iMac use desktop class i7 and desktop class DDR4 so that you know...
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Geekbench Shows 2018 MacBook Pro Has Biggest Yearly Performance Gain Since 2011
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iMac use desktop class i7 and desktop class DDR4 so that you know...
Well those people aren't going to care so much about FLOPS, as far as I know. I think cryptocurrency miners are the only ones who can rely on that as a measurement of GPU performance. Way too many variables with GPUs.
You're right about the 1070 mobile being faster than the rMBP's graphics in any task, though. IDK about being faster than RX580. I think the aim of the rMBP is to let those few people who need the power use an RX580 as an eGPU.
Last edited:
Yea I always use my laptop to do my 8 hours Maya Arnold 3D rendering engine (that use CPU anyway so probably faster than a normal desktop pc gaming if the think don't throttle too much)
What cheap laptop offer more power than a 580rx? really curious!
love also to see all these ultrabook with faster GPU unless you think a 1060 goes 2x faster than you may want to check your facts. yeah we are missing a bit of performance with AMD but is not as high as you make it sound if you pick same TDP
Ok, I see where you were going.
IMO, it’s all been unqualified, rather than dumb. ARM, Apple’s Ax in particular has seriously outclassed anything Intel can do in temperature constrained, size constrained, power constrained devices. I don’t think anyone can reputably deny that. Intel gave up in the end.
What hasn’t been tested or confirmed is whether ARM/Samsung ARM/Apple ARM can scale up when they don’t have thermal, size and power constraints. What could Apple do with space and air cooling? Do you know? I don’t. I’m not confident they could be, and I’m not confident they couldn’t be. It hasn’t been tested.
Sure, but they're still harder to hit without looking than physical keys. You could also remap all of those functions to other shortcuts. The point is, it's still a step back you have to pay for thr privelege of being annoyed by. A set of users (mostly I think users who came to the mac in the first place because they were already unix users) will find it annoying enough to jump to other platforms.
1070 mobile beats RX580 in certain benchmarks. I wouldn't call it just better, but it's impressive. Not like the comparison makes much sense. IRL the first thing a user cares about is compatibility. and AMD and Nvidia are different worlds. You could argue that Apple should've gone with Nvidia, but they chose AMD long ago for reasons I don't understand but I'm guessing made sense.
Last edited:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-NVIDIA-GeForce-GTX-1070-Laptop.169549.0.html 10% slower in average if not the max-Q still think it's slower as all of them throttle, plus none of the 1070 is cheap, an MSI GS65 cost 3200 with slightly slower CPU and 1080p monitor, those cheap gaming laptop with 1050ti/1060 are indeed much slower than desktop and not much faster if any than a macbook pro
Last edited:
The site says the 580 is 10% slower than the 1070 laptop, not the other way around. But with a huge margin of error if I read the chart correctly.
And yeah, idk how throttling comes into play cause I never had a dGPU in a laptop after the crappy experience of having the 650M in a 2012 rMBP. If there's throttling due to high temps, considering that people are using crazy hacks like external fans with their gaming laptops, I don't know what to believe.
2018 MacBook Pro models feature the biggest yearly CPU performance gains since 2011, according to Geekbench founder John Poole.
Geekbench 4 scores indicate the latest 15-inch models have a 12 to 15 percent increase in single-core performance, while multi-core performance is up 39 to 46 percent, compared to the equivalent 2017 models.
A new 15-inch MacBook Pro with the best-available 2.9GHz six-core Intel Core i9 processor, with Turbo Boost up to 4.8GHz, has a multi-core score of 22,439, for example, a 44.3 percent increase versus a 2017 model with a then-best 3.1GHz quad-core Core i7 and Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz.
Likewise, for the latest 13-inch models, Geekbench scores show a 3 to 11 percent increase in single-core performance, and an impressive 81 to 86 percent increase in multi-core performance versus equivalent 2017 models.
A new 13-inch MacBook Pro with the best-available 2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor, with Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz, has a multi-core score of 17,557, for example, an 83.8 percent increase versus a 2017 model with a then-best 3.5GHz dual-core Core i7 and Turbo Boost up to 4.0GHz.
Poole attributes the increases in performance to additional cores, higher Turbo Boost frequencies, and the switch to DDR4 memory.
2018 MacBook Pro models feature eighth-generation Intel Core processors, with up to six cores on 15-inch models and up to four cores on 13-inch models, both firsts. The refresh marked the first increase in cores since 2011, when the first quad-core 15-inch MacBook Pro models were released.
Interestingly, as Poole notes, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar models are now competitive with 15-inch models from 2017 in both single-core and multi-core performance, essentially making it a smaller replacement.
Poole also notes that these Geekbench scores are preliminary, and likely to rise over the coming weeks, as on brand new machines, macOS completes several setup tasks in the background that can temporarily degrade performance. He says these tasks vary and can take up to several days to be completed.
Apple advertises the new 15-inch MacBook Pro as up to 70 percent faster, and the new 13-inch model as up to two times faster, than the equivalent 2017 models, but Poole told MacRumors that other benchmarks may show different results than Geekbench. Performance in real-world usage will also vary.
Geekbench 4 is a popular cross-platform CPU and GPU benchmark from Primate Labs, with apps available for Mac and iPhone and iPad.
Article Link: Geekbench Shows 2018 MacBook Pro Has Biggest Yearly Performance Gain Since 2011
The ssd is still what makes mac so damn overpriced. I need the memmory cuz want have 3 different os's. Anyway will think thrice. I am pushed between 1TB or 2TB...
Yeah that what I said, that is why I used the "still think".
I would be happy to switch to nvidia especially for the iMac who would benefit in a greater way then the Macbook Pro, I'm simply saying that the difference considering TDP constrain is not as big as the people make it, a 1060 would not transform the MacBook Pro into a 3d powerhouse, not even barely enough to render games at native resolution, just few percent margin better than what it currently have.
It is still frustrating that Apple’s insistence on thinner and thinner and “silence” compromises the purpose of their products. Many of the recurring failures are linked to their design philosophy. One need not look back too far to see various models essentially cooked themselves to death because of poor cooling and a fan profile that kicks in only when the temps hit 100 c and only after throttling the CPU/GPU first. That is why Apple has had so many graphics recalls. It is unnecessary for a pro device to be razor-thin and although Apple can squeeze a lot of performance out of the SSD, the system performance is ruined by thermal throttling and comparatively weak GPU.
Will skip the standard gripes about the thin keyboard design, touchbar, and limited transitional ports (really Apple, including one legacy USB port too much to ask?). However the lack of easy to replace modular parts is unforgivable for a $7000 computer. It isn’t cool that the entire top case has to be replaced just to pop in a new battery. Or even worse, if the RAM or SSD goes bad it is a major repair. These all seem like design choices for a disposable device that is meant to die after 2-3 years.
Will skip the standard gripes about the thin keyboard design, touchbar, and limited transitional ports (really Apple, including one legacy USB port too much to ask?). However the lack of easy to replace modular parts is unforgivable for a $7000 computer. It isn’t cool that the entire top case has to be replaced just to pop in a new battery. Or even worse, if the RAM or SSD goes bad it is a major repair. These all seem like design choices for a disposable device that is meant to die after 2-3 years.
[doublepost=1531726876][/doublepost]
I just did Geekbench on my MacBook Air 2015, got a score of around 3900, therefore, this MacBook Pro is only 30% faster, what a bunch of hog wash whoever wrote and tested this. In most case I would wager people do not run things in the background as intensive as a rendering program etc. therefore multitasking is useless.
2018 MacBook Pro models feature the biggest yearly CPU performance gains since 2011, according to Geekbench founder John Poole.
Geekbench 4 scores indicate the latest 15-inch models have a 12 to 15 percent increase in single-core performance, while multi-core performance is up 39 to 46 percent, compared to the equivalent 2017 models.
A new 15-inch MacBook Pro with the best-available 2.9GHz six-core Intel Core i9 processor, with Turbo Boost up to 4.8GHz, has a multi-core score of 22,439, for example, a 44.3 percent increase versus a 2017 model with a then-best 3.1GHz quad-core Core i7 and Turbo Boost up to 4.1GHz.
Likewise, for the latest 13-inch models, Geekbench scores show a 3 to 11 percent increase in single-core performance, and an impressive 81 to 86 percent increase in multi-core performance versus equivalent 2017 models.
A new 13-inch MacBook Pro with the best-available 2.7GHz quad-core Intel Core i7 processor, with Turbo Boost up to 4.5GHz, has a multi-core score of 17,557, for example, an 83.8 percent increase versus a 2017 model with a then-best 3.5GHz dual-core Core i7 and Turbo Boost up to 4.0GHz.
Poole attributes the increases in performance to additional cores, higher Turbo Boost frequencies, and the switch to DDR4 memory.
2018 MacBook Pro models feature eighth-generation Intel Core processors, with up to six cores on 15-inch models and up to four cores on 13-inch models, both firsts. The refresh marked the first increase in cores since 2011, when the first quad-core 15-inch MacBook Pro models were released.
Interestingly, as Poole notes, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar models are now competitive with 15-inch models from 2017 in both single-core and multi-core performance, essentially making it a smaller replacement.
Poole also notes that these Geekbench scores are preliminary, and likely to rise over the coming weeks, as on brand new machines, macOS completes several setup tasks in the background that can temporarily degrade performance. He says these tasks vary and can take up to several days to be completed.
Apple advertises the new 15-inch MacBook Pro as up to 70 percent faster, and the new 13-inch model as up to two times faster, than the equivalent 2017 models, but Poole told MacRumors that other benchmarks may show different results than Geekbench. Performance in real-world usage will also vary.
Geekbench 4 is a popular cross-platform CPU and GPU benchmark from Primate Labs, with apps available for Mac and iPhone and iPad.
Article Link: Geekbench Shows 2018 MacBook Pro Has Biggest Yearly Performance Gain Since 2011
You know geekbench is but one aspect of performance. But people usually complaim about stuff where real worod impact is probably unnoticeable so i get your point
[doublepost=1531727125][/doublepost]
People like thin and light. Agree with fixability though. Part of the apple charm where if it breaks better but a new one than to fix the old one.
Those x86 computation improvements look amazing. But look how little the multicore score increased going from the 8750h to the 8950HK. It may be throttling. And I would really like to see the scores after those benchmarks have been looping for 10 minutes or more, to allow for full heat soak to see if the laptop can handle the heat of the i9, or even the 8750H. Gaming laptops have a hard enough time keeping the 8750H from throttling at 90C at full load. I don't expect a Macbook to do any better.
but the price!!! come on Apple its still way more than a Dell... also 32GB? what about 64GB and nVidia GPU...
Wich Dell specifically? could not find one with similar spec, I'm genuinely curious of the price difference since MSI price similar spec laptop very similarly
You should complain to whoever created that software. So if you buy the most expensive iMac Pro, you have one core working like crazy and 17 cores twiddling their thumbs?
That may be ugly, but if Apple keeps emaciating to the point that durability and reliability are impacted (like what happened with the iPhone 6 and now the keyboards) then I'd rather take something solid and rugged than something I have to baby with utmost delicacy in a sterile clean room with HEPA filtering to prevent issues.
Melodramatic? Yes. But you get my point. A Pro laptop shouldn't have to be babied. Nor does the MacBook Pro look so pretty when the space grey finish starts wearing off.
Last edited:
Sure, Which side is most convenient to you?
Funny you should say that. I'm a die hard mechanical keyboard user and I like the butterfly switches better than most laptop switches. I also absolutely hated them at first. I hated them so much I carried an external Bluetooth Keyboard around with me so I didn't have to use the butterfly keys while I was on the go with my laptop.
Then I started using it bit by bit and you know what? I got used to it and I started to rather like it.
It definitely takes a little getting used to. Don't judge it until you've used it for a month. If you still hate it after a month, it's not for you and there's nothing wrong with that. Lots of different factors go into whether a keyboard is right for one person or another.
I own over three dozen keyboards (yes, that's excessive and I plan to thin the herd soon). I have keyboards of all types (mostly mechanicals). I loved some of the boards from the second I started using it. Others took some time for me to warm up to and some fell out of favor. You can't always tell if you like something as "initimate" as a keyboard by just tapping on it for a while. You have to get used to it before you can really know if it'll be ok for you or not.
I'm not going to rank my MBP keyboard above any of my favorite mechanicals anytime soon, but I would rank it higher than most laptop keyboards I've used. I'm actually not a fan of the Apple scissor switches when installed in their laptops, but I like them when they're used in their external keyboards.
Yeah, go figure, right? The only reason I found out not all Apple scissor switches are bad was because I gave them a second chance in a new form factor.
I think the dust thing has been overblown. We really don't know exactly why there's an elevated failure risk with the keyboards. I'm pretty sure a lot of perfectly fine functioning keyboards belong to people in dustier offices and to messier eaters than some of the ones being returned for repair.
I have a 2016 MBP. The finish is fine. I've even dropped it over a couple of feet onto a carpeted floor by accident. I thought I had a visit to the Apple Store for repairs in my near future, but it was fine. It appeared none worse for the wear and didn't even get a dent or scratch that I could see.
Computers are gear to me. They're the tools of my trade and I run them hard and I don't believe in treating them like jewelry. Mine never get babied and so far I've been fairly impressed at the hardiness of my 2016 MBP. I don't think most regular laptops would have fared as well getting dropped like that.
Last edited:
That guy will have a battery and UIperformance complaints if Apple increase the resolution like he wanted. Some people never feel happy.