Jump to content
Welcome to InsanelyMac Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Allan

      Forum Rules   04/13/2018

      Hello folks! As some things are being fixed, we'll keep you updated. Per hour the Forum Rules don't have a dedicated "Tab", so here is the place that we have our Rules back. New Users Lounge > [READ] - InsanelyMac Forum Rules - The InsanelyMac Staff Team. 
Sign in to follow this  

5 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I know many of you guys have intel based imacs now since they perform pretty well and are pretty cheap for the specs. my question is though, do you think that with the release of the conroe chip, apple should replace the intel imac chips with the desktop conroe as oposed to the laptop merom? i know that merom will still be a pretty powerful chip but its meant for mobile computers and not desktops and the imac fits in with the desktop line. ofcourse i realize that with a desktop chip, the power requirements will increase and the heat produced will also increase. however, conroe is *said* to be 40% more powerful yet 40% less energy intensive than the pentium d 950. so what do you guys think? would the imac benefit from the introduction of the conroe chip or should they just stick a merom in the next generation of imacs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah, they should stick it out for a Tigerton quad core...that would be far more fitting for OSx :D

 

Really though, power consumption is something they should definately consider...my A64 Venice core system consumes over 100watts less on full load than my Pentium Prescott, and the Venice is overclocked massively, has over 700gbs of hdd space packed in it, 2gbs of ram, AND a 7800gt, where the pentium has two little hdds and onboard GMA900 for video, with only 1gb of ram...where's all that juice GOING???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think they should shoehorn a Woodcrest in there. That would be awesome! :guitar:

 

haha it wouldnt be as bad as trying to shoehorn a g5 into a powerbook chassis :) (or two... :P)

 

Nah, they should stick it out for a Tigerton quad core...that would be far more fitting for OSx :)

 

Really though, power consumption is something they should definately consider...my A64 Venice core system consumes over 100watts less on full load than my Pentium Prescott, and the Venice is overclocked massively, has over 700gbs of hdd space packed in it, 2gbs of ram, AND a 7800gt, where the pentium has two little hdds and onboard GMA900 for video, with only 1gb of ram...where's all that juice GOING???

 

thats true, the athlon 3500+ consumed less power on full (9 micron process) than the prescott 550 did on idle (13 micron). ofcourse, intel proccies have improved since the days of the early prescott, even the 6xx series was a major improvement so the heat and power issue isnt that much of a deal anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×