Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Loaded Mini - Cinebench 11.5

dasx

dasx

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 18, 2012
1,107
18
Barcelona
I don't plan on gaming in this machine but I was asked in another thread and by 2 people by PM to run this benchmark, so here it is.

I don't really know what these results mean. Yes, I can compare to what they tell me there, but I haven't use any of those so... I hope you guys can tell me how this compares to a 2011 iMac or Mini with dedicated graphic cards.

(Both CPU and GPU benchmarks)

EDIT: Mini is: 2.6GHz i7, 16GB RAM and 256GB SSD.
 

Attachments

  • CPU.png
    CPU.png
    2.5 MB · Views: 1,316
  • GPU.png
    GPU.png
    2 MB · Views: 976
k.alexander

k.alexander

macrumors 6502a
Jul 14, 2010
502
264
Thanks for the results, but can someone explain the Cinebemch results to the rest of us.

Are these results only for gaming? Or are they at all representative of graphic performance for photo work (Aperture / Photoshop)?
 
B

blanka

macrumors 68000
Jul 30, 2012
1,551
4
Cinema 4D is a 3D rendering app, and the makers created a standalone rendering app to benchmark systems cross platform. Rendering 3D is a complex multi core activity with huge memory bandwidth and complex floatingpoint and normal instructions. Guess it compares to movie rendering and heavy photoshop filters.

The GPU is tested with a complex real time rendering. The result of the HD 4000 is great. My radeon Mini does 24 fps, so 2 frames less for integrated is almost negligable.

----------

CPU is more than twice as fast as the radeon mini: Mine score 2.82
 
dasx

dasx

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 18, 2012
1,107
18
Barcelona
blanka said:
Cinema 4D is a 3D rendering app, and the makers created a standalone rendering app to benchmark systems cross platform. Rendering 3D is a complex multi core activity with huge memory bandwidth and complex floatingpoint and normal instructions. Guess it compares to movie rendering and heavy photoshop filters.

The GPU is tested with a complex real time rendering. The result of the HD 4000 is great. My radeon Mini does 24 fps, so 2 frames less for integrated is almost negligable.

----------

CPU is more than twice as fast as the radeon mini: Mine score 2.82
Click to expand...

I can understand the graphics not being so great, but this CPU is a beast. Now that I've had more days to get used to it, speed is awesome!
 
S

scottsjack

macrumors 68000
Aug 25, 2010
1,906
311
Arizona
dasx said:
I don't plan on gaming in this machine but I was asked in another thread and by 2 people by PM to run this benchmark, so here it is.

I don't really know what these results mean. Yes, I can compare to what they tell me there, but I haven't use any of those so... I hope you guys can tell me how this compares to a 2011 iMac or Mini with dedicated graphic cards.

EDIT: Mini is: 2.6GHz i7, 16GB RAM and 256GB SSD.
Click to expand...

As a comparison my 2010 Mac Pro 3.2 quad, 24GB 1044MHz RAM and WD RE4 2TB HD typically scores about 5.7 on the CPU and 35 +-3 on the OpenGL on either Mountain Lion or Lion. It rates slightly slower on CPU and about 50% OpenGL faster than yours. Your mini is pretty cool IMHO.

On Windows 8 the MP gets OpenGL scores in the low to mid 60s. A new mini running Windows might get OK gaming frame rates.

BTW, my top-of-the-line BTO late 2009 mini 2.66 C2D gets up to 6.4 OpenGL and 1.54 CPU from Cinebench. Can you believe that?
 
dasx

dasx

macrumors 65816
Original poster
Jun 18, 2012
1,107
18
Barcelona
scottsjack said:
As a comparison my 2010 Mac Pro 3.2 quad, 24GB 1044MHz RAM and WD RE4 2TB HD typically scores about 5.7 on the CPU and 35 +-3 on the OpenGL on either Mountain Lion or Lion. It rates slightly slower on CPU and about 50% OpenGL faster than yours. Your mini is pretty cool IMHO.

On Windows 8 the MP gets OpenGL scores in the low to mid 60s. A new mini running Windows might get OK gaming frame rates.
Click to expand...

It's amazing to see how machines evolve. Just 2 years and a simple Mini outperforms the CPU of a 2 year old Mac Pro. Amazing!!


scottsjack said:
BTW, my top-of-the-line BTO late 2009 mini 2.66 C2D gets up to 6.4 OpenGL and 1.54 CPU from Cinebench. Can you believe that?
Click to expand...

I had a 2010 2.4GHz Core2Duo Mini and the difference is huge. I do some CPU starving programs at work and when testing them at home, processing times are incredible compared to the 2010 Mini. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom