Entry-level 2018 15" MBP is faster than top-of-the-line 2017 15" MBP

[vaugha]

I won't hazard to guess, but sometimes the mid-range processors have longer battery than the low end ones. Why? Because of something called race-to-sleep.

A faster processor will accomplish a task faster than a slower one, and thus will go into idle mode quicker than the slower CPU. However, the power characteristics and battery life will vary from chip to chip, and from activity to activity, so it's hard to say.

Again, thanks for the informative post. Appreciate you taking time to explain.

 

[Dave245]

The link has the specs in it. 2.2 GHz i7-8750H.

5084/22222


Actually, they are reflective of some types of real life usage to a certain extent, because real life usage tends to be bursty. Most people don't peg the CPU at 100% all day long.

That’s an impressive score, anyone know what it will be for the 2.6 GHz version?

 

[EugW]

There is literally no chance of this happening. Making a version of Mojave to work on ARM would be a HUGE undertaking. They would not do that just for a 12" MB, and most likely many apps wouldn't work either.

I'm pretty sure macOS already runs on ARM in Apple's labs.

Arguably getting Windows to run on ARM is an even bigger job, but whaddya know? It runs on ARM. Yes, there are limitations and compatibility issues, but it works.

I could see Apple using a 13" ARM MacBook as an introduction to macOS on ARM, and then release other machines later. This would make sense, as I don't think Apple's current or likely even the next Apple Ax ARM chips are suitable for high end machines.
[doublepost=1531579116][/doublepost]

That’s an impressive score, anyone know what it will be for the 2.6 GHz version?

Only at best marginally better so far.

5029/22412

In fact, this seems to be almost identical. But we shall see as time goes on. Also, I suspect the 2.6 GHz 8850H in the MacBook Pro will do better with extended non-bursty benches like Cinebench. Here it is with Windows machines:

https://www.notebookcheck.net/8850H-vs-8750H_9578_9576.247596.0.html

1276 vs 1176 is an 8.5% difference between the 2.6 GHz 8850H vs 2.2 GHz 8750H.

BTW, for reference, my 2017 MacBook 12" Core m3-7Y32 gets only 265 in Cinebench and a little over 7000 multi-core in Geekbench 4, and I have no issues with its performance for my business type usage.

 

[Dave245]

I'm pretty sure macOS already runs on ARM in Apple's labs.

Arguably getting Windows to run on ARM is an even bigger job, but whaddya know? It runs on ARM. Yes, there are limitations and compatibility issues, but it works.

I could see Apple using a 13" ARM MacBook as an introduction to macOS on ARM, and then release other machines later. This would make sense, as I don't think Apple's current or likely even the next Apple Ax ARM chips are suitable for high end machines.
[doublepost=1531579116][/doublepost]
Only at best marginally better so far.

5029/22412

In fact, this seems to be almost identical. But we shall see as time goes on. Also, I suspect the 2.6 GHz 8850H in the MacBook Pro will do better with extended non-bursty benches like Cinebench. Here it is with Windows machines:

https://www.notebookcheck.net/8850H-vs-8750H_9578_9576.247596.0.html

View attachment 770585

1276 vs 1176 is an 8.5% difference between the 2.6 GHz 8850H vs 2.2 GHz 8750H.

BTW, for reference, my 2017 MacBook 12" Core m3-7Y32 gets only 265 in Cinebench and a little over 7000 multi-core in Geekbench 4, and I have no issues with its performance for my business type usage.

Impressive score’s, do you think we will see major updates to the MacBook later this year? (Probably in October) like True Tone display? As a writer who spends a lot of time sat in front of my Mac it’s definitely an advantage, even when I’m not writing I’m either helping friends out with video editing or just playing around with editing (I like to edit as a hobby) recharching and so on, a goof display to me is a BIG plus!

I currently use Pixelmator on the iPad Pro but I have been thinking about getting it on which ever Mac I end up buying also.

 

[EugW]

Impressive score’s, do you think we will see major updates to the MacBook later this year? (Probably in October) like True Tone display? As a writer who spends a lot of time sat in front of my Mac it’s definitely an advantage, even when I’m not writing I’m either helping friends out with video editing or just playing around with editing (I like to edit as a hobby) recharching and so on, a goof display to me is a BIG plus!

I currently use Pixelmator on the iPad Pro but I have been thinking about getting it on which ever Mac I end up buying also.

True Tone display? No. Wide gamut display? No. Personally I don't care that much though. I'm OK with the existing MacBook's 8-bit display for business app usage and surfing, since it's Retina.

What might change though is that there might end up being a 13" MacBook.

 

[Dave245]

True Tone display? No. Wide gamut display? No. Personally I don't care that much though. I'm OK with the existing MacBook's 8-bit display for business app usage and surfing, since it's Retina.

What might change though is that there might end up being a 13" MacBook.

So it’s worth waiting until October? The 13” MacBook would be interesting depending on i’ts specs and display technology compared to these MacBook Pro’s that have been given a great update.

 

[EugW]

Here be the Geekbench scores!

Note that these are not maximum scores, but a sort of average of realistic score entries. For example, my 2017 Core iMac i7-7700K got 20200, but in this list is 19326. Anyhoo, the 2018 entry-level 15" Core i7-8750H gets 21236, whereas the 2017 top-of-the-line Core i7-7921HQ gets 15549. My lowly 2017 iMac Core i5-7600 (which I replaced the 7700K with) is at the very bottom of this screen grab at 14867.

What this suggests is that for many people, the i7-8850H and the i9-8950HK will be complete pointless upgrades over entry level.

BTW, my 2017 Core m3-7Y32 MacBook gets 6657 (or as high as 7000+), which is less than a third of what the 2018 15" Core i7-8750H gets, and yet for business type applications it's totally fine. For those types of applications I didn't really notice much difference between it and 2017's top-of-the-line Core i7-7700K iMac.