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.
Real talk: performance comparison
- Thread starter Talbot
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Apple laptops are already known for this. But keep in mind that the rMBP line, for example, uses a 28w chip compared to the 5w in this MacBook. That's a whole lot less heat that must be dissipated, while the overall surface of the laptop on which to dissipate it isn't all that much different.
True, but at idle that 28 watt chip uses maybe 2 watts. 2 watts + 2 fans at 2000rpm. At load it uses 28 watts.
I'm confused because people in other threads are saying that the processor in the new macbook is between an i3 and an i5. So if my air is a 1.7 i5... how could the new macbook be faster?
I feel like this is going to come down to getting one on the release date and using it for a week or two and if it isn't enough, returning it and getting the macbook pro 13".
My initial instinct was that there was no effing way that this macbook could be slower than my 2011 macbook air. But all of these threads are making me nervous.
I feel like this is going to come down to getting one on the release date and using it for a week or two and if it isn't enough, returning it and getting the macbook pro 13".
My initial instinct was that there was no effing way that this macbook could be slower than my 2011 macbook air. But all of these threads are making me nervous.
Eh, between an i3 and an i5 of what generation? From what I've seen, we're talking about i3s of the 2nd generation (Sandy Bridge, from 2011-12), certainly not i3s from the Broadwell or Haswell eras.
Oh I didn't know there was that variable. So was my instinct right? It should be faster?
It should be faster, especially in daily use outside of photo/video editing/processing and gaming. Email, Web browsing, Office/iWork, Media playback should all be a better user experience than your current machine. Especially with that screen.
For reference, I have an 11" MBA with the Maxed BTO Sandy Bridge (2nd Gen "tock", 32nm process, 17W TDP) 1.8 GHz (2.9 GHz turbo boost) dual core i7, 4GB 1333MHz DDR3 RAM, 256GB non-PCIe SSD. Intel graphics 3000 (up to 130 GFLOPS*).
The new maxed BTO rMB will have the Broadwell (4th Gen "tick", 14nm process, 4.5W TDP) 1.3 GHz (2.9 GHz turbo boost) core M, 8GB 1600MHz LPDDR3 RAM, 512GB next gen super fast PCIe SSD. Intel graphics 5300 (up to 346 GFLOPS*).
I expect that these two machines will have similar benchmarks on synthetic tests like Geekbench, etc. However, I also expect that the MB will feel and behave faster and smoother in real life user experience in the categories I mentioned above.
Not to mention, you will be getting the latest tech, like USB 3.1 (gen 1) with up to 10 times the bandwidth and data transfer speeds of your current USB 2.0 ports. Also 802.11ac Wifi as opposed to 802.11n in your 2011. Battery life to die for (compared to the 2011 models). Force Touch trackpad.
That said, this won't be a heavy lifter, if that is what you are in need of. Perfect office productivity machine, though, in my view, and that's exactly what I plan on using it for.
Edit: tick and tock as in tick-tock upgrades Intel is known for. Sandy Bridge was a new architecture (tock) while Broadwell is a die shrink of Haswell (tick). So 2 generations of architecture seperate the two.
*By comparison, the GPU in the iPad Air 2 can do around 300 GFLOPS. The rMB and iPad Air 2 are pushing roughly the same number of pixels. I don't foresee retina being any problem at all for the rMB.
Last edited:
Sounds good. I'll probably be loading up Photoshop and Indesign for small tasks but nothing that my MBA couldn't do.
I mainly want it for the battery life and screen. My current MBA has the worst battery life on the planet.
According to those numbers, the Core M performance is only 8% slower than last year's MacBook Air - seems pretty damn good to me!
I hope you are right. On my 2013 i5 MBA, I can see some dropped frames with Yosemite, most obvious with multi-tasking and swiping between full screen apps.
I think that's bad coding, the MBA graphics should be able to handle that, especially with the MBA's resolution. I can't get UI navigation lag on my rMBP when using it in clamshell mode with a 1080p display and I know the 750M can easily handle 1080p.
I think they will. There are a couple of good signs coming from this review:
1. The Zenbook CPU is the 800 mHz model Core M. The Macbook will be starting at 1.1 gHz.
2. The Zenbook uses the manufacturer default TDP of 4.5 watts. The Core M in the Macbook has been tweaked to 5.0 watts.
3. The Yoga Pro throttled more aggressively because it is a convertible tablet, while the Zenbook lets itself get hotter. I expect Apple engineers to outperform the Asus engineers in terms of passive heat dissipation.
In other words, not only is Core-M looking very capable in general, but I also fully expect the MacBook to be the *best* performing Broadwell Core-M machine on the market.
https://www.macrumors.com/2015/04/01/retina-macbook-benchmark-performance/
My macbook air just scored 2168 Single core and 4445 Multi.
Should I be worried?
I mean I guess I don't need better performance if I get better battery life, retina, thinner laptop, and better keyboard. But I was sort of assuming it would be better.
My macbook air just scored 2168 Single core and 4445 Multi.
Should I be worried?
I mean I guess I don't need better performance if I get better battery life, retina, thinner laptop, and better keyboard. But I was sort of assuming it would be better.
My Macbook Air late 2010 has a score of 817 and 1471. I don't feel limited by the cpu for the things I do but rather would like a faster SSD, more battery life and more RAM.
As you see in the benchmarks the Core-M has plenty of power to do everything you need. It may sound drastic since it is "only" as fast as a i7 in 2011 but think about it a bit. The cpu performance didn't do the big jumps that they did the years before. Normally you see an increase of about 3-5% per new generation now. So if it is as fast as a 2011 CPU that means that the 2015 is about 20% faster than the Core-M. But again you are comparing a 5W CPU to the much beefier 15W. That means Intel managed to drop power consumption by 2/3 while only reducing the performance by 1/5. Sound pretty awesome to me.
As you see in the benchmarks the Core-M has plenty of power to do everything you need. It may sound drastic since it is "only" as fast as a i7 in 2011 but think about it a bit. The cpu performance didn't do the big jumps that they did the years before. Normally you see an increase of about 3-5% per new generation now. So if it is as fast as a 2011 CPU that means that the 2015 is about 20% faster than the Core-M. But again you are comparing a 5W CPU to the much beefier 15W. That means Intel managed to drop power consumption by 2/3 while only reducing the performance by 1/5. Sound pretty awesome to me.
Fanboys are fascinating. Because it is Apple you assume their passive cooling beats the Yoga 3 pro which has a heatpipe and a small active fan to cool the chip.
It is actually a save bet that the Macbook has to lower clock sooner due to hotter chip temps.
The chips are good for web browsing and office work. Not so great for gaming or streaming on broken flash players like the one from twitch which needs way too much cpu while running on the retina display.
WRONG! Apple engineers used an arcane magic to permanently cool the chip. The macbook will outperform the yoga pro 3 by a factor of 10. Especially the gold one.
Sure, call me a fanboy just because I'm sceptical about Lenovo's thermal engineering with its excellent track record
Some food for thoughts: ASUS UX305 is completely fanless and appears to perform better than the Lenovo despite the later having a faster CPU^
^: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/laptops-portable-pcs/asus-zenbook-ux305-1264384/review/3
Sure, call me a fanboy just because I'm sceptical about Lenovo's thermal engineering with its excellent track record
Some food for thoughts: ASUS UX305 is completely fanless and appears to perform better than the Lenovo despite the later having a faster CPU^
^: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/laptops-portable-pcs/asus-zenbook-ux305-1264384/review/3
BECAUSE they have raised the thermal threshold! = more performance but a super hot case!!!
I can't remember where i read that the chassis was to hot to keep it on lap...
The reviews I read said the only place it got hot was the top between the keyboard and the screen, where you would never really touch it...
A laptop has several surfaces which don't typically get touched and can afford to get much hotter than anywhere on a tablet you would hold in your hands.