP's and Xservers if the Conroe does find its way into the iMac, otherwise where does apple have to go. If the Merom does end up in the iMac then it will be I think fairly clear that a new Desktop could be in the works for Apple, other then the Mini and MP, with hopefully a few more upgradable parts for average consumer.odedia said:
I think Appleis going to renter the speed game,so they will stick fast chips in what I expect to be a redesigned/tweaked iMac.
You want the iMac to be thinner and in another thread you want the MBP to be thicker. I don't get your logic.DevilsRejection said:
I hope they keep the Merom, since a switch to Conroe would probably make it noisier. The noise of the iMac G5 was so frustrating.
I thought Conroe's are to be less expensive than Merom's therefore, Conroe. If I'm wrong on this, I'm sure apple will use the cheapest of the three (so obviously woodcrest is out from the start).
Though, if the come out with a cool new design for the iMac (god I hate the current design) maybe they'll need a cooler chip so thus the Merom.
They could keep the Yonah version as an emac, if the iMac design is kept, then Conroe for it.
Though, if the come out with a cool new design for the iMac (god I hate the current design) maybe they'll need a cooler chip so thus the Merom.
They could keep the Yonah version as an emac, if the iMac design is kept, then Conroe for it.
Putting a laptop chip in the imac was a stop-gap because 1) they wanted to get rid of PPC asap, 2) pentium was/is dying, 3) there was no Core desktop chip available. I know that it would be easier to put Merom in there, but ultimately, it's the wrong move. The imac is a mid-range desktop that needs a desktop chip that will give it specs/speed as good as other mid-range desktops.
Conroe is a desktop chip. The imac is a desktop. The imac should get Conroe.
Conroe is a desktop chip. The imac is a desktop. The imac should get Conroe.
It would make sense for it to me merom, considering that the imac and powerbook/mbp have been essentially identical machines for years.
The other question becomes: is apple really competing in the speed game, with all its machines? Granted, you can run macs and PCs head-to-head in XP, but Macs are designed for OSX and the OSX experience, which doesnt allow a real head-to-head speed comparison. These machines are closer than ever to the architecture of a dell, but for most consumers, they are still worlds apart.
The other question becomes: is apple really competing in the speed game, with all its machines? Granted, you can run macs and PCs head-to-head in XP, but Macs are designed for OSX and the OSX experience, which doesnt allow a real head-to-head speed comparison. These machines are closer than ever to the architecture of a dell, but for most consumers, they are still worlds apart.
I'm going with this
Merom: Mac Mini (eventually), MacBook, MacBook Pro
Conroe: iMac and possibly lower end MacPro
Woodcrest: MacPros (or whatever they're gonna be called)
I say Conroe for the iMac as it is a desktop CPU and the iMac is apple's consumer desktop computer. Conroe isn't a "professional" CPU as someone seemed to say. It is just the new chip for desktops (like a Pentium D replacement). Woodcrest is the "pro" chip (if there is such a thing) as its the new Xeon chip (Xeon DP I believe its called). I think they only used the Yonah chip last time because it was the newest and most powerful Core architecture chip available at the time. It had a desktop chip before (G5) and I believe it will again.
Merom: Mac Mini (eventually), MacBook, MacBook Pro
Conroe: iMac and possibly lower end MacPro
Woodcrest: MacPros (or whatever they're gonna be called)
I say Conroe for the iMac as it is a desktop CPU and the iMac is apple's consumer desktop computer. Conroe isn't a "professional" CPU as someone seemed to say. It is just the new chip for desktops (like a Pentium D replacement). Woodcrest is the "pro" chip (if there is such a thing) as its the new Xeon chip (Xeon DP I believe its called). I think they only used the Yonah chip last time because it was the newest and most powerful Core architecture chip available at the time. It had a desktop chip before (G5) and I believe it will again.
http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=32628 Possilble insight into Apple and IBM getting massive supplies of the Merom...
gekko513 said:
I agree with Conroe may mean more noise but the redesigned iMac case (bulged back) meant that Rev. C iMac G5s are pretty quiet. Still though, I think Merom is the chip of choice.
Difference.
Merom, Conroe, and Woodcrest are the same thing. The actual cores are identical. The only difference is that Meroms will run on a slower front side bus, and have lower power requirements (they will be the 'cream of the crop' chips,) and Woodcrest will run on a faster front side bus, have middle power requirements, and have multi-processor (two sockets per system) support turned on.
The three also have different sockets. Each one will use the same socket it's predecessor used. Merom will use the Yonah/Core Duo's 479-pin socket, Conroe will use the Pentium D's 775-pin socket, and Woodcrest is using the Xeon's 771-pin socket. That means that theoretically, Merom will be a drop-in replacement for current Core Duos, with proper chipset support. Conroes will be drop-in replacements for current Pentium-Ds, and Woodcrest is a drop-in replacement for certain Xeons.
So, for ease of redesign, iMac would get Merom. But if iMac gets redesigned at all, I would expect to see Conroe, simply because Conroe is cheaper, and operates on a faster front side bus than Merom. (Plus, it means they could offer the 'Extreme Edition' as a paid upgrade.)
I agree with Hunts121's segmentation. Merom for the notebooks and mini, Conroe for iMac and possibly the lower-end towers, and Woodcrest for the high-end tower and Xserve.
Merom, Conroe, and Woodcrest are the same thing. The actual cores are identical. The only difference is that Meroms will run on a slower front side bus, and have lower power requirements (they will be the 'cream of the crop' chips,) and Woodcrest will run on a faster front side bus, have middle power requirements, and have multi-processor (two sockets per system) support turned on.
The three also have different sockets. Each one will use the same socket it's predecessor used. Merom will use the Yonah/Core Duo's 479-pin socket, Conroe will use the Pentium D's 775-pin socket, and Woodcrest is using the Xeon's 771-pin socket. That means that theoretically, Merom will be a drop-in replacement for current Core Duos, with proper chipset support. Conroes will be drop-in replacements for current Pentium-Ds, and Woodcrest is a drop-in replacement for certain Xeons.
So, for ease of redesign, iMac would get Merom. But if iMac gets redesigned at all, I would expect to see Conroe, simply because Conroe is cheaper, and operates on a faster front side bus than Merom. (Plus, it means they could offer the 'Extreme Edition' as a paid upgrade.)
I agree with Hunts121's segmentation. Merom for the notebooks and mini, Conroe for iMac and possibly the lower-end towers, and Woodcrest for the high-end tower and Xserve.
ehurtley said:
Extreme Edition... You want to put a 95W processor in the iMac when it currently has a 35W processor?