Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
2011 MacBook 13" benchmarks are here!
- Thread starter jp700p
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The CPU plays a big part too, for example files in the installer tend to be compressed heavily in order to reduce footprint, so the CPU is doing some heavy uncompressing during installation.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
How long does the L4D test take? I would assume some time to get accurate results. Just being impatient :]...
How long does the L4D test take? I would assume some time to get accurate results. Just being impatient :]...
Ok, thanks for enlightening me. Seriously, the people who gripe about this refresh should be gagged. The 13" got a pretty nice upgrade, and its bigger brothers are absolute beasts. Apple's fastest Mac offering is now a notebook, not a desktop or workstation.
You (and many others on this board) make it sound like the 320M isn't.
Maybe I live in a different world (I've been a PC gamer for a long time, and there's no such thing as a "desktop replacement" to me), but I did own a 2010 spec Macbook with the 320M, and did my fair share of experimentation.
It could run Civilization 4 and HL2 and various derivatives just fine, but those games are five and six years old, respectively. Big deal. In the name of science, I did test Bad Company 2, and the results were so horrendous (at least to somebody used to playing it at 1080p with everything maxed out) that I knew then and there that my Mac would be a great way to relive some older games that I loved years and years ago, but that would be the extent of it...and I'm fine with that. Besides, a majority of the most entertaining games ever made (to this day) are so old that even the Intel GPU will blow through them.
It's alright to be upset with the notion that we've suffered an apparent downgrade in graphics performance (who isn't?), but let's please stop pretending that we've done anything other than go from bad to a little bit worse.
No doubt. The 13-inch is not a gaming platform, this generation or last. Sacrificing the Nvidia card for this CPU is a meaningful improvement. As evinced by this real world installation test.
Why does it still have a low resolution screen? It seems like that would have been an obvious upgrade.
I've been meaning say this, every time someone has theorized that the resolution has remained the same because the Intel IGP cannot handle anything greater. Really don't think that's the case. Apple was probably just trying to cut costs.
If you have a "test" you would like me to run, I wouldn't mind it. I normally use handbrake to encode but I don't encode much lol. So if there's like an easy test suite or something available I'd be happy to do this for you.
I can run wprime or whatever if it's available for osx. I know that's a CPU test. haha
Damn, honestly it doesn't matter much. The reviewer said he could not tell the difference in frame rate while playing. Who cares about this though? Get a PC or a bigger Macbook Pro if you want to play games. The new 13" is infinitely better in real world tasks, apparently.
Cost cutting is a likely culprit. Apple could have implemented an ATi IGP as opposed to exclusively using the Intel IGP.
I just wish Apple would take a step back and go to dedicated GPU's ever since the intro of the
PowerBook G3 (Wallstreet). The Ati Rage LT/Pro is a joke now, but at least it didn't use shared system memory.
Now that you have an idea of the benchmarks would you care to help comment on my current situation. We have been discussing it in is thread I made.
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1102543/
Regards
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1102543/
Regards
I ran a geekbench, 64bit.
7498 specs in sig.
as for encoding, how should I go about doing it? Like is there a "standard" to go by I don't have any raw files to encode at the moment =( should I just rip a dvd and then encode it into a certain format?
7498 specs in sig.
as for encoding, how should I go about doing it? Like is there a "standard" to go by I don't have any raw files to encode at the moment =( should I just rip a dvd and then encode it into a certain format?
Attachments
Intel's Quick Sync should make video encoding and transcoding faster than on any MacBook that has previously shipped (discrete GPU or not). In fact, since the 13" models only come with Sandy Bridge's integrated GPU Quick Sync will be active all of the time, which may not be true with the 15"/17" MacBook Pros (since if you are running on the discrete GPU it's possible that Quick Sync will have to be disabled -- not sure about that, maybe Apple has found a way around that problem). Also, we don't yet know whether Apple has or even will in the future take full advantage of Quick Sync. It seems based upon some wording on Apple's MacBook Pro processor website that they will be using Quick Sync (and note they are talking about the Sandy Bridge CPU, not the discrete GPU):
Of course, as a "filmmaker" you may have to stick with the slower, plain-old, software-driven CPU encoding path, since Quick Sync could introduce small changes in the final output in comparison to your previous, software-only encodings.
Last edited: