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.
Received 1.3/512 SG Today - GeekBench Results
- Thread starter southerndoc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Noticed the same thing. I don't know that these test numbers make any sense at all. I see 1.2 machines that were much better than what is shown here. I am withholding judgment until I see a sample on primate.
Or thermal management. Read the AnandTech article about the Core M. The 1.3GHz could be throttling during the test.
I've repeated it several times and gotten the same results. I haven't even looked at what 1.2's and 1.1's are getting.
I've installed 10.10.3, repaired permissions, emptied the caches, etc.
I've turned off Synology CloudSync, Adobe's Creative Cloud app, exited all programs (Mail, Safari, etc.) and I'm still getting the same results (sometimes worse).
I'm wondering if there is background activity doing this as the MacBook was only received about 10am this morning. I turned it off for a good portion of the day while I had meetings.
Will leave it on overnight and see what happens. Hopefully it's not a bad machine!
On another note, love the keyboard... haven't found anything wrong with the screen tilt (unlike some other people that didn't think it tilted back far enough), haven't had any lag issues, etc. Love it. I'm coming from a 2011 13" MacBook Air.
I've installed 10.10.3, repaired permissions, emptied the caches, etc.
I've turned off Synology CloudSync, Adobe's Creative Cloud app, exited all programs (Mail, Safari, etc.) and I'm still getting the same results (sometimes worse).
I'm wondering if there is background activity doing this as the MacBook was only received about 10am this morning. I turned it off for a good portion of the day while I had meetings.
Will leave it on overnight and see what happens. Hopefully it's not a bad machine!
On another note, love the keyboard... haven't found anything wrong with the screen tilt (unlike some other people that didn't think it tilted back far enough), haven't had any lag issues, etc. Love it. I'm coming from a 2011 13" MacBook Air.
I don't think there's enough unique results for them to post it. I suspect next week, results will be up and likely more accurate as the week goes by and people post results that get averaged together.
from primate labs:
Welcome to Primate Labs' Mac benchmark chart. The data on this chart is calculated from Geekbench 3 results users have uploaded to the Geekbench Browser. To make sure the results accurately reflect the average performance of each Mac, the chart only includes Macs with at least five unique results in the Geekbench Browser.
For these computers I bet the Geekbench numbers represent what you'll see when lots of throttling is taking place. I bet in normal use the 1.3MHz is faster/snappier because the turbo mode is generally finished quickly. I doubt a good test for normal usage really exists (as if normal usage can be defined anyway).
It's 500 more than the 1.2 . Not so bad ! Better than a MacBook Air 2014
Where are you seeing this? My 1.2 numbers are faster.
This "normal usage" is also a slippery slope because this 10-20% boost is so marginal the justification for an extra $250 for the 1.3 CPU is probably more for one's pride/insecurity than discernible improvement in user experience. Opening an app 100 milliseconds faster each morning isn't what I'd pay $250 for.
I am hoping we start to see the numbers boost a bit, but so far the 1.3 looks to be doing exactly what Anand's results told us it would.
With my 1.3MHz/512G BTO being many weeks away, I may very likely just cancel and get the 1.2MHz/512G. At least there ought to be a lot of test data available before my ships.
My biggest concern is not with the money but with heat. I don't want my 1.3MHz machine to be warmer than the 1.2MHz. I hope there is a real advantage of getting the 1.3GHz.
Iruns26 say
And in the geek bench website the MacBook Air 2014 32 bits multi : 4655 and the MacBook 1.2 : 4340
I don't know how to Interpret these results ? If what hypno say it's true "only for a little boost when opening an app" it's disappointing
I agree.. I also think that this thread is so confused because people are comparing geek bench 2 and 3 results which can't be compared and we are only seeing a single test. I also am interested in heat generated. Even though I don't need the space, I might also get the 1.2 if the 1.3 results are not much higher and it runs just as hot since I can get a best buy discount and it'll end up being about the same price as my student discount 1.3/256 that I ordered.
I don't know but 64bit results seem a little bit better in general than freebee 32bit results?
I cancelled my 1.3/512 SG BTO. I couldn't justify the 4-6 week wait. i ended up picking up a 1.2/512 SG from a store (non Apple Store). It runs fine. after these apparent benches from the 1.3, i'm definitely glad i didn't wait, i would have been disappointed!
If you go to the Geekbench web-site and query results for the 'macbook8,1' you will see a huge range of values. It's not cut and dried. It's statistically difficult to prove one way or the other. (And only one entry for the 1.3GHz currently exists).
I'm not convinced that the 1.2 is better than the 1.1 except for the fact that it generates less heat.
I don't know much about these metrics and tests, but how can that have been posted on the 24th when we estimate that one of the first 1.3's arrived today? Someone in Asia that was adjacent had access and uploaded the results?
Ok I'll bite. Today is the 24th. It wasn't up there earlier today, but it is up there now. How is this so odd?
yeah.. that is my dilemma though. even if 1.3 isn't much better than 1.2 which isn't much better than 1.1, there maybe a significant or noticeable difference between 1.1 and 1.3, esp in heat management or in opening photoshop (for instance).
read/write speeds are probably a little better in the 512 vs 256, so maybe I should go with the larger 512 even though I probably won't ever come close to using all that space.
My 1.3/256 isn't coming for at least a couple more weeks, so I hope that there are some comparisons made out there from people who have 1.1 and 1.3, or that there are some reviews of the 1.3 from websites I trust.
I am looking to see a single core 64-bit G3 score avg in the 2800 range or I am going to cancel my BTO with Apple. I don't see the value of even offering this, but holding judgement until there are good dozen samples to evaluate. Disappointing news on the 1.3.thus far. On the upside, the 1.1 has done very well with everything I thrown at it in the real world and performs very well overall.
BTW, this is a 32 bit score and ONLY one score so we need to see a bunch more to see how they average out. To compare with AVERAGED scores from the 1.1 and 12:
GB3 32bit Multicore
1.3 4841
1.2 4344
1.1 4005
GB3 32bit Singlecore
1.3 2271
1.2 2161
1.1 2149
So there is still a 20% increase from 1.1 to 1.3. If this keeps up, I think that (while a bit on the expensive side for what you get) I'll keep my 1.3/256 config.
I have heard the 1.2GHz produces less heat so that is the one I will get if I cancel my 1.3GHz BTO.
I hate to think that I could be enjoying a new rMB now when I am waiting a long time to get a 1.3GHz that costs me more, generates more heat, and has lower Geekbench scores.