My 8 Plus scores higher Geekbench scores than that! Does that mean it’s more powerful than Apple’s latest laptop?
In the context of the bench mark and the spectrum of tests it made yes.
It is all about how you work the numbers and who cares. For example Apple suggest pretty good battery life for what they consider to be internet usage. The numbers often sound great and they are real. However if your use case is different the battery performance can be ridiculously short. In the case of Geekbench they use a variety of apps to work up their performance numbers. If you want a better indication of what your 8 plus can do you should skip the final score to look at the details that Apply to you.
The existing 13" non-Touch-Bar MacBook Pro hasn't been updated since 2017, and was conspicuously ignored in the last round of MacBook pro updates. With the release of this MacBook Air, I wouldn't be at all surprised to see the 13" non-Touch-Bar MacBook Pro discontinued soon.
Hmm...I believe Laporte said they were using the same processors.
We are not talking about buying a pair of shoes right ? Architecture and how you use the high tech parts matter here.
T2 is said to be based on A10. The A10 Geekbeqnch scores are 3500+ (single core), 6000+ (multi-cores).
If Geekbench can also run on the T2, it would measure the total compute power of the new Macs. Some percentage of the A10 scores would be added to the Intel-only CPU/GPU scores (4248 single core, 7828 multi-cores)
We don’t have the necessary tools to measure the Mac’s performance here.
T2 means nothing in the context of app behavior running on the Intel chip. “”Disk”” I/O might be impacted but that they is only the of concern for a small number of apps.
It it amazes me that people don’t grasp the intent of benchmarking. If benchmarks show a trivial boost in performance then that is what you will experience the hardware means little.
Not really. You misunderstood my point.
The Geekbench numbers do not measure the contribution from T2 at all. It only shows the capacity and power of the Intel CPU.
If some tasks are not performed by the Intel CPU, its benchmark may not matter in that instance. It may be used to do something else in parallel.
Benchmark only measures a subset of the MBA’s computational power.
Just to put it in perspective the new MacBook Air beats the GeekBench Numbers from my MacBook Pro 2011 i7 quadcore. This new model Air will be more than enough power for the intended customer.
Just to put it in perspective the new MacBook Air beats the GeekBench Numbers from my MacBook Pro 2011 i7 quadcore. This new model Air will be more than enough power for the intended customer.
Yes! "For the intended customer".
We seem to be obsessed with how quickly a portable computer can render a 4K video -- when most people use them for browsing the web and data processing -- things that haven't changed significantly since you 2011 MBP.
Shaving a 1/10th of a second off the time to do something is, for most users, meaningless.
Likewise, if the constraining factor is something else -- say communications to a cloud service -- it simply doesn't matter how fast the CPU is.
Putting the complete package together for the intended customer has been where Apple has always excelled. I think, with the Mac line, they fell behind the curve a bit. But I think I see them getting their Mojo back and developing real solutions for real people.
Hmm...I believe Laporte said they were using the same processors.
Leo Laporte is kind of a moron too and doesn't always know what the hell he's talking about. He doesn't seem to be the same person he was back when he was working for ZDTV and TechTV.
[...] if the constraining factor is something else -- say communications to a cloud service -- it simply doesn't matter how fast the CPU is.
Excellent specific example. It's part of why I get so worked up about Apple's prices for internal storage. Why would I buy the fastest computer I can get if I'm going to be constrained to internet speeds to access my files? So I look for larger storage capacity than is available in a base model, which, to Apple's credit, is readily available, but at prices that make my pancreas pucker. If Apple wants me to buy powerful computers, it's going to have to reign in the price of storage upgrades.
Putting the complete package together for the intended customer has been where Apple has always excelled. I think, with the Mac line, they fell behind the curve a bit.
It's confusing to see storage capacities steadily increasing in iPhones while they linger below bare minimum in Macs. That still hasn't been addressed.
Hmm...I believe Laporte said they were using the same processors.
Leo Laporte is kind of a moron too and doesn't always know what the hell he's talking about. He doesn't seem to be the same person he was back when he was working for ZDTV and TechTV.
Weird,
https://browser.geekbench.com/macs/422
Name MacBook (Mid 2017)
Model Identifier MacBook10,1
Processor Intel Core i7-7Y75
Single 3928 Multi 7568
How is it higher than MacBook Air 2018?
Single 4248 Multi 7828
Comments
It is all about how you work the numbers and who cares. For example Apple suggest pretty good battery life for what they consider to be internet usage. The numbers often sound great and they are real. However if your use case is different the battery performance can be ridiculously short. In the case of Geekbench they use a variety of apps to work up their performance numbers. If you want a better indication of what your 8 plus can do you should skip the final score to look at the details that Apply to you.
The Geekbench numbers do not measure the contribution from T2 at all. It only shows the capacity and power of the Intel CPU.
If some tasks are not performed by the Intel CPU, its benchmark may not matter in that instance. It may be used to do something else in parallel.
Benchmark only measures a subset of the MBA’s computational power.
It's confusing to see storage capacities steadily increasing in iPhones while they linger below bare minimum in Macs. That still hasn't been addressed.