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.
2018 Macbook Pro Benchmarks
- Thread starter vetruvian
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
From the reports of professionals apple has allowed to use these for a few weeks before release they are absolute monsters. I would think Apple gave them all the £6k models however.
I want to see how different cpus affect the heat, fan noise and thermal throttling.
I am really interested in seeing this too. I have a hard time imagine the mbp managing the heat well with out doing some heavy throttling.
I think this is my biggest concern. What's the point of the i9 if it is throttled to say 70% of it's potential? (just a hypothetical until we get some benchmarks)
Yes, pay more, less "real-life" performance than written on paper, more heat and noisy fan. I need to know these to decide which CPU option to choose.
[doublepost=1531498084][/doublepost]Also, for 2017, it was mentioned by forum users that the there is no noticeable difference between the i5 and i7. How about on the 2018 models?
Likely very little difference between i5 and i7 in the 2018 13" pro. The upgrade to i7 will likely not be worth the money as with previous generations of 13" Pro.
You can stress test the machines with some benchmarking software, but we’ll need to wait till people get the new Pros in hand to see how they perform thermally.
I know... I'm super bummed out and I have a 2017 15"... I'll be in divorce court if my wife finds out I bought another MacBook... LOL
Not necessarily - geekbench is a synthetic, non-real-world benchmark. Plenty of applications where an i9 or Xeon is worth every penny. How much the i9 will throttle in such a thin laptop is another question . . .
Overall, despite the moaning, I have to give credit to Apple as this was a very solid(if not significant) update for the MacBook Pro. Even the GPU is a decent boost.
Anyone expecting them to backtrack on the touchbar or ports is wishful thinking at this stage, but I think no one can really argue it's not geared for professionals.
I actually kind of want one now and I don't even really use my current rMBP that much anymore.
Anyone expecting them to backtrack on the touchbar or ports is wishful thinking at this stage, but I think no one can really argue it's not geared for professionals.
I actually kind of want one now and I don't even really use my current rMBP that much anymore.
With a mid-level 15" on my desk, I might return it in favor of a CTO 2.2/560/512. The keyboard gets VERY hot when it's under load, to the point that I'm using an external keyboard.
Virtually the same CB score Austin Evans put out on YouTube for the i9. I'd be investigating if it's possible to undervolt the CPU to help pull up the performance.
Is the CB score in isolation or multiple?
Q-6
The mid-level 15" is the 2.6 GHz/16 GB RAM/512 GB storage/560x model.
No idea if the bottom gets hotter than keyboard as I only use it on a desk.
I've run CB a number of times, the highest CPU score is 965 (for the 2.6 i7) and the lowest is 627, after running CB 5 times in succession.
I'm thinking the same as the 2.2GHz remains to be extremely potent. My own W10 primary with 8750H scores 1273CB, if possible to undervolt this CPU in the MBP it may well out perform it's counterparts with bigger numbers.
Q-6
[doublepost=1531761005][/doublepost]
That's less than my old 7700HQ W10 notebook, peaking at 730CB, yet holding 700+ on multiple runs.
The Asus GL703GS (8750H) peaks at 1273CB and rolls back to high 1100's/low 1200's after multiple runs of CB.
You either have poor example, or Apple's cooling solution is simply inadequate, if the latter "corner and paint" once again apply...
Q-6
Last edited: