Early Benchmarks Reveal New MacBook Air Rivaling High-End 2010 MacBook Pro

[gnasher729]

The 13" 1.7GHz i5 air is about the same score as my 2011 13" 2.3GHz i5 pro :/

That's because Intel is using some very, very, very strange numbers for their GHz ratings. The 1.7 GHz means "this processor can run with two cores at 1.7 GHz forever without damaging the MacBook Air through excessive heat". The 2.3 GHz means "this processor can run with two cores at 2.3 GHz forever without damaging the MacBook Pro through excessive heat".

Both processors are mostly limited in their speed by heat production. For a short time, when the heat doesn't matter, both run at the same, much higher speed. The MBA processor can also run a lot faster if only a single core is used, because that single core can probably run around 2.5 GHz producing the same heat as two cores at 1.7 GHz.

(That's also why the quad core processors have lower numbers. If only two cores are used, they run at a much higher speed, but with four cores in use the speed has to be turned down a bit to reduce the heat. So the "official" GHz number is lower than for a dual core chip).

 

[gnomeisland]

But don't forget that you can get -- some of the time -- a refurb iMac 27" for $1439. That gets a complete system for $440 more, with 1 TB and 4 GB more than just the MacBook Air. You can always set it up as an OS X server for $50 more. But you do have to buy your own Thunderbolt cable for $49.

Thought of that, the problem/question is whether you can use the ports like a docking station as you can in the thunderbolt model. I imagine not as it would be a very niche feature, but I for one would love a 27" base-model iMac which instantly switched to being a docking station for my regular-usage MBP and left the iMac's computer parts running silently in the background as a server. Sigh.

 

[Fukui]

If only there was a 15" Air

 

[zen.state]

I wonder how the Asus UX21 is going to compare ?

How can you compare them when the Asus won't run Mac OSX? It's staggering how many people think you can compare 2 different computers that runs 2 different OS's.

If someone only wants a Mac OS device then what good at all would that Asus serve them? Get some perspective.

 

[KnightWRX]

How can you compare them when the Asus won't run Mac OSX? It's staggering how many people think you can compare 2 different computers that runs 2 different OS's.

It's staggering how many people place so much importance on the OS. Who cares what OS it runs, it's the tasks it does that are important. What is it you want your computer do to ?

Obviously, if you like your computer doing some memory management, process scheduling and primitives drawing, then yes, OS is important. However, if you want to e-mail, edit video, edit photos, browse the web, listen to music, watch videos, who cares about the OS ?

The OS doesn't matter. Both Windows and OS X have the same apps roughly or equivalents. Heck, even Linux is pretty capable when it comes to 90% of workflows out there.

 

[MrCrowbar]

Hmmm... if it had more storage space, 8 GB RAM and Firewire (I need that for professional audio interfaces), I'd totally get one to replace my 13" MPB.

 

[zen.state]

It's staggering how many people place so much importance on the OS. Who cares what OS it runs, it's the tasks it does that are important. What is it you want your computer do to ?

Obviously, if you like your computer doing some memory management, process scheduling and primitives drawing, then yes, OS is important. However, if you want to e-mail, edit video, edit photos, browse the web, listen to music, watch videos, who cares about the OS ?

The OS doesn't matter. Both Windows and OS X have the same apps roughly or equivalents. Heck, even Linux is pretty capable when it comes to 90% of workflows out there.

You obviously don't understand at all why most people use Macs in the first place. I have no interest in having an OS orgy because there is only one I have any interest in using.

If the OS doesn't matter then why did you ever bother buying a Mac in the first place?

 

[KnightWRX]

You obviously don't understand at all why most people use Macs in the first place. I have no interest in having an OS orgy because there is only one I have any interest in using.

No, quite the contrary, I do understand why people use Macs, but it's obviously flawed thinking. The OS doesn't matter. People that think it does obviously don't understand what it is that matters : the tasks that get accomplished.

Posting on Facebook is the same from any OS. Unless you have an application that is required for your workflow that locks you into a particular platform, you are not locked to any OS. That's called vendor lock-in btw. And for consumer applications, that is a very rare occurence. This mostly happens at the professional or high-end level nowadays.

No need to have an OS war. The OS doesn't matter. All OSes these days are GUI based, with multi-user and multi-task support. For the end user, it makes no difference.

If the OS doesn't matter then why did you ever bother buying a Mac in the first place?

Frankly ? Because I wanted some commercial application support for my Unix installation. I'm a big Microsoft hater (not their software, the company) and I haven't used Windows in a good 11 years aside from a WoW addiction.

So I moved from running Linux on my self-built rig and Dell laptops to Macs.

 

[bpaluzzi]

It's staggering how many people place so much importance on the OS. Who cares what OS it runs, it's the tasks it does that are important. What is it you want your computer do to ?

Obviously, if you like your computer doing some memory management, process scheduling and primitives drawing, then yes, OS is important. However, if you want to e-mail, edit video, edit photos, browse the web, listen to music, watch videos, who cares about the OS ?

The OS doesn't matter. Both Windows and OS X have the same apps roughly or equivalents. Heck, even Linux is pretty capable when it comes to 90% of workflows out there.

I agree with what you're saying, but keep in mind that for most people, when they say "OS", they really mean "GUI". For me, the Mac GUI is vastly superior to the Windows GUI. Little things like Quick Look, application switching, Expose, etc -- those are all indispensable parts of my workflow. While not part of the OS (from a computer science standpoint), they're certainly "Mac-specific" features.

Edit -- (didn't mean that application switching is exclusive to Mac -- just meant that I prefer the way it is handled on the Mac, compared to Windows)

 

[zen.state]

No, quite the contrary, I do understand why people use Macs, but it's obviously flawed thinking. The OS doesn't matter. People that think it does obviously don't understand what it is that matters : the tasks that get accomplished.

Posting on Facebook is the same from any OS. Unless you have an application that is required for your workflow that locks you into a particular platform, you are not locked to any OS. That's called vendor lock-in btw. And for consumer applications, that is a very rare occurence. This mostly happens at the professional or high-end level nowadays.

No need to have an OS war. The OS doesn't matter. All OSes these days are GUI based, with multi-user and multi-task support. For the end user, it makes no difference.



Frankly ? Because I wanted some commercial application support for my Unix installation. I'm a big Microsoft hater (not their software, the company) and I haven't used Windows in a good 11 years aside from a WoW addiction.

So I moved from running Linux on my self-built rig and Dell laptops to Macs.

You make some valid points indeed about what the typical consumer does in any given OS. I myself do a lot of audio, video and graphic arts work and all at a reasonably high level. That is why for me there is only one choice.

 

[John.B]

It's staggering how many people place so much importance on the OS. Who cares what OS it runs, it's the tasks it does that are important. What is it you want your computer do to ?

Obviously, if you like your computer doing some memory management, process scheduling and primitives drawing, then yes, OS is important. However, if you want to e-mail, edit video, edit photos, browse the web, listen to music, watch videos, who cares about the OS ?

The OS doesn't matter. Both Windows and OS X have the same apps roughly or equivalents. Heck, even Linux is pretty capable when it comes to 90% of workflows out there.

I care very much which OS my computer runs. I've said this all before, but it's worth repeating:

My son, running a patched-up version of XP on a non-admin account, got the family PC infected with a rootkit virus and spyware doing nothing but playing Flash-based games on the web. It took a complete reinstall of Windows to fix. Six months later the same thing happened, except that I got WGA-ed during that reinstall (due to changing the DVD burner and video card). I had to call Redmond on a Saturday and beg them to generate a new Windows license key for me.

The fact that my bandmates at that time used Logic was the nudge I needed, and I've never looked back. My son complained early on about some games that aren't on OS X, but the combination of Steam and a new gaming console solved that little problem.

I'm not saying that Mac OS X is perfect, but I am saying it's a damned sight better than Windows. (FWIW, we are still seeing rootkit viruses on our Windows 7 PCs at work.)

 

[bradl]

How does running Linux, one of the BSDs or Solaris make you a "Windows guy" ?

Maybe you should quit before you choke on that foot in your mouth.

Please, don't get me started.

Is it a bloody crime to mention what other OSes the guy could run on a Dell?

BTW.. 15 year Linux and Solaris sysadmin here. I think I've earned, figuratively, monetarily, and experience wise a little leeway. Or do I also have to mention that he could LiveCD, run Windows in any of those via VMWare, Xen, or VirtualBox? FreeDOS, perhaps? Or maybe he did that Win95 on-a-stick?

Or maybe you're right.. I should just give up. I digress. back to my little Linux cubbyhole...

Heck, I remember my first computer that had no communications hardware at all, completely, 100% offline. It ran on a single digit mhz chip if even that and required tapes for storage because it didn't have a hard drive. Heck, since I didn't get the writable tape drive, only the RO version, I had to save my documents I typed out to this thing called a printer and paper.

So, you're Sid from UserFriendly, eh?

Seriously, this sounds like me at age 7, except I really must have been lucky.. My IIe had *2* 5.25 drives! But somehow, while I thought it was cool, the notion of going outside and playing sounded funner. So that was what I did.

 

[zen.state]

His sig also says that he owns a Dell. So unless he hackintoshed it, he's running Windows, Linux, *BSD, or Solaris.

BL.

It's a Dell LCD you poor little unable to read properly person you. Read what it says..

Not sure if you realize this but an LCD is not a computer.

 

[Eidorian]

Please, don't get me started.

Is it a bloody crime to mention what other OSes the guy could run on a Dell?

BTW.. 15 year Linux and Solaris sysadmin here. I think I've earned, figuratively, monetarily, and experience wise a little leeway. Or do I also have to mention that he could LiveCD, run Windows in any of those via VMWare, Xen, or VirtualBox? FreeDOS, perhaps? Or maybe he did that Win95 on-a-stick?

Or maybe you're right.. I should just give up. I digress. back to my little Linux cubbyhole...

The Dell UltraSharp 2407WFP is a PVA based monitor.

Ever deploy Sunrays? I love those things.

 

[Mr. Gates]

How can you compare them when the Asus won't run Mac OSX? It's staggering how many people think you can compare 2 different computers that runs 2 different OS's.

If someone only wants a Mac OS device then what good at all would that Asus serve them? Get some perspective.

I was talking about Benchmarks ...you know....the thread topic.

Anyway, don't try to tell me I can't put OSX on that Asus unless you want to bet some money. I'd be glad to take your money.

"Get some perspective"???

Really?!

Get Some Manners !

 

[zen.state]

The Dell UltraSharp 2407WFP is a PVA based monitor.

Ever deploy Sunrays? I love those things.

Correct. Mine is actually the later HC variant that upgraded the backlighting to LED.

 

[Eidorian]

Correct. Mine is actually the later HC variant that upgraded the backlighting to LED.

I thought the "HC" variant increased the color gamut. (70 to 92%) I do not recall any Ultrasharp displays having LED backlights even to this day. They should all be CCFL up to this point. Dell does offer an array of LED backlit monitors but they are not Ultrasharps or PVA/IPS.

 

[kapolani]

No, quite the contrary, I do understand why people use Macs, but it's obviously flawed thinking. The OS doesn't matter. People that think it does obviously don't understand what it is that matters : the tasks that get accomplished.

Of course the OS matters. Maybe not to you, but to a lot of people it does matter.

Your thinking is flawed. Flawed because you assume everyone thinks as you do.

 

[zen.state]

I was talking about Benchmarks ...you know....the thread topic.

Anyway, don't try to tell me I can't put OSX on that Asus unless you want to bet some money. I'd be glad to take your money.

"Get some perspective"???

Really?!

Get Some Manners !

The benchmarks are pretty much meaningless if they come from different operating systems. Different OS, apps etc etc.

So many here are so sensitive to things. Asking someone to get perspective is certainly not rude. It's practical.

Also, when you use the name of a software overlord and the avatar of a former Russian overlord it's a little challenging to take you seriously.

 

[jsw]

No, quite the contrary, I do understand why people use Macs, but it's obviously flawed thinking. The OS doesn't matter. People that think it does obviously don't understand what it is that matters : the tasks that get accomplished.

It's not in any way "flawed thinking." It's a matter of personal preference. In nearly any product category, and especially in consumer product categories, there are a wide variety of choices which all essentially perform the same tasks. There are only so many ways to brew coffee, to wash dishes, to provide vehicular transport from point A to point B, and so on. The fact that the underlying task can be performed in essentially the same way by a number of products does not negate the usefulness of allowing personal choice to enable consumers to pick what "feels" best for them.

Yes, if one is using Facebook, the experience for that specific task is fundamentally the same on all platforms, but the enveloping experience is quite different. I can read a book on a hammock in the shade between two palm trees, and I can read the same book in a room lit by florescent lights and with garish images painted all over the walls. In both cases, the book is the same, but the overall experience is vastly different.

My issue is with saying that it is wrong to prefer a given OS over another. It's not. However, it's just as wrong to say that it's wrong to have a preference, regardless of what it is, and that having one is flawed thinking because you can do the same things on all of them.

I strongly suspect that even you, KnightWRX, choose items based on personal preference and not solely on what accomplishes a task in the least expensive/most expedient way.

 

[zen.state]

I thought the "HC" variant increased the color gamut. (70 to 92%) I do not recall any Ultrasharp displays having LED backlights even to this day. They should all be CCFL up to this point. Dell does offer an array of LED backlit monitors but they are not Ultrasharps or PVA/IPS.

Dell claimed it was LED to me and several forums I have read either confirm that or say that even if it isn't it's very close to what other LED displays look like. Not 100% sure exactly but at the minimum it's very close in visual quality.

 

[Mr. Gates]

The benchmarks are pretty much meaningless if they come from different operating systems. Different OS, apps etc etc.

So many here are so sensitive to things. Asking someone to get perspective is certainly not rude. It's practical.

Also, when you use the name of a software overlord and the avatar of a former Russian overlord it's a little challenging to take you seriously.

It is rude.
Practical ?

Anyway, it has nothing to do with the OS when looking at these two machines

As a matter of fact, people are always comparing benchmarks of Macs to PC's

 

[AppleScruff1]

Have any of you checked out the new MBA and Lion yet? I'm going to try to get out later today or tomorrow and play around with them a bit.

 

[jhende7]

It's staggering how many people place so much importance on the OS. Who cares what OS it runs, it's the tasks it does that are important. What is it you want your computer do to ?

Obviously, if you like your computer doing some memory management, process scheduling and primitives drawing, then yes, OS is important. However, if you want to e-mail, edit video, edit photos, browse the web, listen to music, watch videos, who cares about the OS ?

The OS doesn't matter. Both Windows and OS X have the same apps roughly or equivalents. Heck, even Linux is pretty capable when it comes to 90% of workflows out there.

This has got to be one of the dumbest things I've ever read in my entire life. The OS doesn't matter? the OS isn't important?

The OS is the backbone of the GUI (you know, the interface which the user actually interacts with). I would argue that the OS (more specifically GUI) is the most important part of the computer - period. I don't care if you have a 100 core processor with 512 GB ram, a 20 TB SSD with 10000 GB/s read/write speeds if it only runs windows DOS - I won't buy it.

In the Mac vs PC world, the OS is the most defining aspect of the two computers. For that reason, I call your assessment bollocks, and side with the poster you quoted.

 

[cavf88]

Those are MPS's 10, right? what happened with the Geekbench against the '11 MBP's?