or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Benchmarks of Apple's new MacBook Pros find speeds 13%-53% faster
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Benchmarks of Apple's new MacBook Pros find speeds 13%-53% faster

post #1 of 67
Thread Starter 
The addition of Intel's latest-generation Sandy Bridge processors has boosted the performance of Apple's new line of MacBook Pros by between 13 percent and 53 percent faster than their predecessors.

Speedmark 6.5 tests administered by Macworld found that the entry-level 13-inch MacBook Pro with a 2.3GHz Core i5 dual-core processor earned a score of 140, versus its predecessor's score of 106. That means the new 13-inch MacBook Pro is 35 percent faster than the model released last April.

While the new system was faster at "just about everything," it did fall short in playing the game Call of Duty 4, averaging 26 frames per second versus 33 frames in last year's model. This is due to the use of Intel's integrated HD Graphics 3000 in the Sandy Bridge processor, while last year's model included a discrete Nvidia graphics card.

The 13-inch 2.7GHz Core i7 MacBook Pro was 13 percent faster than last year's offering with a score of 155. It sports a 2.7GHz Core i7 processor, but again relies on Intel's discrete graphics.

The 15-inch MacBook Pro with 2.0GHz quad-core Core i7 MacBook Pro came in 33 percent faster than last year's 15-inch model with a 2.4GHz Core i5 dual-core system. And the 15-inch 2.2GHz Core i7 quad-core came in 38 percent faster than last year's model.



The new 17-inch MacBook Pro has similar specifications to the high-end 15-inch model, and was 53 percent faster than last year's 17-inch model. Both the new 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros feature discrete Radeon HD 6750M graphics with 1GB of dedicated video memory that makes them display 31 percent more frames per second in Call of Duty 4.

Macworld also had the new MacBook Pros square off against Apple's iMac all-in-one desktop line, and found that the 2.0GHz 15-inch MacBook Pro beat out the entry-level 3.06GHz dual core Core i3 iMac by one speedmark point. They also found the 15- and 17-inch 2.2GHz MacBook Pros to be about 7 percent faster than the high-end standard configuration iMac with a 2.7GHz quad-core Core i5 processor.

For more, see AppleInsider's coverage of Apple's new line of MacBook Pros:

Apple's new 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros feature quad-core i7 chips, AMD graphics

Apple's new 13-inch MacBook Pros sport dual-core Core i5, i7 chips

First Look: Inside Apple's fast new Thunderbolt port on MacBook Pros

Teardown of Apple's 15-inch MacBook Pro finds large Thunderbolt chip
post #2 of 67
Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #3 of 67
I’m more interested in real world battery tests under various usage models. I would expect that idle that the new MBPs exceed the previous MBPs.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #4 of 67
on my 2.2ghz MBP 15" I can play TF2, SC2, WoW, and LFD2 all at max settings flawlessly. I have yet to install Windows and try out Bad Company 2.

I am very pleased.
post #5 of 67
I really like the $1800 15 inch, it looks sweet. just wondering if anyone can give me some idea if its any good for windows gaming? not looking for a gaming laptop, I want a high end nice professional laptop that can boot windows and play games from time to time.

are teh macbook pros with discreet graphics OK for windows games? I am particularly interested in FPS games, and I know I will be playing much Duke Nukem Forever when it arrives this summer
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #6 of 67
Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.
post #7 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by n42 View Post

on my 2.2ghz MBP 15" I can play TF2, SC2, WoW, and LFD2 all at max settings flawlessly. I have yet to install Windows and try out Bad Company 2.

I am very pleased.

Just saw your post after I posted...thanks for the answer!
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #8 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.

If the overall performance is higher than before its hyperbolic to say its hobbled. While I would liked to have had a dGPU in the new 13 MBP that cant happen without something else being removed, like the ODD, or being reduced, like the battery. The former would be great, the latter would be bad.

I say pick your battles. Is pathetic battery life worth getting a dGPU? Is still using the Nvidia 320M worth it if they have to keep using C2D? When you weigh the pros and cons I think this is the best move. Its also the move that most predicted would happen. Nothing else really makes sense until they do a case change that can allow a larger logic board.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #9 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.

cant speak to the current models, but when I had the opportunity to open up a few MBPs of the first unibody generation (first ones with sealed battery) to upgrade some ram, I can tell you that it is (or was with that generation anyhow) purely engineering and not marketing, you simply cant fit the GPU and fan in the current 13 inch chasie its just too thin and narrow, its pretty amazing that it can fit everything in that is in, I have never seen such tight space margins on a laptop.
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
You can't quantify how much I don't care -- Bob Kevoian of the Bob and Tom Show.
Reply
post #10 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

What do you think of the integrated graphics chip on the MBP compared to what we currently have?

Its better than the alternatives while they are still keeping the internal optical drive.

Quote:
I also never thought I would see a day moving foward where Apple would put out a product where they posted lower battery times. However I think Apple is rating differently now based on WIFI usage

There previous usage was based on WiFi productivity, and while Apple and Sony had the most stringent testing methods they still didnt represent real world usage. Note that Steve mentioned this change in their testing method during the MBA presentation last October.

I get a solid 6.5 to 7.5 hours of actual usage from my10-hour battery MBP doing my normal routine so I assume there new method is somewhat inline with my usage patterns. I suspect that its not any worse than before and likely a little better but I want to see comparisons (using a new battery in an last gen MBP, not one with a few hundred cycles on the battery, like mine).
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #11 of 67
why Apple held back on Firewire 3200, USB3, HDMI, Express card and eSata. They knew what they were working on and made a choice to wait and invest in the technology that could all of this and more rather than invest in every wiz bang cutting edge of the moment new thing or detour which came along.
post #12 of 67
We knew the graphics would take a hit on the MBP's. Nothing to be done about that without adding a discrete card, which might happen in next year's redesign if Apple finally drops the SuperDrive from the MB line.

I love how they compared the MBP's to the iMac's. While impressive that the MBP's scored higher, it's not too unexpected as the iMac's were just as in need of an update as the MBP's.

Still the 53% improvement for the 17" is really nice. Glad to see they finally gave the MBP's quad-core's and GPU's with 1GB of memory.
MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
MBA 13" i7/4GB/256GB

C2D MBP 2.33GHZ/2 Gig/120 Gig/256MB
Reply
post #13 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by aiolos View Post

We knew the graphics would take a hit on the MBP's. Nothing to be done about that without adding a discrete card, which might happen in next year's redesign if Apple finally drops the SuperDrive from the MB line.

No AACS support for Blu-ray movie playback in SL or Lion. No change in the speed of the SuperDrive since 2007, I recall correctly. Thats a pretty long stagnation. I cant see how we can not expect Apple to depreciate the ODD with the next case change.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #14 of 67
Check out other's review about MBP 15".
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/lapt...11.aspx?page=1

It looks like that the battery life lasts about 5:25. I do wish Apple could bring more lightness and longer battery life into MBP. Under 2kg in weight, and ten hours of battery life would be a sweet spot for MBP.
post #15 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownz View Post

Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.

That's a little harsh isn't it?
post #16 of 67
I'm surprised the 1.83Ghz Core 2 MacBook Air outranked the 2.4Ghz Core 2 MacBook on the bench. Now I don't feel so bad using the Air as my primary laptop. I'd like to see how the new Sandy Bridge MacBook Pros on the high-end compare to the single-CPU Mac Pro with their older Xeons and AMD graphics cards.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #17 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

I really like the $1800 15 inch, it looks sweet. just wondering if anyone can give me some idea if its any good for windows gaming? not looking for a gaming laptop, I want a high end nice professional laptop that can boot windows and play games from time to time.

are teh macbook pros with discreet graphics OK for windows games? I am particularly interested in FPS games, and I know I will be playing much Duke Nukem Forever when it arrives this summer

I play games on my 2010 MBP using Win7 and Bootcamp, and it's pretty good. I play NFS:Shift, L4D, L4D2, BF2:BC, Crysis, Civ V, HL2 and Fallout 3 etc in 1680*1050 on my 15" machine.

I usually play in full detail, but with no AA.

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply

Do not overrate what you have received, nor envy others.
15" Matte MacBook Pro: 2.66Ghz i7, 8GB RAM, GT330m 512MB, 512GB SSD

iPhone 5 Black 32GB

iPad 3rd Generation, 32GB

Mac Mini Core2Duo 2.26ghz,...

Reply
post #18 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I say pick your battles. Is pathetic battery life worth getting a dGPU? Is still using the Nvidia 320M worth it if they have to keep using C2D? When you weigh the pros and cons I think this is the best move. It’s also the move that most predicted would happen. Nothing else really makes sense until they do a case change that can allow a larger logic board.

Heard a knowledgeable engineer speculate that a mid-level dGPU in an external closure hooked to TB is technically feasible and could improve graphics performance on the 13" some - but given the engineering and software involved, and the likely price tag (and kludginess factor) seems like a long-shot for such a small market niche.

However, if TB scales up by 10x over the next few years as projected, all kinds of never before possible enhancements become not only possible but nearly inevitable on ALL TB-equipped computers.

Also, the 1st gen TBolt internal parts are big enough to help 'splain why no room (with the, yes, superfluous ODD still the biggest single component) for a discrete GPU in the 13" case space.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownz View Post

Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tbusby52 View Post

That's a little harsh isn't it?

Jump! Jump! (J/K, really....)

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #19 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

If the overall performance is higher than before its hyperbolic to say its hobbled.

Actually it is not. Using an average to gauge a performance increase can be extremely misleading. The MBP 13 has a great CPU and it is definitely an improvement, so if what you do on your machine is CPU bound you will be happy.

However, if you find the CPU of your current MPB 13 adequate and the GPU is where you would like improvement, than this MBP 13 is a downgrade.

Take myself for example, the only time my MBP 13 shows a performance weakness is when I play a game (I have the model that was just replaced).

"Hobbled" seems to fit here because Apple decided to combine a great CPU upgrade with a GPU downgrade compared to the model it is replacing.

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply
post #20 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

Intel didn't give them a choice.
post #21 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

I'm surprised the 1.83Ghz Core 2 MacBook Air outranked the 2.4Ghz Core 2 MacBook on the bench.

That is probably because the benchmark in question was an average of a bunch of tests and some of them had to do with drive performance. Since the Air has an SSD, that gave it a boost. On CPU and GPU based benchmarks the Air is slower.

-kpluck

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply

Do you use MagicJack?

The default settings will automatically charge your credit card each year for service renewal. You will not be notified or warned in anyway. You can turn auto renewal off.

Reply
post #22 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.

It isn't hobbled. This is an entry level model. It's entry level model priced. GPU performance isn't worse than the previous model, and is slightly better. But the much faster system overall makes up for the lack of a separate GPU and memory.

If Apple added what you want, they would have had to charge more, and then you would be complaining about that.

The 13" model is a compromise for those who want, and need, a smaller, lighter machine, but who don't need that extra graphics performance. People who need seriously more power will buy the 15" which has it, and the larger, higher resolution screen they need with that power.

For the market the 13" is aimed at, it's plenty good enough.
post #23 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownz View Post

Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.

Uh, it's just a computer, you know? I'm sure there are much more important things for you to kill yourself over, but they will pass as well, so you might as well stay in the land of the living, so that you can complain along with the rest of us.

And you can be sure that plenty of PC users are thinking the same thing about Sandy Bridge.
post #24 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

I haven't had a chance to look at GPU benchmarks. I know you and I both own the currrent 13" MBP. What do you think of the integrated graphics chip on the MBP compared to what we currently have?

I also never thought I would see a day moving foward where Apple would put out a product where they posted lower battery times. However I think Apple is rating differently now based on WIFI usage

They're using stricter testing methods. What I hate seeing is battery life given as "up to...". That says nothing at all. I'd rather see an honest number, such as we get with the iPad, and other Apple products.

We have CIPA battery rating for cameras, it's about time we get an industry applied standard for other goods as well.
post #25 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

While the new system was faster at "just about everything," it did fall short in playing the game Call of Duty 4, averaging 26 frames per second versus 33 frames in last year's model.

From playable to unplayable in some cases. 26FPS I'd say is playable though. For an IGP, I wouldn't say it's necessarily bad but it's a downgrade from last year. It shows how far behind Intel has been when it takes them 2 years to catch up to NVidia. If only they'd put 24 EUs in Ivy Bridge, even 20 and they'd come even with what NVidia would've had.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

This is due to the use of Intel's integrated HD Graphics 3000 in the Sandy Bridge processor, while last year's model included a discrete Nvidia graphics card.

The 320M was integrated too but it was separate from the CPU die. The Intel one is combined with the CPU. Apple hasn't had a discrete GPU in the smaller pro laptops since the 12" Powerbooks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Both the new 15- and 17-inch MacBook Pros feature discrete Radeon HD 6750M graphics with 1GB of dedicated video memory that makes them display 31 percent more frames per second in Call of Duty 4.

I would have expected a little more than that given Apple's 3x faster graph for Half-Life 2.

The 6490 would be about 30% slower than the 330M and the 6750 has 3x the shader processors although they are at a lower clock. Comparing clock speed, the 6750 should be over 2x the 6490.

So: 6490 (=9600M) -- x1.5 --> 330M -- x1.5 --> 6750

It's a bit of a wild stretch to get 300% out of 50% expected improvement. Maybe they had a blowtorch on the 330M model so that it slowed down.
post #26 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by saarek View Post

Such a shame that Apple decided to hobble the 13" MacBook Pro with the pathetic intel integrated graphics chip.

They could easily have has the best line out ever of MacBooks, still at least the 15-17" MacBooks have everything a pro could desire.

Apple could only let CPU performance get so far ahead before being forced to make the jump. This generations Intel graphics are better than last generations, so the gap in video performance is smaller and the gains in CPU performance are larger.

Nvidia doesn't make integrated video chipsets for the i5/i7 line so there's little Apple can do about it. Unless you can find room in the 13" MBP for discrete graphics. I'm pretty sure Intel is discontinuing Core 2 duo production as well, Apple rode Core 2 duo to the end.
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
The key to enjoying these forums: User CP -> Edit Ignore List
Reply
post #27 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by extremeskater View Post

Yeah I am not sure why the optical drive isn't a thing of the past by now. Nice to see you back posting.

By the way I decided to break down and get myself an MBA. I use it more now then my MBP.

Thanks. I’ll be gone again in a day.

11 or 13” MBA? I don’t mine the CPU performance in them, but the max storage will keep me away until I get a desktop as my primary machine… which isn’t likely to happen. I’ll likely stick with my current MBP with SSD and HDD until Apple revamps the lineup.


Quote:
Originally Posted by da585 View Post

Check out other's review about MBP 15".
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/lapt...11.aspx?page=1

It looks like that the battery life lasts about 5:25. I do wish Apple could bring more lightness and longer battery life into MBP. Under 2kg in weight, and ten hours of battery life would be a sweet spot for MBP.

There tests are as informative as Apple’s testing methods. They say nothing of the sites, types or sites, size of the sites, other apps, brightness of display, power efficiency settings, type of wireless network, distance from router, internet connection speed, or page refresh times… to name a few. I’d be happy with just a small sample of those, which is something I give AnandTech credit for.

Quote:
Battery Life
We never expect stellar battery life out of 15-inch notebooks, yet that's where the 15-inch MacBook Pro really stands out. On our LAPTOP Battery Test (continuous web surfing over Wi-Fi), the notebook lasted 5 hours and 25 minutes; that's an hour and a half longer than the mainstream average, and almost equal to the ultraportable average, but it's below the expected 7-hour runtime Apple quotes; we will retest this system and update the review.



Quote:
Originally Posted by kpluck View Post

Actually it is not. Using an average to gauge a performance increase can be extremely misleading. The MBP 13 has a great CPU and it is definitely an improvement, so if what you do on your machine is CPU bound you will be happy.

However, if you find the CPU of your current MPB 13 adequate and the GPU is where you would like improvement, than this MBP 13 is a downgrade.

Take myself for example, the only time my MBP 13 shows a performance weakness is when I play a game (I have the model that was just replaced).

"Hobbled" seems to fit here because Apple decided to combine a great CPU upgrade with a GPU downgrade compared to the model it is replacing.

But you’re isolating ONE aspect of the machine to do a comparison and then making a claim that the entire machine is hobbled compared to the previous version. That is an erroneous argument.

It’s like if said that Thunderbolt as a whole was a hobbled technology compared to FireWire but then using the fact FireWire can be 4.5M in length compared to Thunderbolt’s 3M using copper.

I’m note sure if yours and saarek argument would be considered a confirmation bias, composition fallacy, both or other but it’s not a sound argument to say the 13” MBP itself is hobbled without qualifying it to refer to your needs or needs of those for a particular usage pattern.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #28 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

cant speak to the current models, but when I had the opportunity to open up a few MBPs of the first unibody generation (first ones with sealed battery) to upgrade some ram, I can tell you that it is (or was with that generation anyhow) purely engineering and not marketing, you simply cant fit the GPU and fan in the current 13 inch chasie its just too thin and narrow, its pretty amazing that it can fit everything in that is in, I have never seen such tight space margins on a laptop.

That's pretty old data, a discrete GPU would most likely fit if Apple wanted to do that. The Sandy Bridge CPU and intel platform controller are MUCH smaller than the old core 2 duo and nvidia system chip that were used in the previous generation 13" MBPs. If you want to point back to a design that was done several years ago as evidence that something can't be done today then why not go back two decades more and say that it wouldn't be possible to produce ANY notebook computer. I mean just look at the size of a 1990 era desktop, how could that possibly fit?

Besides that, why would they have tried to make the previous generation's motherboard smaller than it had to be? Just so they could say, "Hey, look at all that free space that we didn't use." No, they designed it to fit the space they had with the chips sets they selected based upon performance and cost considerations.
post #29 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by da585 View Post

Check out other's review about MBP 15".
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/lapt...11.aspx?page=1

It looks like that the battery life lasts about 5:25. I do wish Apple could bring more lightness and longer battery life into MBP. Under 2kg in weight, and ten hours of battery life would be a sweet spot for MBP.

If you find an engineer who can accomplish that, I'm sure Apple will hire him (or her) on the spot.
post #30 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownz View Post

Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.

That's what Ebay is for. A well-kept MacBook Pro that is just a generation old will fetch a fairly decent price on Ebay. Only you can decide if it is worth selling your current MacBook Pro and pay some more $$ to get the new one.
post #31 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The addition of Intel's latest-generation Sandy Bridge processors has boosted the performance of Apple's new line of MacBook Pros by between 13 percent and 53 percent faster than their predecessors.

I'm interested in seeing some h.264 encoding benchmarks.
And if there is software/ benchmark apps that support intel's new Quicksync option I read somewhere (maybe here?) that this could potentially speed up h.264 encoding dramatically. (like tenfold or some crazy numbers like that.)
post #32 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by a_greer View Post

I really like the $1800 15 inch, it looks sweet. just wondering if anyone can give me some idea if its any good for windows gaming? not looking for a gaming laptop, I want a high end nice professional laptop that can boot windows and play games from time to time.

are teh macbook pros with discreet graphics OK for windows games? I am particularly interested in FPS games, and I know I will be playing much Duke Nukem Forever when it arrives this summer

While not about Windows gaming, the original MacWorld article did have additional frame rate comparisons to previous Macs. That might give you an idea of the graphics performance for gaming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by da585 View Post

Check out other's review about MBP 15".
http://www.laptopmag.com/review/lapt...11.aspx?page=1

It looks like that the battery life lasts about 5:25. I do wish Apple could bring more lightness and longer battery life into MBP. Under 2kg in weight, and ten hours of battery life would be a sweet spot for MBP.

I think you'd end up with the performance of the MacBook Air.

Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

I'm interested in seeing some h.264 encoding benchmarks.
And if there is software/ benchmark apps that support intel's new Quicksync option I read somewhere (maybe here?) that this could potentially speed up h.264 encoding dramatically. (like tenfold or some crazy numbers like that.)

The original MacWorld article has benchmarks for encoding using Handbrake. There's a pretty good boost, but it's probably mostly due to the quad-cores. Maybe a future update the Handbrake will make better use of the new technology.
post #33 of 67
Shit. Well, there goes my update plans. I shall NOT have a graphic downgrade, Apple. I hoped Turbo would fix this but that was just wishful thinking.

Any tips on how to wrap a 21.5" iMac on an airplane's baggage?

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #34 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

I would have expected a little more than that given Apple's 3x faster graph for Half-Life 2.

The 6490 would be about 30% slower than the 330M and the 6750 has 3x the shader processors although they are at a lower clock. Comparing clock speed, the 6750 should be over 2x the 6490.

So: 6490 (=9600M) -- x1.5 --> 330M -- x1.5 --> 6750

It's a bit of a wild stretch to get 300% out of 50% expected improvement. Maybe they had a blowtorch on the 330M model so that it slowed down.

Remember this is Mac gaming we are talking about. It's slowly getting better, by right now it still sucks a lot. And I mean on performance per hardware, not just 4 year-old titles.

EDIT: Wait, where did you read that the 6490 is worse than the 330M? I know FLOPS don't tell you the whole picture, but I'll be damned if it doesn't mean enough to disprove this. The 6490 has 256 GFLOPs, the 330M has 182. That's 40% more.

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #35 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by wattsup View Post

That's pretty old data, a discrete GPU would most likely fit if Apple wanted to do that. The Sandy Bridge CPU and intel platform controller are MUCH smaller than the old core 2 duo and nvidia system chip that were used in the previous generation 13" MBPs. If you want to point back to a design that was done several years ago as evidence that something can't be done today then why not go back two decades more and say that it wouldn't be possible to produce ANY notebook computer. I mean just look at the size of a 1990 era desktop, how could that possibly fit?

Besides that, why would they have tried to make the previous generation's motherboard smaller than it had to be? Just so they could say, "Hey, look at all that free space that we didn't use." No, they designed it to fit the space they had with the chips sets they selected based upon performance and cost considerations.

It's not just about size - it's also about power consumption and cooling. That was the limiting factor in the 13" MBP.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #36 of 67
This revision has clearly been all about power. The CPUs are twice as fast, the GPUs are 3x as fast, and the new Thunderbolt I/O port is the fastest port I know of. The next revision will probably be about looks with a thinner case and dropping the DVD drive.
post #37 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

No AACS support for Blu-ray movie playback in SL or Lion. No change in the speed of the SuperDrive since 2007, I recall correctly. Thats a pretty long stagnation. I cant see how we can not expect Apple to depreciate the ODD with the next case change.

Very perceptive of you. I can understand why they would take the ODD out. The MAS is another indication as well (and the Software Reinstall Drive that comes with the new Airs)

As someone else stated on AI: "you won't be walking around with your laptop while burning a disc" So yes, just buy the $79 acc. if you still need an ODD.
post #38 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

No AACS support for Blu-ray movie playback in SL or Lion. No change in the speed of the SuperDrive since 2007, I recall correctly. Thats a pretty long stagnation. I cant see how we can not expect Apple to depreciate the ODD with the next case change.

And the reverse for the screen. 15" at 1440x900 since the first MBP. Screen has to 'appreciated' with new case as well. The option to upgrade to 1680x1050 I would think is wrong direction (wrong ratio etc.

Here's to next year.....
Good for <del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks
<del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks for Good
Reply
Good for <del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks
<del>wiki</del>OpenLeaks for Good
Reply
post #39 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unknownz View Post

Bought last years' model and I knew that this would eventually happen, but having to see the leap of technology that Apple makes after having recently dropped thousands of dollars in cash on the quickly depreciating laptop makes me want to kill myself.

Easily solved - stop buying new Apple kit. Then you will never find yourself in that situation ever again.

And I would have thought that there are much more important things to kill yourself over than a new computer, if that's your preferred method of dealing with upsets in your life.
post #40 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

EDIT: Wait, where did you read that the 6490 is worse than the 330M? I know FLOPS don't tell you the whole picture, but I'll be damned if it doesn't mean enough to disprove this. The 6490 has 256 GFLOPs, the 330M has 182. That's 40% more.

http://www.macworld.com/article/1578...enchmarks.html

In order of performance from least to most:

Intel HD 3000 = 26FPS
Geforce 320M = 33FPS
Geforce 320M in SSD MBA = 40FPS
Radeon 6490 = 51FPS
Geforce 330M = 62FPS
Radeon 6750 = 81FPS

So it's more like:

Radeon 6490 -- x1.2 --> 330M -- x 1.3 --> Radeon 6750

but still, the 6490M is a downgrade along with the HD 3000. Also, it seems the 6750 could only get 300% increase compared to the 320M. Ah, they don't actually say they were using the 330M for the test, just comparing to a model with the 330M - that model also has the old Intel IGP in it.

It seems if you want to do some gaming on an entry model, you're better with the MBA. Why couldn't they have put the 6490 into the 13" and the 6750 into the entire 15"/17" lineup? Then it would have been upgrades from the previous generation.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Benchmarks of Apple's new MacBook Pros find speeds 13%-53% faster