Sidebar Sidebar
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

Received 1.3/512 SG Today - GeekBench Results

Southerndoc, thank you for taking some time out of your busy weekend schedule to publish this data and to help those of us on the fence about the bto order. I am sure many of us would also be very thankful for any additional real world usage information such as heat and UI lag when you get around to it. Only problem with positive benchmark and review results- it carries with it a few more weeks of waiting around as opposed to canceling and getting one from BB right away!
 
tecnho said:
Southerndoc, thank you for taking some time out of your busy weekend schedule to publish this data and to help those of us on the fence about the bto order. I am sure many of us would also be very thankful for any additional real world usage information such as heat and UI lag when you get around to it. Only problem with positive benchmark and review results- it carries with it a few more weeks of waiting around as opposed to canceling and getting one from Bb right away.
Click to expand...

Not had any problems at all with heat or UI lag. I took it with me to work last night (I'm an ER physician) and didn't have any issues at all.
 
artivideo.nl said:
I thought the turboboost works in single core as well as multi core. If so there should also be a speed difference in the single mode score going from 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 GHz, right ?
Click to expand...

Yes, there will be a difference. I think the question though was is that difference worth it. Right now, with the info we have, the single core score, though better, isn't a large difference. It really doesn't seem worth it, but the multicore does. We have to wait for more user scores.
 
southerndoc said:
2 more tests: (just figured out how to upload)

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/2409396
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/2409416

I had to sign out from iCloud, then sign back in due to some keychain issues. I think everything has sync'd. Will try again tomorrow. Unfortunately time is limited for testing, so I can't test with coconutbattery etc.

Getting some slightly different numbers each time. Guess that's to be expected.
Click to expand...

Makes me wonder if the other scores (1.1 and 1.2) would also be better if they had more things off when their tests were run.
 
Wahlstrm said:
1,1≈ 2150 / 4500
1,2≈ 2170 / 5000
1,3≈ 2800 / 5500

Seems like the 1,3 might be a lot snappier after all..
That price thou..

It´s like buying my old 2011 13" MBP i7 128GB SSD + 750GB HDD 16GB ram again. Same money, same speed. Bigger SSD, better graphics, a lot better screen, equal battery and über-sexy thin design.

That machine worked quite well with Photoshop so I assume this machine will to.
Click to expand...

weight and portability is a premium tradeoff in this category. The MB weights SIGNIFICANTLY less, not just a minor improvement.
 
bjet767 said:
My 64 Bit GB3 Score 1.2 512

Geekbench Score
2446
Single-Core Score
5161
Multi-Core Score

Slightly slower than my 2014 i5 11" Air

Update: Ran GB3 with nothing else running, previously had Firefox and Duet as primary users.
Activity monitor was running during test.

Single = 2641
Dual = 5344

Equaled 2014 11" MB i5 1.4
Click to expand...

This is pretty close to my tests and I have the same config as you.
 
southerndoc said:
Definitely background stuff on the first go round... here's the latest (with Adobe Creative Cloud, Synology CloudStation, Office 365, etc. in background running). No apps like Mail, Safari, etc. running.
Click to expand...

Thanks for posting. That's about on par with my 2012 rMBP and that is no slouch.

I'm glad you're enjoying the machine. It gives others that ordered it a good reason to keep waiting.

I have been using the 1.2 myself and based on my positive experience and the guys who have posted their reviews, I'm thinking Core-M will be in Apple's lineup for the foreseeable future.

When they release the 13/14 inch version of this machine that too would sell like hotcakes.
 
southerndoc said:
2 more tests: (just figured out how to upload)

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/2409396
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/2409416

I had to sign out from iCloud, then sign back in due to some keychain issues. I think everything has sync'd. Will try again tomorrow. Unfortunately time is limited for testing, so I can't test with coconutbattery etc.

Getting some slightly different numbers each time. Guess that's to be expected.
Click to expand...

These tests are exactly what I expected to see from the 1.3....I will be taking delivery as this looks like it is clearly the model to own. Thanks for your time/patience in getting the tests cleanly run. Also, thanks to the poster on the SDD write speed, I think I may just go full boat on this one for the extra I/O write speed benefit.

This is great news!
 
Maclee2010 said:
These tests are exactly what I expected to see from the 1.3....I will be taking delivery as this looks like it is clearly the model to own. Thanks for your time/patience in getting the tests cleanly run. Also, thanks to the poster on the SDD write speed, I think I may just go full boat on this one for the extra I/O write speed benefit.

This is great news!
Click to expand...

Don't see any posted SSD write speeds.
 
Maclee2010 said:
There are none posted, but am told that the 512GB drive is faster?? Does anyone have any data on that?

Thanks.
Click to expand...

What program can I use and I may try it tonight.

May try coconutbattery as well. Not sure if I will have time.
 
I don't think the SSD speeds are anything to write home about. It's a Toshiba part, according to someone who ran the blackmagic disk speed test on another thread.
 
Thanks for posting Geekbench results.

May I suggest some running two other (free) benchmarks such as Cinebench:
http://www.maxon.net/en/products/cinebench/

and Sunspider Javascript:
https://www.webkit.org/perf/sunspider/sunspider.html

----------
Alekto said:
I don't think the SSD speeds are anything to write home about. It's a Toshiba part, according to someone who ran the blackmagic disk speed test on another thread.
Click to expand...

Its flash storage does large sequential transfers at half the speed of the 2015 13" MacBook Air and 2015 Retina MacBook Pro 13" -- that's because the link speed is x2 instead of x4.

----------
consumeritis said:
That latest benchmark is really impressive.

Makes me think that maybe I should have waited for the MacBook rather than buying a rMBP. The i7 Pro is only 25% faster single-core and 30% faster multi-core. And it's 70% heavier.

I was originally expecting a score >2500 and it looks like the MacBook beats that easily.

The leaked/faked benchmark really put me off.
Click to expand...

The 2015 rMBP 13" GPU is faster. The flash storage of the 2015 rMBP 13" is twice as fast as the 2015 MacBook 12". You also are paying for Thunderbolt.
 
Cvx5832 said:
Thanks for posting. That's about on par with my 2012 rMBP and that is no slouch.

I'm glad you're enjoying the machine. It gives others that ordered it a good reason to keep waiting.

I have been using the 1.2 myself and based on my positive experience and the guys who have posted their reviews, I'm thinking Core-M will be in Apple's lineup for the foreseeable future.

When they release the 13/14 inch version of this machine that too would sell like hotcakes.
Click to expand...

YES! I'm hoping for a 14" next year. With some more wrist rest area like my 13" MBA for my big paws!
 
Maclee2010 said:
There are none posted, but am told that the 512GB drive is faster?? Does anyone have any data on that?
Click to expand...

I tested the 12" MacBook's 512G flash.
AJA System Test 16G large sequential
886MB/s READ, 454MB/s WRITE
QuickBench small random test
213MB/s READ, 213MB/s WRITE

Compare that to the 2015 13" Retina MacBook Pro's 512G flash
AJA System Test 16G large sequential
1391MB/s READ, 1504MB/s WRITE
QuickBench small random test
421MB/s READ, 668/s WRITE
 
barefeats said:
I tested the 12" MacBook's 512G flash.
AJA System Test 16G large sequential
886MB/s READ, 454MB/s WRITE
QuickBench small random test
213MB/s READ, 213MB/s WRITE

Compare that to the 2015 13" Retina MacBook Pro's 512G flash
AJA System Test 16G large sequential
1391MB/s READ, 1504MB/s WRITE
QuickBench small random test
421MB/s READ, 668/s WRITE
Click to expand...

I think he means compared to the 256gb on same laptop
 
The small palm rest is probably the only thing I'm still struggling with, as I believe I'll get used to the keyboard over time.

But getting back on topic of this thread, I'm finding the 1.2/512 I'm testing out not bad performance wise... but I'm going to wait until the my 1.3/512 arrives to decide whether its a keeper, or move back to my MBA.
 
consumeritis said:
That latest benchmark is really impressive.

Makes me think that maybe I should have waited for the MacBook rather than buying a rMBP. The i7 Pro is only 25% faster single-core and 30% faster multi-core. And it's 70% heavier.

I was originally expecting a score >2500 and it looks like the MacBook beats that easily.

The leaked/faked benchmark really put me off.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat 2015 rMBP i7/16/512 I have had since April 1. I ordered a Maxed out rMB thinking I would try it out and return it. I will find out on Tuesday. My only regret was I ordered the Space Gray. Every demo unit I have looked at has been a hot mess of grimy fingerprints and to me it resembles a plastic netbook. In a do over, I would have just ordered regular silver.

I would say those of us that went for the 1.3 may have made a better choice, especially if it becomes know as the relative "workhouse" of the 3 versions. Might recoup a little more at resell time.
 
So ? We must wait the next week for more accurate results ? 1.2 or 1.3 ? When I go to geek bench score it's difficult to have a final decision between the 2 . I remember when I ve test a MacBook Air 2013 with an i5 and 8 gb ram vs a MacBook Air 2013 with an i7 and 8gb ram, the test said 15% difference but when I test by myself a see a good difference between the 2
 
ct1211 said:
I would say those of us that went for the 1.3 may have made a better choice, especially if it becomes know as the relative "workhouse" of the 3 versions. Might recoup a little more at resell time.
Click to expand...

As for the resale price, probably not. It depends on whether people think the extra speed is worth the pretty high price Apple is asking for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back