First 2018 MacBook Air Benchmark Shows Moderate Gains Over 2017 MacBook Air and MacBook

[MacRumors]

The first benchmark for the 2018 MacBook Air surfaced on Geekbench today, giving us our first look at how the low-power 7W Amber Lake Intel chip in the machine measures up to the performance of other Macs in Apple's lineup.

Equipped with a 1.6GHz Intel Core i5-8210Y chip and 16GB of RAM, the benchmarked MacBook Air earned a single-core score of 4248 and a multi-core score of 7828.

As should be no surprise, it's significantly better than the previous-generation MacBook Air equipped with a 1.8GHz Broadwell processor, which earned a single-core score of 3335 and a multi-core score of 6119.

It's faster than the fastest Core M chip in the 2017 MacBook models, but not by much. The 1.4GHz MacBook earned a single-core score of 3925 and a multi-core score of 7567, while the base model with a 1.2GHz Core M chip earned a single-core score of 3527 and a multi-core score of 6654.

Compared to MacBook Pro models, it's not too far off from the 2018 13-inch Touch Bar MacBook Pro with a 2.3GHz Intel Core i5 processor when it comes to single-core performance, but it can't compete with the four cores in the 2018 MacBook Pro. That machine earned a single-core score of 4504 and a multi-core score of 16464.

It's also slower than the 2017 13-inch MacBook Pro sans Touch Bar that Apple still sells, which earned a single-core score of 4314 and a multi-core score of 9071.

Single-Core Performance
[*]2018 MacBook Air - 4248
[*]2017 MacBook Air - 3335
[*]1.4GHz 2017 MacBook - 3925
[*]1.3GHz 2017 MacBook - 3630
[*]1.2GHz 2017 MacBook - 3527
[*]2.3GHz 2018 MacBook Pro - 4504
[*]2.3GHz 2017 MacBook Pro - 4314

Multi-Core Performance
[*]2018 MacBook Air - 7828
[*]2017 MacBook Air - 6119
[*]1.4GHz 2017 MacBook - 7567
[*]1.3GHz 2017 MacBook - 6974
[*]1.2GHz 2017 MacBook - 6654
[*]2.3GHz 2018 MacBook Pro - 16464
[*]2.3GHz 2017 MacBook Pro - 9071

Previous MacBook Air chips used 15W U-series chips from Intel, but the 2018 model is using a lower-power 7W Y-series chip, and there were some concerns about its performance relative to the rest of the Mac lineup.

Based on these Geekbench scores, which aren't necessarily indicative of how these machines will perform in the real world, the MacBook Air is superior to the MacBook lineup at this time, but falls short of the base-level MacBook Pro, which is about right given its price point ($1,199 for the Air vs. $1,299 for the Pro). What the Mac lineup will look like if and when the 12-inch MacBook is refreshed remains to be seen.

Additional benchmarking results should be available soon, as the MacBook Air is set to arrive to the first customers on Wednesday, November 7, and MacBook Air reviews should come out before then.

Article Link: First 2018 MacBook Air Benchmark Shows Moderate Gains Over 2017 MacBook Air and MacBook

 

[jackietreeh0rn]

There's a 2017 Macbook air?

 

[DanGoh]

I don’t even know what Macbook I plan to upgrade from my 2013 MBPr much less which one to reccomend to people anymore.

 

[radiologyman]

Good to know that top MacBook 12 is close in performance!

 

[neilw]

Looks like a decent improvement over the 2015 model (3050/5563), although I admit I would have hoped for a bit better. Still, good improvement considering half the power.

 

[Naimfan]

Keyboard makes it a hard fail.

And how about cinebench and unigine and . . . ?

 

[lec0rsaire]

I don’t even know what Macbook I plan to upgrade from my 2013 MBPr much less which one to reccomend to people anymore.

It’s very simple. For you nothing less than a 2018 13” TB. For casual users that are Apple fans i.e. the sort of people who have never opened a computer up and never will, the new MacBook Air or the 12” MacBook if they want a thinner notebook.

Basically, if you go on MR and tech forums, a MBA is not for you. For everyone else they are fine.

 

[neilw]

Oh, and let us not forget the new iPad Pro at 5030/17995.

Imagine an A13x or A14x in an Air form factor...

 

[jclo]

There's a 2017 Macbook air?

Yeah, because Apple bumped up the processor from 1.6GHz to 1.8GHz. Still Broadwell, though.

 

[EugW]

Ouch

If this is truly representative, there doesn't seem to be much improvement vs. the i7-7Y75 it seems to be based off of.

I guess Apple will be relying on the fan to keep the performance from dropping due to throttling.

 

[pier]

What about the GPU?

 

[bigpics]

Slightly more powerful than the cute, doggy all-about-thin Mac? I'm disappointed. Not a bad looking machine and nice screen (and not totally port crippled and the crap KB will likely not succumb to crumbs too quickly).

So a second processor option (even for $3-400) might have made the sale...

....but as is, nawww.....

 

[EugW]

What about the GPU?

GPU specs are the same as the Core i7-7Y75 in the 12" MacBook.

 

[BODYBUILDERPAUL]

It’s very simple. For you nothing less than a 2018 13” TB. For casual users i.e. the sort of people who have never opened a computer up and never will, the new MacBook Air or the 12” MacBook if they want a thinner notebook.

Basically, if you go on MR and tech forums, a MBA is not for you. For everyone else they are fine.

But surely a casual user will pay £400 for a windows laptop. Is there such a thing as a Apple casual user who pays £1200 or £1400 for a laptop? I really don't think so. In todays world, £1400 is a hell of a lot of money. Good luck to Apple with the Air but I think that greed has caught them with this and it's going to fail. £1000 for an iPhone X that does everything Ok because that's often bought on a contract but £1400 for a basic, rather unadventurous MacBook Air no thanks.

 

[Queen6]

Keyboard makes it a hard fail.

And how about cinebench and unigine and . . . ?

Yeah Geekbench tells you nothing how the CPU performs under sustained load.

Q-6

 

[lec0rsaire]

But surely a casual user will pay £400 for a windows laptop. Is there such a thing as a Apple casual user who pays £1200 or £1400 for a laptop? I really don't think so. In todays world, £1400 is a hell of a lot of money. Good luck to Apple with the Air but I think that greed has caught them with this and it's going to fail. £1000 for an iPhone X that does everything Ok because that's often bought on a contract but £1400 for a basic, rather unadventurous MacBook Air no thanks.

I should have said casual user that is a fan of Apple and macOS. There are many, many out there. Some people will never buy a Windows computer.

As for the price. I don’t think it is really that much. The prices are higher but the currency is worth less than it was even a decade ago. The original MacBook Air at around $1799 was a much more outrageously priced machine and they still sold tons of them.
[doublepost=1541124340][/doublepost]

What about the GPU?

GPU a little more powerful than what you find in the 12” MacBook and the 2017 MBA. Nowhere near the Iris in the MBP or even the standard integrated Intel UHD630 in the 15” MBP.

 

[Xgm541]

But surely a casual user will pay £400 for a windows laptop. Is there such a thing as a Apple casual user who pays £1200 or £1400 for a laptop? I really don't think so. In todays world, £1400 is a hell of a lot of money. Good luck to Apple with the Air but I think that greed has caught them with this and it's going to fail. £1000 for an iPhone X that does everything Ok because that's often bought on a contract but £1400 for a basic, rather unadventurous MacBook Air no thanks.

There are plenty of casual apple users who spend over $1000 on a laptop and use it for word documents, YouTube, and social media.

Im not saying that's financially responsible or smart but they exist

 

[EugW]

Yeah Geekbench tells you nothing how the CPU performs under sustained load.

Yeah, but if you are going to be using these machines for sustained loads on a regular basis, you are probably better off getting the MacBook Pro which has a significantly faster CPU. Pricing is similar and the Pro only weighs a quarter pound more.

 

[pier]

There are plenty of casual apple users who spend over $1000 on a laptop and use it for word documents, YouTube, and social media.

Im not saying that's financially responsible or smart but they exist

Sure, but are those users enough to drive the Mac division?

I hope not...

 

[EugW]

GPU a little more powerful than what you find in the 12” MacBook and the 2017 MBA. Nowhere near the Iris in the MBP or even the standard integrated Intel UHD630 in the 15” MBP.

GPU specs are the same as the Core i7-7Y75 in the top end 12" MacBook.

 

[lec0rsaire]

GPU specs are the same as the Core i7-7Y75 in the top end 12" MacBook.

They’re different. HD615 vs UHD617. It’s not a night and day difference but they’re not the same.

 

[Queen6]

Yeah, but if you are going to be using these machines for sustained loads on a regular basis, you are probably better off getting the MacBook Pro which has a significantly faster CPU. Pricing is similar and the Pro only weighs a quarter pound more.

True, but it should perform as advertised and many of the MacBook Pro's struggle to do that, so concern is justified...

Q-6

 

[Aussi3]

It’s amazing that the new iPad is supposed to be 5100 and 18,000 multi core

 

[swingerofbirch]

Apple used to sell consumer notebooks with processors that were close to the top of the heap. I remember their white Core 2 Duo MacBooks were fairly comparable to what you could get with higher-end machines, plus had a lot of good I/O.

Now to get the current middle-of-the-road, state-of-the-art you're starting at $1799—and that only has 8 GB of RAM.

They used to have a sweetspot with notebooks I found desirable around $1200-1500.

I don't see anything in their mobile line-up that looks appealing to me or looks like an upgrade over what I currently have (late 2013 13" rMBP).

I wonder if they didn't put a 15 W quadcore processor in because they thought it would cannibalize the low-end MBPs (without touchbar)? I also wonder why they didn't just update the low-end MBPs.

 

[oldmacs]

What a shame.

Imagine if they'd used the existing chassis and upgraded. They could have made a great machine. Instead they had to thin it down, shrink the battery etc.