2017 nTB 13" 2.3 GHz MBP Benchmarks

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by HiRez, Jun 21, 2017.

  1. HiRez, Jun 21, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 21, 2017

    HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #1
    Got my 13" non-touch bar 2.3 / 16 GB RAM / 512 GB SSD yesterday. I'll update with more stuff as I can, but initial Geekbench results are 4485 single core / 9501 multi core / 29528 compute. That's with some extensions running even (iStatMenus, Dropbox, iCloud Drive, Adobe updater, Google Drive), but I waited until the CPU died down to < 3%. There's a few things I don't like, such as both USB-C ports being on the same side, but overall, loving it so far.

    Update: Cinebench R15 (3 run average)
    OpenGL: 35.91 fps
    CPU: 368 cb


    Update: Intel Power Gadget (power, frequency, and temp over time).

    Idle:
    Screen Shot 2017-06-21 at 9.25.23 PM.png
    Idle to start of task:

    Screen Shot 2017-06-21 at 7.54.56 PM.png
    After ~30 minutes of continuous max load (modo render, 100% CPU usage):

    Screen Shot 2017-06-21 at 8.36.24 PM.png
     
  2. PressureDrop macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2011
    #2
    Cinebench plz!
     
  3. asoksevil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Location:
    Taipei, Taiwan
  4. HiRez thread starter macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #4
    See graphs above. It jumps to its 3.6 GHz turbo speed under max load, but then almost immediately throttles down to 3.3 GHz, where it appears to stay pretty much indefinitely (I kept it loaded for about 45 minutes and it never changed). I don't really have anything to test what happens when both the CPU and the GPU are loaded at the same time, my tests were pretty much pure CPU load only. Internal temps ranged from about 37°C idle to 96°C under full load. Surface got warm but not painfully so. Fan did spin up and make noise, but not too bad (quieter than my 2011 MBA).
     
  5. dof250, Jun 22, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2017

    dof250 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    #5
    Its weird that you're idle power is so high. I have the 3,1ghz TB model and this is my idle power and after 30 minutes of 100%CPU.
    idle.png Power.png
     
  6. HiRez thread starter macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #6
    I think that's just a glitch. If you look at the end of the graph there's a little spike right when I did the screen grab. For the whole graph area it's very similar to yours, about 1.3 GHz and < 1W.
     
  7. dof250 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    #7
    Yeah I see :) Well this shows the load wattage difference. The 13"TB model keeps its turbo frequency indefinitely but the nTB needs to throttle. Still its only a 200mhz difference. I don't think it would me noticeable
     
  8. Populus macrumors 6502a

    Populus

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2012
    Location:
    Valencia, Spain.
    #8
    Hi Rez.

    You don't know how thankful I am for those tests. That shows indeed that a 15W low consumption CPU cannot stay at 3.6GHz because it is too much. On the other hand 3.3GHz is a good mark, and assures not too much heat and reasonable battery life.

    I would like to compare this results with the 2016 MacBook Pro 2.0GHz laptop, it would be interesting.

    On the other hand, I have a few test with the 13" 2015 MacBook Pro unit I purchased earlier this month (wich I finally returned). I will update this post with those graphs.
     
  9. jeff107 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2017
    #9
    so is it a big difference for these two CPU?

    I am now lokking for a macbook pro tb/ntb for using Lightroom
     
  10. dof250 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2014
    #10
    In short bursts the nTB could be a little bit faster because of the higher turbo, but on longer loads the TB model will be faster. because it stays on 3,5Ghz longer. Also the GPU off the TB model is a bit faster.
     
  11. jgbr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
  12. asoksevil macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Location:
    Taipei, Taiwan
    #12
    Geekbench results weren't that different but could it be more noticeable on other more taxing benchmarks that have a sustained test for 30 minutes or more?
     
  13. jgbr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2007
    #13
    Does seem a weird toss up between the i7 ntb and 3.3 TB. IF claims of battery life are true, versus more ports, touchbar debate etc
     

Share This Page