New rMB Core M vs. 2.66 Arrandale i7?

Discussion in 'MacBook' started by puma1552, Mar 23, 2015.

  1. puma1552 macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2008
    #1
    Curious how this new rMB would stack up against my mid-2010 MBP, both in terms of processor (I've got a 2.66 i7 Arrandale, which IIRC is dual core), and GPU (NVIDIA GT 330M with 512 MB).

    Still behind, or have the ultra portables surpassed these specs?
     
  2. Freyqq macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Dec 13, 2004
    #2
  3. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    #3
    You will probably not notice much of a difference, but the i7 should be faster in theory. Obviously the Core M will take much less power to give you similar performance.
     
  4. lchlch macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2015
    #4
  5. iRun26.2 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #5
    Thanks for the link! I was able to look up my 2010 11" MBA score. Wow, is it ever behind the times! The Core M processor will be a significant upgrade for me! I didn't think it would be that much better.
     
  6. squirrrl macrumors 6502a

    squirrrl

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2013
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    #6
  7. danielwerner macrumors regular

    danielwerner

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2012
    Location:
    Stockholm, Sweden
    #7
    How can the single core scores be worse than multi core?
     
  8. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #8
    Turbo Boost

    The turbo boost on one core is much higher than if it is running both cores,
     
  9. maclook macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2008
    #9
    Yikes my i7 2011 MBA has a much better score than the Lenovo...
     
  10. dusk007 macrumors 68040

    dusk007

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2009
    #10
    The GPU is also not too far apart. Depending on settings and CPU limitation the 330M can pull ahead but on playable settings (25-40 fps range) they are quit similar.
    Here are some games tested on both. You just have to select archived old GPUs for the 330M to appear.
    330M is quite bad by todays standards.
     
  11. iRun26.2 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #11
    Link???

    ----------

    The is something wrong with the Lenovo's implementation. Other computers using the Core M processor do much better.
     
  12. leman macrumors 604

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    #12
    As stated by previous posters, Core-M CPU performance is quite comparable to the i7-620M if we look at micro benchmarks. In real life everyday applications, Core-M is likely to perform better because of its very quick power state switches and improved branch predictor.

    As to the GPU performance, I'd like to wait for more game benchmarks. The Core M has around 2 times more computation power over the 330M, but I doubt that it will be able to make use of this advantage in games because of its limited TDP. Overall, I'd guess that 5300 will fare better in shader-intensive games while 330M should do better in games with simpler shaders and more overdraw.
     
  13. iRun26.2 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2010
    #13
    Where is the 330M used?
     
  14. thunng8 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2006
    #14
  15. Samuelsan2001 macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2013
    #15
    I doubt that

    The cooling in the 2010 was dreadful...
     

Share This Page