First Geekbench Scores for New Mac Mini With M2 Pro Surface, Beats M1 Max

[l0stl0rd]

Weird comparison to make when the Pro and Max have the same CPUs. Surely it would only be notable if the M2 Pro beat the M1 Max in a graphics benchmark.

Exactly it is click bait headlines.

Because M1 Pro =M1 Max CPU
M2 Pro = M2 Max CPU

So as the M2 Pro is faster then the M1 Pro it is of course faster then the M1 Max too.😂

 

[obviouslogic]

Intel and AMD have reached 2200 in Geekbench single-core so Apple needs to keep up on the performance side of things. People don't need to put their cape on and defend Apple. The M2 Pro and M2 Pro Max are not amazing updates. Apple knew it too and that's why they didn't compare them to any recent AMD and Intel chips. Apple only compared to i9 Intel MacBooks before the Apple Silicon transition (lol). Johny Srouji wasn't even on stage to present these new chips. He's a engineer. He can't put on a fake smile and BS you so he tapped out this round.

Yeah they did so by "boosting" the clock well above 5GHz, even approaching 6GHz...
Intel i9 13900k, 2220@5800MHz
AMD Risen 9 7950X, 2190@5700MHz
Apple M2 Pro, 1950@3500MHz

By the way, in multi-core scores...

Intel i9 13900k @ 5.8GHZ w/24 cores (260W)... 25,388
AMD Risen 9 7950X @ 5.7GHz w/16 cores (230W)... 23,027
Apple M1 Ultra @ 3.2 GHz w/20 cores (60W)... 23,325

The Ultra uses cores that are 2 generations old (A14 vs. A16). However, based on multi-core performance increase between M1 Pro and M2 Pro (~24%), we should get...

Apple M2 Ultra @ 3.5 GHz w/24 cores... ~29,000

And that's still a core design that's not the latest generation. (A15 vs. A16)

So how exactly does Apple need to up the performance side of things? And these still use a fraction of the power Intel and AMD CPUs use to achieve those scores.

 

[Cromulent]

Yes I do think the majority of Mac's sold are MacBook Air's and Mac Mini's....because price does matter to even Mac fan's.

I use a Mac Studio for my main computer, but I also bought the cheapest M1 MBA because I knew I wouldn't do any work away from my desktop. Hence, I just went with something that would be fine for web browsing and other media consumption, so yeah, I wouldn't want to pay much more for a laptop because I only have small light requirements for a laptop.

 

[John642]

If the difference in cost between the M2Pro and M2, specked out the same for ram and SSD size, is it worth the $300, You get 10 core cpu 16 core gpu vs 8 core cpu 10 core gpu, 2 extra Thunderbolt ports, HDMI 2.1 support. Wondering what everyones thought on this is? Thx

 

[BorisJohnson]

Geekbench scores for the newly announced Mac mini with M2 and M2 Pro chips have revealed a significant increase in performance compared to the previous-generation Mac mini and previous M1 Pro and M1 Max devices.

The scores reveal that the Mac mini with M2 Pro achieved a single-core score of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for a configuration with 16GB of unified memory. For comparison, the previous M1 Mac mini achieved a single-core score of 1,651 and a multi-core score of 5,181.

The Geekbench scores are the first we've seen for the new M2 Pro, which is also available on updated 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros. While we've yet to see Geekbench scores for the updated MacBook Pros, M2 Pro's performance with the Mac mini is unlikely to differ greatly from its performance with the new Mac notebooks.

The M1 Pro in the previous-generation 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro scored a single-core score of 1,734 and a multi-core score of 10,076 compared to a single-core of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for the M2 Pro. The M2 Pro, according to these results, also beats the M1 Max, which achieves 1,727 single-core and 12,643 multi-core scores.

Geekbench scores for the Mac mini with the M2 chip have also surfaced, revealing similar performance to the M2 MacBook Air announced in June 2022.

Users can configure the Mac mini with M2 with up to 24GB of unified memory, compared to 16GB with the previous M1 model. With the M2 Pro, Mac mini models can be configured with 32GB of unified memory. 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros powered with the high-end variant of M2 Max can have up to 96GB of RAM.

Both the updated Mac mini and 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro are available for pre-order on Apple's website and will begin arriving to customers on Tuesday, January 23.

Article Link: First Geekbench Scores for New Mac Mini With M2 Pro Surfaces, Beats M1 Max

I'm thinking I could use the new Mac mini

Geekbench scores for the newly announced Mac mini with M2 and M2 Pro chips have revealed a significant increase in performance compared to the previous-generation Mac mini and previous M1 Pro and M1 Max devices.

The scores reveal that the Mac mini with M2 Pro achieved a single-core score of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for a configuration with 16GB of unified memory. For comparison, the previous M1 Mac mini achieved a single-core score of 1,715 and a multi-core score of 7,442.

The Geekbench scores are the first we've seen for the new M2 Pro, which is also available on updated 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros. While we've yet to see Geekbench scores for the updated MacBook Pros, M2 Pro's performance with the Mac mini is unlikely to differ greatly from its performance with the new Mac notebooks.

The M1 Pro in the previous-generation 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro scored a single-core score of 1,734 and a multi-core score of 10,076 compared to a single-core of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for the M2 Pro. The M2 Pro, according to these results, also beats the M1 Max, which achieves 1,727 single-core and 12,643 multi-core scores.

Geekbench scores for the Mac mini with the M2 chip have also surfaced, revealing similar performance to the M2 MacBook Air announced in June 2022.

Users can configure the Mac mini with M2 with up to 24GB of unified memory, compared to 16GB with the previous M1 model. With the M2 Pro, Mac mini models can be configured with 32GB of unified memory. 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros powered with the high-end variant of M2 Max can have up to 96GB of RAM.

Both the updated Mac mini and 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro are available for pre-order on Apple's website and will begin arriving to customers on Tuesday, January 24.

Article Link: First Geekbench Scores for New Mac Mini With M2 Pro Surface, Beats M1 Max

Still think of getting the Mac Studio Max, but this M2 pro mini is interesting.

 

[ApplesAreSweet&Sour]

If the difference in cost between the M2Pro and M2, specked out the same for ram and SSD size, is it worth the $300, You get 10 core cpu 16 core gpu vs 8 core cpu 10 core gpu, 2 extra Thunderbolt ports, HDMI 2.1 support. Wondering what everyones thought on this is? Thx

Just don't get the 256GB baseline M2 mini -It's going to have Apple's innovative slower SSD that was first introduced in the M2 Air and 13" Pro.

$100 less at launch is not a lot saved when the internal SSD might hold the SoC back so much that it barely outperforms the baseline 256GB M1 mini at all.. especially when you're going to get an 256/8 M1 mini for at lot less than $599 after the M2 mini hits retail.

 

[Zdigital2015]

At some point, cheap power is going to become a lot less cheap and PCMR gaming PCs are going to cost more to run than it’s worth for the average consumer. Those who have started prioritizing performance per watt will be rewarded and those that thumb their nose at it will be in for a rude awakening. Being able to recharge my M1 MacBook Pro from a battery I charged up using a 100w solar panel gets really enticing really fast when intermittent rolling black outs and higher energy costs start kicking in. Even where I live in BFE we have an issue with someone attacking substations and knocking out power. This is going to get worse, not better. Prepare now.

 

[i486dx2-66]

For anyone like myself who was curious how the prior best Intel Mini compares:
(Also, tables)

Geekbench 5 Scores as of 2023/01/19:

	Single Core	Multi-Core
Late 2018 i7-8700B	1098	5464
Late 2020 M1	1715	7442
2023 M2	1951	9003
2023 M2 Pro	1952	15013

So coming from the prior top-spec Intel unit, the M2 pro is double the single-core performance and triple the multi-core performance!

 

[falkon-engine]

Intel 13th gen runs macOS? Huh…

It can... on a hackintosh. Spoof the Comet Lake CPUID and the kernel will boot.

 

[lysingur]

Exactly. Many still say that we shouldn't care about energy consumption on a desktop device, but here in Europe it's starting to become more and more of a deciding factor.

What most people do on their desktop devices doesn't make energy consumption a "deciding" factor.

 

[John642]

Just don't get the 256GB baseline M2 mini -It's going to have Apple's innovative slower SSD that was first introduced in the M2 Air and 13" Pro.

$100 less at launch is not a lot saved when the internal SSD might hold the SoC back so much that it barely outperforms the baseline 256GB M1 mini at all.. especially when you're going to get an 256/8 M1 mini for at lot less than $599 after the M2 mini hits retail.

Can you comment about HDMI versions please.

 

[chucker23n1]

Those HX series are mostly used in huge 17" desktop-replacement "laptops" that are barely portable at all. In more compact ones, you'd likely find the H series CPU.

Yup. Exactly my point. You can't build a MacBook Pro competitor with a HX series.

 

[roland.g]

Sorry but while I would expect the GeekBench score on my M1 Max Studio to be slightly behind the scores for an M2 Pro, but the M1 Max has 400GB/s memory bandwidth compared to 200GB/s on the M2 Pro Mini, as well as higher GPU efficiency. Not to mention more ports, and better thermal management.

Let's take a look.

M1 Max Studio
Geekbench 1756 / 12336
10 Core CPU / 8 Performance 2 HE
24 Core GPU
16 Core Neural Engine
400GB/s Memory Bandwidth
More Ports
More Video Support

M2 Pro Mini
Geekbench 1952 / 15013
10 Core CPU / 6 Performance 4 HE
16 Core GPU
16 Core Neural Engine
200GB/s Memory Bandwidth

Configuring both with 32GB RAM and bringing the M2 Mini in line with the Studio w/ 10GB Ethernet the Studio is $1,999 and the Mini is $1,799.

Why would I buy a Mini for $200 less in this situation?

 

[jdb8167]

I was very unimpressed with the base M2 air both from its SSD slow down and its less than impressive performance hike.

Umm, the performance hike is just about the same as the M2 Pro vs. the M1 Pro.The difference between the M2 MacBook Air vs. the M1 MacBook Air is about 11% in single core and about 19% in multicore. Weird how the narrative can change people's opinions without any real evidence.

 

[4odomi]

Geekbench scores for the newly announced Mac mini with M2 and M2 Pro chips have revealed a significant increase in performance compared to the previous-generation Mac mini and previous M1 Pro and M1 Max devices.

The scores reveal that the Mac mini with M2 Pro achieved a single-core score of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for a configuration with 16GB of unified memory. For comparison, the previous M1 Mac mini achieved a single-core score of 1,715 and a multi-core score of 7,442.

The Geekbench scores are the first we've seen for the new M2 Pro, which is also available on updated 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros. While we've yet to see Geekbench scores for the updated MacBook Pros, M2 Pro's performance with the Mac mini is unlikely to differ greatly from its performance with the new Mac notebooks.

The M1 Pro in the previous-generation 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro scored a single-core score of 1,734 and a multi-core score of 10,076 compared to a single-core of 1,952 and a multi-core score of 15,013 for the M2 Pro. The M2 Pro, according to these results, also beats the M1 Max, which achieves 1,727 single-core and 12,643 multi-core scores.

Geekbench scores for the Mac mini with the M2 chip have also surfaced, revealing similar performance to the M2 MacBook Air announced in June 2022.

Users can configure the Mac mini with M2 with up to 24GB of unified memory, compared to 16GB with the previous M1 model. With the M2 Pro, Mac mini models can be configured with 32GB of unified memory. 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros powered with the high-end variant of M2 Max can have up to 96GB of RAM.

Both the updated Mac mini and 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pro are available for pre-order on Apple's website and will begin arriving to customers on Tuesday, January 24.

Article Link: First Geekbench Scores for New Mac Mini With M2 Pro Surface, Beats M1 Max

Single Core increases are very, very disappointing, multicore are very good

 

[djplong]

I've been migrating from Windows to Mac over the past couple of years. When the improved M1 chips made came out, I bit the bullet and bought the M1 Max MacBook Pro and I've been extremely happy with it. It's MOSTLY used as a desktop, to be honest and it's a BIT of a hassle deinstalling and reinstalling it in my workspace when I need to be mobile. So I'd been on the lookout for what would happen with the Mac mini. (I was tempted by the Studio but held off when the M2 came around)

With the Mac mini now available with an M2 Pro that has the ports I need and can have plenty of external monitors, it was just a question of performance. When it came to comparing the M1 to the M2, Apple only really compares like to like - as in M1 to M2, Pro to Pro and Max to Max. I was wondering how the M2 Pro compared to the M1 Max that I was already familiar with. Seeing these geek bench scores, now I know why Apple didn't compare the M2 Pro to the M1 Max since the M2P comes out on top and there's no M2 Max for the Studio (yet) and that fact could cannibalize sales of M1 Max based Studios.

But it does mean that it looks like Apple found a way for me to spend some more money on their products. I think there's an M2 Pro based mini in my near future.

 

[fakestrawberryflavor]

Meh, My PC Laptop is dead within 6 to 8 hours, my MBP goes all day and then some.

My Razer Blade 15 inch is dead in 3 hours and slower on battery at the same time. People who compare Apple laptops to PCs and only speak about total peak theoretical performance are not only missing the point entirely, but don't really know how to effectively manage expectations.

 

[4odomi]

12% is very good. 23% is very good. Especially della already powerful and efficient chip. Who cares how many cores and frenquency speed if the result is still efficient, doable and pretty fast.

12% very poor!, 23% is very good!.....I want faster speeds on my single core, as 70% of my tasks is using that 😏 BTW, 10000 to 15000 on multicore is 33% and that is excellent.
Will just stick with my M1

 

[Unregistered 4U]

It can... on a hackintosh. Spoof the Comet Lake CPUID and the kernel will boot.

“Getting the kernel to boot” is not the same as “running macOS”.

 

[Velli]

What most people do on their desktop devices doesn't make energy consumption a "deciding" factor.

Elaborate please.

 

[Choco Taco]

Not true a water cooler helps yes with raptor lake, but a 13600k does not need a water cooler a noctua fan cooler will tame that beast.

And the amd 7900 (non X) part is even more power efficient out of the box before you apply PBO, and it has a much lower tdp of only 65W. Runs cool under load. And is faster than m2 pro.

The article is about laptops. There aren't any comparable laptops to this in terms of power to performance. And literally every other laptop with comparable performance turns into sluggish trash when unplugged from the power source. Nobody cares how power hungry, surface of the sun heated desktop chips compare to this. And you don't have any idea how the laptop version of the 7900 will compare to the M2 as nothing has been benchmarked yet because it doesn't exist. Not to mention the fact that 65 watts is only for the CPU. Whatever laptop the chip is going to go into will have a GPU to go along with it, so the wattage is going to be much higher and draw more power.

 

[4odomi]

The M1 Max is virtually the same in terms of CPU as the M1 Pro; it's basically an M1 Pro with more GPU cores (and more memory bandwidth to support them).



It'll handily beat it in SC. Even the MacBook Air's M2 (with no suffix) does.

In MC, no. The Ultra scores 23325; the 15013 don't come close to that. Which makes sense — the M1 Ultra has 16+4 cores, whereas the M2 Pro and M2 Max have 8+4.



Probably, but it could be close!

Just wanted to say, you're very knowledgeable and I like your comments

 

[Velli]

I doubt the bulk of high CPU/GPU demand Mac users are on Macbook's or Mac Mini's.

Our Marketing department is currently on maxed out Intel iMac's, 64gig, high-end i7 for their time (2019), or Mac Pro's. Their replacements coming this year, since all of their software is finally ported, will be Mac Studio's or whatever the Mac Pro replacement will be. They have a few Intel 16inch MacBooks for road work but they are rarely used and probably more so for showing off completed work.

Yes I do think the majority of Mac's sold are MacBook Air's and Mac Mini's....because price does matter to even Mac fan's.

No way Apple sells more Mac Minis than Macbook Pros.

 

[4nNtt]

Better than expected but still behind Intel 13th gen. Apple needs to bring their A Game for M3 chips.

It depends on the metrics you look at. The 13th gen was a big performance improvement for micro-benchmarks, but the M2 Pro is still the king by a long shot in terms of memory bandwidth and performance per watt. Intel still clocks their processors above 5 GHz, so most likely they can't sustain any micro-benchmark performance without throttling down. I would consider the M2 Pro still on top overall by a large margin considering you could put an M2 Ultra in the power envelope of the 13th gen chip. Especially for mobile users where performance per watt is extremely important.

The M2 Pro increased multi-core performance by 50% and the Intel chip by 64%, regardless of the details these are both impressive gains.

 

[sammy2k8]

And the amd 7900 (non X) part is even more power

*gg* to keep it comparable - UV this 7900 (non x) to 30w max. like the m2 and hit the road again

by the way: the tdp of 65w is not the open end. It’s know the package power total is at least 88w.