2.8GHz Retina MacBook Pro Geekbench!

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by THETIMES, Feb 15, 2013.

  1. THETIMES macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    #1
    My Retina Macbook Pro 2.8ghz scored 13777 in 64bit mode.

    12633 in 32bit mode.

    The 2012 i7 iMac scored 13938 in 64bit mode by comparison. So close!

    I just got the macbook pro retina so these tests were done without power connected on a half charge.
     
  2. snowboarder macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    #2
    Did you get in an Apple store? Are they available already?
    What screen does it have? thanks!
     
  3. DeusInvictus7 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2008
    Location:
    Kitchener, Ontario
    #3
    My 2.6Ghz got 12978. Not sure if that extra 5% boost is worth the extra $250, unless you get paid for the work you do on your computer.
     
  4. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
  5. Outkast27 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2012
    Location:
    Earf
    #5
    when did a 2.8 model become available? I thought I topped mine out at 2.7
     
  6. iPhonesandMacs macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    #6
    yes the new macbooks are available in apple stores, I got the new 2.6 13" yesterday.
     
  7. dekka007 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2009
    #7
    13464 Geekbench on the old MBPr 2.7ghz with 8MB L3 Cache.

    Noted that the now offered 2.7Ghz processor only has 6MB L3 Cache.
     
  8. vatter69 macrumors 6502a

    vatter69

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
  9. alphaod macrumors Core

    alphaod

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2008
    Location:
    NYC
    #9
    That's because it's an update for the old 2.6GHz processor, whereas the new 2.8GHz processor is the upgrade for the old 2.7GHz (with 8MB L3 cache) processor.
     
  10. snowboarder macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2007
    #10
    I was specifically asking about the 2.8GHz model
     
  11. iPhonesandMacs macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    #11
    Yes it is available. What I was saying is that the new 13" was there so why wouldnt the 15" be. You can check the stores stock online
     
  12. TSX macrumors 68030

    TSX

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #12
    I want to know to, i just ordered a 3.0ghz 13 rMBP
     
  13. THETIMES thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2013
    #13
    Mine has a Samsung screen. The screen is pretty much perfect, and I've seen a lot of Samsung and LG screens. I've seen many Samsung's with a bit a yellow in one corner and I've seen LG's which lean slightly towards being too red or too blue.
     
  14. jenzjen macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2010
    #14
    These are 32bit scores for the 15" rMBP:

    12000 - 2 week old "mid 2012" 2.6ghz
    12400 - new "early 2013" 2.7ghz
     
  15. TSX macrumors 68030

    TSX

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
  16. vatter69 macrumors 6502a

    vatter69

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2013
    #16
    Thanks. Disappointing but not unexpected. 2.9 scored roughly 7800. :cool:
     
  17. TSX macrumors 68030

    TSX

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2008
    Location:
    Texas
    #17
    The number keeps going up little by little every time I run it
     
  18. iPhonesandMacs macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2012
    #18
    lol my 2.6 i5 256GB 13 scored 7710
     
  19. johnnnw macrumors 65816

    johnnnw

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2013
    #19
    My non retina Macbook Pro 2012 i5 2.5 got a 6300. Haaaaaaa
     
  20. daneoni macrumors G4

    daneoni

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2006
    #20
    Hehe, i don't feel ancient with my score. Early 11 MBP gets a score of 11152 (64bit)
     
  21. HundredthIdiot macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2013
    #21
    The devil is in the detail

    I own a late-2011 MBP 15" 2.2 Quad, and am considering moving to a 13" Retina 3.0 Dual.

    The overall Geekbench results are ~10,000 for the 15, and ~8000 for the 13, but that's probably because the 15 has twice as many lower clocked cores.

    Most of my work is code compilation, and I believe this is a single-threaded integer workload.

    Under these workloads, the 13 scores much higher, e.g.

    Blowfish single-core scalar
    13: 2685, 15:1932. 39% higher on 13.

    Text Compress single-core scalar
    13: 3102, 15: 2580. 20% higher on 13.

    Image Compress single-core scalar
    13: 2677 ,15: 2261. 18% higher on 13.

    Average: 26% higher on 13.

    These data were from a 2.9 13, where the clock speed is 32% higher than the 2.2 15, so it's hardly surprising that the 13 does better.

    Even 15" MBPs posting overall Geekbench scores in the mid-12000s are only managing ~2750 in the Blowfish single-core scalar, which is within 3% of the latest high spec 13".

    So basically, YMMV.
     
  22. b0fh666 macrumors 6502a

    b0fh666

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2012
    Location:
    south
    #22
    you guys talk about this 'geek bench' all the time so I went ahead, downloaded, installed... and it says it is a 'trial' and only would do '32-bit'... uninstalled without even running.

    want my 5 minutes back. meh
     
  23. AlexeyG macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2013
    #23
    can you upload some photos your screen?
     
  24. CausticPuppy macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    May 1, 2012
    #24
    Don't compare the base clock speeds; you need to compare the single-core TurboBoost speeds. Your old 2.2 will run at 3.1GHz when only one core is under load, while the 2.9GHz 13" will actually run at 3.7GHz on a single core.

    However, the new 2.7GHz quad-core will also run at 3.7GHz for a single core.

    For single-threaded workloads, the 13" gets you more bang for the buck, but if you are going for maximum speed, the high-spec quad-core notebooks will still be faster in single-core workloads even though the base clock is slower.
     

Share This Page