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.
Unreleased 2012 MacBook Pro and iMac Models Showing Up in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually the point commander was trying to make is that RAM can work in pairs for improved performances, so if the iMac comes with a single stick of 4Go of RAM performances could take a hit.
This could be the case, with the MBPro showing 8Go Apple could have implemented the Air-like redesign which would lead to un-upgradable RAM forcing Apple to directly fit the MBPro with 8Go, while setting the iMac with 4Go since the user can upgrade RAM in those machines.
I hope those results are for the low end MacBook Pros, because my MacBook Pro gets a geekbench score of 11,000.
The 12,000 score is pretty lousy for a laptop with a new processor.
The 12,000 score is pretty lousy for a laptop with a new processor.
The software still runs on your normal 64-bit boot. It is indeed slower in this mode.
Ehhh..seems like too little too late. The i Apple is too busy cranking up gadgets for the masses. Seems like the switch time is coming. For many.
What are your specs?
because 12000 looks pretty juicy compared to my baseline 13" 2011 stock which only got 5248
Excuse my technical ignoranceBut my 2010 Mac Book Pro Scores 5285 on Geekbench. Does that mean that if the 12000+ figure is correct in this story, that a new macbook pro would more than double the performance of my current machine in real word situations (Adobe CS6 / Logic Pro)?
Probably not. The whole point of tools like Geekbench is that they try to figure out the optimal performance of specific hardware (primary the CPU), but are far from "real world".
Software applications are a whole different issue and rarely see the kinds of performance improvements that the benchmarks suggest.
Sure, but I don't recall the hit being that large. We also don't know if the iMac is really only running one 4 GB stick or 2x2 GB.
If either computer was running a retina-style display, would such effect the geekbench score (and therefore plausibly account for the iMac's relatively poor performance)? I don't know how such higher resolutions would effect the performance of CPU.
Edit: a boy can dream, can't he?
Edit: a boy can dream, can't he?
The current quad cores score around those numbers. Your MBP has a dual core CPU. That quad core in the article is unlikely to make it into the 13" MBP.
----------
Too late for what exactly?
8GB of RAM in that benchmarked MacBook Pro. That would be awesome if that's the new standard and not BTO!
This is the highest rated iMac in Geekbench with Ivy Bridge processors
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/650074
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/650074
The thing is that they don't seem to be equivalent.Wait so the macbook pro has more processing power?
I'm confused.
Check the memory scores. That's where the difference comes into play. The iMac would probably score ~4000 points better if it had as much RAM (it's affecting not one, but two subtest scores). It's already scoring better on the other subtests. I think the MBP has been fitted with more RAM. If 8 GB is the standard on it, it should really be on the iMac too.
The scores say they're running a new build of Mountain Lion that hasn't been released, which may imply that new Pros and iMacs are dropping soon with Lion, and developers will need a newer build of ML in order to install on them. (one with new drivers, kexts, etc)
Or the second scenario would be that they ship with Mountain Lion, and ML will be finished early and released at WWDC.
Or the second scenario would be that they ship with Mountain Lion, and ML will be finished early and released at WWDC.
Mmm. Thanks. As a rule, I only tent to upgrade when I can get at least a 50% increase in real-world speed.
Might wait until they are out for a short while and see what people are getting out of these with CS6 and Logic Pro in the wild.
Anyone using Logic / CS6 out there that might have an idea what kind of performance increase we could be looking at in real application use over a MacBookPro 6,1?
I think this will be the case. While I think WWDC will have tons of Mountain Lion news I don't think it's going to be released until August/September. We'll see the new MacBooks before then.
More than what? It's losing to the iMac in the processing department at least. It's the RAM that makes it win, but no wonder about that, since it has twice as much RAM.Wait so the macbook pro has more processing power?
I'm confused.
Keep in mind, Ivy Bridge only has a minor performance improvement. You're only going to see an improvement of 10-15%, plus these scores were run in 32-bit mode.
The only concerning things of IB are drastically improved graphics with the HD 4000, and a slightly improved Turbo Boost.
Since the 600 series has almost no GPGPU performance, for professional use AMD cards would be far superior. That's why the 680 is on par with the 7970 and uses less power in gaming, they literally dumped all professional processing architecture from it.
i know my MBP is a dual core,but I never knew that the 12000 range was not much better then the 15" Sandy bridge processors.
