Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

2017 MacBook Pro is Up to 20% Faster Than Last Year's Model in Benchmarks

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
51,597
13,233


Apple this week refreshed its MacBook Pro lineup with Intel's seventh-generation Kaby Lake processors, and early benchmarks for the notebooks suggest the 2017 models are up to 20 percent faster than the equivalent 2016 models equipped with Intel's sixth-generation Skylake processors.


Specifically, the new 15-inch MacBook Pro configured with a 2.9GHz Core i7 processor has average single-core and multi-core scores of 4,632 and 15,747 respectively based on nearly a dozen Geekbench 4 results so far.

By comparison, last year's 15-inch MacBook Pro configured with a sixth-generation 2.7GHz Core i7 processor, which was the equivalent high-end stock configuration, has average single-core and multi-core scores of 4,098 and 13,155 respectively based on over 4,800 Geekbench 4 results.

On a model-vs-model basis, the benchmark results suggest the 2017 MacBook Pro with a 2.9GHz processor is up to 13 percent faster in single-core performance, and up to 19.7 percent faster in multi-core performance, than the equivalent 2016 MacBook Pro model. Its price remains unchanged at $2,799.


There's only one Geekbench result for the new 15-inch MacBook Pro's base configuration with a 2.8GHz Core i7 processor, but the benchmarks suggest that model is up to 9.5 percent faster than the equivalent 2016 MacBook Pro equipped with a sixth-generation 2.6GHz Core i7 processor.

There are no Geekbench results yet for the new 15-inch MacBook Pro's highest-end built-to-order configuration with a seventh-generation 3.1GHz Core i7 processor, so its performance cannot be compared to the equivalent built-to-order 2016 MacBook Pro with a sixth-generation 2.9GHz Core i7 processor.

Article Link: 2017 MacBook Pro is Up to 20% Faster Than Last Year's Model in Benchmarks
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Avieshek

ikir

macrumors 68000
Sep 26, 2007
1,520
1,027
I'm more interested in integrated performance compared to Iris 540/550. Anyway my super eGPU will destroy both together eh eh
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikecorp and rekhyt
Comment

TigerWoodsIV

macrumors 6502a
Apr 3, 2010
577
415
But there's no way of you knowing or anyone else knowing when the next model was going to be updated. It's not a slap in the face at all. You still have an amazing machine.
It's a slap in the face because they took so long to put out Skylake machines, they just went for the cash grab. They rarely put out updates so fast. You can tell they just wanted these out for Christmas. Glad I spent a fortune on one...
 
Comment

fyun89

macrumors 6502
Oct 3, 2014
342
324
My 2012 Retina Macbook Pro is now 5 years old and still holding quite well. Single core score of 3606 and multicore 11748 isn't quite off from 4632/15747 of the latest.

Only <30% difference from a 5 year old device? No way I'll pay another grand for that (after resale) lol.

Not to discourage people from buying rMBP though. They're good investment for long term use.
 
Last edited:
Comment

manu chao

macrumors 604
Jul 30, 2003
7,004
2,862
I'm so glad I bought mine six months ago when it previously took them three years to update.... what a slap in the face...
Yeah, Apple slipping from 9 to 12 months to 16 months for one iteration and now catching up with an 8 month turn-around is really such a slap into the face. It also seems you multiplied the number of months it went over the roughly Intel-imposed 12-month cycle by a factor of ten to get to your 3 year number.
 
Last edited:
Comment

vanillaspice

macrumors member
Jan 27, 2012
31
10
I'm so glad I bought mine six months ago when it previously took them three years to update.... what a slap in the face...
Yeah, I don't normally care about these things and I really do like my machine, which I needed in January, but I do feel up to 20% screwed.
[doublepost=1496864052][/doublepost]
I'm more interested in integrated performance compared to Iris 540/550. Anyway my super eGPU will destroy both together eh eh
IIRC, Intel said the difference is supposed to be in power consumption, not performance.
 
Comment

shaunp

Cancelled
Nov 5, 2010
1,811
1,395
It's still too thin. Give me one with a proper keyboard, more expansion ports (you can shove dongles where the sun doesn't shine), a matte screen option and 64GB RAM and then I'd buy it. For £3k I want it to be functional not look pretty.
 
Comment

andreyush

macrumors 6502
Oct 24, 2015
492
311
If my device does the tasks well, then I don't care how much slower it is in comparation with 2017 macbook pro. :3

But for a guy who bought 6 months ago the late 2016 version ....yeah it's pretty much a slap in the face .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tovenaar
Comment

andreyush

macrumors 6502
Oct 24, 2015
492
311
It's still too thin. Give me one with a proper keyboard, more expansion ports (you can shove dongles where the sun doesn't shine), a matte screen option and 64GB RAM and then I'd buy it. For £3k I want it to be functional not look pretty.


Your wishes will be only dreams my friend. Too bad, this are some good wishes :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sasparilla
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.