Apple's new 11" MacBook Air a "much faster iPad" or "much slower MacBook Pro"
The first benchmarks on Apple's new MacBook Airs have hit the web, revealing that the 13.3-inch models trail the company's similarly-sized MacBook Pros by a small margin while the 11.6-inch models fall far shorter in processing power, and may be more appropriately categorized as a larger, faster iPad.
Geekbench developer Primate Labs has compiled scores from the Geekbench Result Browser for all the standard MacBook Air CPU configurations dating back to 2008 and pit them against scores for the iPad and the latest 13-inch MacBook Pro models, as those are the two products most customers will use as comparisons.
The new 13.3-inch MacBook Airs, which include a 1.86GHz Core 2 Duo processor, faired pretty well, posting scores that suggest it's capable of roughly 80% of the performance of the latest 13.3-inch MacBook Pros, which ship with 2.4GHz and 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo chips.
On the other hand, the 11.6-inch MacBook Air, which includes a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo, was only capable of reaching 60% of the performance of the 2.4GHz 13.3-inch MacBook Pro, raising questions as to whether it would make a good fit as a primary machine.
"There are two ways you can look at the new 11-inch MacBook Air; it's either a much smaller but slower MacBook Pro, or a much faster but larger iPad," wrote Geekbench author John Poole. "The 11-inch MacBook Air is small enough that I'd consider bringing it instead of an iPad, but I'd worry it's not fast enough (or have enough screen space) to be my primary laptop."
It should be noted that Poole did not include scores for Late 2010 1.6GHz or 2.13GHz MacBook Airs, which are $100 build-to-order options for the 11.6- and 13.3-inch models, respectively, through Apple's online store.
AppleInsider recently published a first look at the new Airs ahead of its formal review. It also lined up a deal with reseller MacMall, which is currently offering AppleInsider readers an additional 3% off its already reduced pricing when ordering online using the links in the chart below, or through AppleInsider's full-fledged Mac Price Guide. It's also offering $102 savings off a high-end, non-standard 13.3-inch configuration that includes the 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo processor mentioned above.
Geekbench developer Primate Labs has compiled scores from the Geekbench Result Browser for all the standard MacBook Air CPU configurations dating back to 2008 and pit them against scores for the iPad and the latest 13-inch MacBook Pro models, as those are the two products most customers will use as comparisons.
The new 13.3-inch MacBook Airs, which include a 1.86GHz Core 2 Duo processor, faired pretty well, posting scores that suggest it's capable of roughly 80% of the performance of the latest 13.3-inch MacBook Pros, which ship with 2.4GHz and 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo chips.
On the other hand, the 11.6-inch MacBook Air, which includes a 1.4GHz Core 2 Duo, was only capable of reaching 60% of the performance of the 2.4GHz 13.3-inch MacBook Pro, raising questions as to whether it would make a good fit as a primary machine.
"There are two ways you can look at the new 11-inch MacBook Air; it's either a much smaller but slower MacBook Pro, or a much faster but larger iPad," wrote Geekbench author John Poole. "The 11-inch MacBook Air is small enough that I'd consider bringing it instead of an iPad, but I'd worry it's not fast enough (or have enough screen space) to be my primary laptop."
It should be noted that Poole did not include scores for Late 2010 1.6GHz or 2.13GHz MacBook Airs, which are $100 build-to-order options for the 11.6- and 13.3-inch models, respectively, through Apple's online store.
AppleInsider recently published a first look at the new Airs ahead of its formal review. It also lined up a deal with reseller MacMall, which is currently offering AppleInsider readers an additional 3% off its already reduced pricing when ordering online using the links in the chart below, or through AppleInsider's full-fledged Mac Price Guide. It's also offering $102 savings off a high-end, non-standard 13.3-inch configuration that includes the 2.13GHz Core 2 Duo processor mentioned above.
Comments
I personally would take the extra weight for performance and display size but I think what they have squeezed into these small pkgs is amazing.
Between 13"MBP 2.4GHz and 11"Air 1.4GHz ? 1332
Between 11"Air 1.4GHz and iPad ? 1573
Conclusion, the 11"Air 1.4GHz is more similar in performance stats to a MBP, therefore it is more analogous of a slower MBP.
Benchmark performance differences:
Between 13"MBP 2.4GHz and 11"Air 1.4GHz — 1332
Between 11"Air 1.4GHz and iPad — 1573
Conclusion, the 11"Air 1.4GHz is more similar in performance stats to a MBP, therefore it is more analogous of a slower MBP.
Note that the test was done based on browsing. Add to that the fact that the Air has a full operating system to run real programs (i.e. more than just apps...you can do your taxes on it, for example), has USB ports for extra storage and connectivity, has a keyboard, etc....it's even more obvious that it's a slow MBP, and not a fast iPad.
Plus....the iPad needs a 'real' computer to snyc with. It's not stand-alone. You can sync an iPad with a Macbook Air, just like any other Mac.
Benchmark performance differences:
Between 13"MBP 2.4GHz and 11"Air 1.4GHz ? 1332
Between 11"Air 1.4GHz and iPad ? 1573
Conclusion, the 11"Air 1.4GHz is more similar in performance stats to a MBP, therefore it is more analogous of a slower MBP.
I'll buy that. Discussion closed.
But, I don't think that matters to a majority of the people who will buy one. My new Macbook Air is perfect as my primary computer (on my desk), while the Mac Mini is connected to the TV. I don't think many hard-core geeks/computer folks understand that such a small and lightweight machine is fine for a vast majority of the people "out there". I won't do photoshop on this machine, but I don't use photoshot....the only heavy duty program I use is Arc GIS (on the Windows 7 partition) when connected to my desktop LCD monitor. The rest? email, web browsing, music, videos, etc. It works just fine.
So, for those who don't like it, don't buy it.
The damned thing just FEELS fast, and frankly that's all that matters to me, particularly if I need its other features (e.g. ultra-light portability.)
But as much as I drool over this thing, I just don't need it for my own use cases.
An iMac at home and an iPhone in my pocket, and when necessary, an iPad in my bag, and I have yet to find a situation where I'm wanting.
I think they've filled the niches pretty completely now.
"There are two ways you can look at the new 11-inch MacBook Air; it's either a much smaller but slower MacBook Pro, or a much faster but larger iPad," wrote Geekbench author John Poole. "The 11-inch MacBook Air is small enough that I'd consider bringing it instead of an iPad, but I'd worry it's not fast enough (or have enough screen space) to be my primary laptop."
Its a silly article. I am not sure the Airs were ever really designed to be anyone's primary machine. Having said that, it totally depends on your requirements. If you want a small lightweight laptop, primarily use it for email, web surfing and some basic office stuff, and possibly some iPhoto and iTunes, I am sure the 11" will suffice. If you absolutely need to work with all of the above applications at the same time you'd be pretty daft to get the 11". If you also require peripherals, lots of storage and CS5 and FCP, then you deserve what you get if you shell out for the small Air.
In other words my primary machine might be your Super Computer and likewise your primary machine may be my pocket calculator. Its relative.
There's objective performance measurements (CPU speed, etc) and then there's perceived performance. My experience playing with both Airs at the Apple Store, as well as reviews, tell me that the flash ram more than makes up for the CPU differences.
The damned thing just FEELS fast, and frankly that's all that matters to me, particularly if I need its other features (e.g. ultra-light portability.)
But as much as I drool over this thing, I just don't need it for my own use cases.
An iMac at home and an iPhone in my pocket, and when necessary, an iPad in my bag, and I have yet to find a situation where I'm wanting.
I think they've filled the niches pretty completely now.
You've got it right. Benchmark scores don't necessarily translate well to the experience of using a device. I have been using the 11.6" Air for a few days now, and have sold my MBP and iPad, and have not regretted it yet. It is quite liberating to forget about specs and just use the machine as the tool that it is!
i.e., processor speed has largely gotten to be a "mine's bigger than yours" issue.
Irrelevant for the vast majority of real world users.
You've got it right. Benchmark scores don't necessarily translate well to the experience of using a device. I have been using the 11.6" Air for a few days now, and have sold my MBP and iPad, and have not regretted it yet. It is quite liberating to forget about specs and just use the machine as the tool that it is!
-2
You sold an iPad.
The Macbook AIR models should not so much be compared with the PRO models as they should the regular Macbook models.
If anything, all this comparison does is highlight that the Macbook PRO models are in need of a product refresh...
How do they compare to the Macbook?
Benchmark performance differences:
Between 13"MBP 2.4GHz and 11"Air 1.4GHz ? 1332
Between 11"Air 1.4GHz and iPad ? 1573
Conclusion, the 11"Air 1.4GHz is more similar in performance stats to a MBP, therefore it is more analogous of a slower MBP.
Probably a better way of comparing them is:
iPad runs iOS4, MBA runs Mac OS X 10.6
MBA is 4.5 TIMES faster than iPad
C'mon everyone. The MBA is a Mac, and the iPad is a very different animal altogether.
Except that the Macbook Air not a tablet, has no touch interface, can't be held like a tablet, doesn't operate like a tablet, doesn't look like a tablet and is not an iPad. Other than that, it's a faster iPad I guess.
The report emphasizes, however, that Geekbench only measures processor and memory performance, leaving out what is expected to be significant overall performance improvements over earlier generations due to the use of the NVIDIA GeForce 320M video card and flash storage across all models.
No offense to Geekbench, but i would like to see Flash drive and video card benchmarks, too.
"... and may be more appropriately categorized as a larger, faster iPad".
Except that the Macbook Air not a tablet, has no touch interface, can't be held like a tablet, doesn't operate like a tablet, doesn't look like a tablet and is not an iPad. Other than that, it's a faster iPad I guess.
:-) Its really a lighter and faster PowerBook 100