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 - Page 2

post #41 of 67
As I am interested only in 13 inch configurations, which look yummy with the new Sandy Bridge processors, I was searching around about the Intel HD Graphics 3000 and came upon this review (Windows based testing, but it is pretty thorough): http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/vid...0_9.html#sect0

Demanding games aside, there seems to be a lot of power on these chips, especially in terms of video playback and processing. With Open GL 3.0 support, H.264 super fast encoding & decoding and, from what i get, support for flash video acceleration, it looks like those integrated chips could do a pretty good job with iMovie and iPhoto or any simple game.

Does anyone know if this QuickSync technology for encoding/transcoding/decoding video is available on Snow Leopard?
post #42 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

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.

If this is about dropping the DVD drive and making the device thinner and of course lighter, seems like what you're describing is the Macbook Air as it will be when it goes to the Sandy Bridge chips likely in June.

I think there will be more of a raising the bar on the Airs than a dramatic alteration in form factor for the Macbook Pro range. There needs to be a distinct difference between the two lines, otherwise why bothering carrying both.
post #43 of 67
Intel announced a recall of its Sandy Bridge chipset a few weeks ago for issues with the longevity of the 3Gb/s SATA interface; has that been addressed already?

'Sandy Bridge' evokes something which is prone to being washed out, but I'm not a marketer...
post #44 of 67
Someone made this spreadsheet of all speedmark tests since 2004:

http://marketingtactics.com/Speedmark/
post #45 of 67
More interested in a detailed comparison between the HD3000 and the 320M. Anandtech's testing showed they were about on par (but the former had the advantage of a faster CPU, so it still might be a slower GPU), but drivers can vary performance a lot.

Also, of the 6490. I'm both baffled and unsurprised that they are still using a 256MB card in a machine near 2 grand.

EDIT: Just saw the macworld benchmarks above...Looks like the HD3000 is indeed slower as a GPU.
post #46 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

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.

I do like the improvements with the new CPU, GPU and Thunderbolt. As an Artist who travels outside the studio I would of liked to have seen a few more changes:

1. Remove the Superdrive. I can’t recall the last time I used it or would even have need of it.
2. Replace the 2.5″ HDD/SSD with on board flash storage like the MacBook Air.
3. Increase battery life.
4. Reduce the number of ports. I like Thunderbolt and having redundancy but there are to many ports.
5. Make it thin but strong. Liquidmetal would help with this as well implementing 1 through 4.

My guess is that Apple will implement these design changes before the end of 2011, possibly September or October. In the past multiple times they have released a minor performance upgrade then later a major upgrade to the MacBook line in Q3 or Q4 of the same year. Having a powerful laptop is great but having one that is also extremely lite and has a long battery life is even better. The current uni-body design has been the same for several years which leads one to surmise that a redesign of the shell is imminent. So I'll be holding off on purchasing another MacBook Pro as I don't want to plunk down several grand twice in one year.
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
Unity3D, Maya, Final Cut, iPhone 5S, Apple TV, Mac Pro, MBP, iPad Mini
Reply
post #47 of 67
Too many ports? Never heard that one before, if anything people complain alot about not having enough ports.


I agree with removing the optical drive though, I've only used mine once in the two years I've had this laptop and it was for an OS upgrade.
post #48 of 67
I think that they had little choice but to make the move to Intel. They copped a lot of flak for sticking with the Core 2 Duo last year, in order to remain with Nvidia. If they had done that again they would have been crucified.

I think it's an ideal time to pick up a last gen machine; you get to upgrade, you save about £400 and it gives Thunderbolt a year to actually get a few peripherals on the go. I picked up a brand new 2010 today for £800 on eBay. That's some saving compared to a week ago.

Next gen should have a redesign as well as a better GPU and probably a better screen. It's a win/win. Hopefully a matte option as well, so we can stop being stroked into buying the 15".
post #49 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

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.

I concede defeat

But 78fps for the baseline iMac? It's like Apple doesn't want us to buy their portables!

Seriously, any tips for wrapping it up inside some sheets or etc?

As you may have noticed, I live in a godforsaken hellhole called Brazil, where we have all of the issues super-developed Nordic countries have (that is, just high taxes), and absolutely zero of the benefits.

A $1200 iMac here costs $2350, not to mention our average buying power is much inferior to yours. So after the MBP graphic fiasco, I've been thinking of convincing a friend of my father's to put an iMac on his case on his way back from Canada (hey, I knew a guy that did it with the 27" model!)

If he declares the iMac (is this the right term to use in English?), he pays 1.5x the price. Let's ignore taxes for this. 1200*1.5= $1800. If he does not and gets caught, he pays double. Which is kind of the national price anyway.

BTW, this gets more ridiculous the further up you go. The $2000 iMac costs $4530 here, so even if you pay double, you will still save $530 (that's an iPad!)

I think the most difficult will be convincing my father to ask this of his friend

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 #50 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post

I think that they had little choice but to make the move to Intel. They copped a lot of flak for sticking with the Core 2 Duo last year, in order to remain with Nvidia. If they had done that again they would have been crucified.

I think it's an ideal time to pick up a last gen machine; you get to upgrade, you save about £400 and it gives Thunderbolt a year to actually get a few peripherals on the go. I picked up a brand new 2010 today for £800 on eBay. That's some saving compared to a week ago.

Next gen should have a redesign as well as a better GPU and probably a better screen. It's a win/win. Hopefully a matte option as well, so we can stop being stroked into buying the 15".

They could, you know, have thrown the ODD off the window and replaced it with a dedicated GPU and moar battey

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 #51 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

But 78fps for the baseline iMac? It's like Apple doesn't want us to buy their portables!

The iMacs use desktop GPUs though and they draw a lot of power. The 6750 GPU is a nice GPU to use, just wish it was in a more affordable model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

Seriously, any tips for wrapping it up inside some sheets or etc?

A $1200 iMac here costs $2350, not to mention our average buying power is much inferior to yours. So after the MBP graphic fiasco, I've been thinking of convincing a friend of my father's to put an iMac on his case on his way back from Canada (hey, I knew a guy that did it with the 27" model!)

I'd say you'd be better off getting a $1200 refurb i5 Macbook Pro with the 330M GPU. Much easier to carry and has international warranty.

You'll have to be quick when they get in the refurb store though because a lot of people will want them.

You could always get the i7 refurb for $400 more:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC...co=MTgwOTc3NDM

This is just $100 more than the highest 13" but you get the bigger screen and a GPU that's about 2.5x faster. CPU will be a bit slower but not much.

Putting an iMac in a suitcase would be more hassle than its worth.
post #52 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

The iMacs use desktop GPUs though and they draw a lot of power. The 6750 GPU is a nice GPU to use, just wish it was in a more affordable model.



I'd say you'd be better off getting a $1200 refurb i5 Macbook Pro with the 330M GPU. Much easier to carry and has international warranty.

You'll have to be quick when they get in the refurb store though because a lot of people will want them.

You could always get the i7 refurb for $400 more:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC...co=MTgwOTc3NDM

This is just $100 more than the highest 13" but you get the bigger screen and a GPU that's about 2.5x faster. CPU will be a bit slower but not much.

Putting an iMac in a suitcase would be more hassle than its worth.

Thanks for the advice. Though if I had extra $400 I'd probably settle for the 6490.

And I get it that iMac uses desktop parts etc... but even then, I can't see how the MBPs can hope to compare in value. Notebooks will always lag behind in performance, but that much? And let's not forget that the 21.5" LED IPS display isn't cheap.

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 #53 of 67
Wait I have a good story it involves a Company replacing 2007 MBP's with new ones.
They were suppose to order these at the end of December, some how it was forgotten until February, then they were allegedly delayed and have yet to ship to Corporate all the while the new ones are announced, and said company is unwilling to call Apple and see if they have the option to get the newer ones instead.
To get an idea of the purchase just upgrade everything you can on the new 17", best proc, 8 gb ram, 512 SSD etc. Surprisingly it ends up $400 cheaper per unit than the last model fully loaded. Alas now it is a waiting game to see what said company actually gets, and what they can do about it later. Because 3D animation and Video Production surely couldn't benefit from any of this :/
post #54 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine Engine View Post

I do like the improvements with the new CPU, GPU and Thunderbolt. As an Artist who travels outside the studio I would of liked to have seen a few more changes:

1. Remove the Superdrive. I cant recall the last time I used it or would even have need of it.
2. Replace the 2.5″ HDD/SSD with on board flash storage like the MacBook Air.
3. Increase battery life.
4. Reduce the number of ports. I like Thunderbolt and having redundancy but there are to many ports.
5. Make it thin but strong. Liquidmetal would help with this as well implementing 1 through 4.
.

Looks like you want a MBAir.

There are three different portable lines:
- MBA - for people who want ultra portability and don't need optical, etc
- MB - Consumer line, low cost
- MBP - Full featured laptop

Why would you want the full featured laptop to be missing an optical drive? Even if you don't use it, lots of people do.
"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 #55 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

Im more interested in real world battery tests under various usage models. I would expect that idle that the new MBPs exceed the previous MBPs.

the stated spec is less battery life than the previous models. i think this is not a good thing and apple shouldn't have updated without equal or better battery life (or at least an option of a model with much better battery life and less horsepower).
this is why i don't understand all the hubub about dual core phones or tablets. i don't want or need a dual core phone/pad that gets the same or worse battery life.
post #56 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

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.



marvin 2 hours after reading your speed chart
i went and bought the highest end 15 in possible
3000 w. ed dis count

i can't breathe


now i need to sell m old 3.02 ghz 15 in 2 graphic chip model

thanks marvin


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #57 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

http://gizmodo.com/#!361001/apple-sa...roved-slightly

this if true is good news....
post #58 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.

what kind of fps are you getting?

I have a bto on the way.....its in anchorage now.....I'm checking airline ticket prices
post #59 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

Thanks for the advice. Though if I had extra $400 I'd probably settle for the 6490.

The 6490 MBP would be $600 more though. The refurb i5s are probably your best bet:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC...co=MTgwOTc3MTg

$240 more than the iMac in that case but saves the hassle. There was one at just $70 more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post

And let's not forget that the 21.5" LED IPS display isn't cheap.

You can get one for $200 now but if you plan to use it for desktop use then the iMac is going to be cheaper no question. It'll be easier to upgrade to an SSD with the laptop later though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep

marvin 2 hours after reading your speed chart
i went and bought the highest end 15 in possible
3000 w. ed dis count

i can't breathe

now i need to sell m old 3.02 ghz 15 in 2 graphic chip model

It should be a great machine and last a while with the quad i7. If you get Applecare within a year, it will keep its resale value pretty well. The Geekbench score on these machines is very high for a laptop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSqifuILQQQ

Breaking 10,000 matches the i7 iMac and just falls short of the entry Mac Pro.

The 6750 doesn't drop below 30FPS playing Black Ops on high quality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmQ8wOswUUE

Unlike the HD3000:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjBQgi4_J3c

Barely able to play MW1 without lagging and freezing right in the middle of gameplay. I just know they're going to do this to the Mini too.

Even just a 6490 + dual i7 would do. No HD 3000.
post #60 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

I think there will be more of a raising the bar on the Airs than a dramatic alteration in form factor for the Macbook Pro range. There needs to be a distinct difference between the two lines, otherwise why bothering carrying both.

I agree and hope we're both right. MacBook Pro's are finally offering desktop performance in an Apple portable; to gut them in the next revision and turn them into larger-screened Airs would be a damn shame.
post #61 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.

check the article again:

"Ed. Note (3/2/11): After re-running our battery test twice, the MacBook Pro saw its endurance increase to 8 hours and 23 minutes."

That's pretty impressive.
post #62 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

The 6490 MBP would be $600 more though. The refurb i5s are probably your best bet:

http://store.apple.com/us/product/FC...co=MTgwOTc3MTg

$240 more than the iMac in that case but saves the hassle. There was one at just $70 more.



You can get one for $200 now but if you plan to use it for desktop use then the iMac is going to be cheaper no question. It'll be easier to upgrade to an SSD with the laptop later though.



It should be a great machine and last a while with the quad i7. If you get Applecare within a year, it will keep its resale value pretty well. The Geekbench score on these machines is very high for a laptop:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSqifuILQQQ

Breaking 10,000 matches the i7 iMac and just falls short of the entry Mac Pro.

The 6750 doesn't drop below 30FPS playing Black Ops on high quality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PmQ8wOswUUE

Unlike the HD3000:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjBQgi4_J3c

Barely able to play MW1 without lagging and freezing right in the middle of gameplay. I just know they're going to do this to the Mini too.

Even just a 6490 + dual i7 would do. No HD 3000.

sadly i screwed up
the high end MBP15IN came and went
they sent me a matte screen anti glare version
it looks like crap
i will re order today

black ops plays on ???

THANKS AGAIN


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #63 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

they sent me a matte screen anti glare version
it looks like crap

It does lack the black bezel but the screen is much clearer without the glare IMO. I do think it would be better if Apple added a black surround to the anti-glare model.

Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

black ops plays on ???

Black Ops would run under Windows/Bootcamp.
post #64 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

It does lack the black bezel but the screen is much clearer without the glare IMO. I do think it would be better if Apple added a black surround to the anti-glare model.



Black Ops would run under Windows/Bootcamp.

The high res matte they sent me had a black bezel .
the glossy looks so good . yes the glare or reflection is annoying at times ,
Mac tripper talked about it so much that i noticed the mirror like reflection on my MBP . And even on my TV i see it .

Any way to each his own i guess . Thank

ps I would love Black ops for mac
peace

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #65 of 67
(hic) <wineskin> (hic)
post #66 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imagine Engine View Post

I do like the improvements with the new CPU, GPU and Thunderbolt. As an Artist who travels outside the studio I would of liked to have seen a few more changes:

1. Remove the Superdrive. I cant recall the last time I used it or would even have need of it.
2. Replace the 2.5″ HDD/SSD with on board flash storage like the MacBook Air.
3. Increase battery life.
4. Reduce the number of ports. I like Thunderbolt and having redundancy but there are to many ports.
5. Make it thin but strong. Liquidmetal would help with this as well implementing 1 through 4.

My guess is that Apple will implement these design changes before the end of 2011, possibly September or October. In the past multiple times they have released a minor performance upgrade then later a major upgrade to the MacBook line in Q3 or Q4 of the same year. Having a powerful laptop is great but having one that is also extremely lite and has a long battery life is even better. The current uni-body design has been the same for several years which leads one to surmise that a redesign of the shell is imminent. So I'll be holding off on purchasing another MacBook Pro as I don't want to plunk down several grand twice in one year.


I agree with your opinions/predictions, EXCEPT....I think expecting the update to come in September a tad early. A major redesign of the MacBook pros where they drop the Optical drives will happen in January of 2012 at the earliest. IMHO.

But who knows.

Personally I can't wait. There is so much they can do with that space the OD takes up. extra flash storage, bigger battery... As well as making it lighter and thinner.

When the Macbook Airs were updated last, the tag line was "The FUTURE of the Macbooks". It's a not so subtle hint at where Steve Jobs wants the entire Mac line to go. Particularly the portable lines. Much like he did away with the floppy drives back in 1998.

It's only a matter of time. The seed has been planted. The writing is on the wall. Why else do you think Jobs refuses to put blue Ray drives in any of the macs? It's not because of licensing fees!!!

I think the Optical drives will stay on the iMacs and Mac Pros longer...but they will be phased out of the MacBook pros next.

I'm holding off on getting a 13" MacBook pro right now partly for this reason....but also to wait and see if the MacBook airs will get updated this summer with Sandy Bridge and thunderbolt.

It'll be interesting to see how they meld or differentiate the MacBook airs and the MacBook pros when the MacBook pros lose the optical drives too. Will Apple make the pros only slightly thinner and put more options inside? And keep a distinction between the two lines? Or will the MacBook airs get beefed up and become the new 13" MacBook pro?

Should be an interesting year.
post #67 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.

My spanking new 15"MBP 2.3GHz is screaming fast . Borderline can be played at full graphic setting's while the nov 09 2 tip 15" version had some headaches laying the exact same game .

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.

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. That’s a pretty long stagnation. I can’t see how we can not expect Apple to depreciate the ODD with the next case change.

Quote:
Originally Posted by melgross View Post

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.

Sorry MEL but so many people play games now and in 3 yrs this model will be a slow slow race car . THE PRO LABEL should be stripped off . The MBA seems like the real 13" entry model this year.

And in 2-3 yrs who nows how demanding graphic wise games may be ??
If you are a non-tech person and if you are not VERY careful about what you buy then this 13" MBP machine can be a nightmare for some one on a limited budjet and a crowded house of 10 to 14 yrs old gamers . TRUST ME on this one . Any product line-up should not have such a wide rift .


peace


9





BUY the 15"MBP3.2GHz hi res glossy screen model .I am so happy.
It blows every screen i have ever seen outthe this world . TRON looked better than on my new MBP15 3.2GHz Than on my plasma TV
Matte sucks .
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
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