rMacbook 1.1 vs 1.3 test

[pookitoo]

Hello,

For the week end i've the 1.1 and the 1.3 in front of me ! So i can do some test with the two
If you 've idea to test something to see the real difference between the two i'm very open !!

*The benchmark with the same thing installed (spotlight index is done and permission clean) :

32 single & multi :
1.1 : 2233 & 4090
1.3 : 2583 & 5170

64 single & multi :
1.1 : 2440 & 4597
1.3 : 2871 & 5797

*Logic pro benchmark test (cf. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/tried-the-new-macbook.1887830/page-2 thank to tbirdparis)

1.1 : 28 track stables
1.3 : 34 track stables

If someone have a good project in Xcode to test the compile time or other

Shoot !!

 

[dan.tebeau]

Any difference navigating around the UI? As in noticeable lag in one vs the other?

 

[pookitoo]

Maybe a little but it's not really noticeable.

 

[tbirdparis]

Maybe a little but it's not really noticeable.

Wow that's great, how did your get your hands on one of each model for the weekend?

I'm trying to think of a good test you could run, but in the meantime, what about just a basic battery drag race between the two? As others have been keen to point out, real-world battery life testing is a very trick thing indeed... Given that results change radically depending on what the machine is doing, and I expect this would be even more extreme in a machine with a CPU designed to make very big jumps between extremely low-consumption and high-performance, probably in an even more exaggerated manner than the turbo switching in i5/i7 chips.

So for a start, what about a simple "movie watching on a train" scenario? Play the same movie in QuickTime player (or even better, VLC) on both machines with the same screen brightness from a full charge and see how long they last. I guess you could loop the playback so the movie starts over once it finishes.

I'll try and think of another test in the meantime...

Cheers!

Ps thanks for running the Evan logic benchmark... Interesting result, about what I would expect. FYI on my MBP i7 2.66 8GB RAM from 2010, I can only get 21 tracks to reliably loop with no CPU overload. From there, I can sometimes get it to go as far as 25-26, but it will stop from time to time. And by then, the super loud fan has kicked in and it starts getting really hot so performance all goes downhill.

 

[fisherking]

is logic X really workable on either?

 

[tbirdparis]

is logic X really workable on either?

I think it depends on what you mean by Logic X being workable. For me, it would not be good enough to run any of my actual work projects for what I do today (primarily film music). But, considering that the performance of the 1.3 (and even the 1.1) in logic seems to outgun my (admittedly not recent) MBP, it looks like they would be usable at least to an extent. Indeed, I used to use my 2010 MBP for actual work in logic, had to do a lot of track bouncing and many of my bigger sound libraries and synths (the ones that use a lot of CPU) were either a PITA to use or not usable at all because playing them live was instantly pinning the CPU meters. This was for things like Omnisphere (only the heavier patches) and tone hammer emotional piano.

For me, if I ever use logic on the rMB, it would be for simple tracking sessions in a single mic scenario, with a pre-printed playback track. It would handle that task with no issues at all, and because there's no fan, you can record without ever caring about needing an iso booth or keeping the mic far from the computer. Of course the annoying thing is that the audio interfaces we use these days are thunderbolt (UA Apollo), umm.. So I'd need a secondary USB interface with high quality converters to not defeat the purpose of using it. But I think we have options like that lying around in the studio.

I also think that given the number of tracks we're seeing in the Evan logic benchmark, these machines would probably be OK for a bit of light composing and production duties, such as simple songwriting on the go using reasonable sound libraries and synths that aren't the most demanding on the market. Just remains to be seen how the thermal envelope behaves on them - because if after an hour of working on a song, pegging the CPU over and over, it's possible that the whole computer would just slow down because it gets too hot.

Actually this would be something to test pookitoo - if you have a demo song in logic x or a project of your own, perhaps you could put it into a loop cycle and play it for a good while and see what happens when the MB gets hot. Also play live on some virtual instruments as well and see if that is usable or punishing...

 

[sasha.danielle]

Hello,

For the week end i've the 1.1 and the 1.3 in front of me ! So i can do some test with the two
If you 've idea to test something to see the real difference between the two i'm very open !!

*The benchmark with the same thing installed (spotlight index is done and permission clean) :

32 single & multi :
1.1 : 2233 & 4090
1.3 : 2583 & 5170

64 single & multi :
1.1 : 2440 & 4597
1.3 : 2871 & 5797

*Logic pro benchmark test (cf. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/tried-the-new-macbook.1887830/page-2 thank to tbirdparis)

1.1 : 28 track stables
1.3 : 34 track stables

If someone have a good project in Xcode to test the compile time or other

Shoot !!

I would second a battery test! That would be highly useful information for me!

 

[squirrrl]

I would second a battery test! That would be highly useful information for me!

And while you're doing battery tests check outside and processor temps

 

[fisherking]

I think it depends on what you mean by Logic X being workable. For me, it would not be good enough to run any of my actual work projects for what I do today (primarily film music). But, considering that the performance of the 1.3 (and even the 1.1) in logic seems to outgun my (admittedly not recent) MBP, it looks like they would be usable at least to an extent. Indeed, I used to use my 2010 MBP for actual work in logic, had to do a lot of track bouncing and many of my bigger sound libraries and synths (the ones that use a lot of CPU) were either a PITA to use or not usable at all because playing them live was instantly pinning the CPU meters. This was for things like Omnisphere (only the heavier patches) and tone hammer emotional piano.

For me, if I ever use logic on the rMB, it would be for simple tracking sessions in a single mic scenario, with a pre-printed playback track. It would handle that task with no issues at all, and because there's no fan, you can record without ever caring about needing an iso booth or keeping the mic far from the computer. Of course the annoying thing is that the audio interfaces we use these days are thunderbolt (UA Apollo), umm.. So I'd need a secondary USB interface with high quality converters to not defeat the purpose of using it. But I think we have options like that lying around in the studio.

I also think that given the number of tracks we're seeing in the Evan logic benchmark, these machines would probably be OK for a bit of light composing and production duties, such as simple songwriting on the go using reasonable sound libraries and synths that aren't the most demanding on the market. Just remains to be seen how the thermal envelope behaves on them - because if after an hour of working on a song, pegging the CPU over and over, it's possible that the whole computer would just slow down because it gets too hot.

Actually this would be something to test pookitoo - if you have a demo song in logic x or a project of your own, perhaps you could put it into a loop cycle and play it for a good while and see what happens when the MB gets hot. Also play live on some virtual instruments as well and see if that is usable or punishing...

 

[fisherking]

i do a lot of post-production and mixing on my 13" (late 2011); i DO have to freeze tracks often when working, but...i can unfreeze them when i bounce. so...i know the new macbook is NOT for me (but i look forward to the new design elements moving to the pros over the next year (or so)...
thanx for the info!

 

[sdugoten]

would want to know the battery life of both machine. some kind of battery test can be done?

 

[pookitoo]

So, for Logic, TBirdparis answer better than i can ! But for a project like this :
https://soundcloud.com/wesstong/lebowski-where-are-u

I need only 9 tracks with Battery, samples and Spire, with automation and some effect but i need to work again on this project. On both rMacbook, only 20 % from the core is taken. (i don't understand why but on the 1.3 maybe a little bit more ressource are taken)

For battery life test, this evening i'll launch that with VLC, wifi close and 70 % brightness.

 

[tbirdparis]

Maybe do the test with wifi on? I mean, who ever really uses the computer with wifi off, except when you're in a plane?

 

[pookitoo]

ok i'll do that (it's for a test in the train

 

[Pandarama]

So you have no difference navigating or using mission control ?

 

[pookitoo]

A very little lag when i open app, a little bit more than the 1.3, but very very little (maybe it's in my head)

 

[pasadena]

I would also like a battery / CPU temp test !

 

[JoePa2624]

I'm excited to get your thoughts after you've had some extended time with both. I was going round and round trying to figure out which processor to get. In the end, I chose the middle, with the 1.2 for the added hard drive space.

Could you see if you notice any kind of noticeable difference between the two when navigating through Excel/Numbers spreadsheets?

Thanks!

 

[keviig]

Hello,

For the week end i've the 1.1 and the 1.3 in front of me ! So i can do some test with the two
If you 've idea to test something to see the real difference between the two i'm very open !!

*The benchmark with the same thing installed (spotlight index is done and permission clean) :

32 single & multi :
1.1 : 2233 & 4090
1.3 : 2583 & 5170

64 single & multi :
1.1 : 2440 & 4597
1.3 : 2871 & 5797

*Logic pro benchmark test (cf. https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/tried-the-new-macbook.1887830/page-2 thank to tbirdparis)

1.1 : 28 track stables
1.3 : 34 track stables

If someone have a good project in Xcode to test the compile time or other

Shoot !!

Any chance you could convert a 720p movie with Handbrake and record what speed GHz the processor runs at with the 1.1 and 1.3 after they both throttle?
My 1.1 boosts to 2.0 GHz, and after it hits 95c it goes down to a mix of 1.9 and 1.8. Would be interesting to see the difference between the 1.1 and 1.3.

 

[tbirdparis]

Any chance you could convert a 720p movie with Handbrake and record what speed GHz the processor runs at with the 1.1 and 1.3 after they both throttle?
My 1.1 boosts to 2.0 GHz, and after it hits 95c it goes down to a mix of 1.9 and 1.8. Would be interesting to see the difference between the 1.1 and 1.3.

Just out of interest, how do you monitor the speed that the CPU is running at? Is there a way to see this in activity monitor or do you need a 3rd party app?

 

[keviig]

Just out of interest, how do you monitor the speed that the CPU is running at? Is there a way to see this in activity monitor or do you need a 3rd party app?

Intel Power Gadget will give you the speed of the CPU and GPU, as well as power draw (W) and CPU temp.
You can download it here: https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-power-gadget-20

 

[pookitoo]

So, hello everyone.

With VLC and a "bug's life movie", wifi on, brightness to 70%, sound to 50 % :

1.1 : 5 hours and 44 minutes
1.3 : 6 hours ans 13 minutes

For handbrake with interstellar 720p movie (2.2 go) :

like you the 1.1 boosts to 2.0 GHz, and after it hits 95c it goes down to a mix of 1.9 and 1.8 : Time : 50 min
But in 1.3 it's a different story : 45 min and i post some pic :

 

[sdugoten]

So, hello everyone.

With VLC and a "bug's life movie", wifi on, brightness to 70%, sound to 50 % :

1.1 : 5 hours and 44 minutes
1.3 : 6 hours ans 13 minutes

So, most likely the 1.2 version will be around 6 hours......

 

[pookitoo]

I don't know if the performance of the 1.3 worth the extra cost ? But maybe a little less lag in the UI, but like i said, maybe it's in my head

 

[Pandarama]

I don't know if the performance of the 1.3 worth the extra cost ?

I don't think so. Btw I got some reductions to have 1,3 less expensive than 1,1 so i'm ok but seriously ..

Maybe we could see a better difference in 3 months with some updates of the OS (apparently on Windows we can really see a difference)