MBP retina 15 inch vs MBP 2006 model

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by iPersian, Dec 11, 2012.

  1. iPersian macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #1
    Im a heavy Cinema 4d user and have a 2006 model.

    wondering if anyone can point me to a site where you can see the GPU performance (since rendering is dependent on GPU right) to compare with MBP2006.

    I wonder who much faster MBPr is for 3d.
     
  2. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #2
    The MacBook Pro with Retina Display is probably a bit faster, you can use and download CineBench, GeekBench and SpeedMark to your Mac and run them and compare your results with the results posted here and here.
     
  3. iPersian thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #3
    thanks. but the results for 2012 and for 2006 do not seem to be comparable it seems.
     
  4. AndyDiamond macrumors regular

    AndyDiamond

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #4
    "a bit faster"?

    I've just come off a 2006 MBP Pro Core 2.0Ghz with 2GB RAM.
    I had upgraded the HDD to a 500GB 7200rpm a few years back.

    I'm now using a 2012 MBP Retina 2.7/16GB/768SSD and the difference is rather astounding.

    I also just sold a MacPro tower 2.8 Octo with 14GB RAM and 240GB SSD - that was fast but this MBP is at least as fast if not faster.

    GeekBench score for my MBP 2006 was around 2300 - for this 2012 MBPr it is close to 13000....

    I'm not using Cinema 4D but the graphics on the MBPr is pretty good for a laptop - I don't know if 4D is available for Retina yet.
     
  5. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #5
    They are, if you use CineBench and GeekBench and use the legend they posted for Speedmark.

    But then again, AndyDiamond posted some results and explained the "bit faster" saying.

    Anyway, a current MBP will beat your six year old MBP in almost any respect except the subjective beauty of the old G4 PowerBook.
     
  6. iPersian thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #6
    but does geekbench measure the gpu ?

    ----------

    did run cinebench and it gave:


    0.91 pts as result :eek::eek: what the hell does that mean? other laptops are like 100 times faster? doesnt make sense.
     
  7. simsaladimbamba

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Location:
    located
    #7
    No, that is what Cinebench is there for.

    And if you do not want to run benchmark software, you could always look for scores for the GPU you have in your MacBook Pro (System Profiler > Hardware > Graphics/Displays) and scores for the current GPU used in the MacBook Pro with Retina Display (NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M).

    ----------

    Not that, but I also could not find Cinebench scores for the ATI X1600.

    Maybe these two articles can help:
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-X1600.2163.0.html
    http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

    From the look of it, using the 3DMark 05 benchmark, the MacBook Pro with Retina Display GPU is almost six times faster.
     
  8. iPersian thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Location:
    Copenhagen, Denmark
    #8
    aha this site lists

    6.12 points for the retina

    while mine had 0.9 pts


    so were talking at least 6.6 times faster gpu if i get this right.

    ----------

    thanks for the links.
    the reason you cant find any can be that cinebench says that the card doesnt support the opengl gpu (or whatever) test when i do the test.
     
  9. AndyDiamond macrumors regular

    AndyDiamond

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    Location:
    The Black Lodge
    #9
    just be careful to check C4D is compatible with hardware and OS.

    OSX 10.7 onwards required OpenCL for a lot of graphical stuff.
     
  10. thejadedmonkey macrumors 604

    thejadedmonkey

    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Pa
    #10
    Lets see... off of the top of my head, the x1600 is 1/2 the speed of the 320, which is 1/2 the speed of the Intel 3000...

    The 4000 is what, 22% faster than the 3000? So 4x + 22% is somewhere like 5x faster than the x1600.

    So my off the cuff math tells me that a current generation macbook air will be 5x faster at rendering than the 2006 MBP. Is the MBPr like 5x better graphic performance than the macbook air?

    So that's 25x faster than what you have now.

    but how I loved my 2006 MBP, it was the last of its kind to use a CCFL backlight instead of an LED backlight.
     

Share This Page