New MacBook Pro Benchmarks Show Massive Improvement

[AAPLaday]

Super glad I got my 17" 2.3Ghz MBP today Totally stoked about how well it performs! I've been waiting for this one since selling my 2010 MBP 13" and 2010 iMac i3 27" to get it It's nice to consolidate two so-so machines into one badass MBP that I can take with me from city to city.

Better update your sig then hadn't you

 

[Keziski]

Moreover, there's next gen of SF controllers around the corner (to be released in next month or so) which will be as fast in the slowest scenario as the current models are in the fastest scenario!!! And it will come in prices almost at the same level as the current gen...Not to mention next-gen Intel drives, that are gonna be released soon.

The only qestion remains is had Apple implemented 6Gbps SATA on the board, becouse if not, those new drives are just too fast for 3Gbps bus.

Do you mean released and then used by Apple? Or are you one of those do it yourself people?

 

[jeff33702]

This is great, but expected on the CPU/Memory side. I'd like to see the GPU benchmarks.

 

[tivoboy]

testing error

Are we sure this isn't some testing error with the current version of the test bench software? Seems pretty odd, even INTEL didn't say to expect 2x performance from the sandy bridge processor

 

[AlvinNguyen]

Better update your sig then hadn't you

Thanks for the reminder

 

[sasasule]

Well now, if the MBP refreshes are that good, I wonder what Apple has in store for the iMac refresh… Can't wait...

I am not expecting much probably new CPU + updated graphic card and adding TB connector on existing models.

Basicaly same as they did for MBP and ofc adding higher price tag hehe

 

[melchiorsen]

waste of CPU power

When the new MBA was introduced the most impressive thing was the overall performance compared to the 13" Macbook Pro. The results was achieved with the inclusion of SSD storage together with CPU processing power.
The new MBP's have very fast CPU very fast I/O and very slow storage. I my opinion theres very large inconsistency between the electric and mechanical parts in the laptops. I really think Apple should pay much more attention to this matter before introducing machines that can't perform to the max due to severe bottlenecks.

 

[slomap]

Do you mean released and then used by Apple? Or are you one of those do it yourself people?

I don't now what will Apple use.

Anything wrong with doing someting that simple (unscrewing and screwing back few screws) yourself? Coz you've written it as if ppl doing it are some other kind?

If you don't want to do it yourself, send it to for instance OWC - they'll do it for a small charge. And you'll end up with drive a lot faster, more realible and cheaper than what Apple will install you.

I know, you'll say someting about warranty - well, I had my drive replaced with bigger one and computer been back to Apple for warranty repair - no problem. If there's an issue, you can keep your original drive and swap it before sending to Apple. It takes about 5 minutes...

 

[sasasule]

EDIT:
Well, the top-end 15" would cost me around 1900 € (around 2630 $) including taxes. At the moment I got around 1400-1500 € (2000 $) which I could spend. Hmm. Damn.

Just wait more and save more and then buy proper unit if you waited so long anyway why not wait few more month, at list you will see how new MBP work you will have more reviews to check and you will be more informed.

 

[wizard]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

This is Geekbench guys, it doesn't represent a balanced set of benchmarks.

 

[sasasule]

When the new MBA was introduced the most impressive thing was the overall performance compared to the 13" Macbook Pro. The results was achieved with the inclusion of SSD storage together with CPU processing power.
The new MBP's have very fast CPU very fast I/O and very slow storage. I my opinion theres very large inconsistency between the electric and mechanical parts in the laptops. I really think Apple should pay much more attention to this matter before introducing machines that can't perform to the max due to severe bottlenecks.

Their will be all time some bootle neck were Apple can drain your money away. If you want top notch unit pay few hounderds of USD more for SSD, and you will be amazed with total performances. But Apple will be richer as well.

It is all about marketing and making money but at end you are the one who will make decision to purchase or not. Apple will just guide you enough so you decide to spend more.

 

[CrackedButter]

I do not understand and will ever understand ppl who buy SSD upgrade from Apple. Even though it's reasonably priced (well, the 128GB version is) you don't really know what's inside - and since MacOS X doesn't support TRIM, garbage collection is crucial in maintaining speed and realiability of those drives...

Moreover, there's next gen of SF controllers around the corner (to be released in next month or so) which will be as fast in the slowest scenario as the current models are in the fastest scenario!!! And it will come in prices almost at the same level as the current gen...Not to mention next-gen Intel drives, that are gonna be released soon.

The only qestion remains is had Apple implemented 6Gbps SATA on the board, becouse if not, those new drives are just too fast for 3Gbps bus.

OS X doesn't need TRIM as much as you and others keep harping on about: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-performance-trim-in-osx/1

 

[Marlor]

Can anybody please explain to me why the 17" benchmarks better than the 15" when they are the exact same chipset, cpu & RAM configuration?

Possibly some tweaking to Turbo Boost to deal with the different heat dissipation capabilities of the different form factors.

 

[dr Dunkel]

...and now for some more relevant benchmarks. I mean, are they trying to hide something with this very specific - and dare I say, a bit far from real world - test?

 

[Mr. Retrofire]

One advice to everyone. Don't be cheap and try to upgrade yourself. Use Apple's BTO because it is covered under warranty.

One must be really dumb, if one damages something within a MBP. The internet is full of 1st class guides, and Apple allows the replacement of the HDD and the RAM. For example:
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/MacBook_Pro_17inch_Mid2010.pdf

 

[wizard]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Sorry, did they even read any of the negative comments here today?

Everyone knows this MacBook Pro refresh was totally underwhelming.

I wouldn't say underwhelming but I would say they are a mixed bag of goods. The regressions with respect to GPUs should bother many.

Geekbench or not I'm not very happy with the CPU performance. People here are acting all excitable over the good benchmark score relative to the old machines but fail to realize just how old the CPUs where in things like the 13"MBP. Frankly the numbers are really not that surprising.

Even then Benchmarking is just getting started, it will be far more intersting to see how the machines stack up in a couple of weeks when we have a more balanced set of benchmarks to look at. It will be especially interesting to see how well the video drivers do for example.

I see the new machines as being very desirable, however I'm one of those guys that purchased a MBP in early 2008 just before the unibodies arrived later in the year. I could see a repeat of this again. That is we could see a more significant update in September/October. As it is I may have to stay away from the Apple store for a few weeks to avoid laying out the cash. Even with this mixed bag the machines would still be a huge update over my current machine.

 

[Thares]

Just wait more and save more and then buy proper unit if you waited so long anyway why not wait few more month, at list you will see how new MBP work you will have more reviews to check and you will be more informed.

The thing is: I need that laptop for my study. Or at least I think so. I waited six month and then I waited a couple of weeks more to get a new MacBook Pro. As you see, you can always 'wait a bit longer'.

I get your point. But my old iMac from 2006 comes to his end. I want something new. Something portable. With power. Cheap. Damn.

 

[E.Lizardo]

Goodness!3Just think how much better they would be if Apple had not abandoned computers and OS X!
Crow,anyone?

 

[Tears Apart]

I want something new. Something portable. With power. Cheap. Damn.

Buy a Windows PC.

Follow my advice: buy *one* machine only, but a high end one. It will cost you more but last you so.much.more. Plus you won't have second thoughts.

 

[toddybody]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I'm most interested in the graphical benchmarks...I'm not expecting much from those though. Anyhoo, SB is a great performer...Tomshardware had a fun article on how the $300 SB i7 2600(quad core) mopped the floor with the $999 i7 980x (hexa core). Way to go intel!

 

[impulse462]

How useful are these benchmarks then? The CPU hasn't been the bottleneck in computers for years.

lol what are you talking about...the CPU has been the major bottleneck in computers pretty much the last few years until today.

 

[slomap]

OS X doesn't need TRIM as much as you and others keep harping on about: http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/apple/2010/07/01/mac-ssd-performance-trim-in-osx/1

Have you actually READ this article to the end? Seen the conclusion? What good is an SSD merely faster than good 7200 rpm drive?

If you think Apple SSD's are good, have a look at this:
http://macperformanceguide.com/SSD-RealWorld-BeforeAfter-AppleToshiba512.html

Ask anybody doing something more disk-speed dependant than word processing what they think of Apple SSDs and they'll tell the same...

We're not harping about TRIM - if MacOS X has similar function, then great. But it's not been documented and I'm not leaving my data to a chance, not to mention paying that much for a drive that might or might not retain it's speed after 12 months of use. If oyu don't care about it, fine - buy overpriced, slow dirve form Apple. I actually make money with the help of a fast hard drive, so I'll invest in something I know for sure will work.

 

[BobbyLight]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

Just picked up the 13" last night and love it! Anything new beats my old PowerBook G4. Glad I waited a few extra months for this update.

 

[jonhaxor]

core i5-2415M??

what the heck is a core i5-2415M they're using in the base 13" model? .. this doesn't even show up yet in the intel spec sheets over on ark, and a google search just currently shows the geekbench results - did apple get it's own special sku from intel?

 

[jmcguckin]

wow, I had a feeling (just from observation) that my new MBP was roughly twice as powerful as my previous generation MBP... go figure, it was literally exactly double! (my last Geekbench score was somewhere around 3300-3500 with a 2.4GHz C2D)

this runs a little counter to how I felt before buying this computer yesterday, but I'm willing to forgo a resolution bump until the next substantial refresh if it means I can have performance like this now!