Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
56,623
19,373



133703-2010_mbp_geekbench.jpg


MacBook Pro Geekbench results: 2.66 GHz Core i7 (green) vs. 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo (blue)
Gizmodo publishes preliminary benchmarks comparing the performance of Apple's new top-of-the-line 2.66 GHz Core i7-based 15" MacBook Pro released today to a previous-generation 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo model. With the caveat that the tests did not include the previous top-of-the-line 3.06 GHz model, the new MacBook Pro still seems to show impressive performance gains of nearly 50% on many tests.

The preliminary testing utilized two standard benchmarking utilities, Geekbench and Xbench, as well as a test of video re-encoding with 64-bit Handbrake. The Geekbench and Xbench results showed about 50% improvement over the previous-generation model in overall scoring, although the individual Xbench scores varied fairly significantly from only marginally better in Quartz and CPU tests to over twice as high in Thread and OpenGL tasks.



133921-2010_mbp_xbench.jpg


MacBook Pro Xbench results: 2.66 GHz Core i7 (purple) vs. 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo (blue)
Handbrake re-encoding speed also increased by about 35-40% in Gizmodo's testing with a 600 MB file, dropping from 32:19 to 19:54.

The performance gains come despite increased battery life in the new models, a result of more energy efficient components and a slight bump in battery capacity for the latest models. Apple's automatic graphics switching will enable seamless shifting between discrete and integrated graphics processors, allowing for maximum horsepower for tasks such as the benchmarks used above and maximum battery life for less power-hungry tasks.

Article Link: Early Benchmarks Show Significant Performance Gains for Core i7 MacBook Pro
 

Kiddo86

macrumors member
Apr 16, 2008
64
0
Very reassuring! I just ordered the 2.66 i7 this morning. Glad to see test results for exactly the product I purchased :D
 

NebulaClash

macrumors 68000
Feb 4, 2010
1,810
0
This is a good thing. A lot of people have been saying they can get better deals elsewhere from Dell or Acer or Sony. Fine. Do so. No one cares. What we care about is what we can get that runs OS X (legally), and these babies are the hottest things on the planet that can do so.

Don't bore me with a Windows machine specs. I don't run Windows, and I never will again.
 

alent1234

macrumors 603
Jun 19, 2009
5,688
170
i really want to see how the i5 compares with the i7...hopefully someone benchmarks that model soon.

anandtech did it on the Dell/HP models months ago and very little difference. only worth it if you run something that's very CPU intensive
 

thatisme

macrumors 6502
Mar 23, 2010
485
106
United States
im curious how the auto switching graphics plays with ICC profiling.... on my current MBP, I have 2 profiles set (using a colorimeter). One for the 9400 and one for the onboard system graphics.

will the system continually change profiles on the fly, or will the GPU switch but leave you with a single, non optimal color profile?
 

mbproky

macrumors newbie
Feb 19, 2010
4
0
anandtech did it on the Dell/HP models months ago and very little difference. only worth it if you run something that's very CPU intensive

Yeah, I'd like to see a benchmark too. I had this powerbook for 6+ years now and would like to hang to my mbp for a looong time too.

Adding 310 euros for the i7 it's a bit hard on the wallet, though...
 

Robert M.

macrumors 6502a
Jan 4, 2010
761
163
further highlighting on how poor a decision it was to keep the C2D in the 13" :(

Yup! Last night I figured I would be ordering a 13inch today, but I refuse to buy a laptop in 2010 with C2D!! :mad:

So I went with the 15 with the higher resolution screen on a student discount!! :D Yeah, it might be overkill for what I plan on doing with it, but I think it's a better value than the 13's.

Maybe this was Apple's plan? To get people to just go with the 15!! Haha idk...
 

johny5

macrumors 6502a
Mar 31, 2007
750
11
UK
Yup! Last night I figured I would be ordering a 13inch today, but I refuse to buy a laptop in 2010 with C2D!! :mad:

So I went with the 15 with the higher resolution screen on a student discount!! :D Yeah, it might be overkill for what I plan on doing with it, but I think it's a better value than the 13's.

Maybe this was Apple's plan? To get people to just go with the 15!! Haha idk...

My thoughts exactly!! :)

I still have my 2.4 c2d (unibody with the battery compartment) and was hoping for a bump on the 13" as I travel a lot. Cant really justify a new 13 although the 10 hr battery sounds great I will be looking at a 15" now with a HD screen.
 

kirky29

macrumors 68000
Jun 17, 2009
1,510
430
Lincolnshire, England
Some nice speeds there! I think I might invest/save for an upgrade to my MBP 2.6, 4GB, 500 15" - Get the i7 with a 500SSD. Finally an SSD for MBP with a size I can handle!!
Thank you Apple :)
:apple:
 

macduke

macrumors G4
Jun 27, 2007
11,967
17,012
Central U.S.
Meh someone PM me when we get quad-core chips ok?

CS4 really slows down my MBP, and it's only two years old. Otherwise I'd be fine with my current hardware. Hopefully CS5 with its supposedly better 64-bit coding can fix my problems.

Either that or I'll get an iMac. I don't bring my MBP to class anymore now that I've got an iPad. But then I'd need a bigger desk. No use in letting my 26" H-IPS display go to waste. Have they made xBox 360 to displayport adapters yet? Might just sell off my monitor to help buy the 27" model.
 

JoePike

macrumors member
Jun 22, 2004
70
0
Minneapolis, MN
Somebody Test i5 vs. i7

These benchmarks are both very helpful and very promising. But, the only thing holding me back from placing an order for a new 17" MBP is knowing whether it's worth the extra $$$ for the i7 over the i5.

If I understand things correctly, both are dual core processors, both support "turbo-boosting", and both support hyperthreading. So the question is, how much realistic performance gain will be attained by going from 3MB to 4MB of L3 cache, and a minimal bump in clockspeed?

If anybody has any legit benchmarks, please post!
 

jayducharme

macrumors 601
Jun 22, 2006
4,182
4,631
The thick of it
Apple just can't win. These seem to be respectable improvements in their laptop line. This supposedly is what a lot of people on this site were waiting for, complaining that Apple was ignoring computer users and needed to update their laptops. Now Apple has delivered, and look how many people are rating it negative. :rolleyes:
 

mbproky

macrumors newbie
Feb 19, 2010
4
0
These benchmarks are both very helpful and very promising. But, the only thing holding me back from placing an order for a new 17" MBP is knowing whether it's worth the extra $$$ for the i7 over the i5.

If I understand things correctly, both are dual core processors, both support "turbo-boosting", and both support hyperthreading. So the question is, how much realistic performance gain will be attained by going from 3MB to 4MB of L3 cache, and a minimal bump in clockspeed?

If anybody has any legit benchmarks, please post!

http://www.barefeats.com/imi7.html

Well, you have these results for the iMac. I don't know if they apply to laptop processors, but it seems like the i7 kicks a bit of i5's bottom.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.