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.
MacBook 1.2Ghz Geekbench score
- Thread starter bibyfok
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Roughly 13% ahead of the 1.1 Ghz in multi core, while behind in single core. Hardly impressive... http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/2218084?baseline=2295233
That's not terrible. If 1.3Ghz version gets above 2,500 single core - it puts it in the territory of 2013/2014 MBA.
It certainly should be able to. Several 1.1 Ghz base models have scored over 2450 single core.
A 13% jump from the 1.1 Ghz to the 1.2 Ghz model in multi core.
You can see all the results here: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/search?utf8=✓&q=macbook8,1
Still disappointing compared to my work computer SP3. Particularly single core. Multi-score pretty much showed that it's less than 2.6 GHz (2 cores loaded = 2.6 GHz for i5-4300U) since it scored lower than the SP3. If the 5Y71 scores lower than 2893 in single core, it means it throttled during the benchmark since it's both i5-4300U and 5Y71 go up to 2.9 GHz.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/1845544?baseline=2295233
This almost convinces me that I should cancel my BTO for the 1.3GHz and simply order the 1.1GHz instead.
The 1.1GHz single-core scores are better than the 1.2GHz. This is just like the results that AnandTech found.
It's hard to know in real life, though. Maybe the 1.3GHz turbo mode will be faster for my type of work (which is more bursts of speed, not continuous speed like the benchmark).
MacBook 1.2Ghz Geekbench score
All I would need on mine is to handle iTunes, photos, web surfing, emails and some small document work. Not sure if I really need that power unless on some web sites especially things like You Tube, Netflix etc. Wondering if 1.2Ghz would be sufficient.
All I would need on mine is to handle iTunes, photos, web surfing, emails and some small document work. Not sure if I really need that power unless on some web sites especially things like You Tube, Netflix etc. Wondering if 1.2Ghz would be sufficient.
How is that not impressive? After the AnandTech article, a lot of us were worried about throttling and that there was a risk the higher clocked versions might be slower.
----------
The Core M is different because it's limited by thermals. AnandTech had a great article this week about how a well-designed Core M running a "slow" chip could beat a poorly designed Core M running a "faster" chip.
But the single-core performance is definitely worse just like AnandTech found. I think it may not be worth getting the higher frequency versions.
This entire time, I've been planning on going all out on a 1.3ghz 512gb model. I spontaneously ordered a 1.1ghz last night when it was available for 1-3 day shipping with the intention of returning it after testing it out. It'll be a funny twist if I end up keeping it.
I do "professional" work on my maxed out 2011 MBA such as graphic/web/app design and development. I'm excited to see some benchmarks of the 1.3 and to see if maybe even the 1.1 is enough.
This is the only good thing about the long shipping time that I will be able to see the anandtech review. They are always so thorough but because of that it takes some time before they post their reviews. After their Core-M article it seems they are probably the only ones who can tell you about the real performance of the MB before you can test it yourself.
The store I visited had only 1.1gHz machines out (I checked five of the six display units).
