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.
Benchmarks for Mid-2012 MacBook Pro and MacBook Air
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Has that been confirmed yet? It was claim the new CPU this year would be 16-20% faster than last year CPU.
No previous 15" MBP with 2.2GHz Quad-core i7 in charts but I guess it's safe to say that the new 15" MBP with 2.3GHz quad-core i7 is about 15% faster, right?
Was hoping for better.
Guess I'll pull the trigger on a refurb 15" MBP with 2.2GHz Quad-core i7 for $1359 vs a 15" MBP with 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 for $1799. Then use money saved to upgrade HDD to a SSD to close the performance gap in half? Seems like a smarter buy.
Was hoping for better.
Guess I'll pull the trigger on a refurb 15" MBP with 2.2GHz Quad-core i7 for $1359 vs a 15" MBP with 2.3GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 for $1799. Then use money saved to upgrade HDD to a SSD to close the performance gap in half? Seems like a smarter buy.
Also looked for the CPU-upgrade speeds... Looks like the money is better spend on the memory upgrades?
Looking at a lot of benchmarks in the database, there are a lot running 10.7.3 - I'd have at least thought they'd have shipped with 10.7.4 as a base!
You can also see that the motherboard number in the leaked MacBookPro9,1 is exactly the same of the motherboard number in the benchmarks coming out. BIOS slightly different. Now i think they were indeed real on the MBP side, let's hope for the iMac too.
My macpro (see sig) just got a 12,600.
Looking forward to getting a fully specced retina MBP and seeing the same speeds! Awesome! Probably why they are perhaps killing the pro?
Looking forward to getting a fully specced retina MBP and seeing the same speeds! Awesome! Probably why they are perhaps killing the pro?
Funny how the retina and same non-retina MBP scored with the retina being just slightly higher. Pushing 4x the pixels would think it would be less?
About what I'd expect
My mid-2011 15" 2.3GHz i7 comes in at 11440...so not a huge jump for the portable though it still doesn't compare to my MacPro's 21730 but it's WAY more portable. Sadly I'm mid-cycle so I'll hold for next year...but will be jonesing hard for that retina display when the time comes.
And for the naysayers: video processing needs raw processing power and the extra 4 cores are routinely maxed out when outputting from FCX. It makes a HUGE difference over the i5 or the dual-core i7 - and narrows the gap significantly with the MacPro.
If you edit a few photos, send email and surf the web you probably don't need anywhere NEAR the processing power of an MBP. But, don't narf about the folks that do.
My mid-2011 15" 2.3GHz i7 comes in at 11440...so not a huge jump for the portable though it still doesn't compare to my MacPro's 21730 but it's WAY more portable. Sadly I'm mid-cycle so I'll hold for next year...but will be jonesing hard for that retina display when the time comes.
And for the naysayers: video processing needs raw processing power and the extra 4 cores are routinely maxed out when outputting from FCX. It makes a HUGE difference over the i5 or the dual-core i7 - and narrows the gap significantly with the MacPro.
If you edit a few photos, send email and surf the web you probably don't need anywhere NEAR the processing power of an MBP. But, don't narf about the folks that do.
In the netherlands its even 150 euros. Against 1549 euro for laptop. About 10%
Dont know what the effect of the battery duration is
If you look at cpubenchmark.net, the new Core i5 3317U has been tested to be slower than the old Core i5 2467M, and the Core i7-3667U isn't available at all, so this test is still very much relevant.
Unboxed Retina
Here are some unboxed pics, forget the performance the retina display is incredible!
Unboxed MacBook Pro with Retina Display
Here are some unboxed pics, forget the performance the retina display is incredible!
Unboxed MacBook Pro with Retina Display
Geekbench is a CPU test so what the GPU is doing would not impact it in any way.
The one plausible explanation, if the difference was at least a couple of hundred points, might have been the improved cooling system in the RMBP, which would allow Turbo Boost to stay on for longer.
However, 44 points is an insignificant difference in this benchmark. I can run it over and over again and get such small variances on each run. This is due to the fact that it is run by users in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore the computer could be doing various things whilst the test is running.
No 17" model means that I will be left to only used models. I used to do that. Plus it saves dollars. Apple has done their part in keeping my bank account untouched. They finished my want to update with keeping the Mac Pro the longest computer to not keep an update. But at least they are still selling one, unlike the 17" laptop.
I had a 15" PowerBook, but after purchasing the first of at least 4 17" Ma laptops, I refuse to go back in size.
I'll have to check out the Frankentosh market, that Hackintosh to most. No wonder I do not feel welcome at the local Apple Store. I have my own requirements & will not go with what Apple is selling unless it meets those requirements.
What good is a 1,0000,000 X 1,000,0000 pixel display if it is to small to see or have enough useable space to work with?
I give the new Macs 0 Stars at this point. Let's see if they can change that. To make matters worst I've purchased only Macs since they came out in 1984. I always thought that Apple has always been run by the almighty dollar, now I know it for sure.
Yeah - Ideal time for the Hackintosh shops to make a comeback and make some sales to support the old skewl pro users! I would love to upgrade my Mac Pro - but new Mac Pro updates are weak sauce! Maybe Power Computing can be resurrected???
My late 2011 2.5Ghz MBP with 16Gb Crucial RAM scores just over 11,000.
And I will use that for what I do.
Honestly ? I'm happy with my machine and that I didn't wait. The performance boost isn't enough to have justified the wait when I wanted to buy.
I don't mind being end of the line for this moddle = its a well established machine. I'll let all the early adopters work the kinks out of this retina meachine and maybe think about one next release when they drop the old MPB, drop the price for the retina models, have 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and 3.5GhZ Ivy bridge and scoring 15,000
And I will use that for what I do.
Honestly ? I'm happy with my machine and that I didn't wait. The performance boost isn't enough to have justified the wait when I wanted to buy.
I don't mind being end of the line for this moddle = its a well established machine. I'll let all the early adopters work the kinks out of this retina meachine and maybe think about one next release when they drop the old MPB, drop the price for the retina models, have 32GB RAM, 1TB SSD and 3.5GhZ Ivy bridge and scoring 15,000
Pretty much...
Intel has such an advance in CPU performances over AMD that they focused this generation on the graphics (that still lag AMD integrated graphics but are much better than previous Intel offerings), and the implementation of a new foundry process (3D transistor to improve efficiency of the CPU) reducing consumption.
The final blow for AMD dominance in the integrated GPU market (for cheap laptop or small form-factor computers) is supposed to be Intel's next generation Haswell, with further improved graphics.
Whether we like it or not CPU single-threaded performances per GHz (most apps aren't well optimized) haven't evolved a lot in the last couple of years and GPUs have become more important with the introduction of OpenCL.
Ivy Bridge is a big leap in that regard since it's Intel's first Integrated GPU supporting it (OpenCL Programs ran on the CPU on Sandy Bridge defeating the purpose of OpenCL), personally that's one of the reasons I've been waiting for Ivy Bridge before making a purchase decision... And I'm still waiting since I was looking more for an iMac or mac mini even ^^.
On-die eDRAM appears to be next year's magic bullet for the IGP arena. Both Intel and AMD are working on getting a super shader packed IGP that is not crippled by sharing the DDR3 memory bus next year.
Haswell will have improved Ivy Bridge shaders but you are looking at a jump from 16 to a whopping 40 on GT3 and the inclusion of eDRAM. Hueg dies guaranteed.
Those scores aren't the whole picture though...
Xeon processors (workstation CPUs used in Mac Pros and concurrent workstations) have more memory channel and better memory throughput, ECC.
So if you work on RAM intensive tasks, Mac Pros, probably, still have an edge. Another important factor is the apparition of PCIe SSD cards that offer WAY better data-rates and latencies, again for specific tasks (heavy DB duties).
There is no way to cheat some of the benefits of Xeon CPUs, or a true workstation, but the question is aren't most DB task run out of Linux servers, the same goes for heavy calculations, and most CAD-like apps are only available on Windows.
Most of the people really annoyed by the stagnant state of the MPro are probably heavy duty Audio or video professionals, they might even be happy with a Xeon iMacPro (or something like that, as long as it offers a lot of RAM and one or two PCIe).
The top-end 12-core Mid-2010 Mac Pro gets 21653, and that is 2 year old hardware. The new top-end Mac Pro naturally will do better than that. I don't think they are killing the pro (especially with the recent rumors of a more significant update in 2013), but it certainly isn't their main focus.
It's amazing that the latest MacBook Air benches 170% faster than my Mac Pro (granted I have the slowest Mac Pro they ever made, the 2006 2.0 GHz 4-core model).
There is still no MacBook that can do 32GB of RAM. I believe the iMac can (unofficially), though. There are non-Apple notebooks that can do 32GB, though, so Apple is a bit behind in this regard.