PDA

View Full Version : MacBook Air 2.13 Geekbench Scores




adamjackson
Aug 22, 2009, 06:49 PM
How do these looks? I'm curious if anyone with a Rev C 1.86Ghz HDD MacBook Air could post their results?

Just some internal justification for the money I spent on the extra speed and SSD :p


http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/158856


Score: 2521



wetrix
Aug 22, 2009, 06:55 PM
Well it smokes my 1.86/SSD running SL :-(

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/158858

Score: 2303

California
Aug 22, 2009, 07:28 PM
I am confused. Why wouldn't the 2.13ghz Macbook Air beat out the 2.0ghz Mac Mini from 2009 which came in at about 2700 points on geekbench?

adamjackson
Aug 22, 2009, 07:36 PM
I am confused. Why wouldn't the 2.13ghz Macbook Air beat out the 2.0ghz Mac Mini from 2009 which came in at about 2700 points on geekbench?

I'm willing to be it's the solid state drive. I didn't go for the 2.13 because of the speed. that's just resale value in my opinion. My reason was the SSD. Put an SSD in the mini and i bet you'll be fine.

BTW. what's the Front side bus and RAM speed of the Mac mini? MBA is 1066Mhz. Thay may have something to do with it as well.

gman901
Aug 22, 2009, 08:14 PM
I am confused. Why wouldn't the 2.13ghz Macbook Air beat out the 2.0ghz Mac Mini from 2009 which came in at about 2700 points on geekbench?

Because when Geekbench rates performance for the 2.13 Ghz, it's throttling down to 1.60 Ghz, while the Mac Mini maintains a 2.0 Ghz processor speed throughout the test. I have a Mac mini and the 2.13 Ghz and have the same Geekbench scores. My guess is that Apple has the Air agressively clocking down the processor to avoid meltdowns.

NC MacGuy
Aug 22, 2009, 09:23 PM
I don't think GeekBench measures disk performance. XBench would do that.

My 1.86 Rev. B SSD GeekBench:

California
Aug 22, 2009, 09:26 PM
Because when Geekbench rates performance for the 2.13 Ghz, it's throttling down to 1.60 Ghz, while the Mac Mini maintains a 2.0 Ghz processor speed throughout the test. I have a Mac mini and the 2.13 Ghz and have the same Geekbench scores. My guess is that Apple has the Air agressively clocking down the processor to avoid meltdowns.

Can't you override this MB Air clockdown by putting "energy saver" on "Highest" instead of "automatic"?

DayStar used to sell a program that would override this "down clocking" on Macs, can't remember what it's called.

California
Aug 22, 2009, 09:28 PM
I'm willing to be it's the solid state drive. I didn't go for the 2.13 because of the speed. that's just resale value in my opinion. My reason was the SSD. Put an SSD in the mini and i bet you'll be fine.

BTW. what's the Front side bus and RAM speed of the Mac mini? MBA is 1066Mhz. Thay may have something to do with it as well.

No, you read it wrong. The 2.0 Mini is clocked faster than the MacBook Air on the scores.

The mini has the same bus speed. The 2.13 Macbook Air should perform marginally faster than the mini and it scored LOWER, i.e. SLOWER than the 2.0 ghz Mini.

NC MacGuy
Aug 22, 2009, 09:47 PM
I think the difference you see in GeekBench scores between a Mini and an Air is SpeedStep is active in the notebook Macs and probably not in the desktop systems.

adamjackson
Aug 22, 2009, 09:53 PM
No, you read it wrong. The 2.0 Mini is clocked faster than the MacBook Air on the scores.

The mini has the same bus speed. The 2.13 Macbook Air should perform marginally faster than the mini and it scored LOWER, i.e. SLOWER than the 2.0 ghz Mini.


ah sorry yeah i did read that wrong. speedstep makes sense. It's unfortunate that it's hard to truly gauge the speed correctly when it does that.

ayeying
Aug 22, 2009, 10:26 PM
Could've scored higher but the system was running a lot of stuff... plus vista vm

Airforcekid
Aug 23, 2009, 09:12 PM
Could've scored higher but the system was running a lot of stuff... plus vista vm

Wow I cant stand having Safari Mail and iTunes up at the same time.

ayeying
Aug 23, 2009, 09:27 PM
Wow I cant stand having Safari Mail and iTunes up at the same time.

say wut?

Cynicalone
Aug 23, 2009, 10:25 PM
Here is my late 08 Air running on battery power.

Scottsdale
Aug 23, 2009, 10:41 PM
It would be a mistake to buy an HDD MBA. What makes the MBA enjoyable is the fact that it feels like a MBP but only when the MBA has an SSD.

Do yourself a favor and buy either rev B 1.86/SSD refurbished for $1349 before ever spending even half as much for a rev C MBA with HDD.

The HDD makes the MBA a slow boring incapable ultraportable that doesn't make it a primary capable Mac.

Cynicalone
Aug 23, 2009, 11:55 PM
It would be a mistake to buy an HDD MBA. What makes the MBA enjoyable is the fact that it feels like a MBP but only when the MBA has an SSD.

Do yourself a favor and buy either rev B 1.86/SSD refurbished for $1349 before ever spending even half as much for a rev C MBA with HDD.

The HDD makes the MBA a slow boring incapable ultraportable that doesn't make it a primary capable Mac.

I agree 100% with that.

Both my early 08 (Rev. A) and late 08 (Rev. B) have the SSD. I wouldn't buy the Air without one. Now if only they would use a standard connector so I could swap them out myself...

slapguts
Aug 24, 2009, 05:12 AM
Rev. A, 80gb HD. No idea why the number is this high.

ayeying
Aug 24, 2009, 11:09 AM
Rev. A, 80gb HD. No idea why the number is this high.

64-bit. We're running 32-bit.