New Macbook 2.4ghz Geekbench Results

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by arun21, Oct 15, 2008.

  1. arun21 macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 13, 2006
    #1
  2. macbooker15 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Location:
    Hello! I'm over here!
    #2
    Wow..not bad at all!
    Here are mine: (Not New Macbooks mind you)
    Geekbench Score 2564
    Version Geekbench 2.0.19
    Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
    Operating System Mac OS X 10.5.5 (Build 9F33)
    Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU T7200 @ 2.00GHz
    Model MacBook (Late 2006)
    Memory 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
    Integer Score 2204
     
  3. budkid macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
  4. ohemetophobia macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #6
    And this, my friends, is why Macs are so much better.

    Geekbench Score 1361
    Version Geekbench 2.0.19
    Platform Windows x86 (32-bit)
    Operating System Microsoft Windows XP Professional
    Processor Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz
    Model Dell Inc. Dell DV051
    Memory 1014 MB 533 MHz
     
  5. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #7
    Find me a Mac with identical specs. :p
     
  6. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #8
    that is irrelevant

    i have a q6600 setup that scores a ~6700 geekbench
     
  7. ohemetophobia macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #9
    Of course it scores that high, that's a freakin' Quad-core processor.
     
  8. dukebound85 macrumors P6

    dukebound85

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2005
    Location:
    5045 feet above sea level
    #10
    my point was that pc's arent bad in terms of performance lol
     
  9. ohemetophobia macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    #11
    True, but I spent about $1000 for this computer in mid-2006, and could have instead gotten an iMac (at a slightly higher price) that would run at around 2337. :eek:
     
  10. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #12
    The iMac Core Duo started off at US$1,299.

    It's not still not identical hardware.
     
  11. dnguyen macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    #13
  12. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #14
    It's a little depressing Apple didn't go with the P8400 (2.26 GHz) for the low end model.

    We're using Montevina P Series Penryn processors now.
     
  13. reclusivemonkey macrumors 6502

    reclusivemonkey

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2008
    Location:
    Sowerby Bridge, West Yorkshire, UK
    #15
  14. vendettabass macrumors 6502a

    vendettabass

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2006
    Location:
    Seoul, South Korea
    #16
    I think I'm right in saying Geekbench doesn't test the GPU.

    Heres the results of my 2.4Ghz

    http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/81724

    I'm installing my 7200rpm drive a little later (if I can find a screw small enough!)

    Will post back with updated results.
     
  15. Ryffie macrumors member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    Sweden
    #17
    So after comparing the results it seems the 2.4 has a nice speed advantage, but is it enough to justify the price gap? I think it's a matter of preference but either way you really can't go wrong. Both machines are stunning.
     
  16. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #18
    There shouldn't be any appreciable change since Geekbench doesn't test the hard drive.
     
  17. Adidas Addict macrumors 65816

    Adidas Addict

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Location:
    England
    #19
  18. Ping Guo macrumors 6502

    Ping Guo

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2008
    Location:
    Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
    #20
    PC Magazine benchmarks:
     

    Attached Files:

  19. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #21
    The GMA X3100 pulls about 800-900 in 3DMark 06 using the default.

    It is synthetic but I highly doubted Apple's it's 5x faster then other IGPs.
     
  20. Davidkoh macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2008
    #22

    Actually the Macbooks with x3100 was at around 6-700 ;).
     
  21. Eidorian macrumors Penryn

    Eidorian

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2005
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    #23
    I've gotten 846. *shrug*

    I always use Intel's latest drivers on the MacBook.
     
  22. krypticos macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2007
    #24
    here is my geekbench!!! For late 2007 model i figured it would be worse an what it was. im kind of HAPPY that the performance is not that much better than mine. i just got it a few months ago and did not want to have to upgrade to the new one dont have the money to. lol:apple:
     
  23. Nistilian macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    #25
    You guys are gonna laugh...

    My 2001 PC desktop, P4 1.7GHz, 1GB RAM, Geekbenches at about 770 with nothing running. I know I'm way overdue to upgrade. I'll be buying a MacBook shortly; I just want to see what happens at the WWDC.
     

Share This Page