Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New MacBook Pro 6,1 on Geekbench!!

This looks interesting. Just ran Geekbench on my MacBook Pro 5,2 (17 inch Early 2009) in 32-bit and got a score of 3711, so it's a fair upgrade CPU wise from my C2D 2.66GHz 6MB L2.

In response to OP asking about battery usage... I quite often forget to plug in my MBP and sit around surfing for 5-6 hours without being reminded to plug in. It doesn't last forever though but it's more than usable.
 
JacaByte said:
I wouldn't want an i7 in my MacBook; currently they only work when tethered to a power outlet, unless you're fine with a 1 hour battery life. (e.g. there is no mobile version of the i7 yet)
Click to expand...

This is the high end dual core i7 mobile version which uses only 35W, just as much as the old C2D cpu's. ;)

And even quad core i7 can go over 3 hours running Windows on laptop PC's. Since this is a dual core i7, it should last far more than 1 hour.
 
Nicken said:
Would it be possible for Geekbench to trace the ip-number to see where the result was submitted from?
Click to expand...

Most likely. But why would they. Let's say it IS an actual leak from apple. Do you think geekbench would get the leak another time around for exposing source?

ALWAYS uppon apple releases there are multiple leaks, software,firmware hw specs, case design etc... For a "news" site these leaks most likely gather valuable traffic.

/hijacking OFF
 
Nicken said:
Would it be possible for Geekbench to trace the ip-number to see where the result was submitted from?
Click to expand...
That would be interesting to know. I guess it's technically possible but I think Geekbench can't reveal this information.
 
This looks like it's an intentional leak from apple. As for the IP. Who else could it be? Santa, the NSA, Elvis?! Of course it`s someone at Apple.
 
Huh? Yet another dual core MacBook? What is everyone smoking here? Why isn't this buried in negative votes?

Thumbs down from me. Way down.

Lucky I bought my flickering/HDD churning i7 iMac and not waited for an updated MBP (although ironically it might have more IO options).

I'll stick with my iPad :)
 
Well this is an 80% increase over my MacBook (not pro) that this would be replacing so I guess I can't really complain about those specs :)
 
tfstone said:
This looks like it's an intentional leak from apple. As for the IP. Who else could it be? Santa, the NSA, Elvis?! Of course it`s someone at Apple.
Click to expand...
it could for example be a russian IP. In that case I'd consider all this as fake. It it's a IP from Cupertino I'd consider this as legit.
 
fobfob said:
Huh? Yet another dual core MacBook? 8% performance increase? What is everyone smoking here? Why isn't this buried in negative votes?

Thumbs down from me. Way down.
Click to expand...

45nm battery draining Quad Cores + Apple obsession for battery life = IMPOSSIBLE

So stop naysaying and just wait for 32nm quad cores next year.

Today, only 32nm dual cores are available.
 
Spanky Deluxe said:
I'm a little disappointed with Intel's new mobile chip lineup. After mobile processors being nearly as fast and feature compatible as desktop counterparts for the last few years, I was expecting quad cores to be the norm. A 2.66GHz Dual Core i7 will probably be on roughly a par with a 3.06GHz Core 2 Duo on the whole.

Of course, there are the Core i7-920XM Extreme Edition chips but they're insanely expensive and have a comparatively slow clock speed.

My guesses are that the 17" MacBook Pro will have the 920XM or a faster unreleased quad core as an option.

I don't think I'd switch to a Core i7 based MacBook Pro for at least a generation. The battery life of mobile iX laptops compared to C2D laptops hasn't impressed me all to much yet. It feels a little like Intel's getting too big for its Watts again, the Core i7 mobile reminds me far too much of the P4 mobile. If AMD want a hope of survival then they should concentrate on a high performance per watt chip for laptops and try to emulate the breakthrough Intel had with their Centrino platform.
Click to expand...


Do you think - bang for buck based - that you'd buy a top spec end of line current MBP or refurb just as these come out, or would you end up losing long term when it comes to selling it on?

Its kind of odd that I'm more excited about battery life than processor power on these things
 
Tex-Twil said:
it could for example be a russian IP. In that case I'd consider all this as fake. It it's a IP from Cupertino I'd consider this as legit.
Click to expand...

The consensus in this forum and all over the net seems to be that it's legit. Fakeing it wouldn't be trivial.
 
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

i have a MacBookPro MB 985 - 2.66 GHz, and it's great for work. I'm upgrade when in MBP's be really core i7 with 4 phisical cores and 8 HT... Thats be very fast, but this "un-core i7 2.66 " isn't to need update a C2D line for custumers...
sorry for my english, i'm from Ukraine
 
So the 6,1 Macbook Pro seems to be a 17" judging by the i7. How does Apple number their Macbook Pros? According to that beta of Snow Leopard ages ago, 6,1 and 6,2 are in the works, would those just be the 17" and the highest 15"? Will all the rest just receive Core2Duo clockspeed bumps you think? I really want a 13" MBP, it would be devastating to only have the higher spectrum of the lineup be updated. If that were the case so much for the unified 'family' of Macbook Pros.
 
I need to see quad cores in a 15 inch before I buy. I need the cores for processing raw image files. I'm using a 40 mpx cam so I need horsepower
 
evitica said:
All I'm worried about is if the aluminum keys are coming back. God, those black things are terrible!
Click to expand...

+1

I didn't buy the new MBPs because of that. They look awful. I like the keys though, but not in black. Silver would be perfect.
I might just keep my old MBP and get the next iMac whenever they release a better video card.
 
niuniu said:
Definitely not going for a base model 15 this time, it's just not worth it if you're a heavy user and keep one of these things for more than a couple of years. Will try to scrape together enough cash to go as high as possible with the 15incher.
Click to expand...

can you elaborate? I am getting a 15" and I am a heavy user, lots of VMs, etc. I thought your money was better spent on SSD, than .2 ghz bump or 8 GB RAM, etc.
 
People this is SOOOOO Simple to fake.
Some guy has an i7 Laptop Hackintosh. He Puts the SMBIOS from a MacBook Pro, modifies the model integer to 6,1, Changes the Number of the OSX by changing a file (Can't remember which off of the top of my head). Runs Xbench. Bam.

Or it could all be reals :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back