Given that the i5 2.0GHz 2016 MBP No-Touch (15W) Geekbenches on a par with the 2015 i7 3.1GHz, what can we realistically expect from the top-spec 2016 MBP Touch i7 (28W) in terms of benchmarks?
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.
i7 benchmark speculation
- Thread starter SBruv
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
stockscalper
macrumors 6502a
This review may give you an idea: http://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/laptops/hp-spectre-x360-13-inch
Although the i7 tested is in Windows notebooks, it is of the Kabylake variety. The slower 2mhz i5 doesn't look too shabby against the 2.7mhz i7 in my opinion. Keep in mind that the Pro's have very fast SSD's which will help with overall speed in general use.
Although the i7 tested is in Windows notebooks, it is of the Kabylake variety. The slower 2mhz i5 doesn't look too shabby against the 2.7mhz i7 in my opinion. Keep in mind that the Pro's have very fast SSD's which will help with overall speed in general use.
Dang, that's pretty speedy! Do Windows Geekbench 4 benchmarks translate equivalently to OS X, though?
Oh, h
Oh, hold on… I see what you're saying now: the one in that review is Kaby Lake, so that's not really representative of what you'd get out of the MBP 3.3GHz i7, is it?
Surely, though, we can expect it to be significantly faster than the 2.0GHz MBP, since it turbos 0.5GHz faster?
[doublepost=1478099518][/doublepost]If the processor is the 6567U, then I guess…
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=6567U
Quite a wide range of variation, but hopefully Apple will have it somewhere near the high end!
Oh, hold on… I see what you're saying now: the one in that review is Kaby Lake, so that's not really representative of what you'd get out of the MBP 3.3GHz i7, is it?
Surely, though, we can expect it to be significantly faster than the 2.0GHz MBP, since it turbos 0.5GHz faster?
[doublepost=1478099518][/doublepost]If the processor is the 6567U, then I guess…
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?q=6567U
Quite a wide range of variation, but hopefully Apple will have it somewhere near the high end!
stockscalper
macrumors 6502a
The comparison with the i7 was Kabylake, which only offers an incremental speed increase over Skylake. Kaby concentrates on better power and memory management. I do think the comparisons hold some value because it is with an i7 series chip at a faster clock rate and as I said the slower i5 used in the base Macbook Pro didn't look to shabby in the tests. Keep in mind that the Pro's have lightening fast SSD drives that will give the user an overall fast computing experience.
Yep, all true. However, presumably Geekbench measures the CPUs at their fastest turbo speeds, in which case the difference between the base i5 and the top i7 isn't quite so huge, right?
I'm not trying to be a downer, btw! I've no doubt my Touchbar i7 will be awesome when it arrives. 🙂
stockscalper
macrumors 6502a
That's what I see in the tests and why the base model may be a good buy. A lot of folks seem to be put off on the i5 processor and lower clock rate, but the tests show it holding up quite well. If you don't need the touchbar and want to save some money the base model may turn out to be the sleeper in the series.
I've read a lot of reviews by tech magazines on the base model and they've all be positive. What I've gleaned from all the reviews is that the screen is very bright and gorgeous, the hard drive is very fast and the processor speed has surprised everybody. It has done very well with video streaming and gaming and folks shouldn't be put off by the slower clock speed. The complaints about the model are the same - the keyboard and the price. And you're right, the i7 touchbar model should be very fast based on how well the slower i5 does. It also will come with very fast ram.
Last edited: