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
Not $250 worth difference. The multi score of the 1.3 is about the same as the base model 2015 MBA 13. I notice zero difference in speed from the 2015 MBA I had to my 1.1 MacBook. You would have to pull out a stopwatch and time everything and even then, maybe a second or two faster?
1.3GHz to run ssh terminal??
Yes, I'm sure this sounds very impressive, but you basically need a handful of ssh terminals, and maybe a VNC client, Citrix, or remote desktop.
You could do this with pretty much any computer from the last 7 or 8 years...can't really see the justification for maxing out the rMP for this prupose, but if it makes you happy....
Yes, I'm sure this sounds very impressive, but you basically need a handful of ssh terminals, and maybe a VNC client, Citrix, or remote desktop.
You could do this with pretty much any computer from the last 7 or 8 years...can't really see the justification for maxing out the rMP for this prupose, but if it makes you happy....
Thanks Southerndoc and dugbug for this ^^^.
After Geekbenching my current MBP and MM the above numbers look quite good - http://browser.primatelabs.com/user/GreenZero .
I think it should be fine for my usage - mail/word etc/Kodi/light VM usage of Win 7.
Cheers
Those scores are not bad, infact it would be ideal to have the 1.3 Macbook and pick up a Mac Mini quad from 2012.
I'm typing this on -
Retina Macbbok Pro 13 2015 Model,
2.9 Ghz,
16GB RAM
512GB SSD
Using Geekbench 3 64-bit get -
3238
Single-Core Score
7153
Multi-Core Score
I'm typing this on -
Retina Macbbok Pro 13 2015 Model,
2.9 Ghz,
16GB RAM
512GB SSD
Using Geekbench 3 64-bit get -
3238
Single-Core Score
7153
Multi-Core Score
Last edited:
I agree with you that the speed increment in 1.3 is probably small. However, I am still willing to pay the $250 for this small but significant speed increment. For me, I want to use the best rMB setup.
I agree with you that the speed increment in 1.3 is probably small. However, I am still willing to pay the $250 for this small but significant speed increment. For me, I want to use the best rMB setup.
I was confused by this. I see its $250 from the 1.1 model you might as well get the 1.2 with the double storage. It's $150 uograde from that
I quoted $250 from comments before me. I actually don't know the price for all other models because I ordered the maxed up version (512/1.3) right away.
I'm still skeptical, 1.2 or 1.3? When we see the benchs you think it's a question of speed or responsiveness of applications and possibilities? Because if it's just for a few milliseconds i prefer to buy now.
I struggle to realize the gain it can bring ?
I struggle to realize the gain it can bring ?
Like I wrote way back then before the 1.3 GHz model gets released: 1.3 GHz Core M = i5 4300U on average CPU tests:
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/2413527?baseline=1845544
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench3/compare/2413527?baseline=1845544
You are correct and that is exactly my point that "most" users are in the same boat. If I was a video editor or movie producer, I would look elsewhere but for everyone else the base rMB is fine. I want the upgrade as my work can get very involved at time and I want the higher performance for when I push it into paging and the cpu's are needed to manage the overhead. I run a ton at once when I get deep into things and multi-task. There are a lot of times when my work is very time sensitive as in human lives depend on it...
One more thing..handful of ssh can mean 10-20 at once as I deal with server farms...
I agree with you that the speed increment in 1.3 is probably small. However, I am still willing to pay the $250 for this small but significant speed increment. For me, I want to use the best rMB setup.
And that my friends is why I own Apple stock!
imac 24", C2D, 3.06 GHz, 8 GB 1067 MHz DDR3, NVIDIA GeForce GT 130 512 MB, just an old fashion HDD
GB3 score single : 1685 multi : 3141 (test was performed with all applications closed)
This score is way below that of any rMB's and I have no problem in editing HD video in FCX/Motion5. So why is everybody thinking video editing is not easily possible on the rMB ?????????
GB3 score single : 1685 multi : 3141 (test was performed with all applications closed)
This score is way below that of any rMB's and I have no problem in editing HD video in FCX/Motion5. So why is everybody thinking video editing is not easily possible on the rMB ?????????