New MBA geekbench score

[Bloodiron]

Hi guys,

What do you think that the geekbench score of the new Macbook Air with Sandy Bridge will be? Can I get some estimates? I would think somewhere between 4000 and 5000.

 

[TC25]

hi guys,

what do you think that the geekbench score of the new macbook air with sandy bridge will be? Can i get some estimates? I would think somewhere between 4000 and 5000.

4237

 

[Oppressed]

Are we so desperate for the new MBA that we are going to make up benchmark scores for hardware that we don't even know what the specs are?

 

[delcotron]

4237

I'll go for 4236

 

[Oppressed]

Clearly over 9000.

 

[HellDiverUK]

42, obviously.

 

[Oppressed]

4237

4237 and one dollar Bob!

 

[42streetsdown]

Are we so desperate for the new MBA that we are going to make up benchmark scores for hardware that we don't even know what the specs are?

apparently so. i want to cryogenically freeze myself so i don't have to wait any long. hitting CMD+R on MacRumors itching for news lol

 

[endhalf]

If you want some performance comparison, you can look at:

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/samsung-series-9.aspx?page=3 (have same processor that supposedly will be in new MBAs)

and you can look at:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-i5-2537M-Notebook-Processor.49695.0.html (detailed view of that processor)

in copmarison with:

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/apple-macbook-air-13-2010.aspx?mode=benchmarks

and

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Core-2-Duo-SL9600-Notebook-Processor.33810.0.html

Hope that helps

Btw:

According to this the new 1.4Ghz Core i5 is better than C2D 2.1Ghz by:

6.4% in 64b Cinbench
23.5% in superpi (1M - not a real CPU benchmark)
23% in wPrime 2.0x: 1024m

Doesn't seem that big a deal to me... I personally wait for refresh and then go for C2D version. I thought that MBA will gain a lot more power from new iCore than this... It should be atleast 60-70% benefit to justify 40-50% loss on GPU...

 

[trims]

What do you think that the geekbench score of the new Macbook Air with Sandy Bridge will be? Can I get some estimates? I would think somewhere between 4000 and 5000.

Current:

MBP 13" 2011 2.7GHz i7 = 6867
MBP 13" 2011 2.3GHz i5 = 5917
MBP 13" 2010 C2D 2.4GHz = 3346
MBA 13" 2010 C2D 2.13GHz = 3292
MBA 11" 2010 C2D 1.4GHz = 2244

Predicted:

Top MBA 13" likely to have 25W 2.3GHz i7 = 6000+
Base MBA 11" likely to have 17W 1.4GHz i5 = 3200+

11 inch performance is harder to predict, but looks likely there will be a greater performance gain for the 13 inch model. With its SSD and 4GB RAM I think the 13" MBA will feel seriously fast.

PS My iMac scores 4226; and the Tecra 2253; so looking forward to the upgrade!

 

[Umbriel]

Take this Alienware notebook for e.g.
It has the slowest i7 ULV and scores 4526

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/424719

There are numerous results with the slowest i5 too.
They score between 3300 and 4500. 3783 is the average.

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/search?q=core+i5-2537M&commit=Search

If Apple offers the fastest i7 LV as BTO, it will probably score 5500-6000.
This would be very impressive

 

[trims]

Take this Alienware notebook for e.g.
It has the slowest i7 ULV and scores 4526

That's the 17W 1.5GHz 2617M processor - see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_bridge

My bet is that the top spec MBA 13" will run the 25W 2.3GHz 2649M - which won't be far off the 2620M in the top end MBP 13". If you look at the Turbo scores for the 2649M v. 2617M v. 2620M you can see why I anticipate a Geekbench score well over 6000 . . . .

 

[cirus]

That's the 17W 1.5GHz 2617M processor - see:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_bridge

My bet is that the top spec MBA 13" will run the 25W 2.3GHz 2649M - which won't be far off the 2620M in the top end MBP 13". If you look at the Turbo scores for the 2649M v. 2617M v. 2620M you can see why I anticipate a Geekbench score well over 6000 . . . .

Yes, except the design of the air may not allow for prolonged turbo due to poor cooling. Turbo boost is for short moments of intense CPU activity, not prolonged periods.

 

[wavetool]

Long time lurker, first time poster...

Hahaa! I just ran GB on my netbook (primary use). Got a score of 894 with the turbo setting on.

I guess no matter what the number is, I'm in for a big performance increase!

Come on, Apple. Please release my next laptop!

Love,

wavetool

 

[Psilocybin]

30090


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk

 

[pmr1]

Doesn't seem that big a deal to me... I personally wait for refresh and then go for C2D version. I thought that MBA will gain a lot more power from new iCore than this... It should be atleast 60-70% benefit to justify 40-50% loss on GPU...

Can you link some evidence to this "40-50%" loss in GPU power? Considering anadtech actually reported a general 8% power increase over the 320m?

Across most reviews the 320m and the hd3000 seem pretty much on par. Which is sad, because its supposed to be new technology.

But nowhere have i read this "40-50%" loss in gpu.

 

[Oppressed]

Can you link some evidence to this "40-50%" loss in GPU power? Considering anadtech actually reported a general 8% power increase over the 320m?

Across most reviews the 320m and the hd3000 seem pretty much on par. Which is sad, because its supposed to be new technology.

But nowhere have i read this "40-50%" loss in gpu.

http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/samsung-series-9.aspx?page=3

3D Mark 6, 2188 vs 4611

 

[h00ligan]

Does geekbench take hdd into consideration?

That would drastically alter my thoughts.. iirc it does not, so there's no way I see it outperforming the base 13"

somewhere around 4.5k?

 

[trims]

Yes, except the design of the air may not allow for prolonged turbo due to poor cooling. Turbo boost is for short moments of intense CPU activity, not prolonged periods.

Not even long enough to run Geekbench - about a minute?

Not to worry, with a fast SSD it will probably feel faster than the HDD eqipped MBPs.

 

[Umbriel]

Yes, except the design of the air may not allow for prolonged turbo due to poor cooling. Turbo boost is for short moments of intense CPU activity, not prolonged periods.

The SL9600 and the 320M consume 37 Watts together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...ocessing_units#GeForce_300M_.283xxM.29_series
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=37262

The SB CPU/GPU in the new Macbook Air will only consume 17W or 25W altogether. There is plenty of cooling power left for the turbo boost.

 

[Bloodiron]

The SL9600 and the 320M consume 37 Watts together.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compar...ocessing_units#GeForce_300M_.283xxM.29_series
http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=37262

The SB CPU/GPU in the new Macbook Air will only consume 17W or 25W altogether. There is plenty of cooling power left for the turbo boost.

nice

 

[trims]

Predicted:

Top MBA 13" likely to have 25W 2.3GHz i7 = 6000+
Base MBA 11" likely to have 17W 1.4GHz i5 = 3200+

11 inch performance is harder to predict, but looks likely there will be a greater performance gain for the 13 inch model. With its SSD and 4GB RAM I think the 13" MBA will feel seriously fast.

New 17W 2677M 1.8GHz i7 was announced today.

Top upgrade for the 11" MBA?
Long battery life cool chip for MBA 13"?

Geekbench 4500+?

 

[trims]

New 17W 2677M 1.8GHz i7 was announced today.

Top upgrade for the 11" MBA?
Long battery life cool chip for MBA 13"?

Geekbench 4500+?

I seriously underestimated. Given that the 1.7GHZ i5 turned in a Geekbench score of 5860 in today's Laptopmag review I suspect the 1.8GHz i7 will crack 6000 . . . .

 

[rkahl]

I seriously underestimated. Given that the 1.7GHZ i5 turned in a Geekbench score of 5860 in today's Laptopmag review I suspect the 1.8GHz i7 will crack 6000 . . . .

That's what I'm hoping for as well. If so, my 1 yr old iMac will have the same score as my air.

 

[MRU]

Base models.