Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
New MacBook Pro Benchmarks Show Massive Improvement
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No, i didnt know that, thanks. but it wouldnt be fair either, as its the new laptop model and it wouldnt change a bit from the one when the OS will be release, so it should be free for 2011 laptops at least
I agree! And I thought that my i5 was a huge jump...There's a small part of me that gets spec-envy seeing this one year after buying my MBP, but I have to resist and be happy with my still top of the line machine...
Must be grateful
Ah well - can't have buyers remorse for something I bought almost a year ago (my i7 17"), since that's just how technology works.
But I CAN start saving for its replacement in 2013, which should knock the socks off even these impressive numbers.
It should also be fairly interesting when Sandy Bridge hits the MacBook Air.
However, I'm most curious about the performance of the Intel graphics vs. the NVIDIA card in the 2010 models. Anybody have benchmarks and real life tests on this yet?
But I CAN start saving for its replacement in 2013, which should knock the socks off even these impressive numbers.
It should also be fairly interesting when Sandy Bridge hits the MacBook Air.
However, I'm most curious about the performance of the Intel graphics vs. the NVIDIA card in the 2010 models. Anybody have benchmarks and real life tests on this yet?
We already know Sandy Bridge is awesome, i'm getting 13,000ish with a minor boost to the Turbo multiplier on my 2600K
What I really want to see are 3dMark/Cinebench and real world gaming.
What I really want to see are 3dMark/Cinebench and real world gaming.
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)
The 17" MBP probably has a larger heatsink which allows more heat to be transferred away from the CPU die. On these new chips Intel has implemented aggressive, automatic overclocking that is based on the CPU die temperature. So when you remove more heat from the CPU, the CPU can run at higher frequencies for longer periods of time. The 17" MBP runs at higher frequencies for longer periods of time compared to the 15" hense the better benchmarks.
number1Tango said:
The 17" MBP probably has a larger heatsink which allows more heat to be transferred away from the CPU die. On these new chips Intel has implemented aggressive, automatic overclocking that is based on the CPU die temperature. So when you remove more heat from the CPU, the CPU can run at higher frequencies for longer periods of time. The 17" MBP runs at higher frequencies for longer periods of time compared to the 15" hense the better benchmarks.
With this update I was really wanting the MBP 13 to have the display of the MBA 13. I am sure you have heard that a ton already but now what are your thoughts between the top end MBP 13 or top end MBA 13.
The resolution of the screen might be nice, but so will it's price-tag be + it's not the same format as the current 13" mbp's.
With this update I was really wanting the MBP 13 to have the display of the MBA 13. I am sure you have heard that a ton already but now what are your thoughts between the top end MBP 13 or top end MBA 13.
It really should have had the MBAir display, but alas...
Personally I would go with the lowest MBPro. C2D isn't worth a better display. The increase in processor and harddrive are worth at most 100 dollars, not 300.
If you really need the power, you'd be better off putting a little more in and going for the 15inch.
WOW - these numbers are better than i thought they would be yesterday morning. that seals it for me, i have been waiting on this update for 4 months. Question is when there is my son 2009 MBP and a 2010 MBP sitting closed on the coffee table, how can i tell which one is my new 2011 one?
I can see one day driving off to work with the wrong model. lol
Well, you could write your names on them with a permanent marker.
I bought the 15" 2.2 tonight, finally a machine I can live with. I sold my 17" i7 MacBook Pro Mid 2010 last night, 1 Hour before the official announcement....Phew
This machine is killer fast it craps all over the Mac Pros I use at work
. I used the 64bit geekbench test and the new MacBook Pro 15" 2.2 scored an impressive 10954......mmmm and thats with the crappy 750GB 5400rpm HD still in it. Me thinks I'll rip it out and chuck in the Momentus XT Hybrid HD and see what that does...Off 2 perform surgery..PS Just tried a handbrake rip and the machine was super super fast at encoding/ and it actually gave off less heat than the previous 17" i7 MacBook Pro from last year.
Best Mac refresh since 4ever very happy....
ADDENDUM : The Glossy low resolution 1440 x 900 screen was not doing it for me at all, so I returned this machine and am now very happy with my High Resolution Antiglare model...
Last edited:
Just search google for Macbook Pro Anti-Glare. The design is exactly the same as the last generation.
Probably worth repeating: The new i5 / i7 chips increase their clock speed as long as the computer is not too hot.
The 2.0 GHz chip will actually run at a much higher speed until it gets too warm (I don't know the exact numbers, the 2.3 GHz goes up to 3.4 GHz). And it will always run at much higher speed if only two or one cores are actively used, because two cores cannot produce enough heat to force it slowing down to 2.0 GHz. That means the 2.0 GHz quad core is _always_ at least as fast as maybe a 2.7 GHz dual core.
I want to see battery benchmarks comparing the 2010 MBP 13 to the 2011 MBP 13.
AFAIK... we haven't seen battery life compared between these two models using the same benchmark tests. If the 2011 MBP 13 uses more power, its not too surprising that it gets higher CPU performance. If the 2011 MBP 13 uses the same amount of power (so 10 hours on the 2010 MBP 13 equals 7 hours on the 2011 MBP 13), then the higher CPU performance is welcome.
This makes it hard to enjoy my 2010 MBP, but it's still cool, its still cool, its still cool... (say this over and over in my head)
Oh well, this just shows that when I get a new one in two or three years, it's gonna rock!
"the fastest MacBook Pro is faster than a lot of Mac Pros (including the current generation of Mac Pros)."
I call BS on this. The charts on their site showed Mac Pros with much higher benchmark scores than Macbooks. Twice as high in some cases.
I call BS on this. The charts on their site showed Mac Pros with much higher benchmark scores than Macbooks. Twice as high in some cases.
And so many were complaining this would be nothing but a little performance tweak. This is a major leap. This is the stuff that matters (to me), not liquid metal.
dang my MacBook5,1 only clocks in at 3168, and that was after the upgrade to snow leopard, on 10.5 it used to clock in around 2800
I know yeah
Both MB Airs come with a real video card (320M), so they surprisingly might do better than the new 13" MBP.