Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Unscientific MBP Test: Penryn vs Merom

Hls811

Hls811

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Apr 19, 2004
832
55
New Jersey
OK, so I picked up my Penryn MBP last night and since I haven't yet shipped out my "old" Merom to its new owner so I thought I'd do a few quick tests - nothing too in-depth, but a few things I was curious about. To keep things simple, the new Penryn is going to be listed as "Mac-P" and the Merom will be "Mac-M" (I hopes its not too confusing!!)

Here's the basic specs:
MacBook Pro 'Mac-P'
CPU: 2.5 Ghtz Penryn
Cache: 6MB
Mem: 2GB
HD: 250GB 5400
VRAM: 512MB

MacBook Pro 'Mac-M'
CPU: 2.4 Ghtz Merom
Cache: 4MB
Mem: 4GB
HD: 320GB 5400 (Western Digital Passport drive that I upgraded)
VRAM: 256MB

Boot Up Time:
Mac-P: 28 seconds
Mac-M: 31 seconds

VideoHub Conversion:
The file that I used is Episode 1, Season 3 of the TV Series Lost. It is a 348.8MB AVI file running 42:15. I converted it using the "Optimize for iPod Touch" setting and did H.264 encoding and Standard Quality.

Time Elapsed:
Mac-P: 12:09
Mac-P: 13:29
*Note - when I first clicked on the 'Start button in VisualHub, the estimate time for each was 14 minutes for the Mac-P and 16 minutes for the Mac-M, both finished ahead of the estimate.

GeekBench Testing:
(testing was done immediately after cold boot - I disabled the Login Items, Shut Down, turned back on and went right into Geekbench and ran the tests with nothing else running).
Time to Run:
Mac-P: 22 seconds
Mac-M: 24 seconds

Mac-P:
Overall Score: 3212
Interger Score: 2830
Floating Point Score: 4500
Memory Score: 2412
Stream Score: 1642

Mac-M:
Overall Score: 3074
Interger Score: 2697
Floating Point Score: 4244
Memory Score: 2266
Stream Score: 1923

System Information:
Mac-P
Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Compiler GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)
Operating System Mac OS X 10.5.2 (Build 9C2018)
Model MacBookPro4,1
Motherboard MacBookPro4,1
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T9300 @ 2.50GHz
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 23 Stepping 6
Logical Processors 2
Physical Processors 1
Processor Frequency 2.50 GHz
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB
L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB
L2 Cache 6.00 MB
L3 Cache 0.00 B
Bus Frequency 800 MHz
Memory 2.00 GB
Memory Type 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
SIMD 1

Mac-M
Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Compiler GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)
Operating System Mac OS X 10.5.2 (Build 9C31)
Model MacBook Pro (Mid 2007)
Motherboard MacBookPro3,1
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7700 @ 2.40GHz
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 10
Logical Processors 2
Physical Processors 1
Processor Frequency 2.40 GHz
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB
L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB
L2 Cache 4.00 MB
L3 Cache 0.00 B
Bus Frequency 800 MHz
Memory 4.00 GB
Memory Type 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
SIMD 1

One other thing I'll comment on is the temperature - I have the iStat Pro Widget on both and both temperature readings were very close to each other (all categories were within 1-2 degrees of each other) before and after converting the video. The CPU temperature both fluctuated from 110-112 degrees before the video conversion to 128-131 degrees immediately after on both computers. The enclosure bottom reading was 90 degrees for Mac-P and 92 for Mac-M. With that being said, the Mac-P feels alot cooler to the touch. It doesn't seem to get as warm as my Mac-M.

I will be upgrading the Mac-P to 4GB ram soon, so once I do that I'll reference this thread and update with the new scores (probably within 2-3 weeks unless someone wants to donate 4GB of crucial memory to get it done sooner!:D)
 
I snapped a quick picture before I packaged the Merom up.. You can't really see much from the picture but they outside hardware is definitely identical!

(and no, thats not anything plugged into my Penryn screen, its a surge protector on the wall behind it).
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0991.JPG
    IMG_0991.JPG
    77.1 KB · Views: 405
To make this a fairer test (begone images of Cinderalla!), you should rerun everything after swapping RAM between the two machines and averaging the two sets of results.
 
Hls811 said:
OK, so I picked up my Penryn MBP last night and since I haven't yet shipped out my "old" Merom to its new owner so I thought I'd do a few quick tests - nothing too in-depth, but a few things I was curious about. To keep things simple, the new Penryn is going to be listed as "Mac-P" and the Merom will be "Mac-M" (I hopes its not too confusing!!)

Here's the basic specs:
MacBook Pro 'Mac-P'
CPU: 2.5 Ghtz Penryn
Cache: 6MB
Mem: 2GB
HD: 250GB 5400
VRAM: 512MB

MacBook Pro 'Mac-M'
CPU: 2.4 Ghtz Merom
Cache: 4MB
Mem: 4GB
HD: 320GB 5400 (Western Digital Passport drive that I upgraded)
VRAM: 256MB

Boot Up Time:
Mac-P: 28 seconds
Mac-M: 31 seconds

VideoHub Conversion:
The file that I used is Episode 1, Season 3 of the TV Series Lost. It is a 348.8MB AVI file running 42:15. I converted it using the "Optimize for iPod Touch" setting and did H.264 encoding and Standard Quality.

Time Elapsed:
Mac-P: 12:09
Mac-P: 13:29
*Note - when I first clicked on the 'Start button in VisualHub, the estimate time for each was 14 minutes for the Mac-P and 16 minutes for the Mac-M, both finished ahead of the estimate.

GeekBench Testing:
(testing was done immediately after cold boot - I disabled the Login Items, Shut Down, turned back on and went right into Geekbench and ran the tests with nothing else running).
Time to Run:
Mac-P: 22 seconds
Mac-M: 24 seconds

Mac-P:
Overall Score: 3212
Interger Score: 2830
Floating Point Score: 4500
Memory Score: 2412
Stream Score: 1642

Mac-M:
Overall Score: 3074
Interger Score: 2697
Floating Point Score: 4244
Memory Score: 2266
Stream Score: 1923

System Information:
Mac-P
Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Compiler GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)
Operating System Mac OS X 10.5.2 (Build 9C2018)
Model MacBookPro4,1
Motherboard MacBookPro4,1
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T9300 @ 2.50GHz
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 23 Stepping 6
Logical Processors 2
Physical Processors 1
Processor Frequency 2.50 GHz
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB
L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB
L2 Cache 6.00 MB
L3 Cache 0.00 B
Bus Frequency 800 MHz
Memory 2.00 GB
Memory Type 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
SIMD 1

Mac-M
Platform Mac OS X x86 (32-bit)
Compiler GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5465)
Operating System Mac OS X 10.5.2 (Build 9C31)
Model MacBook Pro (Mid 2007)
Motherboard MacBookPro3,1
Processor Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU T7700 @ 2.40GHz
Processor ID GenuineIntel Family 6 Model 15 Stepping 10
Logical Processors 2
Physical Processors 1
Processor Frequency 2.40 GHz
L1 Instruction Cache 32.0 KB
L1 Data Cache 32.0 KB
L2 Cache 4.00 MB
L3 Cache 0.00 B
Bus Frequency 800 MHz
Memory 4.00 GB
Memory Type 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
SIMD 1

One other thing I'll comment on is the temperature - I have the iStat Pro Widget on both and both temperature readings were very close to each other (all categories were within 1-2 degrees of each other) before and after converting the video. The CPU temperature both fluctuated from 110-112 degrees before the video conversion to 128-131 degrees immediately after on both computers. The enclosure bottom reading was 90 degrees for Mac-P and 92 for Mac-M. With that being said, the Mac-P feels alot cooler to the touch. It doesn't seem to get as warm as my Mac-M.

I will be upgrading the Mac-P to 4GB ram soon, so once I do that I'll reference this thread and update with the new scores (probably within 2-3 weeks unless someone wants to donate 4GB of crucial memory to get it done sooner!:D)
Click to expand...

Dude, thanks for all the work!
 
akadmon said:
To make this a fairer test (begone images of Cinderalla!), you should rerun everything after swapping RAM between the two machines and averaging the two sets of results.
Click to expand...

I'd thought about doing that but I think it would have opened a bigger gap in the results as it would be comparing a 2.4Ghtz w/ 2GM Ram vs a 2.5Ghtz w/ 4GB Ram.

Had the 2.4Ghtz been faster in anything I probably would have done the tests that way to really see how much the RAM effected things, but since the 2.5Ghtz w/ less ram was still faster (although slightly) I didn't think we'd learn anything new.
 
This is a good test for people on the fence about upgrading to see if it is worth it to them. I'd like to see what the Penryn would get with 4gb of ram.
 
I say completely level the playing field!


2GB ram each!




Actually, I'd be more interested in seeing what kind of performance the 4gb in the peryn would do.... Think it's significant?
 
akadmon said:
To make this a fairer test (begone images of Cinderalla!), you should rerun everything after swapping RAM between the two machines and averaging the two sets of results.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but he said it wasn't scientific... I think he did a pretty good job!

Hls811 said:
I'd thought about doing that but I think it would have opened a bigger gap in the results as it would be comparing a 2.4Ghtz w/ 2GM Ram vs a 2.5Ghtz w/ 4GB Ram.

Had the 2.4Ghtz been faster in anything I probably would have done the tests that way to really see how much the RAM effected things, but since the 2.5Ghtz w/ less ram was still faster (although slightly) I didn't think we'd learn anything new.
Click to expand...

wayland1985 said:
I say completely level the playing field!


2GB ram each!




Actually, I'd be more interested in seeing what kind of performance the 4gb in the peryn would do.... Think it's significant?
Click to expand...

You both missed akadmon's point. Some of the speed difference might be attributable to the RAM (different make/quality/random-variations). He was suggesting that you switch the RAM between the two machines, such as MBP-P with RAM-M and vice versa, and then re-doing all the tests and averaging the results to be more fair.

Cheers
 
Adokimus said:
Yeah, but he said it wasn't scientific... I think he did a pretty good job!





You both missed akadmon's point. Some of the speed difference might be attributable to the RAM (different make/quality/random-variations). He was suggesting that you switch the RAM between the two machines, such as MBP-P with RAM-M and vice versa, and then re-doing all the tests and averaging the results to be more fair.

Cheers
Click to expand...

the Merom is gone, I had to ship that one out already, but I should be getting the new 4GB for the Penryn this week and I'll re-run the tests.
 
MacBook Pro 'Mac-P' (Upgraded)
CPU: 2.5 Ghtz Penryn
Cache: 6MB
Mem: 4GB
HD: 250GB 5400
VRAM: 512MB

Boot Up Time:
Mac-P: 28 seconds

GeekBench Testing:
(testing was done immediately after cold boot - I disabled the Login Items, Shut Down, turned back on and went right into Geekbench and ran the tests with nothing else running).
Time to Run:
Mac-P: 20 seconds

Mac-P:
Overall Score: 3235
Interger Score: 2862
Floating Point Score: 4515
Memory Score: 2416
Stream Score: 1708

I haven't had time to do the video conversion test yet.. I'm not sure how memory intensive that is, so I'd assume the results would be similiar.
 
CINEBENCH R10
****************************************************

Tester :

Processor :
MHz :
Number of CPUs : 2
Operating System : OS X 32 BIT 10.5.2

Graphics Card : NVIDIA GeForce 8600M GT OpenGL Engine
Resolution : <fill this out>
Color Depth : <fill this out>

****************************************************

Rendering (Single CPU): 2894 CB-CPU
Rendering (Multiple CPU): 5433 CB-CPU

Multiprocessor Speedup: 1.88

Shading (OpenGL Standard) : 5213 CB-GFX


****************************************************
 
I was thinking about an upgrade to the new 2.5 but I dont think that it would be worth it after seeing your tests..even if your 2.4 only has 2GB ram. thanxs for your work
 
Yea a difference of 138 in the geekbench score is nothing in comparison. I mean my Mac Pro gets 7900, now that's a huge difference! =D
 
jjahshik32 said:
Yea a difference of 138 in the geekbench score is nothing in comparison. I mean my Mac Pro gets 7900, now that's a huge difference! =D
Click to expand...

So, you're paying roughly $1.07 per 'point' and I'm paying about .77 cents per 'point'. I guess its true - you get what you pay for.
 
Thanks for sharing that information. I'm glad to hear (or read) that Mac-P feels cooler on the touch. :) Now I'm just waiting patiently for the purchasing department to get mine in.
 
Hls811 said:
So, you're paying roughly $1.07 per 'point' and I'm paying about .77 cents per 'point'. I guess its true - you get what you pay for.
Click to expand...

Well my point is that what's the point of picking up the penryn when you already have a merom 2.4ghz mbp with no differences at all. And your paying .77 cents per point for something almost dead identical from the penryn and merom and you already own the merom. Unless work or someone else purchased for you then why not, of course.

Nehalem is the only next best thing imo. Penryn=merom. I actually played with my friend's the other day, it is nice I love the trackpad but then again speed/heat wise felt pretty much identical.
 
jjahshik32 said:
Well my point is that what's the point of picking up the penryn when you already have a merom 2.4ghz mbp with no differences at all. And your paying .77 cents per point for something almost dead identical from the penryn and merom and you already own the merom. Unless work or someone else purchased for you then why not, of course.

Nehalem is the only next best thing imo. Penryn=merom. I actually played with my friend's the other day, it is nice I love the trackpad but then again speed/heat wise felt pretty much identical.
Click to expand...

The only reason I did it was because I was able to sell my merom for such a good deal that it didn't cost me anything to upgrade. (Even accounting for the ebay/paypal/shipping fees!) I was all set to pull down my auction until someone bought it with the Buy It Now! :)
 
boonleng said:
Thanks for sharing that information. I'm glad to hear (or read) that Mac-P feels cooler on the touch. :) Now I'm just waiting patiently for the purchasing department to get mine in.
Click to expand...


I find it much cooler to use than the previous generation and I'm not imagining it. I can actually use this one on my lap for extended periods without it getting hot. And the top doesn't get nearly as warm either. Pretty damn cool. Literally and figuratively.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back