Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
55,033
17,416


Benchmarks for Apple's new 13-inch MacBook Pro without the Touch Bar are beginning to collect on Geekbench, providing a closer look at the notebook's performance improvements and energy efficiency.

13-inch-macbook-pro-2016-vs-2015.jpg

The entry-level model, powered by a Skylake-based 2.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,970, indicating the notebook is only up to 7% faster than the early 2015 base model 13-inch MacBook Pro. Last year's comparable model, equipped with a Broadwell-based 2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,497.

The late 2016 model is also slightly faster than last year's mid-range 13-inch MacBook Pro, while slightly outperformed by the higher-end model.

macbook_pro_2016_geekbench.jpg

The notebooks are each calibrated against a baseline score of 4,000, which is the score of Intel's high-end Core i7-6600U processor.

While the performance improvements are negligible, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro sans Touch Bar's 15-watt chip is more energy efficient than the 28-watt chip in last year's entry-level model. The lower power consumption gives the 2016 base model comparable battery life to last year's model despite having a smaller 54.5-watt-hour battery versus the 74.9-watt-hour battery in last year's comparable.

Given that the non-Touch Bar model's 6360U chip would typically be appropriate for the MacBook Air, the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Touch Bar should be a more accurate comparable to last year's base 13-inch model. However, it is also $500 more expensive. Benchmarks for that model should be available next month when Apple begins shipping the Touch Bar notebooks to customers.

Article Link: New 13-Inch MacBook Pro Sans Touch Bar is Marginally Faster But More Efficient Than Last Year's Base Model
 
Last edited:

BootsWalking

macrumors 68000
Feb 1, 2014
1,519
9,128
Performance per watt is much higher but is offset by a lower clock speed and a smaller battery. The net result is a thinner and lighter notebook that is about the same speed as last year's with no improvement in battery life. Not sure how many users will find value in the upgrade from the 2015 model - might appeal to those with earlier models though, who were due for an upgrade anyway.
 

meaning-matters

macrumors 6502a
Dec 13, 2013
513
2,135
I've concluded: Under Jobs we received explanations for design choices. Currently: No word about leaving MagSafe behind, no logic for the non-industry-standard audio output on iPhone 7, not a word about the MBP's headphone jack (probably too scared to mention), ...

Jobs' explanations were also fabulous: "The problem with them is really sort of in the bottom 40 there." talking about plastic keyboards on 'smart' phones during iPhone's introduction.

Explanations we now get are 'courage' or Ive's 'making it thinner, lighter and more powerful' that's conflicting with adding a touch screen for example (MR post today).

Change triggers natural resistance and needs reasons to be accepted. Apple doesn't explain=sell their changes/choices any longer.
 
Last edited:

d5aqoëp

macrumors 65816
Feb 9, 2016
1,214
1,765
So we got all fluff improvements and they forgot the old school REAL improvement by making it crunch data faster.

Maybe this MBP is targeted to crowds who are newly discovering Apple stuff and who don't care as long as things get done and they look cool sporting latest available Apple product.

The traditional jaded crowd of iMac and MBP are long forgotten. Most have moved on to serious Windows 10 based PC. Ignoring telemetry stuff, Windows 10 is turning out to be one fine OS.
 

miknos

Suspended
Mar 14, 2008
940
793
What about the difference in Graphics Card? The sans-touchbar uses a 540 iris. The one with touchbar, 550.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nagromme

Ghost31

macrumors 68030
Jun 9, 2015
2,924
4,162
And it comes in different color :D
Yeah. "Dark silver". Thanks apple! And which space gray is this? From which iphone or which ipad? Most of us would have liked a "matte black" option like the iphone. But that would show TOO MUCH consistency with the rest of their brand

And i honestly dont know what to think anymore. As an apple fanboy, i keep trying to justify the new macbook like "ok its expensive, but at least it has a cool touchbar!" That i realize I wouldn't use much. Or "at least its thinner! But...its barely any faster than last year's model". It seems like when you've made slight improvements at such DRASTIC compromises, the price shouldn't go up at all. AT ALL. Like ok its thinner...but the speed just isn't there. So market it as "the same as last year. But thinner and better design and THATS why you should buy the new one for the same price". But do they do that? No

I dont know why anybody would buy this at this price. It's just nuts
 

peteo

macrumors regular
Sep 23, 2007
224
134
The entry-level model, powered by a Skylake-based 2.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,970, indicating the notebook is only up to 7% faster than the early 2015 base model 13-inch MacBook Pro. Last year's comparable model, equipped with a Broadwell-based 2.7GHz dual-core Intel Core i5 processor, currently has an average multi-core score of 6,497.
Can innovate my a**
 

Ghost31

macrumors 68030
Jun 9, 2015
2,924
4,162
Well, this model really replaces the 13-inch Air, not the 13-inch Pro. So a fairer comparison is against the 2.2 GHz MacBook Air, which scored 6561 in Geekbench. 6.2% boost.
Not if you're calling it a "pro". Saying 'it replaces the air' doesn't really mean anything when you've jacked up the price and called it a pro. We are livin in the twilight zone man
 

enc0re

macrumors regular
Jun 7, 2010
200
407
Considering it's a 15W part, I wish this one was equipped with Kaby Lake. It's unrealistic to expect it for the other models. The higher W parts haven't been released yet. Skylake is current, not "old" or "outdated" as some unreasonable posters claim.

But Kaby Lake's built in support for certain codecs would have combined nicely with the lower clock speed and greater emphasis on battery life. It would have made the base model the ideal "stealth buy."
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.