[confuzedwizard]

Which is faster: Core2 in the new iMac or the Xeon in the MacPro?

Does anyone have benchmarks or know how much faster one is over the other?

[Commodus]

Do you even have to ask?

The Core 2 Duo variant in the iMac is a mobile chip. It has a 667MHz system bus and tops out at 2.33GHz.

The Xeon 5100-series chips in the Mac Pro are desktop chips. They have a 1333MHz system bus and can run up to 3GHz. And of course, you can have two of them (at least) in a system - which makes for quad processor cores.

The latter really makes benchmarking a moot point. Any app which stresses system bandwidth is going to favour the Xeon, and any app that can use more than two cores is going to leave the mobile Core 2 Duo in the dust.

[brokenjago]

What he said!

[Pao|o]

Xeons are workstation & server chips not desktop chips. Desktop chips of C2D are the Conroes.

[brokenjago]

And the server/workstation chip of the C2D line is the Xeon 5100 & up, as featured in the Mac Pro.

[Simon]

Core 2 comes in many flavors:

Merom - mobile CPU, 667 MHz FSB, 2/4MB L2, ≤ 2.33GHz -> iMac

Conroe - desktop CPU, 1066 MHz FSB*, 2/4MB L2, ≤ 2.67 GHz** -> not (currently) used by Apple

Woodcrest - workstation/server CPU, 1333 MHZ FSB***, 4MB L2, ≤ 3.0 GHz-> Mac Pro, Xserve

*) in Q4 Intel will introduce the E4200 Allendale with only an 800MHz FSB. Other than that one, all Conroes have a 1066 MHz FSB. The rumored X8000 Conroe Extreme supposedly has a 1333 MHz FSB, but that won't materialize until the end of the year.

**) The Core 2 Extreme X6800 also offers 2.93, an X6900 with 3.2 GHz is expected by the end of 2006.

***) There are two low-end Woodcrests (5110, 5120) that use a 1066 MHz FSB, but Apple doesn't use them.