Can anyone please post the geekbench score together with the spec?

Discussion in 'Mac mini' started by sza, Oct 29, 2012.

  1. sza, Oct 29, 2012
    Last edited: Oct 29, 2012

    sza macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    #1
  2. Flood123 macrumors 6502a

    Flood123

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2009
    Location:
    Living Stateside
    #2
    Which system are you looking for the geekbench info? All systems?
     
  3. xlii macrumors 68000

    xlii

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Location:
    Millis, Massachusetts
    #3
  4. sza thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    #4
    Thank you! Very impressive!

    I am wondering whether to pay 100 dollars more to get the 2.6ghz version if the scores doesn't have much difference.

    Edit: i found it here: 13000+
    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1216294

    I can't believe the new generation of macmini is so much powerful! And it has the best performance/price ratio in apple's product line. I am thinking to get one. :D
     
  5. Yanwoo macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #5
    Note that one has 16gb ram tho whereas the one linked above only had 4gb. The i7 2.6ghz with 4gb is still getting impressive 11000 to 11700 scores tho.
     
  6. iamsen47 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2012
    Location:
    Kobe, Japan
    #6
  7. linds15 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Location:
    Great White North
    #7
    i just got my 2.6 with stock drive and 4GB of ram and without anything but geekbench on it, i scored somewhere in the 1100s, im still waiting for my ssd and ram so ill do another test when its all in there.

    seems as if 2.3 vs 2.6 stock is a 1000 point difference roughly
     
  8. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #8
    Anyone have an idea how these scores compate to the base i5 that's in the new iMac? I'm debating myself on replacing my 2010 mini with the new mini i7 quad and keeping my monitors (or a TB Display...), or going with the new iMac with the i5. I think I read that both processors are like 3.5x faster than my 2.4C2D.
     
  9. Luap macrumors 65816

    Luap

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2004
    #9
    Also keep in mind when comparing scores, that some are 32 bit results, and others are 64.. As with a couple of the examples above. It makes a difference too.
     
  10. sza thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    #10
    Good point. The 64-bit result is somewhat around 1000 - 1500 higher than the 32 bit result. So keep it in mind.

    ----------

    The base model is not fast. it is around 6000-7000.

    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=macmini6,1
     
  11. iamthedudeman macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2007
  12. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #12
    I meant the base i5 quad core in the iMac vs the i7 quad core in the Mac mini. I'm trying to figure out, for example, which would perform Handbrake video encoding faster.
     
  13. Poki macrumors 6502a

    Poki

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2012
    #13
  14. Athelstan macrumors newbie

    Athelstan

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2010
    #14
    10771 is what I got in the 32-bit mode.
    http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1217992

    I've already stripped it, but in a Samsung 830 128GB SSD and slaved the original drive as media storage and put in 16 gigs of ram. I love this little machine. Sold my rMBP to pick this up and an 13" air... then they released the rMBP 13" that's only half a pound more in weight. Decisions decisions.

    Edit: I have the mid range model with the quad core chip.
     
  15. xlii macrumors 68000

    xlii

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2006
    Location:
    Millis, Massachusetts
    #15
    I'm back from the power outage that Sandy gave us. I have 16gbytes of memory coming from Crucial and I expect the score to improve somewhat when that is installed. At the moment my machine is a stock 2.3 quad bought from Amazon.
     
  16. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #16
    These scores are pretty impressive! I think my 2.4C2D 2010 mini scores around 3000 or so. I'm really thinking about getting a mid range 2012 insted of an iMac. Even with the apple installed ssd, it's a grand less than an iMac. Could get a Thunderbolt display later on, once they upgrade the ports... :)

    I just really want to be able to AirPlay mirror.
     
  17. stellan0r macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    #17
    impressive scores, too bad the Intel HD 4000 kind of sucks compared to the GPU in the new iMac..
     
  18. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #18
    That is true, but if it's the same graphics power that's in the new 13" MBP retina, than it should be fine for my purposes. I don't play games, but I do see the occasional hiccup when playing HD video with my GeForce 320M. 4000 should be better than that. I'm really looking for processing power over graphics capabilties. And this thing still has a FW800 port!
     
  19. stellan0r macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2012
    #19
    I am dependent on the FW port for my audio interface and the TB port for my TB-to-ExpressCard/34 adapter from Sonnet (and as I need 2 screens, the new iMac would be much more expensive than the Mini (iMac + TBD vs. Mini + TBD + old 23" ACD), also it will have decent gfx power).

    I'm on an early 2008 MBP with 2,5GHz C2D, 6GB RAM, SSD+HDD and a GF 8600M GT, it even runs Diablo 3 - a bit laggy at some points during the game, but I simply hope the HD4000 is faster than that ;-) (i know it is, also not much according to this http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Graphics-Cards-Benchmark-List.844.0.html )

    ----------

    btw, regarding the GFX power of the HD4000, check this out:


    http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html
     
  20. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #20
    That sounds pretty good. I run two Dell 24" 1080p monitors right now, they aren't the best, but were $400 for the pair. I have a 160gb Intel 320 SSD, and all my media is on a FW800 drive containing a WD Scorpio black 500GB 7200rpm drive (allowing me to take my media with me without taking the computer). I could do the mid level 2012 mini with the 256gb SSD for 1100 bucks, add ram later, use my existing monitors, and be pretty happy. Then dump my exisitng mini for a few hundos. The new iMacs look so sweet, but not 2-3x the price sweet.
     
  21. iPhisch macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2010
    Location:
    Indiana
    #21
  22. NewbieCanada macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2007
    #22
    This is true, but Apple sells a $200 Mac Mini Pro upgrade kit.

    It's non-removable plugs for the Firewire and Ethernet ports! :D
     

Share This Page