Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Silicon M1 MacBook Pro Earns 7508 Multi-Core Score in Cinebench Benchmark

theotherphil said:
Can’t wait for the ”real world tests”...like editing 64Gb, 7,000 layer psd files. Without 32Gb and bootcamp, these are gonna suck 🤔😂


/sarcasm
Click to expand...
Back in the days I could only dream of machines like these. I remember editing big billboard print files and just saving the Photoshop file took 30 to 40 minutes so you could go have your brake in the mean time. Imagine my frustration when I came back from the coffee break and realized I missed a spelling error! LOL! Reload file (40 minutes waiting) correct the error (5 seconds) tripple check everything and save it again (40 minutes waiting).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apple Fritter, wilhoitm, richinaus and 7 others
JuanGuapo said:
I can't think of how this makes Intel look good in any light.
The M1 is also fanless, no?
Click to expand...
The 3 GHz Tiger Lake has slightly higher single-core performance (~1570). The multi-core performance is slower than the M1 at ~6200, but that's with only half the CPU cores. The M1 performance is impressive, but it doesn't really "blow away" Intel at least in this benchmark.

I was under the impression that the M1 Macbook Pro has active cooling, but I may be wrong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Coconut Bean and Moyapilot
Can someone post the results for the true base model (8core, 7coure gpu, 8gig of ram)? Or point me in the direction of those results
 
So for some perspective:

M1 has fastest single core speeds, faster than high end 16.

M1 beats the more expensive intel 13inch macs with 4 ports, that are still available (1500 vs 1100, 7500 vs 5000)



M1 also beats the lower end 16inch i7 (1500 vs 1100, 7500 vs 6900).


and this is the worst *slowest* Apple chip they will ever release?

If I need better multi-core performance in a laptop from Apple than the M1 I have to reach for the top end 16?

if I need better single core I can’t have it.

Impressive.
Speedyboi.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: Ex2bot, Websnapx2, Mescagnus and 16 others
Excellent news.
I can't wait to see just how good these 1st machines are.
As if this is what the 1st machines are like, we can imagine how much faster the next batch will be.

I hope the entire industry get shaken up by this. Intel have sat on the butt's for so so many years with such tiny improvements.
It will take a few years I'm sure, but hopefully this will send shockwaves to all others, and PC/Windows makers to follow Apple's lead as we can finally all move forward to a much faster future together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AvisDeene
MacRumors said:
It's worth noting that the new M1 Macs are lower performance machines that aren't meant for heavy duty rendering tasks. The M1 MacBook Pro replaces the low-end machine, while the MacBook Air has always been more of a consumer machine than a Pro machine.
Click to expand...
But it's called MacBook... Pro

I get it that's it's the base model, but they should just call it "MacBook".
 
  • Like
  • Angry
  • Love
Reactions: SMacDuff, MacAddict1978, biziclop and 8 others
First generation. If the performance cadence of the M1 continues, we'll see 20% gains for each release for the foreseeable future. Also these apps aren't optimized; it's just literally retargeted for ARM. With profiling and some tuning the scores should go up another couple of percent, maybe around 6-8% (my SWAG on platform-based optimization gains).
 
cmaier said:
Now waiting for all the normal complainers to say it’s meaningless because cinebench is too short a test.
Click to expand...
Is it that impressive though? In multicore, it’s roughly equivalent to an Intel tiger lake i7, right?

That’s good, but nothing crazy.
 
  • Love
Reactions: calstanford
Just to be clear, for anyone who has used Cinebench in the past— this is the new version, so the scores have different values from before.

My 10900k in my PC just benched 14,217 multicore. So... M1 is not the PC crusher yet, in Cinebench at least.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Disagree
Reactions: SMacDuff, Norvak, Miha_v and 8 others
Rigby said:
The 3 GHz Tiger Lake has slightly higher single-core performance (~1570). The multi-core performance is slower than the M1 at ~6200, but that's with only half the CPU cores. The M1 performance is impressive, but it doesn't really "blow away" Intel at least in this benchmark.

I was under the impression that the M1 Macbook Pro has active cooling, but I may be wrong.
Click to expand...
You appear to be forgetting another aspect of the M1...improved speed, even if only slightly, at lower power consumption. Combine the two and you have a winner.
 
  • Like
Reactions: throAU and Madd the Sane
dannyyankou said:
But it's called MacBook... Pro

I get it that's it's the base model, but they should just call it "MacBook".
Click to expand...
I guess we're going to go through this every time Apple names a device :D

Maybe Apple realized they don't want three distinct laptop lines. That either would require having a high end Air, or a low end Pro. It makes more sense to keep the Pros with the same outer shell/keyboard/display.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: mazz0
Robospungo said:
Is it that impressive though? In multicore, it’s roughly equivalent to an Intel tiger lake i7, right?

That’s good, but nothing crazy.
Click to expand...

This is a bottom-of-the-line machine, running with only 4 high performance cores. And running the 11.0.0 version of the OS which degrades the high performance core clock rate by 100MHz.

It’s a remarkable result. Compare it to Intel version at the same price point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacAddict1978, 2Stepfan, grefenius and 11 others
vinegarshots said:
Just to be clear, for anyone who has used Cinebench in the past— this is the new version, so the scores have different values from before.

My 10900k in my PC just benched 14,217 multicore. So... M1 is not the PC crusher yet, in Cinebench at least.
Click to expand...
Cool, how many watts does your rig run off of? And why are you comparing the entry level to your machine anyway? Can you link us to your entry level computer with 15 hour battery life?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Disagree
Reactions: Queen6, SMacDuff, SFjohn and 40 others
djjeff said:
You appear to be forgetting another aspect of the M1...improved speed, even if only slightly, at lower power consumption. Combine the two and you have a winner.
Click to expand...
Well, that remains to be seen. I haven't seen any systematic power consumption tests yet, but I think Tiger Lake is also quite efficient. But M1 will probably be slightly better due to the smaller process node.
 
cmaier said:
This is a bottom-of-the-line machine, running with only 4 high performance cores. And running the 11.0.0 version of the OS which degrades the high performance core clock rate by 100MHz.

It’s a remarkable result. Compare it to Intel version at the same price point.
Click to expand...
I thought this was going to be giant generational leap, and I guess for battery life, it is. But as for performance, it looks like this chip can be best described as “competitive with Intel mobile chips”.

That’s nice and all. But I’m not blown away like I was after Apple’s presentation and seeing the geekbench results. I’ve gone from “Apple just disrupted the entire industry” to “meh, I guess it’s a good first try.”
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: tbirdparis, Ex2bot, Miha_v and 13 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back