13" MBP w/Touchbar benchmark (geekbench)

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by mikeo007, Nov 8, 2016.

  1. mikeo007 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    #1
    Was just browsing geekbench results and came across a new 13" MBP benchmark that was run yesterday. Likely someone with a review model is running geekbench on it to test performance.

    It's about 10-15% faster than last years model, which is about par for the course for a "tock" in Intel's cycle.

    But what's more important is that fact that people have these in their hands and are using them right now! I'm expecting reviews to be out soon.

    [​IMG]

    https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/983171
     
  2. terminator-jq macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2012
    #2
    Not bad. Not bad at all! Should be interesting to see what other people come up with. If this is true, it will be a very nice upgrade from my current MBP.

    Looks like we get a pretty big jump in multicore performance over the base 13" without touchbar.
     
  3. jacob_w macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2015
    #3
    Nice. Hopefully we'll see some reviews this week
     
  4. Howard2k macrumors 6502a

    Howard2k

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2016
    #4
    Rubbish. According to all the pros on here there is no performance gain at all.
     
  5. chabig macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2002
    #5
    I'm looking forward to the results from all three models, i5 @ 2.9, i5 @ 3.1, and i7. The base performance is really good. I wonder if the 3.1 is worth an extra $100. I'm almost certain the i7 won't be worth a $300 premium. But let's see.
     
  6. keviig macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    #6
  7. Macalway macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    #7
    Wouldn't the non-TB with the lower TDP have much more aggressive throttling? It seems to me that if I were to tax that thing out it would throttle down at some point. That sort of thing makes me nervous if i'm running a couple apps I need.

    Of course I don't know. Just guessing. The reason i'm asking is the Geekbench for the 2GHZ isn't far off from the 2.9GHZ, which confuses things a bit. I understand the boost aspect, just saying. Got to 'try' to sort this out. :)
     
  8. Nick11Mac macrumors 6502

    Nick11Mac

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Location:
    California
    #8
    Looking forward to what the reviews will be after the first orders are delivered.
     
  9. mikeo007 thread starter macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    #9
    As mentioned above, the 2GHz will throttle much more aggressively than the 2.9. They both have very similar turbo frequencies (3.1 vs 3.3) but the CPU in the base model won't be able to maintain the turbo for nearly as long as the one in the touchbar model.
     
  10. Macalway macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    #10
    Yes that's what I figure. It would be interesting to test this; see how long the 2ghz can go at varying loads. Because it's an attractive package. It's just an unknown this way, so until I see charts, I can't really commit to it.
     
  11. hj576 macrumors regular

    hj576

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #11
    And the results, as expected are better than the Kabylake i5 (in Dell XPS 13) that some people are soo sad was not included in the Macbook Pro. How dare apple use an older generation processor when its clearly better than the newer generation one available in the market right now
    https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/986436?baseline=983171
    --- Post Merged, Nov 8, 2016 ---
    Whats more surprising is, the baseline 13 inch w/o touchbar actually has better results than the new XPS13 with 7th gen ..

    https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/compare/983217?baseline=989057

    (sorry I know out of topic)
     
  12. Phisherman81 macrumors 6502

    Phisherman81

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    #12
    My current 2010 MBP pulls a 2406 in MultiCore!!

    Needles to say, I can't wait for this guy to get delivered!!!!
     
  13. dmelgar macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2005
    #13
    I had a MBP wo touch bar and could not make it slow down. I pegged the CPU until the entire chassis was quite warm and ran geekbench immediately after and it was pretty much the same speed.
     
  14. hj576 macrumors regular

    hj576

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2016
    Location:
    Netherlands
    #14
    Louis try to see thermal throttling as well in his video, couldnt find any
     
  15. keviig macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    #15
    I could. Try running a game without Vsync. The GPU will max out at around 800-900 MHz (max speed is 1000 MHz) and the CPU will hover around 1.8-1.9 GHz (max turbo 3.1 GHz). This combined results in a 24-29W power draw and 90c temp with 5000 rpm fan (according to Intel Power Gadget). Geekbench only tests the CPU, not the GPU (unless you do the compute benchmark, which no one seems to do).
     
  16. markusberger, Nov 8, 2016
    Last edited: Nov 8, 2016

    markusberger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #16
    guys, not meaning to be bashing, but considering the price tags, these scores are nothing to get too excited about:

    (Geekbench 3 scores, geekbench 4 scores below)

    my 11in MacBook Air 2015: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/8127053
    mba 2015.jpeg


    my 17in MacBook Pro 2011: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/8121533
    mbp 2011.jpg


    my Hackintosh, because MacPros are the most useless overpriced thing since the MiniDisc player: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/8129561
    hackintosh.jpeg


    And unless you spend your working days duplicating 30GB files a faster SSD (beyond 500 MB/s) will NOT make macOS "feel" faster ... these are pure benchmark values ... just saying ;)
     
  17. Macalway macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    #17
    I don't know ANYTHING, yet I know this ain't true :D
     
  18. Phisherman81 macrumors 6502

    Phisherman81

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    #18

    FWIW - those are all GeekBench 3 Results, the link in the original post in GeekBench 4.
     
  19. raymond7 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2016
    #19
    The increase compared to my MBPr early 2015 is only 8% for multicore and for single core roughly 2%. Not worth the extra money for this unnoticeable speed difference.
     

    Attached Files:

  20. Ma2k5 macrumors 6502a

    Ma2k5

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2012
    #20
    Only 8%? I don't know, 5-10% is usually the annual performance jump by Intel, as they work more on efficiency rather than performance.

    Anyway, the new rMBP's, the performance of the SSD's/RAM and the better display/speakers are the main selling points, a long with the smaller form factor - not the CPU/GPU side of things.
     
  21. markusberger macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    #21
  22. FrozenDarkness macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2009
    #22
    apple really should've made faster processors
     
  23. Phisherman81 macrumors 6502

    Phisherman81

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    #23
  24. protoxx macrumors 6502a

    protoxx

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    #24
    The fastest processors Apple makes are in the iPhone 7s. The Macintoshes use intel processors.
     
  25. xraydoc macrumors 604

    xraydoc

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    192.168.1.1
    #25
    I think (I hope) he was being facetious.
     

Share This Page