Home › News › Industry News
iMac with Intel Core Duo processor performs poorly
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)
Post a comment|
nathanskywalker
on January 19, 2006 4:59 PM |
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
on January 19, 2006 7:08 PM |
Sounds like a bit more homework could have been done on Apple's part. |
|
MonkeyMan
on January 19, 2006 7:26 PM |
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
on January 19, 2006 8:36 PM |
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
on January 19, 2006 8:52 PM |
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
on January 19, 2006 9:44 PM |
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
on January 20, 2006 4:30 AM |
Well, I guess MAc also suffer what PC has suffered, the software is not yet catching up with the whole dual core. |
|
asphix
on January 20, 2006 7:55 AM |
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
on January 20, 2006 10:14 AM |
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
on January 20, 2006 10:23 AM |
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
on January 20, 2006 10:47 AM |
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
on January 20, 2006 2:36 PM |
[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
on February 22, 2006 1:30 AM |
[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. |
Most Popular
| Trending | Featured |
-
iOS 5.1.1 untethered jailbreak tool released, supports 4S, iPad 3
-
After five days, Facebook ranks as worst IPO flop of the decade
-
Rumor: Windows 8 RC will launch June 1, will ship with Adobe Flash
-
Rumor: AMD "Piledriver" FX CPU production to begin Q3 2012
-
Diablo III becomes the fastest-selling PC game in history
Editors' Case Picks
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and tech breaking news.
