New iMacs running an overclocked Penryn chip, not Montevina

Following this morning's iMac introduction, speculation has been rampant as to whether Apple got an early shot at Intel's upcoming Core 2 Duo Extreme X9100 chip. The X9100 is meant to usher in the "Montevina" Centrino 2 era, and boasts significant less power consumption than its forebears, in addition to those spiffy new clock speeds. Well, it turns out the new iMacs aren't Montevina, but instead a special-made 45nm Penryn 3.06GHz chip with a 1066MHz frontside bus. That means most of the juice of the X9100, but at 55 watts instead of 44. This chip exclusivity has been a bit of a pattern with Apple, and one which we're sure its competitors are quite appreciative of.

Read - Electronista
Read - TG Daily

[Waveblade @ Apr 28th 2008 7:06PM]

Wait iMacs have laptop processors? This is new to me D:

[ssuk @ Apr 29th 2008 2:39AM]

Ruben, he was referring to the spculation that these new iMacs would run on a Montevina processor. Not that an overclocked Penryn was a new off-the-block processor.

[Kurian @ Apr 29th 2008 4:33AM]

Now iCraps are even more over priced pieces of crap than I though. They don't even have desktop components!

[Jon Kit @ Apr 28th 2008 7:09PM]

What is the reason for Apple getting special chips? I mean, they're not a real dominant force in PC sales, why would Intel not give the treatment to the other retailers that move more product?

[yoshi @ Apr 28th 2008 7:14PM]

Two reasons:

1. To get Apple to make the switch from the PowerPC to Intel, Apple probably got a multi-year deal of sweetness. The PowerPC->Intel switch was a big win for Intel.

2. Lower volume. Apple ships less units than major competitors and so special chips like this are easier to supply. If Dell were to try the same thing, they'd be out of stock very soon. So Apple gets the first fruits and the rest of the world gets to wait for production to ramp up.

[John M @ Apr 28th 2008 7:18PM]

Let's not forget that Apple just bought a boatload of IP from PA Semi and has had a bunch of graphics chip IP from an earlier acquisition that they can now license to Intel in exchange for early access to chips

[Cesar Cardoso @ Apr 28th 2008 7:45PM]

Apple is the only 100% Intel shop in the business. This helps a lot :)

[Bender Bending Rodriguez @ Apr 28th 2008 8:24PM]

In addition to Cesar Cardoso comment about Apple being 100% Intel for Macs they are ship only high-end system. The chips used are all top-tier Intel processors. This, coupled with the free press Apple get from their boutique-like machines allows Intel to also receive the associated free press associated with Apple.

This is the 3rd time Intel has introduced a chip to Apple before the rest of the industry and Apple is most likely not having to pay a dime to get this type of exclusivity.

[Steffen Jobbs @ Apr 28th 2008 9:17PM]

Otellini calls up Steve Jobs in the middle of the night and says, "Please Steve, we'll do anything for you if you just keep using our processors. We'll give you first pick and highest clock speeds because you're the man. Together we can both rule the computer world and turn Windows into a thing of the past where it belongs."

Apparently all the other computer companies are heading for the toilet in a couple of years, so the Ot' wants to stay on Steve's good side as Apple's market share climbs exponentially.

Apple and iMac FTW.

[Ruben @ Apr 28th 2008 9:48PM]

Did anyone even venture to think that this really isnt an exclusive chip, but a standard 800MHz FSB mobile chip, that because of the larger casing and the ability to house a much larger cooler than a laptop, can run at the 1066FSB, and therefore, at 3.06?

[BigD145 @ Apr 28th 2008 7:11PM]

Does that mean they are specifically trying to shorten the lifespan of the computer?

[Alex @ Apr 28th 2008 7:17PM]

Don't worry, once it burns out the Apple fanboy will gladly replace it with something 3x the cost of a PC

[Sneakz @ Apr 28th 2008 7:24PM]

Well lets see here. the 2.8GHz model has a 200MHz bus multiplied by 14 (the.. um.. multiplier) which gets a clock speed of 2.8GHz. This new proc might not necessarily be overclocked. We know the FSB is 1066MHz or a 266MHz bus. If that's the case, then the multiplier must have been dropped to 11.5 to get 3.06GHz. The proc probably isn't overclocked to say. It's more like a custom processor for Apple by Intel. Using this
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors#.22Penryn-3M.22_.28standard-voltage.2C_45_nm.29
as a reference, the 2.8GHz processor is also custom as Intel does not have a Penryn proc that is 2.8Ghz without C2E branding. Also some idiot edited the Wikipedia page assuming the release date for the X9100 was today because he/she thought it was in the new iMacs.

[TimeyWimeyStuff @ Apr 28th 2008 7:24PM]

Alex, you are an idiot.

You can always tell when someones 360 has RROD, they're usually full of envy and can't handle it...

[clak @ Apr 28th 2008 7:30PM]

I just don't understand why Windows Fanboys feel the need to come into Apple related topics and spew nonsense about Macs and then turn around and complain about Engadget's bias toward Apple. Most of you guys don't even comment in other topics. You have a hard-on exclusively for Apple.

I almost never go into Windows related topics because quite frankly, Microsoft bores me to tears. I think the only Windows related topic I commented on was one about Surface about a month ago. I find Surface interesting, but I hate Microsoft's implementation of the technology, but besides, Surface, I don't see anything remotely interesting about the Microsoft ecosystem.

This constant bashing of Apple seems to grow with Apple's popularity. Are Windows users really afraid that Apple is going to gain some serious ground? Or is it just plain old jealousy? I also get the feeling that some of you guys really want a Mac, especially since you know you can install Windows on it, but you're angry because you don't have the money. Hey, don't get mad at Mac users because you work at McDonald's.

[sinai @ Apr 28th 2008 7:44PM]

as long as it survives the 1 year warranty, who cares?

[z0phi3l @ Apr 28th 2008 9:30PM]

@ clak

It's a bit of both jealousy and fear, it Macs do become more popular than Windows, all the MS fanbois are going to have to learn how to use a decen OS and let go of the mediocrity that MS makes. And jealousy because OS X is three times better than Vista, and the Mac hardware is generally better too.


Me I'm happy with Linux

[Ruben @ Apr 28th 2008 9:31PM]

@clak:

You may not go into Microsoft posts and bash microsoft, but a number of Apple fanboys do.

This stems from the very first release of OSX (maybe 10.2, because 10.1 sucked). There has been a constant "war" (i know, its pathetic) between Apple and Microsoft users. With each fault Microsoft suffered in the late 90's, early 2000's, Apple fanboys have been right there to pick up the sand and hurl it in their faces. For years, this has been happening.

Like another poster stated, this is basically a spring that has been compressed to such a large amount that it cannot bear pressure any longer.

They are basically doing what Apple users have been doing for years. Finding any excuse to make mention of what their platform can do, in opposition to what is talked about. Its just new to Apple fans who have yet to experience what they have been handing out all these years.

[Nohone @ Apr 28th 2008 10:44PM]

@Clak:

Again, I will ask you this, if you do not like Microsoft supporters posting in Apple posts, then why do you do it in Microsoft posts? As you mentioned, remember the Surface thread? How about the Zune thread? Apple fans post in every single Microsoft post, and I do not see you going into those telling them not to post because it is not a thread that interests them (from your Zune post: "I never go into articles that don't interest me, so what's your problem?" - which has shown to be a fallacy). Are you and the other Apple fans really that afraid of Apple failing that you and the others need to constantly make posts like "What's a Zune?" etc.

Yep, the usual. It is OK for Apple fans to be hypocrites. MS people are supposed to sit back, let Apple fanboys say whatever they want in a MS thread, and not say a thing. They are also supposed to stay out of any Apple thread, or Clak will shortly be there to scold them and tell them how mean they are and hurt their feelings.

[clak @ Apr 28th 2008 11:42PM]

How is it that a minority of computer users can upset a bunch of computer users that have the majority of the market? I don't understand this new Windows victimhood. I was a Windows user five years ago and I distinctly remember PC guys making fun of Macs. I knew one guy who was a Mac user back then and I am ashamed to say it, but I succumbed to the ignorance that I had heard from other PC users.

This Mac guy didn't pressure me or try to evangelize for Apple, but somehow we got into a conversation about Macs, which I had used at an old job when I was in high school. I told him I didn't like the Mac mouse and complained about some aspects of OS 9. It never occurred to me that this guy was a fanboy, but I unfairly dismissed some of his comments about OS X and didn't think anymore about Macs until I started Film School and got involved with Final Cut Pro.

Now, five years later, I'm a Mac user and suddenly, things have been turned completely around. Whereas Mac users used to be the victimized minority, more and more I see the aura of persecution migrating to Windows users and it's absolutely pathetic and ironic. Some of it has to do with those Get-A-Mac commercials that started in 2006, but COME ON, Windows users having been making fun of Mac users for fifteen years! You're not innocents in this war, so get over it.

The Chickens are coming home to roost.

[Leo M. @ Apr 29th 2008 4:19AM]

thank you clak

[Chris in CA @ Apr 29th 2008 11:56AM]

I think the whole comment controversy thing stems from Apple's irrelevancy for the longest time. Think about it, Apple had to resort to computers in completely gay colors to get any kind of notice. At that time it would have just been rude to comment on Apple's misfortune- like kicking a dog when it's down. Now you have a time where Apple is meeting with some claimed success where are all that repressed hatred can flow into the community where it belongs. Really, this is all just a cleansing and should be supported by the entire community. It's good for you! Join me!

[Nohone @ Apr 29th 2008 12:14PM]

Awww, poor Clak, you need a hug for how poorly you and all the other Apple users have been treated. You are just fighting the good fight, against all us evil Windows users.

What BS. Just keep making up excuses, Clak, and keep playing the hapless victim. Your argument does not hold up. You could make it fit in the OSX vs. Windows argument, but, as is so often pointed out, Zune has a much smaller marketshare than the iPod. The minority OSX users fighting against the majority of Windows users, but are not the iPod users treating the Zune users the same as you are complaining about? But that is OK, because you are Apple users. The argument only applies to you at your discretion, just like you going into a Surface post and adding your $0.02 is OK, but you decide that somebody making a negative posting about the iPod is bad. Grow up.

[Predator.Z6 @ Apr 29th 2008 6:25PM]

#1. This must be the longest thread in the history of engadget.

#2. WHO THE HECK CARES IF Mac users hate Windows users and vice versa? Just shut the heck up, for golly sakes!

[fanthem @ Apr 28th 2008 7:18PM]

Is that picture some sort of symbolism of how Apple will never be cheap?

[Kizorblade @ Apr 29th 2008 12:20AM]

Actually it's to show how big the chips are...

But I like your suggestion way better.

[Taylor @ May 4th 2008 3:44AM]

Cheap as chips, you could say?

[Rob Conway @ Apr 28th 2008 7:22PM]

So I should get a new one as a replacement because I bought the 20" 2.4 Ghz model like 2 months ago and paid the same price as the 2.66 Ghz model now! I'm entitled, damn it!

Maybe if I cry enough Apple will give me something free! iPhone maybe?
hehehe.

[TimeyWimeyStuff @ Apr 28th 2008 7:27PM]

Always always always check this page before buying anything Apple!

http://buyersguide.macrumors.com

[Rob Conway @ Apr 28th 2008 7:50PM]

@timeywimeystuff
Actually, I thought I was safe from the "Apple Syndrome" because when I bought it, they had just upgraded the HDD to 320 GB from 250. Alas, I was wrong. I don't really care though. What's .26 Ghz amongst friends? Even if I'd known, I probably would have bought it anyway. I needed to upgrade from my Dual 1Ghz G4, Logic kept overloading the CPU.

[happy_penguin @ Apr 28th 2008 10:28PM]

You shouldn't worry about it. I'm using an old ass G5 iMac and I'm perfectly happy with it. I wish I could use Parallels and some of the other stuff that require Intel, but it's okay for now. Much like my PC, I don't want to spend the money to upgrade when I don't really need it. Your machine is plenty powerful enough to serve you for several years.

[Steve @ Apr 28th 2008 7:31PM]

Maybe I'm confused by the Intel codewords, but isn't Montevina just the next Centrino platform - i.e. the combination of a processor, motherboard, and wireless chip, whereas Penryn is just the processor?

In fact, I thought Montevina was supposed to use Penryn processors.

[Bender Bending Rodriguez @ Apr 29th 2008 12:29AM]

That is correct. The first Montevina will be Penryn (45nm).

Sicne these chips can address 800MHz RAM they can't be the Santa Rosa platform. Which the iMacs in late 2007 were. They were Santa Rosa/ Merom.

Despite the claims that these aren't the Montevina/Penryn chips that Intel was planning to release in June, they do contain many aspects of the Montevina platform. I personally don't care what Intel internally calls them as that is just marketing; the important thing is that they are Penryns with a 1066MHz FSB, 6MB L2 cache that can address 800MHz RAM. I nice bump in speed, especially for the low-end iMac which now has a discreet GPU and a bump from 2.0 to 2.4GHz with a high-end chip.

[Iain @ Apr 28th 2008 7:38PM]

Montevina is a platform, not a processor. Penryn is a processor, not a platform.

[MeatyPi @ Apr 28th 2008 8:05PM]

so why then does engadget make it seem like they're both processors? I'm not questioning you I just want to know

[blastop @ Apr 28th 2008 7:41PM]

"Montevina" (35/45 series northbridges) is the name of the platform that suceeds to the "Santa Rosa" (965 northbridge), NOT the processor.
In fact, both the "Santa Rosa" and "Montevina" can use either the refreshed 800MHz FSB "Merom" (65nm) or "Penryn" (45nm) Core 2's -as long as they are Socket P compatible-.
The "Montevina" brings mostly a official 1066MHz FSB and lower-voltage DDR3 (1.5v, instead of DDR2's 1.8v) options, but the former already exists unofficially in Santa Rosa, and the CPU's of each platform should be interchangeable pending BIOS/EFI updates -same socket/pin layout, as i said above-.
This is further complicated by the fact that both "Santa Rosa" and "Montevina" chipsets can decrease their FSB's clockspeeds independently from the CPU core clockspeed, pending bandwidth utilization patterns. That's why a Core 2 "Santa Rosa"-based CPU can be used at full speed while its FSB may run at just 400MHz, instead of the 800MHz standard speed.

DDR3-1333 will only improve integrated graphics (an area where clocks, not access latency, play a key role) performance and slightly lower the overall power consumption. Due to increased latencies of the DDR3 technology, you'll be hard pressed to find anything else running faster versus the bog-standard DDR2-667.

So, in short, future "Montevina"-based iMac's/Macbook's/Macbook Pro's will use basically the same CPU's as the "Santa Rosa" platform refresh currently shipping with "Penryn" 45nm Core 2's. The extra 266MHz for the FSB are therefore perfectly negligible in the performance department compared to any recent "Santa Rosa"-based 45nm Core 2 "Penryn". Only a hypothetical mobile quad-core CPU would benefit from it under certain conditions, but the "Penryn" model they've announced for this iMac isn't one, so...

Sorry for the somewhat lengthy post, but it'll be useful if it avoids any upgrade-rush mistakes for many ill-informed or confused buyers out there. :)

[sinai @ Apr 28th 2008 7:48PM]

with Intel's providing BFF status to Apple, it's recent of shunning nVidia; AMD's acquisition of ATi; and rumors of VIA's new Isaiah chip doing backflips over Atom; it creates an interesting place for all involved.

one slip and it's going to get ugly.

[mike @ Apr 28th 2008 8:26PM]

why it is such a big deal to know what kind of CPU is in iMac? Mac
is only 5% (iMac is like what? 1%?), who cares

[gimmeslack12 @ Apr 28th 2008 9:48PM]

Dude you are so ignorant. It's 7% (6.52% rounded).

[mingistech @ Apr 28th 2008 8:49PM]

They say Apple has 21% market share in the U.S.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/mac/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=20875

[Ruben @ Apr 28th 2008 9:17PM]

"Piper Jaffray's chief Apple analyst, Gene Munster, believes Apple now holds "21 per cent of the consumer market", and will extend its reach in that market in future. "


READ: All of their products constitute the 21%. Their products (iPod, iPhone, Macs) are owned by 21% of consumers, which is not suprising, considering the iPod.


Their Mac marketshare actually much less:

"Gartner says that Apple appears to have shown "decent growth" within the professional PC market, which is a little outside of its usual haunts. Apple now has 6.6 percent of the overall U.S. market, according to Gartner, while IDC says Apple's at 6 percent market share. The two firms only release the top 5 in each region at first, and Apple is still pretty far away from cracking the worldwide Top 5."

http://www.news.com/8301-13579_3-9920664-37.html?tag=tb

[Ruben @ Apr 28th 2008 9:22PM]

My mistake, the 21% refers to the consumer market.

The 6% accounts for businesses as well.

Sorry for my misunderstanding.

[Mike @ Apr 28th 2008 10:08PM]

I am sorry, Mac is 6.52%, not 5%. I understand that 1.52% means a lot when you only have 6.52% total.

[puhsitch @ Apr 28th 2008 10:21PM]

Last I checked, Apple was the #3 computer manufacturer in terms of sales. That seems pretty significant to me...

[DT @ Apr 28th 2008 11:12PM]

Uh, even 5% of the GINORMOUS US computer market is pretty substantial. I'd certainly love to sell ANYTHING to 5% of US consumers. Don't compare it to Windows marketshare ("Windows" doesn't manufacture and sell computers)...compare it to Dell (roughly 20%) and HP, who DO manufacture and sell computers.

[Big John @ Apr 28th 2008 11:25PM]

DT has a point. If you're going to compare manufacturers (which is what this thread is doing), you can't count 'Windows' as one group. OS penetration is a different story and mixing the numbers doesn't work well for comparison.

[John Aubrey @ Apr 28th 2008 9:01PM]

Intel probably has these things clocked to around 3.4-3.6 easy, but holding back becuase they don't need anything that powerful to keep above AMD, and slow speeds will keep heat down and not an issue if they clocked it up.

Apple is probably paying a nice prem. for these chips, and Intel knows they will sell them, so why not.

[Nirodha @ Apr 28th 2008 10:42PM]

There's nothing new about running a CPU slightly out of specification, which I suspect Apple is doing and calling it "exclusive" for marketing purposes. PC users have been doing such things for decades now.

[Jeff @ Apr 28th 2008 10:53PM]

@clak

take the time to read around on different news sites, most if not all Microsoft related posts are filled with comments by mac users starting crap.

infact doesnt Apple make Microsoft bashing TV ads that they love to shove into everyones face?

@mingistech

this site will give you a good idea on the desktop market share
http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp
Apple 4.4%
Linux 3.9%
Windows 9x through to Vista is the remainder.

[iofthestorm @ Apr 29th 2008 12:32AM]

Also, clak says he doesn't go into MS threads bashing MS but I seem to see ignorant/stupid posts of his in every thread about something MS related.