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

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 70
    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.



    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.....
  • Reply 42 of 70
    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.
  • Reply 43 of 70
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,351moderator
    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.
  • Reply 44 of 70
    stolstol Posts: 12member
    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?
  • Reply 45 of 70
    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.
  • Reply 46 of 70
    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...
  • Reply 47 of 70
    zephzeph Posts: 133member
    Someone made this spreadsheet of all speedmark tests since 2004:



    http://marketingtactics.com/Speedmark/
  • Reply 48 of 70
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,144member
    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.
  • Reply 49 of 70
    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.
  • Reply 50 of 70
    tipootipoo Posts: 1,144member
    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.
  • Reply 51 of 70
    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".
  • Reply 52 of 70
    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
  • Reply 53 of 70
    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
  • Reply 54 of 70
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,351moderator
    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.
  • Reply 55 of 70
    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.
  • Reply 56 of 70
    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 :/
  • Reply 57 of 70
    jragostajragosta Posts: 10,473member
    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 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.

    .



    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.
  • Reply 58 of 70
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    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.



    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.
  • Reply 59 of 70
    brucepbrucep Posts: 2,823member
    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
  • Reply 60 of 70
    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....
Sign In or Register to comment.