[solofx7]

I am looking to get a new iMac.
I just wanted to know is there is a big difference between these 2 chips like last version the extreme chip was a lot faster or so people have told me.
thanks in advance.

[solofx7]

i understand the mhz difference, but are there any thoughts on if these are different chips again?

[Simon]

Both CPUs have the same L2 cache and run on the exact same FSB. The only performance-relevant difference is the +9% clock. In overall performance that's barely noticeable. On the last iMac generation it was a 17% clock increase. So bigger, but nothing dramatic there either.

The difference between 3.06 and 2.8 GHz will not be big. However, if you do something that is purely CPU-limited you will notice an improvement. And CPU benchmarks will definitely show it too.

Anyhow, unless your work is seriously CPU-limited the $200 are probably better invested elsewhere (RAM, HDD, peripherals).

[Simon]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

i understand the mhz difference, but are there any thoughts on if these are different chips again?

Last time the chips were marketed differently (Merom XE X7900 vs. Merom T7700), but their architecture and instruction set was the same. This time it's even closer: overclocked X9000 vs. regular X9000.

For all practical purposes: these are the same CPUs running different frequencies.

[solofx7]

thanks again. the info invaluable.
you are helping me make all of my decisions.
do you have an imac.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Last time the chips were marketed differently (Merom XE X7900 vs. Merom T7700), but their architecture and instruction set was the same. This time it's even closer: overclocked X9000 vs. regular X9000.

Perhaps this is too pedantic ("overclocking" is poorly defined anyway), but IMO they're both overclocked X9000s. X9000 comes stock with a 200Mhz FSB and 14x multiplier; the 2.8Ghz iMac runs it at 267Mhz FSB and 10.5x multiplier while the 3.06Ghz iMac runs it at 267Mhz FSB and 11.5x multiplier.

[Simon]

Well of course technically they're both "overclocked". The important difference is that any Joe can buy a 2.8 GHz X9000 from Intel. He won't find a 3.06 GHz Penryn though. The 3.06 GHz version of the X9000 is something only Apple (or similar volume buyers) gets from Intel. The regular 3.06 GHz Penryn product will arrive as the X9100 with socket B as part of the Penryn refresh. Right now there is officially no 3.06 GHz Penryn.

[solofx7]

hmmm.... does that mean that there is technically no 3.06, but it is just an overclocked version?
i guess my question is it worth it for the 180 for the faster chip?
i guess it is a toss up.
last time the chip was different.
this time it appears to be the same chip, just overclocked.

[Simon]

Last time the chip wasn't different. This time the chip's not different. The 3.06 is simply a version of the CPU you cannot buy from Intel right now. But Apple can. As I already mentioned unless you are seriously CPU-limited (and you'd know that if you were), the $200 are probably better invested in other things (RAM, disk, peripherals, etc.)

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Simon 

Well of course technically they're both "overclocked". The important difference is that any Joe can buy a 2.8 GHz X9000 from Intel. He won't find a 3.06 GHz Penryn though. The 3.06 GHz version of the X9000 is something only Apple (or similar volume buyers) gets from Intel. The regular 3.06 GHz Penryn product will arrive as the X9100 with socket B as part of the Penryn refresh. Right now there is officially no 3.06 GHz Penryn.

Huh? The average Joe can't buy a 2.8Ghz/1067Mhz FSB chip from Intel any eaiser than he can buy a 3.06Ghz/1067Mhz FSB chip from Intel. He can buy an 2.8Ghz/800Mhz FSB chip and overclock it to either of those options.

[Simon]

OK, let's get this straight:

What you can buy from Intel now:
X9000 - 2.8 / 6MB / 800 MHz - TDP 44 W - $851
T9500 - 2.6 / 6MB / 800 MHz - TDP 35 W - $530
T9300 - 2.5 / 6MB / 800 MHz - TDP 35 W - $316
T8300 - 2.4 / 3MB / 800 MHz - TDP 35 W - $241
T8100 - 2.1 / 3MB / 800 MHz - TDP 29 W - $209
the X9000 has unlocked multipliers so it can be overclocked.

What Intel will offer after the Penryn refresh:
X9100 - 3.06 / 6MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 44 W - $851
T9600 - 2.80 / 6MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 35 W - $530
T9400 - 2.53 / 6MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 35 W - $316
P9500 - 2.53 / 6MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 25 W - $348
P8600 - 2.40 / 3MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 25 W - $241
P8400 - 2.26 / 3MB / 1066 MHz - TDP 25 W - $209
these are all socket B CPUs for Calistoga.

Apple is using parts we can't buy. They're using socket P Penryns on a 1066 MHz FSB with some kind of Crestline-derived chipset.

With regard to the OP's original question: none of these BTO CPU options are "different" CPUs. They are the same CPUs with the same architecture and the same instruction set. They do however have different multiplier settings IOW they are "overclocked". The important point is that they have passed Intel QC at the clock settings they are running on. They are just as good as any other C2D, just faster.

[mattyb]

While the CPU might not be such a step up, the 512M graphics might be worth the extra money - my humble opinion.

Depends obviously what you'll be using your iMac for.

[solofx7]

i am going to be using it for games and using just about every mac app out there.
i fiddle with a wacom tablet too.

[mattyb]

Originally Posted by solofx7 

i am going to be using it for games and using just about every mac app out there.
i fiddle with a wacom tablet too.

I LOVE my Bamboo, great fun. I've been doing loads of SketchUp stuff with it as well as modifying images for my daughter to use as tracing models - really easy with the Wacom.

Mac games or will you install Windows?

[solofx7]

i have games on both systems.
i love them both, but i am a mac person through and through.
i have not used my wacom a lot, but i love it so much too.
hmm... it appears that my computer decision has already been made for me because the only config at the stores is the ultimate.
they have th lesser version, but i cannot get the 8800 on it

[Simon]

You will have a hard time finding a Mac game that performs better with 512 MB VRAM over 256 MB VRAM. The real issue here is the GPU. And the 8800GS will clearly offer better game performance than the 2600 PRO.

If money isn't a big issue and you want good game performance (on OS X or Windows) just get the 3.06 GHz iMac with the 8800GS. It's certainly as great computer.

[solofx7]

thank you.
i called the apple store and have them putting one to the side for me.
i am leaving work to get it, than going to class.

[solofx7]

guess what i am typing on?
yes i got it. i went home unpacked my iMac 24 inch Ultimate!

[Simon]

Congrats! I'm sure you'll have a lot of fun with it.