Sandy bridge & OS X - disappointing?

Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by INEEDANOTEBOOK, Jan 5, 2011.

  1. INEEDANOTEBOOK macrumors member

    Dec 14, 2010
    Icy City
  2. alust2013 macrumors 601


    Feb 6, 2010
    On the fence
    Looks pretty good if you ask me, especially for an unsupported hack. If you look at geekbench, the current i7 iMac only scores 210 points higher, and the sandy bridge was an i5.
  3. mark28 macrumors 68000

    Jan 29, 2010
    I saw some benchmark. The performance gain comes from higher clock frequencies. An overlocked i7 920 can do reasonable well with the i7 Sandy Bridge and is just as a fast and sometimes faster than the Sandy Bridge i5.

    But in terms of power/energy consumption, Sandy Bridge beats the Nalehem cpu's. This power/energy consumption ratio is nice for laptops.
  4. Hellhammer Moderator


    Staff Member

    Dec 10, 2008
    But give some OC to the SB and it will shine again. I've already seen +5GHz OCs with air while i7-920 OCs pretty bad IIRC, around 4GHz. Performance/power consumption ratio is pretty important IMO. In the long run, an OCed 920 will cost you a lot more than default clocked SB, especially since 920 has TDP of 130W without OC while SBs have 95W.
  5. NickZac macrumors 68000


    Dec 11, 2010
    For an i5 I say that looks really good...keep in mind that we will see an i7 and if Intel follows through as they have in the past, we will see an i7 Extreme as well...which ones wind up in the Mac now is another question and since Mac likes to glue their damned CPUs down, whatever they choose is what we will have. I don't think Sandy Bridge is not going to change the face of computing; it is just another step as we advance and I wouldn't call it a leap. Better? Absolutely. Profoundly different? Not really. I would call leaps such as going from IDE to ATA/SATA, USB2, the shrinking of magnetic hard drive physical size, all of OS X, Windows XP, using aluminum on your computers, LED backlihting, etc.

Share This Page