They’re all carefully measured numbers that really only tell you how well a computer does at a particular task. Other benchmarks are more interested in drive speed, overall graphics, 3D gaming, or broader real world performance.
Geekbench looks primarily at CPU and RAM performance.
MACBOOK INTEL CORE 2 DUO INTEL GMA MAC
The “underwhelming” 1.5 GHz Core Solo Mac mini beats that!) What Does It All Mean?Įvery benchmark is different. (For comparison, the 1.67 GHz PowerBook G4 tops out at a score of 937 – or just 562 per GHz – and the 1.42 GHz dual CPU Power Mac G4 only achieves a 1248 for 878 per GHz. That’s two dual-core PowerPC 970MP CPUs with about the same score as a single dual-core Core 2 Duo CPU in an iMac. A single Intel Core 2 Duo offers about the same performance per GHz as a pair of dual-core G5s. If you’re wondering what Apple gained by going Intel, there you have it. Assuming that’s the 2.5 GHz Quad gives a rating of 1356 per GHz. How does the Power Mac G5 fare under Geekbench? There are several results for the Late 2005 Power Mac G5, and the highest scores are in the 3300 to 3400 range. Pretty good for a computer with a lot more expandability, far better graphics, and only 5x the price. With a score of 8735, that comes out to 2912 per GHz – a 56% higher score than the Core 2 Duo at the same speed.Īnd if you look back that the 1.5 GHz Core Solo Mac mini, that’s about 3x the efficiency and 6x the overall score. The highest Geekbench scores have been achieved by our friends at Bare Feats on the new 8-core (two quad-core CPUs) Mac Pro.
MACBOOK INTEL CORE 2 DUO INTEL GMA PRO
These numbers show that the Mac Pro is well optimized for fast CPUs, as there’s only a 1% difference in the Geekbench score per GHz rating of the faster models. Here’s how the Mac Pro scales at different clock speeds: With a pair of dual-core Xeon CPUs, the Mac Pro scores 48% higher than the iMac with a single Core 2 Duo CPU using Geekbench 2. The best comparison to other Macs is at 2.0 GHz: The Mac Pro was initially available in 2.0, 2.66, and 3.0 GHz versions, to which Apple added a 3.0 GHz dual quad-core version last week. There is no Core 2 Mac mini, no was there a Core Duo version of the Mac Pro. The 2.0 GHz iMac goes from 2556 with Core Duo to 2654 with Core 2 Duo, a boost of just 3.8%. Moving to the 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro, the Core Duo model scores 2711 while the Core 2 unit reaches 2825 – an improvement of 4.2%. Core 2 ImprovementsĬomparing the 2.0 GHz MacBook, we have a Geekbench score of 2475 with the Core Duo and 2600 with the Core 2 Duo, a 5% improvement. The CPU benches 1295 per GHz in the 1.83 GHz iMac, 1278 in the 2.0 GHz iMac, and 1251 in the 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro, showing that performance is being constrained by the memory bus, not the CPU. Other Core Duo Resultsīenchmark results are very close across the board for the 1.83 GHz Core Duo, and the range of 2.0 GHz results is only slightly broader. The Core Solo mini beats that by over 50%.
The fastest model runs at 1.5 GHz and achieves a Geekbench score of 862 (or just 575 per GHz). That means the second core on the original Core Duo CPU provides about one-third more power.īy way of comparison, the G4 Mac mini offered a lot less horsepower. There’s an 11% difference in clock speed between 1.5 GHz and 1.66 GHz, and we anticipate a 1.5 GHz Core Duo would benchmark at roughly 1960. The 1.66 GHz Mac mini scores 2136, and the newer 1.83 GHz mini scores 2312, an 8.3% improvement (just a bit less than the 10% difference in clock speed). One step higher, from the 1.5 GHz Solo to a 1.66 GHz Duo, boosts the benchmark score by 50%. This is the only Mac ever released with a Core Solo CPU, and it really does make a difference. Even the least powerful Intel-based Mac ever released, the Core Solo version of the Early 2006 Mac mini, outperformed it with a score of 1472 (just under 1000 points per GHz). The baseline score of 1000 is based on performance of a 1.6 GHz single processor Power Mac G5. Let’s see if the numbers really bear that out. The only big changes occur at the low end with the (discontinued) single-core Mac mini, or at the high end with the quad-core Mac Pro.” “There’s not a huge change in performance across most of Apple’s Intel-based Mac lineup (the high-end MacBook Pro Core 2 Duo is only 30% faster than the low-end MacBook Core Duo, for example). Geekbench 2 is designed to measure CPU and memory performance, not graphics, an area where the Mac mini, MacBook, and entry-level iMac fall behind the rest of the pack with their integrated Intel GMA 950 graphics. How do the Intel Core Solo, Core Duo, Core 2, and new quad-core CPUs compare? That’s the question Primate Labs addresses in their latest Geekbench Comparison.
0 kommentar(er)
