Or maybe I am just grasping at straws so that I can have my iMac Clarksfield
I'll join you on that straw grasping
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.
Quadcore iMacs
- Thread starter ErichVonHinken
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'll join you on that straw grasping
2011. Mid-2010 at the earliest.
Dual-core.
Except that Clarksfield is 45/55 W (35/45 W in Penryn terms) and the 3.07 GHz Penryn used in the 2008 iMac is 55 W. So I don't see any technical reason why the iMacs can't handle some sort of quad-core, now or next year.
I think Apple is purposely holding back on quad-core for some reason, since quads have been available since last year.
It's likely a result of the low clock speeds that Quad-core machines currently have. The current Penryn quad cores have speeds of only 2.26 GHz and 2.53 Ghz and I think Apple, from a marketing perspective, fears that people would only compare speeds clock to clock and not take into account the full benefits of quad core processors. Hopefully the Clarksfield chips will have higher clock speeds to allow for a better comparison clock to clock with dual core chips.
Based on what we've been told by the companies in question. I don't make predictions if no data exists. I'll look for what people are doing, have planned for the future, or have said will happen in the future, and predict from that.
Usually right.
This is anticipated availability in the iMac correct? But most likely won't be across the board. Will probably only be in the high end first. I'll probably only be able to afford the C2 Quad when it's standard in the base model! LOL
And by then Intel will have some 6 or 8 core chip.
Speculation aside, just buy an iMac when you need it with your education discount, then buy SL when it's available. Just before the quad iMacs are tipped to come out next year, you'll be able to sell your Snow Leopard iMac for heaps as it will still have its warranty and you paid less for it to start with.
In my experience macs don't devalue anywhere near as fast as they should.
In my experience macs don't devalue anywhere near as fast as they should.
I'll agree with you there. Look at this:
http://houston.craigslist.org/sys/1090553168.html
Guy is asking $1500 for a G4 450Mhz, 1.5 G of RAM, original 30GB and a 175GB hard drive, along with a 21" CRT, Zip drives. Loaded with design software but no disks included.
People are seriously smoking something.
So is there a quad-core mobile Westmere variant, or have they just not announced one yet?
Precisely. I also believe that the iMac (and other lines) will go straight to all-quad-core, rather than have some periods where there is a mix of dual-core and quad-core.
Clarksfield is 45 nm and Arrandale is 32 nm, so Clarksfield is at a disadvantage there. Also I've heard (back before Havendale/Arrandale were canceled) that Lynnfield was to have 2.xx GHz while Havendale was to have 3 GHz or so. Doesn't favor Clarksfield…
Intel roadmaps haven't shown anything yet, although a 32 nm version of Lynnfield/Clarksfield may be released in mid-2010. It's also possible that Lynnfield/Clarksfield will stay 45 nm until Sandy Bridge.
performance is all well and good...but....what are these framma jamma new chips gonna cost....and further, will the buyers for imacs want to pay it (ala new ms commercials)
We can use this for reference.
Clarksfield (2.xx GHz) is set to replace the three quad-core Penryns (2.0/2.27/2.53 GHz) and Auburndale is set to replace the 25 W dual-core Penryns (I would presume Arrandale will too, now that Auburndale's gone). The prices of Clarksfield/Auburndale seem to be similar to the Penryns they replace, since they are on the same rows.
Interestingly enough, the page isn't sure what, if anything, will replace the (faster and more expensive) 35 W dual-core Penryns.
If there ends up to be no replacement, hopefully that means that Apple is forced to deliver quad-core to the iMac and MacBook Pro lines. But then again Apple could pull a 2009 Mac Pro and put lower-end CPUs in those lines under the headline of "more performance."
They have had BTO CPU options on the high-end iMac before, so it's possible.
thank you for the link and info imacmatician. I like yur insight into Apple marketing as well.
I pulled the trigger and went with a local store 'old' 2.8mhz/320g/2600 machine today and saved a few (hundred) bucks.
what I should do is take the money I 'saved', put it in the bank for a quadcore down the road. But, in all reality, I'll buy more eelectronic stuff.
I pulled the trigger and went with a local store 'old' 2.8mhz/320g/2600 machine today and saved a few (hundred) bucks.
what I should do is take the money I 'saved', put it in the bank for a quadcore down the road. But, in all reality, I'll buy more eelectronic stuff.
Maybe you should use some of the money saved for a Livescribe pen. {http://www.amazon.com/Livescribe-2GB-Pulse-Smartpen-APA-00002/dp/B001AAN4PW/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1238529148&sr=8-1}
If I was going to school I'd buy one in a minute. As a retired professor I'm tempted to go back to school just to use all the cool tools that weren't available when I was in school: computers, multi-function printers, iPods, iPhones, Livescribes, etc.
Mooch
If I was going to school I'd buy one in a minute. As a retired professor I'm tempted to go back to school just to use all the cool tools that weren't available when I was in school: computers, multi-function printers, iPods, iPhones, Livescribes, etc.
Mooch
this is driving me nuts because i can wait but i would really really like an imac within the next few months. Also would the jump in speed from duo to quad be crazy or just a slight bump?
When/If we get Quad Core iMacs, do you think that they will replace the duo cores or run along side them?
I am about to get my 1st Mac and don't want to get it, for it then to be replaced 6 months down the line
p.s how do you delete a double post?
I am about to get my 1st Mac and don't want to get it, for it then to be replaced 6 months down the line
p.s how do you delete a double post?
The clock speed will probably decrease by a few hundred MHz.
The later quad-core comes the more likely they will replace dual-cores. It's hard for me to speculate beyond that, but I do expect the iMacs to be all quad-core at or before 2011.
Report it using the Report Post button.
I am about to get my 1st Mac and don't want to get it, for it then to be replaced 6 months down the line
Welcome to computers.
This is how the entire industry works. This happens ALWAYS. NOTHING is ever the newest for six months.hehe thanks Tallest, been using then for the last 15 years. Was a gripe rather than a question because this will be my 1st MAC.
Just a little confused about sticking to the iMac I have just ordered or to wait for a Quad Core iMac, which I honestly thought were going to be announced earlier this month .. have already been waiting since Oct/Nov last year
Just a little confused about sticking to the iMac I have just ordered or to wait for a Quad Core iMac, which I honestly thought were going to be announced earlier this month .. have already been waiting since Oct/Nov last year
I think many of us were. But all we got was a regular speed bump to half the iMac line.
I'm quite happy with the performance and stability of the 3.06ghz duo core and think it is more than ample for most uses.
So for me the quad core is moreover overkill.
So for me the quad core is moreover overkill.
overall clock speed will probably continue to rule the roost until this time next year when Apple can make good on the quad core promises that SL will offer.
Grand Central should, theoretically make it so that many applications will run much faster on a lower clocked quad core cpu than a higher clocked dual core cpu, but it's going to take a while for all of that to fall into place.
Far better to get a dual core machine now, and upgrade it in a year or so if you really feel the need as the quad core machines should be pretty standard across the Apple lineup by then.
I'm gonna be using my machine for video/photo editing with photoshop etc ... Going to get Adobe CS5 when it comes out too.
Will the 3.06 processor be enough, or will the quad core work out better for me?
Will the 3.06 processor be enough, or will the quad core work out better for me?
How far in advance does Intel announce concrete details about its new processors? If Clarksfield is still on track for 2H of this year, when will Intel tell us the clockspeeds and other technical info?
I went back and looked through that Intel PPT presentation from February when the accelerated 32nm roadmap got announced, and it has a fair amount of info, though not the nitty-gritty details. As an Apple-watcher I'm unaccustomed to such an open roadmap
I went back and looked through that Intel PPT presentation from February when the accelerated 32nm roadmap got announced, and it has a fair amount of info, though not the nitty-gritty details. As an Apple-watcher I'm unaccustomed to such an open roadmap
CS5 will probably use as many cores as you can throw at it. Also, Photoshop is notorious for using vast amounts of RAM.
Depending on how complex your work is you might be better served saving up some more dinero and getting yourself an octo core Mac Pro.
I think clock speeds and other info are known (either from Intel or from leaks) a few months before release.