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

donbenjy

macrumors 6502
Original poster
Oct 15, 2008
259
0
Hey, here's my XBench stats for the new 2.4GHz 15.4" MBP! The disk test always runs slow on every mac I've bench'd so I guess the benchmark used a 7200 RPM drive? And also I was writing like 15 GB of data to my HDD, so that could explain it. I'm using the integrated GPU - I'll post the 9600M GT in "about 11 minutes" once my copying has done: you have to log out to change GPUs...which is kinda annoying, but makes sense if the display needs to change chips!
 
discrete GPU -9600M GT

comparison - comparison

Not sure why the integrated seems to score better at some things, but I guess it's hard to test under exatly similar conditions. The user elements seems to be the strongest effected! Not sure how accurate the whole test is, but it gives an idea anyway!
 
ehhhh!

How does the integrated graphics do better than the dedicated graphics on the Graphics tests? That seems weird!

The real question is can you as a user see a difference when it is being used?
 
when I'm doing what - opening finder windows, setting up Mail or posting here? ;) Not had a chance to really push it yet - I'm still sorting stuff out right now!
 
WTF? The Macbook is equal because they have the same processor? Geekbench doesn't touch graphics benchmark?
 
My MBP 2.4 Benchmarks

Geekbench: 3124
XBench: 125 (slow HD performance)
Cinebench 10: 2:56 (integrated video); 2:52 (discrete video)

I'm not seeing much difference at all between 'turbo' and low power mode. Maybe a fps test or Motion?

The new trackpad is nice. Build is amazing. Looks are very nice. My Powerbook looks soooo ancient and clunky next to it. Screen...ok. Colors off a bit (to be expected) and the glossy...not sure. Using it in a darkened room.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.