 |
 |
Apple publishes iMac SPEC results
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Apple has begun OFFICIALLY publishing SPEC results (again) now. The only ones available as yet are for the older Core Duo 2.0 iMac (OS X with Intel compilers) however:
SPECint2006: 10.1 <-- Same as Athlon 64 FX-60 2.6 GHz with Linux/gcc.
SPECfp2006: 8.88
Also, for SPEC2000, Apple says:

|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status:
Offline
|
|
Discounting the clock speed (meaning normalize for clock speed then calculate the difference), the Core 2 Duo is only 29% faster for SPECint and only 17% faster for SPECfp. Not nearly as impressive.
|

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Eriamjh
Discounting the clock speed (meaning normalize for clock speed then calculate the difference), the Core 2 Duo is only 29% faster for SPECint and only 17% faster for SPECfp. Not nearly as impressive.
Well, I'm assuming the clock speed vs. performance relationship isn't exactly direct, so the improvement by a 2.0 GHz Core 2 Duo over a 2.0 GHz Core Duo might be a bit more than 29% in SPEC2000.
However, even if not, a 29% improvement is nothing to sneeze at. I actually thought the performance improvement was going to be less than that. You're right that the FP improvement isn't as impressive, but I still think it's impressive enough.
OTOH, in real world tests ( Macworld), the improvement isn't as impressive. Comparing Core 2 Duo vs Core Duo at the same clock speed, Core 2 Duo easily wins, but by a much smaller margin. The improvement ranges from none to 37%, but is usually is lower than 25%. The good news is that Core 2 Duo is never slower in any of their tests.
I'm looking forward to when Apple publishes the SPEC2006 results for the new Core 2 Duo iMac. I don't know if Merom scales as well on SPEC2006 as it does on SPEC2000.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Good to see ICC and IFC are working on OSX. Now they just need to compile the OS with it.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: BFE
Status:
Offline
|
|
I'm not complaining... much. I'm just happy that I can actually upgrade my Intel iMac Core Duo in the future with a simple CPU drop-in. Who knows? Maybe in another 6 months, the Merom will hit 2.5 or 3GHz and the iMac will support it?
|

I'm a bird. I am the 1% (of pets).
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status:
Offline
|
|
I don't plan on ever replacing my iMac CPU (or GPU). The internals of the iMac and Apple laptops scare me.
Originally Posted by mduell
Good to see ICC and IFC are working on OSX. Now they just need to compile the OS with it.
So they don't compile any part of the OS with icc/ifc?
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Senior User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Eriamjh
I'm not complaining... much. I'm just happy that I can actually upgrade my Intel iMac Core Duo in the future with a simple CPU drop-in. Who knows? Maybe in another 6 months, the Merom will hit 2.5 or 3GHz and the iMac will support it?
I wouldn't depend on that. The next rev of the Core 2 Duo will use a different socket because of a higher speed bus. You might find yourself 'stuck' at 2.3 GHz as the top for this technology. That's fine if you got a Core Duo earlier this year but if you're thinking of buying now you have a bit more to consider.
|
|
20" iMac C2D/2.4GHz 3GB RAM 10.6.8 (10H549)
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|