Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardw...ac-coreduo.ars

    im not very impressed of the intel chip so far.
    as for the new powerbook, there is no way it will be 4 times faster as they claim

  2. #2
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    baggss's Avatar
    Member Since
    Oct 10, 2004
    Location
    Margaritaville
    Posts
    10,346
    Your Mac's Specs
    3.4 Ghz i7 MacBook Pro (2015), iPad Pro (2014), iPhone Xs Max. Apple TV 4K
    Rep Power
    28
    The new iMac scored fairly well, but not sufficiently well to warrant the speed claims made.

  3. #3
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    Mr Bobbins's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 29, 2005
    Location
    Legoland
    Posts
    790
    Rep Power
    16
    Or an upgrade from the last imac G5's.

  4. #4
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    coach_z's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jul 23, 2004
    Location
    North NJ
    Posts
    3,169
    Your Mac's Specs
    i dont have no mac's
    Rep Power
    19
    in all honesty i just skimmed over the article and the one downfall i might have noticed is that they used macs with 512mb of ram, and we all know that macs are a bit ram hungry....i think they should have upped it to at least a gig before the tests and i think all results would have been a lot better.

    -chris
    MoTM honor roll...
    when?
    i dont remember

  5. #5
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    johnnyluu's Avatar
    Member Since
    Nov 11, 2003
    Location
    London
    Posts
    228
    Your Mac's Specs
    G5 2ghz Dual Processor, 12" Scrolling TrackPad Powerbook
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by coach_z
    and we all know that macs are a bit ram hungry
    Not really macs, rather OS X is Ram hungry.
    I say, "Unless it causes death, it's not a problem!".
    http://johnny.persistentperil.net

  6. #6
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW

    Member Since
    Apr 25, 2003
    Location
    The home of the free and the land that did for Braveheart.
    Posts
    1,301
    Your Mac's Specs
    24"iMac, 15"MB-Pro, MacBook, G4 iMac, PM G5 2x2Ghz, G4 iBook & Some PCs
    Rep Power
    17
    Here is another:

    http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/solution-20060118.html

    Definitely not the 2-3x that Apple are claiming, more like 25-35% on average and that is only for Intel compiled Apps.

    It is a pity that we can't try out a dual core G5 iMac (the chips are available, the will isn't) but I would hazard a guess that such a beast would outperform the Intel version appreciably.

    Amen-Moses

  7. #7
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW

    Member Since
    Nov 24, 2005
    Posts
    749
    Your Mac's Specs
    Powerbook G4/ 15.2"/ 1.67 ghz/ 2 gb RAM/ ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 (128 mb RAM)/ 100 gb hdd@ 5400 RPM
    Rep Power
    15
    The Core Duo T2400 employs Intel's Smart Cache with its Advanced Transfer Cache Architecture. What it amounts to is 2MB of L2 cache shared across both cores of the CPU. It also has Intel's SpeedStep technology, which ramps down the processor speed in order to save power. That's not going to be terribly important for the iMac, but the MacBook Pro should be able to take good advantage of the technology.
    Hmm... should be good for the battery life everyone has been woundering about.

    EDIT: Adding content.

    The 1.83GHz iMac sports a 17" LCD with a resolution of 1440x900, same as its predecessor. Unlike previous iMacs, you are not limited to mirroring if you hook up an external monitor. Using a mini-DVI connector (not included), you can hook an external monitor up and use an extended desktop. You'll be able to run a 23" LCD at 1920x1200, or a CRT (yuck) with an analog adaptor at 2045x1536.
    Sweet, no more need for the hacks.
    I'd use Windows... but I like the Mac OS more.

  8. #8
    Benchmarking using Rosetta is pretty worthless in my opinion when trying to compare different platforms. If I was in the market, I would go with a Core Duo model.

  9. #9
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW
    dtravis7's Avatar
    Member Since
    Jan 04, 2005
    Location
    Modesto, Ca.
    Posts
    30,132
    Your Mac's Specs
    iMac late 2012 21.5 i5 10:14. iMac 2010 27"QuadI7 OS10.13, MBPLate2011, iPad Pro10.5", iPhone7
    Rep Power
    39
    The Benchmarks with Rosetta are to show users that need support for their expensive applications that only run on a PPC what to expect.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by dtravis7
    The Benchmarks with Rosetta are to show users that need support for their expensive applications that only run on a PPC what to expect.
    They are good in that aspect.

  11. #11
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW

    Member Since
    Apr 25, 2003
    Location
    The home of the free and the land that did for Braveheart.
    Posts
    1,301
    Your Mac's Specs
    24"iMac, 15"MB-Pro, MacBook, G4 iMac, PM G5 2x2Ghz, G4 iBook & Some PCs
    Rep Power
    17
    Quote Originally Posted by to_tough_to_die
    Hmm... should be good for the battery life everyone has been woundering about.
    Actually the battery life is the same or slightly lower from the reviews I've read, the dead give away is that the power supply for the duo powered ... what are they called again? MacBook Pro or something ... laptops has had a wattage increase.

    Jobs was extremely careful to not mention battery life wasn't he. :p

    Amen-Moses

  12. #12
    Ex_PC_Puke
    Guest
    As stated earlier ---- users don't run benchmarks -- they run a mix of apps that ranges from basic to quite complex -----

    - Buy the best mix of CPU+Gfx+Memory you can afford
    - Avoid any new major tech changes (OS or HW) for at least 6 months after initial deployment
    - Ignore the hype - be happy :p


    OOOOOOOOmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

  13. #13
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW

    Member Since
    Jan 14, 2005
    Posts
    2,078
    Rep Power
    18
    Yes in my opinion the wattage increase is kinda silly, but I guess we'll see killer battery with the core solo in ibooks (or macbooks, whatever) and I can't wait for my time at college...

  14. #14
    rusbo.uk
    Guest
    So how many hours battery life will it give?

  15. #15
    Apple 17" iMac Core Duo REVIEW

    Member Since
    Nov 24, 2005
    Posts
    749
    Your Mac's Specs
    Powerbook G4/ 15.2"/ 1.67 ghz/ 2 gb RAM/ ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 (128 mb RAM)/ 100 gb hdd@ 5400 RPM
    Rep Power
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by Amen-Moses
    Actually the battery life is the same or slightly lower from the reviews I've read, the dead give away is that the power supply for the duo powered ... what are they called again? MacBook Pro or something ... laptops has had a wattage increase.

    Jobs was extremely careful to not mention battery life wasn't he. :p

    Amen-Moses
    Ya, but even if it had lower battery life, it could afford it, as the processer has power-saving and is faster, which will allow you to get more work done before the thing ides.
    I'd use Windows... but I like the Mac OS more.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Apple iMac "Core 2 Duo" 2.16 20-Inch Specs
    By macmichael2012 in forum Apple Desktops
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-09-2013, 11:12 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-19-2012, 02:34 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-21-2012, 02:03 AM
  4. eBay: 24" Apple Intel Core 2 Duo iMac with Aluminum Body
    By Nathan54AB in forum Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-14-2008, 06:35 PM
  5. Apple iMac 20" Core 2 Duo 2.66GHz 4GB RAM 750GB HD
    By ldhallett in forum Buy/Sell/Trade
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-30-2008, 11:42 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •