iMac with Intel Core Duo processor performs poorly

By Derek Sooman on January 19, 2006, 4:24 PM
Macworld is claiming that tests performed on Apple’s new Intel based Mac don’t back up claims that it delivers a 2X performance improvement over G5-based iMacs. Macworld did, of course, perform its tests using some of the earliest Intel-ready Mac apps and ones running under Apple's slow Rosetta technology, so there is indeed the possibility that Intel Macs will be a good bit zippier once everything is more developed. Whilst the Intel based Mac might not live up to Apple’s claims, there is some good news.

Macworld Lab’s tests do show that the new Intel-based iMac is faster than the iMac G5 when running native applications. However, we found that those improvements are generally much less than what Apple claims is a 2x improvement in speed.

Instead, our tests found the new 2.0GHz Core Duo iMac takes rougly 10 to 25 percent less time than the G5 iMac to perform the same native application tasks, albeit with some notable exceptions. (If you'd prefer, that makes the Core Duo iMac 1.1 to 1.3 times as fast.)




User Comments: 13

Got something to say? Post a comment
nathanskywalker said:
Oh btw:[quote]According to the new study, the $1299 iMac has approximately $873 worth of parts which of course includes the Intel Core Duo processor. The new processor is estimated to cost somewhere in the ballpark of $265, which turns out to be about 30% of the cost of parts and 20% of the final cost of the machine.[/quote]just thought i'd mention that. well, that is a slight dissapointment, or at least, i guessing it will be for Mac users. hey wanna buy a G5?[url]http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/App
eStore?family=iMac&cid=AOSA10000017315&siteID=ukRUajDh%2AK
-CTjPcz021%2FvkG6%2Aahq37jA[/url]Of course they have had a little trouble....[url]http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20
60119080348296[/url]
Race said:
Sounds like a bit more homework could have been done on Apple's part.
MonkeyMan said:
Ouch, this could in fact be a damaging factor, consumerwise, regarding the release of this new processor. Apple probably should have extended the release date, so that they could perform more tests. I'm guessing that Apple is trying to rush this processor onto the market, before it gets lost in the mix, before the release of the super processors that will be released later this year. I couldn't blame them though, they could lose millions, if they promote this processor inadequately. Judging by this post, it may already be too late, but I wish you the best of luck Apple.
paulwuzhere said:
YES! I never liked MAC and I sure don't like Intel. Put an AMD dual core in there and it will fly! Lol poor Intel. Do not pass go, do not collect $200
gamingmage said:
Apple shouldn't have made claims before they could back them up. Hopefully they can step up to the plate with something to shock everyone.
fury said:
This sounds like the beginning of the end for Apple, as far as having a stronghold over the digital media market. Now that Apple's gone to x86, the future versions of Photoshop will not perform any better than it does on equivalent PC counterparts.Looks like from what this article is saying that the iLife software bundle is also going to suffer, which is one of the major things Apple has going for them. If they botch that as well, they will have to come across a miracle to recover their share of digital content creation/management.If they keep going at this rate, Apple's legacy for specialty hardware and software will be long gone before long; as much as the Stevenites would like to think otherwise, the distinction between Macs and PCs will vanish, they will simply be just another computer company. It seems a rather unfitting end to their empire.What is this "Core Duo" processor based on, anyway?
PUTALE said:
Well, I guess MAc also suffer what PC has suffered, the software is not yet catching up with the whole dual core.
asphix said:
Like this article said, this was software in early development. We all know as gamers how much optimization can effect how software runs on specific hardware. And Mac hardware is very specific, which is an advantage it still has over other x86 based systems.We'll see how things go. I wont prophecize apples downfall as others are doing since Steve Jobs has a track record of surprising everyone and paving a road to sucess.I still would never buy a desktop grade Mac.. just not appealing to me at all.. especially not now since there are SLI and quad SLI based alternatives in other x86 markets.Their laptops are another story though, and if i'm ever in the market for a laptop It would be one of my top choices.
mentaljedi said:
Of course it won't go 2x as fast! come on, that would be way too good to be true! Like, a 2.0GHZ being 4.0GHZ. Sure.... whatever you say Apple...
DragonMaster said:
G5 is faster than Intel's 64-bit, but not Athlon 64. That's something I know since the release of the first Mac using a G5 CPU.Also, if we compare the G3 485MHz on the GameCube with the Celeron 733MHz on the xBox, performance is comparable considering that the NGC just has 24MB of RAM and a slower GPU also.
Mictlantecuhtli said:
It's not the first time companies advertise their products like that.Doesn't anyone remember how PowerMac G5 was the world's fastest personal computer? :P
DragonMaster said:
[quote]Doesn't anyone remember how PowerMac G5 was the world's fastest personal computer? :P[/quote]And that a couple of days after(Once Athlon 64 was released) there were benchmarks showing that a slower-clocked Athlon 64 was performing faster?
sornypanafonic said:
[b]Originally posted by nathanskywalker:[/b][quote]Oh btw:[quote]According to the new study, the $1299 iMac has approximately $873 worth of parts which of course includes the Intel Core Duo processor. The new processor is estimated to cost somewhere in the ballpark of $265, which turns out to be about 30% of the cost of parts and 20% of the final cost of the machine.[/quote]just thought i'd mention that. well, that is a slight dissapointment, or at least, i guessing it will be for Mac users. hey wanna buy a G5?[url]http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/App
eStore?family=iMac&cid=AOSA10000017315&siteID=ukRUajDh%2AK
-CTjPcz021%2FvkG6%2Aahq37jA[/url]Of course they have had a little trouble....[url]http://www.macfixit.com/article.php?story=20
60119080348296[/url][/quote]theres also the man power and other factors like, u cant get another comp that small or that neat.. the design, i mean i wouldnt buy a cls just because its fast, i would buy it for its looks.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.