 |
 |
What about Intel iMacs?
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
Anyone else wondering why the intel iMacs did receive the 2.16ghz chips like the new MBP are? hmmmm feeling a little t'd off since i just received my new iMac last weekend.
|
|
Intel iMac 20" 2.0ghz Core Duo
iPod Shuffle
JVC monitors via USB audio
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Portland, OR
Status:
Offline
|
|
The Macbook pro 2.16 is $300 extra. The free upgrades were the 1.67 to 1.83 and 1.83 to 2.0. Or were you upset that you didn't have the option to pay $300 extra to get a 2.16? Personally, I wouldn't pay $300 for 160 mhz extra.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://www.rotharmy.com
Status:
Offline
|
|
did they ?
i thought only the laptops did
it's progress , i guess we have to get used to that 
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
I still don't understand how or why people get mad when technology improves. The machine you own didn't get any slower.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: http://www.rotharmy.com
Status:
Offline
|
|
perosnally i'm happy , when moto were our suppliers in the bad old days , you could wait years literally for a lame 50 Mhz speed bump
now thanks to intel it's going up 160Mhz+ in weeks !!!
roll on , intel !!
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
i'm not getting mad by any means i mean i love my mac and as it is my first i don't think it could get any better of an experience. I guess i worded my statement wrong and i'm sorry for that but what i meant is why didn't they put the 2.16 chips in the new iMacs from the beginning? just curious as to why they wouldn't puch the envelope as far as they could does that sound better hope so
Brad
P.S. didn't mean to offend anyone with this thread
|
|
Intel iMac 20" 2.0ghz Core Duo
iPod Shuffle
JVC monitors via USB audio
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Jan 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
It's the consumer model. It wouldn't be getting 2.16 even if the MacBook had been announced that way from the start (the processors were announced by Intel before then, all the way up to 2.16). Chalk it up to product differentiation.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Brad5689
i'm not getting mad by any means i mean i love my mac and as it is my first i don't think it could get any better of an experience. I guess i worded my statement wrong and i'm sorry for that but what i meant is why didn't they put the 2.16 chips in the new iMacs from the beginning? just curious as to why they wouldn't puch the envelope as far as they could does that sound better hope so
Cost and availability. While the 2.16Ghz chips are available in volume, they may not be available in unlimited quantities; many other companies (Dell, Alienware, etc) want them.
T2400 (2M L2 cache 1.83 GHz 667 MHz FSB) w/ Intel 945 PM Chipset and Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG $359
T2500 (2M L2 cache 2 GHz 667 MHz FSB) w/ Intel 945 PM Chipset and Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG $488
T2600 (2M L2 cache 2.16 GHz 667 MHz FSB) w/ Intel 945 PM Chipset and Intel PRO/Wireless 3945ABG $702
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Dec 2005
Status:
Offline
|
|
gotcha thanks for the explanation
|
|
Intel iMac 20" 2.0ghz Core Duo
iPod Shuffle
JVC monitors via USB audio
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top
