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 Pro Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If these results were not an improvement tonights discussion would be dramatically different. But - they seem to support the logic of moving to Intel.
shawnce said:
Really ? Pentium 4 being the competitor to G5 back a while had less instructions in flight than the G5, and yonah cores, single or dual has a lot less room for OOOE execution than the P4, how can you claim the PM core to be a wide core ? The whole design is centered around having a medium to narrow core that is always fed by having high efficiency from Macro-Op fusion and extremely low L2 latency.
Found the info for you:
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/pentium-m.ars/2 look at the diagram for the execution units of the PM, basically the same as Yonah in Core Duo (Yonah x 2) Notice in particular that the most important port of the SIMD units is shared with the FP unit.
and I quote "You'll notice that the P6 core's floating-point and integer capabilities are weaker than those of the 970; when compared to the P4, its floating-point capabilities don't look too bad but its integer capabilities are much weaker."
http://arstechnica.com/articles/paedia/cpu/ppc970.ars/2 check out how much wider the G5 core is, with no port sharing.
My point was to indicate the biased advertising feeding consumers extremely one sided facts - that a wide bandwidth hog was the way to go.
digitalbiker said:Come-on get real! These dual core intel machines have just become available and are the latest tech. The G4 PB is 6 years old with basically the same chip with speed bumps.
So if you have been saying for "Years" that the PB G4 is overclocked garbage then you would have been incorrect until last week.
The new dual core intels also blow away the old Celerons and pentium-M's.
The Dothan was a fast processor too. It was arguably as fast as the desktop pentium. imo, when those came out, the powerbooks became overpriced and underpowered. That was about 2 years ago. So yes, its been "years."
Anyone that thought the old powerbook was a good deal performance-wise was delusional. It was a great laptop in 2002. So great that it actually stayed relevent well past its prime. You got good features, design, and osx, but in pure performance, it was blown out of the water by the dothan and now the yonah. It might have been a different story if there was a g5 in there, but we all know how that went.
SiliconAddict said:
I dont doub thtat one bit. And im prolly just going to wait for Leopard myself. I know when I got my G5, it was my 1st mac and I was just
it was amazing. I know people are obsessed with "omg, 1.5X faster and from 2.1ghz to 2.5ghz speed" and so am I but when I really think about it, it wont make a HUGE difference. you will say rendering and such and oh Iknow, im into video editing too but to me (and this is part in because of financial reasons, im sure if i had cash, i would got the dual core 2.5 G5's and when Intel PowerMacs hit that too) but for right now, my G5 is doing everything I need it to do. I go in Final Cut, I do iDVD and livetype and they work swell.
so again, IMHO, nothing earth shattering new, not to take away from the intel units cause im sure they kick my mac in the balls (1.6ghz G5 for teh wiN!!!)
NewbieNerd said:For all the G5 bashing, remember that no one is comparing these Intels to the Quad. Quads are still amazing machines, and remember that all PowerMacs can support a whole lot more RAM than the 2 Gigs in the iMacs and MacBook Pros, which for a lot of people is a whole lot more important than any of these benchmarks.
Not to mention that Mr. Anderson just got a Quad, so you G5 haters better relax or feel the wrath.
the quads are fine boxes. I don't think anyone is saying they are bad. But remember, this is is just the midlevel chip from Intel. The merom is yet to come out. It will be interesting to see how a machine with that chip compares to the quad. I suspect it will be a lot faster. And not require liquid cooling...
As for addressing more than 2GB ram, I'm pretty sure the g4 laptops couldn't do that either. And remember, this is a 2500 laptop, not a 3500 desktop (without monitor). The powerpc was a nice chip architecture, but it seems obvious now that intel chips are really ramping up the speed gap. There was a reason Apple was throwing 2 cpu's into machines...
But to be fair to the old powerbooks and the g4 chip, a lot of the pokeyness was due to that ancient 167mhz bus.
Peace said:
Based on what?
If there had been a low-power dual core G5, clock for clock it should have matched the Yonah. Plus the G5 sports 64 bit support,faster fp processing, and the FSB is faster.
This is of course all a fantasy argument as IBM didn't take the dual core now in the PowerMac to a low power 65 nm version.
But is no more wrong than saying that the Yonah would have beaten it's G5 equivalent.
macidiot said:
I agree with you on the Merom. That is the intel chip I will finally trade my G4 PB in on.
By that time, most every pro app should be universal binary. The PB and OS X for x86 will have the bugs worked out. Plus MS's mac group should have VPC peaked and running great on OS X for x86 (needed for those few windows apps that are needed for business) and maybe even DirectX games although that remains to be seen).
Plus 10.5 should be close to shipping with Merom based macbooks.
This is somewhat off topic, but isnt all the anti-Intel boogieman hate sort of silly if you think about it?
Im not well informed on Intels practices other than their unfair domination of the processor arena in recent years, but IBM is most definitely nothing to be proud of. They served as the vehicle for the rise of M$, they played a fine role in WW2, and they are very corporate and detached from the end-user.
So I guess Im curious as to whether the IBM/G5 love and Intel hate is/was more a manifestation of Apple/Mac love. And now that IBM is the past, isnt an apology sort of owed to Intel? You know, start the love and stop the hate.
Im not well informed on Intels practices other than their unfair domination of the processor arena in recent years, but IBM is most definitely nothing to be proud of. They served as the vehicle for the rise of M$, they played a fine role in WW2, and they are very corporate and detached from the end-user.
So I guess Im curious as to whether the IBM/G5 love and Intel hate is/was more a manifestation of Apple/Mac love. And now that IBM is the past, isnt an apology sort of owed to Intel? You know, start the love and stop the hate.
Let me rephrase that: the perfomance of Mactels was never questioned by anyone with half a brainSiliconAddict said:
Did you seriously think that any intel chip Apple put in anyone of their machines would be outperfomed by a G4? The general expectation was that these machines were either going to be at par with the G5 (when you factor in Rosetta) or better (if/when running native or Universal Binary).
Remember that the same hardware runs Windows and Linux - so nobody will switch to an Apple because it's faster....tzibo said:they'll be a lot more switchers coming I think
In fact, Apple isn't offering chips in the MacIntels that are as fast as Dell, Sony, Asus and other Wintel manufacturers are selling. One can buy 2.16 GHz elsewhere, but the Apple tops out at 1.83.
Why's that?
DrNeroCF said:My question is, what will they be putting in the PowerMacs (erm, MacTop Pros) to distinguish them from the ProBooks?
Dual Intels? QUAD Intels? (8 cores
Why don't we just build a Cell wannabe with real freakin' processing units.
One word: Conroe. Its going to be to the desktop as the Core Duo is to the laptop. In short. Its going to give AMD a kick in the shorts. Initially don't expect anything other then duos. Quads for Zeon in 2007 though.
brepublican said:Let me rephrase that: the perfomance of Mactels was never questioned by anyone with half a brain
Better
DrNeroCF said:My question is, what will they be putting in the PowerMacs (erm, MacTop Pros) to distinguish them from the ProBooks?
Dual Intels? QUAD Intels? (8 cores
Why don't we just build a Cell wannabe with real freakin' processing units.
Imagine how hot a MacBook Pro with dual intels. We propaply would have no kids with one of those on are laps
PS: How much battery life do these MacBook Pro's get? apple doesn't say how many hours it gets
macosxuser01 said:Imagine how hot a MacBook Pro with dual intels. We propaply would have no kids with one of those on are laps
PS: How much battery life do these MacBook Pro's get? apple doesn't say how many hours it gets
Jobs has been quoted as saying about as much as the old PowerBooks. They prob haven't said anything because the laptops seen at MWSF were prototypes. The were probably still tweaking the power management, battery firmware, etc.
God, I'm thinking small. I want a little 12ey.szark said:The numbers look great -- I'm definitely impressed with the performance improvements.
Now where's the 17" model?!?!?!?
Get it out, Steve!!
I have yet to see any manufacturer offer a 2.16 GHz Core Duo notebook for sale, although some preproduction units have been circulating.AidenShaw said:
As far as Sony is concerned, you can't even pre-order one of their Core Duo notebooks yet...
more slime than a used car salesman
Jobs was also quoted saying "3 GHz within 1 year"....
He'll say anything to get your $$$. 'nuf said.
SiliconAddict said:
Jobs was also quoted saying "3 GHz within 1 year"....
He'll say anything to get your $$$. 'nuf said.
and Apple
...and Apple's website says "Order Now"
for the MacIntel notebooks, and "Buy Now"
for the legacy models....
So, maybe "buy" wasn't the right word. Why can I *order* 2.16 from other companies, but Apple is only offering 1.83?
MacinDoc said:
...and Apple's website says "Order Now"
So, maybe "buy" wasn't the right word. Why can I *order* 2.16 from other companies, but Apple is only offering 1.83?
Intel's secret plan
Now we know - Intel's secret plan is to sterilize all Apple users, so that only Wintel fans will breed new users.
Brilliant!
(Can we pick which MacRumors regulars to sterilize first?)
macosxuser01 said:We probably would have no kids with one of those on our laps
Now we know - Intel's secret plan is to sterilize all Apple users, so that only Wintel fans will breed new users.
Brilliant!
(Can we pick which MacRumors regulars to sterilize first?)
Macrumors said:
Get out of here, Apple would actually release a product that is "faster" than the previous model.
Come on now, that is a given for every computer companies product line.
maya said:Get out of here, Apple would actually release a product that is "faster" than the previous model.
Come on now, that is a given for every computer companies product line.
You could be right Maya but remember Apple "thinks different". It's possible that the future is for slower, bigger, power hungry, hot laptops?