Unreleased 2012 MacBook Pro and iMac Models Showing Up in Benchmarks

[Navdakilla]

lets start rolling these out..

 

[Spadoinkles]

Disappointing that the iMac scores slightly lower than the equivalent laptop.

SSD possibly?

 

[RalfTheDog]

Disappointing that the iMac scores slightly lower than the equivalent laptop.

The reason you benchmark preproduction systems is, you want to find performance issues, then fix them. There could be driver issues, there could be small hardware issues. I would hope, the systems released to the public, will be faster.

 

[Kludge420]

CUDA is 100%-300% faster than non-CUDA GPUs.

Don't believe everything you read on a manufacturer's website.

A card using CUDA is faster than the exact same card not using CUDA if the program uses the CUDA engine.

However when comparing cards running CUDA (Nvidia only) to OpenCL (Nividia and AMD) they come out about even. CUDA is faster at some tasks while OpenCL is faster at others.

 

[314631]

My 2009 MBP scores 3x lower than the 2012 model. So not too bad and mine doesn't feel slow to me, yet. Apple is doing their best to obsolete old hardware by placing new hardware demands with recent OS X upgrades. Ironically Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft who made their newer operating systems run better on older computer systems.

 

[bushido]

My 2009 MBP scores 3x lower than the 2012 model. So not too bad and mine doesn't feel slow to me, yet. Apple is doing their best to obsolete old hardware by placing new hardware demands with recent OS X upgrades. Ironically Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft who made their newer operating systems run better on older computer systems.

i got a mid 09 mbp as well and just upgraded it with a new SSD. its sooooo fast feels like a up to date machine now my sisters 2 year old tochiba on the other hand is soooooo slow by now, i just want to throw it against the wall waiting for a program to open. gotta love mac os x

 

[fpsBeaTt]

Every NVIDIA Quadro card absolutely murders the so called "AMD Equivalent." NVIDA is king of the professional realm.

Um, not anymore. I can't hear you all the way back in 2008. Furthermore, I'm not talking about quadro cards (which are ridiculously expensive). I'm talking about multi-purpose cards, which Nvidia's high end cards used to be. Now, they're essentially glorified game console substitutes. But hey, don't let facts cloud your belief in NVidia.

 

[MacSince1990]

Wait so the macbook pro has more processing power?

I'm confused.

Did you even look at the scores? The iMac has more processing power.. it just scored lower on memory bandwidth.

 

[cwwilson]

Wow, I really need to update my Mac. Don't know if my current one will be capable of running ML but even so, it's extremely outdated by today's standards. C2D isn't getting it done anymore, it's all about that i5/i7 and 8GB RAM. Perhaps when these new Macs come out, I'll make the move as the prior updates haven't really caught my eye.

Slimmer, lighter iMac with Retina display please.

 

[MacSince1990]

Too bad it didn't give other specs like resolution! and GPU. OMG

It's Geekbench.

----------

Wow, I really need to update my Mac. Don't know if my current one will be capable of running ML but even so, it's extremely outdated by today's standards. C2D isn't getting it done anymore, it's all about that i5/i7 and 8GB RAM. Perhaps when these new Macs come out, I'll make the move as the prior updates haven't really caught my eye.

I'd be extremely surprised if you had a clue what you were talking about.

The speed jump isn't as great as you might expect.

 

[cwwilson]

It's Geekbench.

----------



I'd be extremely surprised if you had a clue what you were talking about.

The speed jump isn't as great as you might expect.

Whatever. The Core2 is old beyond belief, hence why Apple switched to the newer chipsets and is dropping support for them with the newest OS X release. You can't stay on 5 year old hardware forever. If you're here to tell me a quad core i7 can't outpace an aging dual core than maybe it's you who doesn't know what they're talking about.

I know how fast the new iMacs are, a hell of a lot faster than mine. I don't even need to see benchmarks to prove it, I've seen it with my own eyes.

Continue sprouting your drivel if you wish.

 

[Sgt. ButtKiss]

WWDC 2012 - Going to be epic

----------

Whatever. The Core2 is old beyond belief, hence why Apple switched to the newer chipsets and is dropping support for them with the newest OS X release. You can't stay on 5 year old hardware forever. If you're here to tell me a quad core i7 can't outpace an aging dual core than maybe it's you who doesn't know what they're talking about.

I know how fast the new iMacs are, a hell of a lot faster than mine. I don't even need to see benchmarks to prove it, I've seen it with my own eyes.

Continue sprouting your drivel if you wish.

Agreed. I'm running a 2007 17" MacBook Pro with C2D @ 2.4 GHz and 4 GB RAM. I'm starting to hit the wall as well haha.

 

[The Mercurian]

Geekbench gives the new MBP 12500 ish ?

I'm getting 11000 on my 2.5ghz 16gb MBP.

Happy now. Thats not enough of a boost to make me regret it.

 

[The Economist]

Well that is a little more than triple the speed of my early 2009 iMac. At what point do you get off the treadmill and say fast enough? My MacBook is over five years old and is starting to decay so I'll update that which will then be triple the speed of my iMac.

Woo hoo... web pages will decode in 1/30th of a second instead of 1/10th of a second!

If only use your computer to surf the web, the iPad is right for you.

 

[dbit]

2006 MBP core2duo and dying over here, although I'm about to build my own dual xeon e5 workstation if no mac pro news by late july. Moving from web based design work to video and motion graphics and need a machine that can scale with me. C4D and AE/Premiere renders are impossibly long right now. Unless Mac Pro's come about in a serious way I'm gonna build my own Frankenstein pc and see about hackintosh. I'm getting kinda geeky on this hardware stuff now and I'm not sure the 'nanny-company knows best for me' ideology is gonna continue to cut it with my interests expanding.

None the less, these machines should be a welcome refresh for people with macs as old as I.

I'm thinking workstation for my work, mini for my communications, and possibly a cheap pc based render node, and I should be happy!

 

[Beezzy]

Wow. Impressive, for a MacBook Pro!

Question, why are my results for my Mac Pro not much better than yours? The Memory and Streaming sections are almost identical, what does that mean?



Whoops, my bad. Jumped the gun without checking facts.

My Geekbench results below.

System:
3.33GHz 6-Core Mac Pro
10GB RAM
256GB Mercury EXTREME Pro 6G SSD
4x2 TB SATA HDDs
ATI Radeon 5770
2x 24" ACD LED LCD's
LG Blu-Ray
USB 3.0/eSATA PCIe

Its 3000 points higher which makes sense. You have 2 more cores and 2GB of RAM higher than mine. But like I said in my original post. Its easy to get envious over new Macs n MBPs, but as long as your system is running fine than it doesn't matter.

 

[aliasfox]

Whatever. The Core2 is old beyond belief, hence why Apple switched to the newer chipsets and is dropping support for them with the newest OS X release. You can't stay on 5 year old hardware forever. If you're here to tell me a quad core i7 can't outpace an aging dual core than maybe it's you who doesn't know what they're talking about.

I know how fast the new iMacs are, a hell of a lot faster than mine. I don't even need to see benchmarks to prove it, I've seen it with my own eyes.

Continue sprouting your drivel if you wish.

Considering you have Core 2 Duo based Mac Pros that have processor performance that's higher than i3 and dual core i5s (and sometimes faster than i7 based Macs), I think you need to take a step back.

What's stopping older Macs from getting Mountain Lion is the Intel GMA graphics that they have - which were slower than slow when they came out and haven't gotten any better.

I bet that if you put a fresh, new, empty, HD (or SDD) in your iMac Core 2 Duo 3.06 GHz and upped the RAM to 4 GB (or 8 GB, if it supports it), it would feel like you had just gotten a new computer.

Remember, much of the insane benchmark scores come from more parallel processing, which most normal apps don't handle too well.

 

[3282868]

Its 3000 points higher which makes sense. You have 2 more cores and 2GB of RAM higher than mine. But like I said in my original post. Its easy to get envious over new Macs n MBPs, but as long as your system is running fine than it doesn't matter.

Ah, thanks mate. Always wondered how Memory and Streaming were determined.

 

[Stevamundo]

It's NICE to hear about Apple COMPUTERS on here for a change. Instead of talking about Apple's iToys!

I bought both 2011 MacBook Pro and the 21.5 inch iMac. So I'm great!

HOWEVER keep updating your COMPUTERS Apple!!!!!!! Your iToys maybe cute and very popular, BUT your COMPUTERS are more powerful and you still do more productive work on COMPUTERS. Maybe eventually your iToys will become just as powerful someday. HOWEVER you ALWAYS will be restricted by your screen size "without buying assesoreries for it."

 

[cwwilson]

Considering you have Core 2 Duo based Mac Pros that have processor performance that's higher than i3 and dual core i5s (and sometimes faster than i7 based Macs), I think you need to take a step back.

What's stopping older Macs from getting Mountain Lion is the Intel GMA graphics that they have - which were slower than slow when they came out and haven't gotten any better.

I bet that if you put a fresh, new, empty, HD (or SDD) in your iMac Core 2 Duo 3.06 GHz and upped the RAM to 4 GB (or 8 GB, if it supports it), it would feel like you had just gotten a new computer.

Remember, much of the insane benchmark scores come from more parallel processing, which most normal apps don't handle too well.

i could do all that, which would obviously improve my current setup but even still it would not be able to run the newest Mac OS. I would still be stuck with a horrible GPU and of course the C2D. My performance on Lion would be greatly improved which is not a bad idea in the interim. But I would like to purchase a newer iMac and have just been waiting for a valid enough excuse to do so.

Throw in Ivey Bridge, retina display, and a more efficient case and we have a deal.

 

[quasibinaer]

Man, how unbelievably nice it would be to get a new MacBook Pro, iMac and maybe even new Mac Pro (one more thing-style) for WWDC. Heck, I´d even be happy with an 'iMac Pro'. As long as it doesn´t border on useless, like the current model.

But I guess they´ll just send Phil Schiller to tell us how 'great' the flamin' iTunes Store did, why exactly some new Version of iOS is more 'awesome' than anything else and how 'wonderful' the new iPad still is.

So I guess these benchmarks are good news, eh?

 

[aliasfox]

i could do all that, which would obviously improve my current setup but even still it would not be able to run the newest Mac OS. I would still be stuck with a horrible GPU and of course the C2D. My performance on Lion would be greatly improved which is not a bad idea in the interim. But I would like to purchase a newer iMac and have just been waiting for a valid enough excuse to do so.

Throw in Ivey Bridge, retina display, and a more efficient case and we have a deal.

I don't dispute your GPU is likely crap (depending on which 3.06GHz iMac you have, it's at worst a GeForce 9400m up to a Radeon 4850, which is actually pretty decent), but from what I can find all of those iMacs can run Mountain Lion.

 

[CausticPuppy]

My 2009 MBP scores 3x lower than the 2012 model. So not too bad and mine doesn't feel slow to me, yet. Apple is doing their best to obsolete old hardware by placing new hardware demands with recent OS X upgrades. Ironically Apple has moved in the opposite direction to Microsoft who made their newer operating systems run better on older computer systems.

I wouldn't be surprised if 10.8 ran better than 10.7 on the same hardware. I don't know if that's true with the current dev preview builds.
Apple has been taking a "tic-toc" approach with Mac OS X lately; alternating between releases with a lot of new features, vs. releases with primarily internal optimization.

Snow Leopard ran better than Leopard on the same hardware, but Lion added more features. Mountain Lion won't have as many new features but probably a lot of streamlining under the hood.

 

[strausd]

Actually for certain compute task the latest AMD mainstream cards beat the Nvidia cards... It's an effect of changes in Nvidia GPU architecture, resulting in less performance in that domain than the precedent generation.

But it's almost the only case where AMDs are better, then again Apple doesn't care about CUDA since they are behind openCL so...

In the professional realm it might be another story but in that regard neither company has offered proper support for Apple workstation, only offering a handful of outdated EFI capable cards.

Not sure why you brought up consumer cards when my post was obviously about professional cards.

Um, not anymore. I can't hear you all the way back in 2008.

Uhm, no. You're wrong.
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-5000-firepro-v8800-workstation-graphics,2701-8.html

Furthermore, I'm not talking about quadro cards (which are ridiculously expensive). I'm talking about multi-purpose cards, which Nvidia's high end cards used to be. Now, they're essentially glorified game console substitutes.

My post was clearly about professional cards. The fact that you say they are "ridiculously expensive" tells me you know nothing about what they are for.

I do all my work in Maya. Here is just one example of how a professional card murders a consumer card. Now take into account that they use the exact same hardware.

Not sure why you brought up consumer cards. Unless you can't read.

But hey, don't let facts cloud your belief in NVidia.

Ya, its not like I have any sort of proof showing that NVIDIA provides better performance. That would be ridiculous.

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/quadro-5000-firepro-v8800-workstation-graphics,2701-8.html

http://www.techpowerup.com/162498/GTX-680-Generally-Faster-Than-HD-7970-New-Benchmarks.html

And surely its not as if Adobe products took advantage of CUDA. Oh wait, yes they do.

 

[Smartie]

Wow, my Sony Vaio from late 2007 has a Geekbench score of 1682. My new iMac (when I get it) will probably bump things up in speed.

C2Duo @ 2.10GHz and 3 gb DDR2 SDRAM @ 333MHz. It is a bit slow...