2014 13" rMBP 3 GHz benchmarks?

[Cloudsurfer]

Are there any benchmarks yet on the new 3GHz model? I am really curious how it stacks against the 2.8 model.

The 2.8 model scores around 7000 in GB3 64-bit so If I had to guess the 3.0 scores somewhere around 7200. Not a big difference, but still amazing for a dual core chip.

Just curious. Anyone here with a 3.0?

 

[yjchua95]

Are there any benchmarks yet on the new 3GHz model? I am really curious how it stacks against the 2.8 model.

The 2.8 model scores around 7000 in GB3 64-bit so If I had to guess the 3.0 scores somewhere around 7200. Not a big difference, but still amazing for a dual core chip.

Just curious. Anyone here with a 3.0?

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/692881

It clocks in at 7373 multicore, x64.

My 13" rMBP (2.8/16/512) clocked in at 7057: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/662379

 

[Evostar*]

Does the 3.0 over the 2.8 gain any graphics improvement at all with the higher clock speed?

 

[Cloudsurfer]

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/692881

It clocks in at 7373 multicore, x64.

My 13" rMBP (2.8/16/512) clocked in at 7057: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/662379

Not bad at all for a dual core machine!

 

[SarcasticJoe]

Does the 3.0 over the 2.8 gain any graphics improvement at all with the higher clock speed?

No, the only difference is that the CPU is clocked higher. There may be some fairly minor boost in badly optimized graphics tasks, but the GPU is the same and it runs at the same clocks.

 

[thunng8]

Not bad at all for a dual core machine!

Not great either. Intel has been stagnating in CPU performance for last 3 years. My 13" i7 2012 mbpr gets close to 7000. So less than 10% increase in 2 years.