“Barely wrapped your brain around dual-core processors? It only gets worse from here, folks. Welcome to quad core, by way of Intel’s Core 2 Extreme QX6700. Don’t let the “Core 2″ fool you (great job, Intel Product Naming department), this new chip has four physical processing cores in it that make it a multitasking beast,” Rich Brown writes for CNET.
Brown writes, “Apple’s Mac Pro, however, presents a different story. Our Apple test bed (a different system than the one we reviewed back in August) has two dual-core Xeon 5160 chips, each running at 3.0GHz. That makes its raw CPU speed faster than that of the Core 2 Extreme QX6700. On some of our apps–iTunes and Photoshop in particular–differences between running the programs on Windows XP and Apple OS X likely impact performance, but it’s worth noting that even with a slower hard drive, the Mac Pro outpaced the Core 2 Extreme QX6700 chip on a number of tests, likely due to its clock speed advantage.”
The good: Major leap in performance on multitasking and most multithreaded applications compared to high-end dual-core CPUs; lots of apparent headroom for overclocking an already fast chip.
The bad: High price tag makes quad-core processing an elite technology for now; Apple’s twin dual-core Xeons in the Mac Pro make for a faster digital design configuration.
The bottom line: If you thought dual cores were over the top, get ready. Intel presents the Core 2 Extreme QX6700, a single CPU with four distinct processing cores. At $999, the first quad-core CPU will remain an enthusiast part for a while, but as a glimpse of the future, it’s clear that clock speed is out and core counts are in.
Full review here.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
RUMOR: Apple prepping monster eight-core Xeon ‘Clovertown’ Mac Pro – October 26, 2006
AnandTech upgrades and tests Octo-Core ‘Clovertown’ Apple Mac Pro – September 13, 2006
Intel reveals first glimpse of quad-core ‘Clovertown’ chip coming later this year – February 11, 2006
This sounds like the perfect CPU for a high end, Home Entertainment Media Center Mac that complements the Mac mini on the low end…
…Once the price comes down that is…
well a 2 x core quad xserve would be nice
” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />
Geo, I don’t think a media center would require the horse power of a quad core.
I’m also confused with Core, Core-duo, Core2, Core2-duo, etc…
I view reviews like that as a bit premature. How CNet can make a decent comparison of the two CPUs when the new Core 2 quad core is not yet on any hardware system that I know of is beyond me. Add to that the likelihood that a version of OS-X or that other operating system have been optimized to take advantage of the bandwidth this new CPU offers, and you end up with a comparison that may not reflect the true capabilities of the Core 2.
I’d say the CNet writer is suffering from a case of premature rejection…
With Intel working with Apple perhaps Intel should look at the naming scheme used with Macs. Most consumers are totally clueless about technology and putting in all these different processor names makes things even more difficult for them. Now throw AMD processors into the mix and they don’t know what to think. I know they dropped the P name but customers could grasp the the P3 was better than the P2. I have a hard time trying figure out which is better core, core duo, core 2, core 2 duo, centrino duo, P4, P4 with HT(whatever HT is), and that doesn’t even count processors from other companies. If they were smart they would provide a naming scheme that makes it easier for consumers to choose which is right for them. Marketing is everything as there is so much information overload.
I agree with Jeff – the naming is confusing
I’m waiting for Googla-Phonic Core (Steve Martin, kinda)
Disclaimer: I hope my attempt at humor does not offend anyone, especially the stupid ones.
HT is hyper threading.
HT is hyper threading.
OK, what is hyper threading?
Kneedlepointers on meth.
Dough!
Kneedless to say, It’s needlepointers
The core-blitz is on.
Macs were early in the race to get multi-core systems (OK, dual single-core systems – still two cores) to consumers. And early with quad-core systems – 2×2=4. Fact is, there isn’t much software out there for the consumer that benefits greatly from a system with more than two cores … except that such a system can get the ‘overhead processing’ – Classic, Rosetta, OSX – out of the way of the main app.
Apple will likely be among the first to offer dual quads in a ‘consumer’ system. By then there should be software configured to benefit from as many as four cores. Even if all we’re talking about are Final Cut and Logic. There’s no rush. It’s mainly about bragging rights, isn’t it? “My computer is more over-powered than yours is … nyah, nyah!“. Gamers will still gravitate towards higher clock rates – until games get optimized to benefit from multiple cores. There aren’t enough multi-core systems out there – yet – for them to bother … and most of them are Macs (that may change by the end of the month).
Sorry, Big Al
It’s actually just multithreading, or the act of the processor doing many functions at once.
Towertone: big, stupid, bigoted American.
But I repeat myself…
Frank
Lucky you weren’t born a fish, or you wouldn’t have lasted too long.
Frank
Here you go, knock yourself out
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/11494/
But if I bought a QX6700 could I throw it into my new 24″ iMac?
THAT’S the real question.
Core2 vs Xeon… eh… don’t care.
How do I make my iMac purchase a good one? Update when better processors come out from Intel.
So the questions to the crowd are can this be done easily and how do I overclock when its installed?
yo, you do realize that you can buy the Quads on your own and transform any of your dual Core 2 duo mac pros into dual CORE 2 QUAD machines or as I would like to call them OCTOMAC PROS.
wow!
talk about BIONIC MACS with some LEGEND horsepower.
But if I bought a QX6700 could I throw it into my new 24″ iMac?
Probably not. The quad core draws 130 watts while the dual draws 75. It’ll probably melt your the case just before the power supply starts smoking!
Emil said: “Geo, I don’t think a media center would require the horse power of a quad core.”
Well, I think the quad core could could be useful in a media center.
What if you have all your media (photos, music and movies) stored on a central hard drive connected to a souped up Mac mini HT (home theater)? Dad may be watching a downloaded movie on the plasma screen in the family room while a daughter listens to music on the server from her room. Meanwhile, a son is accessing family images on the server via iPhoto and uploading a shot of himself to his Web site from his room. Oh, and mom could be watching a stored TV show from a laptop in the kitchen.
As this tecnology scales up and becomes ubiquitous, some homes will never have enough processing power or network bandwidth.
Apple can make a lot of money selling this kind of configuration to power users. Then when the price and power consumption goes down various derivatives of it will start appearing in iMacs and books.
Apple are so going to kick butt next year. Even CNET isn’t complaining that photoshop will be slow on the Mac using rosetta.
I hope that Apple moves away from the Zeons in the MacPros and use these so I can buy normal DDR2 RAM at a fraction of the cost of the FB DIMM.
4 gigs FB DIMM+ $1200.00 US.
4 gigs DDR2 4200+ $320.00 US.
@ Towertone:
I’m surprised you have time to write posts with all the killing you need to be doing around the world. After all, there’s lots of Iraqis still, and they’re all running around! Same with the Koreans… you’d better clean them UP! Well, you might get your chance soon, with the DRAFT that’s COMING TO YOUR COUNTRY.
Or, should I call you “Saint” Towertone, because you’re such a great guy….
http://macdailynews.com/index.php/weblog/comments/11494/