2.3 Quad. 8MB L3 cache. Does it mean anything.

[alphaod]

Is there a measurable impact on battery life between the 2.3 and 2.2? Anyone get a chance to run multiple benchmarks/encoding to see if the 2.3ghz makes a difference or will I be the first?

The 2.3GHz model shouldn't really use any more power, but should it use more power, any difference would be negated by the fact that the faster processor would clock down earlier after completing a given task.

 

[iDemiurge]

Thanks for all the input guys.

I guess if I'm considering spending $250 to get that little extra punch I might be better off forsaking mobility and getting a Mac Pro. Only drag is that they don't feel so "fresh"...

 

[adnoh]

If you need to ask you don't do the kind of stuff where the difference will be noticeable outside benchmarking things. Anyone whos day to day work will show a significant change with the added cache and minimal change in processor speed will most likely not be relying on a laptop to do that kind of work. The benefits are mainly going to be for people doing non procedural parallel number crunching.

totally agree

 

[LunaC]

. The benefits are mainly going to be for people doing non procedural parallel number crunching.

Like deconvolution, bayer demosaicing, video compression (remember sandy bridge SHARES the L3 cache, a new world for us),etc....

I think the 15/17inch is the first real mobile mobile workstation. Otherwise I would have just gone with a MBA. Given the '11 MBP are running with performance of a MacPro a year or two ago, the cache needs and idea of mobile only usage are quickly blurring away.

 

[Patman]

OK, per my own request.

I ran two simultaneous instances of Geekbench 32bit (free version) on my 2.3ghz 17'', oh and I bought a 2.3ghz yesterday btw =p



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is compared to roughly 10131 when running only 1 instance.


Can someone do the same on one of the 2.2ghz quads?

 

[Onimusha370]

and another "+1" to that.

And another one.
+1

 

[TXBDan]

OK, per my own request.

I ran two simultaneous instances of Geekbench 32bit (free version) on my 2.3ghz 17'', oh and I bought a 2.3ghz yesterday btw =p



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

This is compared to roughly 10131 when running only 1 instance.


Can someone do the same on one of the 2.2ghz quads?

How'd you run two instances at once? I can only get one to run at a time.

I'm on a 2.3GHz and got 10335 for a single instance. Safari w/ tabs and PS3 Media server running

 

[tdream]

Even if it saves you a second here and a second there, these seconds add up fast. The difference between the 2.2 or the 2.3 is the difference between spending your life in front of a computer screen waiting for something to happen, or being out there, living life.

Are you a salesman by any chance? Or are you being sarcastic?

The difference is virtually nothing.

 

[Patman]

How'd you run two instances at once? I can only get one to run at a time.

I'm on a 2.3GHz and got 10335 for a single instance. Safari w/ tabs and PS3 Media server running

Copy the program to the desktop and run it from there for the second instance.

 

[Bobby Corwen]

Are you a salesman by any chance? Or are you being sarcastic?

The difference is virtually nothing.

Yes I am a salesman. That is my biggest skill. It is my career.

I also enjoy being sarcastic a lot. So yup...