Geekbench Shows 2018 MacBook Pro Has Biggest Yearly Performance Gain Since 2011

[vipergts2207]

While the use of dedicated GPUs in 15" rMBPs is nothing new, my point is that Apple really had no choice but to put one in the base model, as not doing so would've resulted in the 15" base model having a weaker GPU than the 13" base model.

Obviously a lot of components in today's MBPs are better than the ones in the 2011 or 2015 MBP, not just the GPU; but that doesn't mean they should be sold at a higher price. Evolutionary technology is about offering more capability at the same or lower price.

Excluding the non-Touch Bar models from the refresh was either a deliberate attempt by Apple to upsell the more-expensive Touch Bar models, or a refresh + reorganization of Apple's lower-end laptop lineup is planned for the fall (time will tell if so).

True, and Apple almost always goes with more performance at the same price. As I’ve shown, when you factor in inflation and compare appropriate hardware, that’s still the case with the new ones as well. Comparing my first MBP from 2007 to my new one almost 10 years later, the $400 increase in that time seems pretty reasonable. Of course it’s not actually only $400 because of my SSD upgrade choice, but these SSDs are still a developing technology that completely blow the doors off my HDD from 2007.

 

[ondert]

I wonder if the i9 version throttles under sustain load? Dell XPS with i9 does throttle.

 

[50ULG]

So, Intel has one of the biggest year over year performance gains since 2011 in their 8th gen processor lineup, and the MacBook Pro which uses Intel's new 8th gen processors has the same performance gains?

Wow didn't see that one coming.

We didn't see it coming because the performance boost is due to AMD VEGA GPU inside now.
[doublepost=1531694218][/doublepost]

So, Intel has one of the biggest year over year performance gains since 2011 in their 8th gen processor lineup, and the MacBook Pro which uses Intel's new 8th gen processors has the same performance gains?

Wow didn't see that one coming.

We didn't see is coming because the performance boost is mostly due to AMD's Vega GPU inside.
[doublepost=1531694359][/doublepost]

Do you think the performance boost might be impacted by the high-end AMD Vega GPU inside?

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

 

[coolX]

Your comment made me smile.

If you're using Microsoft Office, even the latest MacBook Pro won't make it launch quickly.

I've noticed this in the apple store. Is it just because M$oft hobbled the program to make the windows version look better?

 

[redheeler]

True, and Apple almost always goes with more performance at the same price. As I’ve shown, when you factor in inflation and compare appropriate hardware, that’s still the case with the new ones as well. Comparing my first MBP from 2007 to my new one almost 10 years later, the $400 increase in that time seems pretty reasonable. Of course it’s not actually only $400 because of my SSD upgrade choice, but these SSDs are still a developing technology that completely blow the doors off my HDD from 2007.

But you're still going all the way back to 2007 to make your comparison, while the comparison I made was to more recent releases. You might as well go back another five years to 2002, when a base model 867 MHz 15" PowerBook G4 cost $3,220.25 when adjusted for inflation...

 

[Dorje Sylas]

Amazing what putting in a near modern processor will do.It's almost like Intel has actually made improvements to their processors. Go figure. It really is innovative when you don't use totally outdated parts.

 

[coolX]

You get used to it.

not if you are a die hard mechanical keyboard user....

 

[chucker23n1]

We didn't see is coming because the performance boost is mostly due to AMD's Vega GPU inside.

The MBP doesn't have a Vega GPU.

 

[jdiamond]

I thought long and hard about the dilemma that Macbook Pros meeting my requirements are now 50% more expensive. And I've finally decided to spend $1,400 to upgrade my 2015 Macbook Pro to a 2 TB hard drive instead.

My reasoning is that as exciting as the 2018 model is, most of the problems it's mitigating didn't exist in the 2015. The 2015 has a fantastic keyboard (IMO the best), and it's got all the ports you need built in and supports dual external 4K monitors at 60Hz. And these Geekbench scores now show that the 15" 2018 Macbook Pro has a 50% faster CPU than my 2015 (2 more cores), and a 100% faster GPU - that's enough of a difference to notice, not not enough of a difference to be significant. (It's the same difference as my 2010 17" Macbook Pro vs my 2015 15" Macbook Pro in CPU performance, and I don't mind the speed of my 2010 MBP.)

So rather than spend $4700 now, I'll spend $1,400, and maybe in 2020 I can find a 2018 discounted to $3,500. But I am happy they are fixing these laptops, even if they're so expensive - because at some point I will have to buy a new one.

 

[vipergts2207]

But you're still going all the way back to 2007 to make your comparison, while the comparison I made was to more recent releases. You might as well go back another five years to 2002, when a base model 867 MHz 15" PowerBook G4 cost $3,220.25 when adjusted for inflation...

I don’t have to go all the way back to 2007 to make the same point though. That just makes sense to me personally because it was my first MBP. Let’s look at the early-‘13 MBP, the last one with a dGPU in the baseline model before it went on hiatus until 2016. That one was $2200, which in 2018 dollars is $2380. If you want to quibble over the $20 relative price increase compared to that model, well then I guess you got me lol.

If you want to compare another way, to get a dGPU in 2015, you had spend $2500, or $2660 today, which actually makes these new MBPs look like a bargain. My only point is that these MBPs are more or less, depending on whatever metrics one wants to use, just as expensive as they’ve been in the past. If people actually bothered to look at the facts they’d realize that. Instead, headlines like “maxed out MBP costs $6700!” get lots of views. Well no duh, you dropped a 4 TB state-of-the-art SSD in there. SSD prices are what tend to skew the perception into the, “OMG look how expensive these new MBPs are, WTF Apple?!”

 

[ibivibiv]

Hmm but what will all those “professionals” complain about now that their word processors start up quicker? I’m sure the majority of professionals were really struggling without the 32gb ram and six cores .

........ sadly this is EXACTLY who this laptop was made for: Moronic people who used word in Starbucks. If they just took the last model and put the ram/disk/cpu upgrades in that NOW we are talking.

 

[TimmeyCook]

The Dell XPS, SurfaceBook 2, and Razer Blade all have similar build sizes but absolutely demolish the MBP in terms of graphics power. They have a valid point.

No, they don't.

Post real benchmarks or don't.

 

[Lozza013]

I feel so tempted to buy this but I'll probably hold off for a while as my current Macbook Air does a good job.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Any reason this processor couldn’t be in a new Mini? I mean, if it’s power-miserly enough to live in a laptop, it could certainly be in a desktop computer.

No reason the Core i9-8950HK wouldn't work in the current Mac mini chassis, other than the CPU costs $583.00 in 1000 unit quantities, which mean it would be quite the pricy BTO upgrade for any Mac mini introduced later this year. I think the best that we can hope for at this point is the Core i7-8706G (4-core, RX Vega M GL GPU, 65w TDP). Unfortunately, Intel doesn't list the price for this CPU on its website.

 

[KPandian1]

Let’s face it. The MacBook Pro lineup got a great update with very little to complain about...though, people still will (and have).

Let’s face it. The MacBook Pro lineup got a great internal update with very little to complain about...though, people still will (and have).

Do you agree with this fix? This is not a Mac upgrade, just an overhaul.

The silicon film is not significant as it still is the "all-or-none" keyboard fused to the upper case, which is originally a bad idea even apart from going butterfly.

 

[alemsanchez]

Waiting for 13" without touch bar

 

[trifid]

So the 2018 machines are only about 13% faster in single-threaded benchmarks, and about 60-70% multi-threaded which is niche since very specific niche use cases will actually take full advantage of the 6 cores.

 

[RuffDraft]

........ sadly this is EXACTLY who this laptop was made for: Moronic people who used word in Starbucks. If they just took the last model and put the ram/disk/cpu upgrades in that NOW we are talking.

Really? As a professional videographer and editor, this MacBook Pro looks like it meets my needs quite easily when using FCPX. 3 streams of 4K: no problem - by the looks of the Apple page. Either way, with six cores helping out, the 32GB RAM (FINALLY) and the need to use FCPX on the road more often, I bought this as soon as my friend from this forum let me know about the update. I get what you mean by having a larger MacBook Pro with the ports, but I've moved to USBC / T3 now and the benefits are great.

Six cores - massive improvement.
32GB - much more RAM for FCPX to delve into, whilst also being able to search for licensable music via Safari and organise in iTunes etc.

I can't take my iMac Pro on the road, so instead, I can take my six core MacBook Pro and get the job done. As soon as I'm back home, switch my external SSD from the MacBook Pro to the iMac Pro and get any heavy effects work done. Honestly, this is a great MacBook Pro, which hopefully fixes the sticky keys issues.

When people say it ticked these boxes, but not these boxes, some of the things they're listing are unreasonable. It was too early for a re-design by Apple's standards. By the looks of it, there were no better mobile 35w GPUs that they could have included etc. though I'm not an expert in this area...

I just think that Apple did the update as soon as it could, and released the best Mac they could within the design that they've made. I'm sure their R&D department are hard at work looking at the future re-design, but it doesn't take a couple of months to come up with the answer: same with the Mac Pro.

The iMac Pro has made me a believer again. I was very frustrated before the iMac Pro announcement, but now we're on the road to somewhere, and I think we should give them another year or two before we decide the state of the Mac. Apple were on a roll and did some amazing re-designs of the modern laptop, but then they went through a lull... they're on their way back now. I am going to be the positive poster and urge you all to breathe and think happy thoughts and avoid getting stomach ulcers: good times are around the corner.

*Disclaimer* the keyboard problem does sound like a shambles, and I would be annoyed at this problem if I had it / get it, but I am also an owner of a 2011 17" MacBook Pro that has a GPU inside it that's going to fail at any moment (already has and was replaced by Apple around the 4th year of ownership). They're pieces of electronic equipment at the end of the day, and problems do occur. Mistakes do happen. It's a part of life. Apple are fixing it. Let them crack on. If I had a problem with the keyboard but I had a major project running, I'd use an external keyboard until I could be without my Mac for a week etc. It's not as big of a problem as your GPU dying and you're absolutely knackered, which did happen to me. I'm sure Apple will pay for this mistake with their class action lawsuits too.

 

[Ohsnapz8]

So there is very little difference from the i7 from the base model (i7 8740H) to the mid teir (i7 8850H) and the i9 8950HK?!

 

[Zdigital2015]

Someone posted a 7lb neon monster the other day, with dual 1080’s, that requires two (2!) 330w power supplies plugged into it to be used for more than two hours and complained that the new MBP had worse graphical performance than it. Where do you even start with that?

I believe it was probably this behemoth - https://www.originpc.com/gaming/laptops/eon17-slx/ - weighing in at a svelte 12lbs. and costing right around $6,331.00. Yeah, whee do you even start with that...sheesh.

 

[redheeler]

I don’t have to go all the way back to 2007 to make the same point though. That just makes sense to me personally because it was my first MBP. Let’s look at the early-‘13 MBP, the last one with a dGPU in the baseline model before it went on hiatus until 2016. That one was $2200, which in 2018 dollars is $2380. If you want to quibble over the $20 relative price increase compared to that model, well then I guess you got me lol.

If you want to compare another way, to get a dGPU in 2015, you had spend $2500, or $2660 today, which actually makes these new MBPs look like a bargain. My only point is that these MBPs are more or less, depending on whatever metrics one wants to use, just as expensive as they’ve been in the past. If people actually bothered to look at the facts they’d realize that.

The dGPU in the base model was an advancement that Apple was pretty much forced to make for the 15" Touch Bar MacBook Pro to remain competitive (even vs. the 13" Touch Bar MacBook Pro), as I already tried to explain. Using that as a justification for the $300 higher price is the same as using the two extra cores as justification had Apple upped the price with the 2018 models (which thankfully didn't happen, unless you count the attempted upsell of the 13" Touch Bar models over the non-Touch Bar models). Both of these are evolutionary improvements to keep the 15" MacBook Pro current / competitive, and neither should increase the price.

Instead, headlines like “maxed out MBP costs $6700!” get lots of views. Well no duh, you dropped a 4 TB state-of-the-art SSD in there. SSD prices are what tend to skew the perception into the, “OMG look how expensive these new MBPs are, WTF Apple?!”

Yes, headlines like that are meant to attract clicks. And for a lot of people it just confirms their bias that Apple products are too expensive, while they don't bother to break down why it's so expensive...

Apple is using professional-grade NVMe 4 TB SSDs (very expensive to begin with), and positioning them as an optional upgrade for certain professional use cases. It shows that Apple is actually returning some focus back to professional Mac users, which is great to see.

 

[koruki]

Indeed.

A gaming laptop from 2017 with a mobile GTX 1070 and 5.9 TFLOPS smokes the most expensive 2018 MBP with a 560X and 2.6 TFLOPS. Heck, even the most powerful iMac with a 580 has 5.5 TFLOPS (and the BlackMagic eGPU).

lol a gaming laptop, you mean those things that are as thick as my 1990's VCR? Don't get me wrong I hate the new thin macbook pro's but please ... I'm quite sure my 2017 watercooled ITX build would smoke your gaming laptop and prob be smaller

 

[smirking]

Your comment made me smile.

If you're using Microsoft Office, even the latest MacBook Pro won't make it launch quickly.

And 32GB won't be enough for Excel either. It'll still try to eat up 100% of your memory (and CPU cycles) for no apparent reason just because it's Excel and it's entitled to do whatever the damn well it wants to do.

 

[PickUrPoison]

And by same logic, if i9 can be powered by a battery in a laptop, it can be powered by a battery in the new Mini!

It seems really strange we put up with the CPU being built in to the laptop, with so many compromises. Why can’t we have separate Mac mini and keyboard/display?

What good is a battery powered mini? You’d still have to plug it in all the time to charge it. And wouldn’t you need a battery powered monitor to use it?

 

[notabadname]

Really nice. This may become my new (mobile) desktop, with the LG 5 K display when I’m docked in the home office.