Has anyone been sble to find benchmarks of the core m7 in the new MacBook? All I've been able to find is benchmarks of the core m5.
seems some users already get theirs macbooks
Well the m5 benchmarks are from the one's that blogs were given to test out yesterday. I don't think any were given m7 variants, though.
Of course, it's the same chip limited by the same thermals.
If you are doing multiple runs of benchmarks, the M7 should get even closer with every single run.
If you ask me, 280€ more for an overclocked version of the same chip, which will clock down to the same level as the other Core Ms after a short amount of usage, is a total ripoff.
Same reasoning I came toOf course, it's the same chip limited by the same thermals.
If you are doing multiple runs of benchmarks, the M7 should get even closer with every single run.
m7 benchmarks are just beginning to appear in Geekbench. The difference for the upgrade seems rather minimal.
Has anyone been sble to find benchmarks of the core m7 in the new MacBook? All I've been able to find is benchmarks of the core m5.
I wouldn't call that minimal:
https://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/6197563
Here you go... got mine this morning.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/6197563
[doublepost=1461389272][/doublepost]
I feel like I just entered a portal. I was answering an earlier post only to find that someone else had found my result and commented with it in this thread!
Cheers!
What has been your experience so far of the 1.3 Macbook?
Of course, it's the same chip limited by the same thermals.
If you are doing multiple runs of benchmarks, the M7 should get even closer with every single run.
If you ask me, 280€ more for an overclocked version of the same chip, which will clock down to the same level as the other Core Ms after a short amount of usage, is a total ripoff.
What has been your experience so far of the 1.3 Macbook?
What kind of graphics test? I don't have any benchmarking tool and I don't game at all on my Mac. Disk read/writes are ~850 MB and ~925 MB per second.Please could you run graphics and ssd speed tests??
[doublepost=1461398297][/doublepost]
Of course, it's the same chip limited by the same thermals.
If you are doing multiple runs of benchmarks, the M7 should get even closer with every single run.
If you ask me, 280€ more for an overclocked version of the same chip, which will clock down to the same level as the other Core Ms after a short amount of usage, is a total ripoff.
So far so good. I owned the 2015 1.2 ghz but ended up returning it for a 13" Retina before my 2 week period was up. I came from a 2013 11" Air and the 2015 Macbook never felt faster than the Air. The 2016 feels different in use. It certainly doesn't feel slower in normal operation compared to my 2015 13" retina MBP as far as running my typical apps. The same little scrolling hiccups and slow downs in animations are present in both machines. The 13" has the i7 and 16gb so I chalk it up to El Capitan still not being optimized graphics wise.
When I first set up the MacBook it ran well considering it was downloading all my iCloud data, spotlight indexing, and installing apps, etc. It never felt like it was bogged down. The CPU was using around 50% for a good 2 hours during this time did get very warm but never felt as hot as the 2015 MacBook did. Installing Xcode took a few minutes longer than what it did on my 13" Retina but nothing major.
[doublepost=1461399660][/doublepost]
What kind of graphics test? I don't have any benchmarking tool and I don't game at all on my Mac. Disk read/writes are ~850 MB and ~925 MB per second.
[doublepost=1461400578][/doublepost]
That's not really true as the m7 is the best bin out of all the chips produced. It's able to run cooler at any given frequency compared to the m5 and m3. It also turbos much higher than the m5 which means most short tasks can complete quicker and the cpu can enter a lower power state more quickly and cool off faster.
Here you have the way to go:
http://9to5mac.com/2015/05/14/how-to-benchmark-your-mac-free-downloads/
I would appreciate that a lot...
These were run back to back. I ran cinebench twice before geekbench. Cinebench image is the first run. I forgot to snapshot the second run but the numbers went down to 20.5 fps and 226 cb the second run.
View attachment 628238 View attachment 628239
It's a demonstration of the heat throttling. Still impressive.You've posted 6200 here and 6700 before, the score isn't consistant ?
i think the scores are different because the cpu/gpu is beginning to throttle