or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › MacBook Pro Benchmarks from Ogrady's Power Page
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

MacBook Pro Benchmarks from Ogrady's Power Page

post #1 of 23
Thread Starter 
Jason O'Grady from powerpage.org has gotten a MacBook Pro and has posted some new unpacking pictures as well as some initial benchmarks. So far the results look pretty god in camparison to a 1.5ghz PowerBook.

http://www.powerpage.org/archives/20...enchmarks.html
I too, have the ability to kill a yak at 200 yards... with mind bullets!
Reply
I too, have the ability to kill a yak at 200 yards... with mind bullets!
Reply
post #2 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by chilleymac
Jason O'Grady from powerpage.org has gotten a MacBook Pro and has posted some new unpacking pictures as well as some initial benchmarks. So far the results look pretty god in camparison to a 1.5ghz PowerBook.

http://www.powerpage.org/archives/20...enchmarks.html

Just saw that. Will wait for further testing, but that is kinda surprising. I was considering an iBook if one comes out in April. Now it better have a core duo.
post #3 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by backtomac
Just saw that. Will wait for further testing, but that is kinda surprising. I was expecting it to do even better, 3x-4x faster. I was considering an iBook if one comes out in April. Man I'm hoping it packs a core duo.
post #4 of 23
he didn't indicate whether he had beam sync off or not, this slows down the user interface tests (numbers indicate that it was on)

see
http://www.macintouch.com/imacintel/bench.html
post #5 of 23
Battery life doesn't look very impressive.
post #6 of 23
I haven't seen anything regarding MacBook Pro battery performance. Where did you read that it was unimpressive?
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #7 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by Xool
I haven't seen anything regarding MacBook Pro battery performance. Where did you read that it was unimpressive?

It's in that powerpage report.
post #8 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
It's in that powerpage report.

I can't find it?
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
'L'enfer, c'est les autres' - JPS
Reply
post #9 of 23
WTF? Another 2GB v 1GB comparison!!! No wonder the numbers aren't impressive
Here I am, brain the size of a planet and they've got me posting at a bulletin board
Reply
Here I am, brain the size of a planet and they've got me posting at a bulletin board
Reply
post #10 of 23
I don't know how many times I have to tell you people that XBench sucks.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #11 of 23
The "report" also doesn't specify if it is the standard 100GB 5400 rpm or optional 100GB 7200 rpm drive. It was still nice to see all of the comparison pictures with the PowerBook & MacBook Pro & their respective power adapters.
post #12 of 23
It's the standard 5400 rpm model.
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
"When I was a kid, my favourite relative was Uncle Caveman. After school, wed all go play in his cave, and every once and awhile, hed eat one of us. It wasnt until later that I discovered Uncle...
Reply
post #13 of 23
Anyone seen OWC's pictos of the MacBook Pro innards yet?
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
Download BARTsmart BART Widget, the best BART schedule widget for Mac OS X's Dashboard.
Reply
post #14 of 23
Not sure where else to post this, but according to Hardmac.com, the MBP's CPU is soldered to the motherboard (groan!). FYI.
post #15 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
Not sure where else to post this, but according to Hardmac.com, the MBP's CPU is soldered to the motherboard (groan!). FYI.

were we expecting otherwise?
post #16 of 23
I wondering how well these Intel based macs compare to there windows counterparts, there are some Cinebench benchmark results on http://www.railheaddesign.com/ this is a cross platform application so it would be interesting to see whether the Intel chips are faster running on OSX or windows.

I've had no luck looking for results for the core duos running Windows Cinebench 9.5 via Google, if anyone has access to a windows core duo laptop then please download http://www.cinebench.com/ and post the results.

Thanks
post #17 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by deestar
I wondering how well these Intel based macs compare to there windows counterparts, there are some Cinebench benchmark results on http://www.railheaddesign.com/ this is a cross platform application so it would be interesting to see whether the Intel chips are faster running on OSX or windows.

Me too.. People seem to be obsessed with PPC vs Rosetta. But what about Mac x86 vs Win x86?
PM G5 Dual 2.0GHz, 2GB RAM
PB G4 1.67GHz, 1.5GB RAM
Reply
PM G5 Dual 2.0GHz, 2GB RAM
PB G4 1.67GHz, 1.5GB RAM
Reply
post #18 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by 1337_5L4Xx0R
Not sure where else to post this, but according to Hardmac.com, the MBP's CPU is soldered to the motherboard (groan!). FYI.

I'm glad. Apple's testing is done with THEIR OS X and THEIR circuitry. The Compatibility Lab in Cupertino, where ADC member developers can go to test their software on every conceivable Mac, does wonders for the reliability of the apps. The developers don't have to get emails from knuckleheads that wonder why the app blows up on their custom-chip machine.

Also, Mac apps frequently have CPU and graphics criteria for acceptable performance. Someone jacking around and putting a huge clockspeed on a slow bus could confuse the hell out of Apple's scripts that check for compatibility.
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
post #19 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by lundy
Someone jacking around and putting a huge clockspeed on a slow bus could confuse the hell out of Apple's scripts that check for compatibility.

shhh!

I'm looking forward to upgrading my 2.0 iMac to 2.3 GHz when the processors are available on the market.
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #20 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by audiopollution
shhh!

I'm looking forward to upgrading my 2.0 iMac to 2.3 GHz when the processors are available on the market.

hope you're good a soldering
post #21 of 23
This is nice and all, seeing that the new one is faster than the two year old one (DUA) but it is time to see some windows benchmarks now: take Mathematica, install it on a MBP and a dual core intel PC notebook, run a float test, and int test, a 3-d test, calculate the square root of PI 7000 times whatever crazy shit can be cooked up by some hard core math/comp sci geeks and lets see how much faster OSX really is...or are the mac guys scared?
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 #22 of 23
I ran xbench on my ALPB 1.67 (2G ram) and it was substantially faster than the 1.5. (and much closer to the MBP).

Overall was 43.35--14 faster than the PB 1.5 and only 10 slower than the MBP.

The CPU test was 65.42 (less than 2 points shy of the MBP and 30 better than the PB 1.5.

There were a few tests where the MBP was substantially faster, but the results don't seem to represent the entire machine accurately. Does xbench need to be updated to accurately measure the new intel processors? Not sure if beamsync adjustment would be the total solution here.
post #23 of 23
Quote:
Originally posted by a_greer
This is nice and all, seeing that the new one is faster than the two year old one (DUA) but it is time to see some windows benchmarks now: take Mathematica, install it on a MBP and a dual core intel PC notebook, run a float test, and int test, a 3-d test, calculate the square root of PI 7000 times whatever crazy shit can be cooked up by some hard core math/comp sci geeks and lets see how much faster OSX really is...or are the mac guys scared?

Everyone is welcome to run my Monty Hall Simulation. It's Perl, so it does not care what processor it is on, and it automatically detects the number of cores and threads itself across them:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...087#post871087
--Johnny
Reply
--Johnny
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › MacBook Pro Benchmarks from Ogrady's Power Page