Comments on: MacBook Pro 2011 Benchmarks are Insane: Faster than Mac Pro! http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/ News, tips, software, reviews, and more for Mac OS X, iPhone, iPad Tue, 18 Jun 2013 21:04:11 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Steve http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-413602 Steve Sat, 04 Aug 2012 04:33:50 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-413602 "The new top of the line MacBook Pro 2011 is faster than the existing Mac Pro desktop" That's a loaded statement that deserves a huge case of "IF". Whether it's true depends entirely on what you're doing. Benchmarks tend to test burst speed of small things, which may or may not be at all relevant. For example, if you need to do some CPU-bound processing of 10 MB of data (smaller than the Mac Pro's L3 size, but larger than the Macbook Pro's), the Mac Pro is going to win. If the program uses GCD and/or OpenCL, the Mac Pro will look even better (more cores, more and better graphics cards). Or if it needs to use a lot of disk (more disks). Being an expandable workstation, for any particular workload, it's easy to expand it to handle that. That means it'll age better, too. I can buy a used Mac Pro off craigslist, buy some third-party upgrades, and have a faster computer (in general) than a new Macbook Pro, for less money. Newer CPUs will tend to win two kinds of contests: purely CPU-bound serial processes, and RAM latency. That happens to be exactly what this benchmark is. If you were trying to build a benchmark that made the Macbook Pro look good and the Mac Pro look bad, it's hard to imagine how you could do any better than this, except, perhaps, "can lift it with one hand". The performance of the new Macbook Pro is good, but it's not *that* good. The Mac Pro is still king. “The new top of the line MacBook Pro 2011 is faster than the existing Mac Pro desktop”

That’s a loaded statement that deserves a huge case of “IF”. Whether it’s true depends entirely on what you’re doing.

Benchmarks tend to test burst speed of small things, which may or may not be at all relevant. For example, if you need to do some CPU-bound processing of 10 MB of data (smaller than the Mac Pro’s L3 size, but larger than the Macbook Pro’s), the Mac Pro is going to win.

If the program uses GCD and/or OpenCL, the Mac Pro will look even better (more cores, more and better graphics cards). Or if it needs to use a lot of disk (more disks). Being an expandable workstation, for any particular workload, it’s easy to expand it to handle that.

That means it’ll age better, too. I can buy a used Mac Pro off craigslist, buy some third-party upgrades, and have a faster computer (in general) than a new Macbook Pro, for less money.

Newer CPUs will tend to win two kinds of contests: purely CPU-bound serial processes, and RAM latency. That happens to be exactly what this benchmark is. If you were trying to build a benchmark that made the Macbook Pro look good and the Mac Pro look bad, it’s hard to imagine how you could do any better than this, except, perhaps, “can lift it with one hand”.

The performance of the new Macbook Pro is good, but it’s not *that* good. The Mac Pro is still king.

]]> By: Randall http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-405129 Randall Fri, 06 Jul 2012 21:41:01 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-405129 I wonder how much the benchmarks are affected by the solid-state drive (SSD)? If that matters a lot, perhaps we should put an SSD in the Mac Pro and see how it holds up? I wonder how much the benchmarks are affected by the solid-state drive (SSD)? If that matters a lot, perhaps we should put an SSD in the Mac Pro and see how it holds up?

]]> By: Trevor http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-372687 Trevor Thu, 05 Apr 2012 18:25:23 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-372687 Yeah exactly my thoughts... I have a 12 core Mac Pro from mid 2010, and as this was a 2011 macbook pro review I can only assume that the author is retarded in thinking the Macbook Pro has more under the hood. So no, it is not better than the Mac Pro nor will a laptop ever be better than the desktop counterpart anytime soon. It's downright amazing that the new Macbook Pro reaches HALF the speeds of the 12 core Mac Pro beast, but it's still got a long way to go before it matches that power (Also, it's a good thing to understand the impact of RAM on a machine if one is debating Mac Pro vs. Macbook Pro - RAM is a biiig deal for most of us. Yeah exactly my thoughts… I have a 12 core Mac Pro from mid 2010, and as this was a 2011 macbook pro review I can only assume that the author is retarded in thinking the Macbook Pro has more under the hood.

So no, it is not better than the Mac Pro nor will a laptop ever be better than the desktop counterpart anytime soon. It’s downright amazing that the new Macbook Pro reaches HALF the speeds of the 12 core Mac Pro beast, but it’s still got a long way to go before it matches that power (Also, it’s a good thing to understand the impact of RAM on a machine if one is debating Mac Pro vs. Macbook Pro – RAM is a biiig deal for most of us.

]]> By: Harry http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-252755 Harry Wed, 12 Oct 2011 02:56:40 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-252755 And wouldn't it just be dandy if the MBP lovers had common sense and thought - 'Hey, laptop vs probably the most powerful consumer desktop out there, hmm, you know, I will have sense and say desktop,' And wouldn’t it just be dandy if the MBP lovers had common sense and thought – ‘Hey, laptop vs probably the most powerful consumer desktop out there, hmm, you know, I will have sense and say desktop,’

]]> By: Come essere sicuri di comprare un prodotto Apple al momento giusto | Perle Informatiche http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-228881 Come essere sicuri di comprare un prodotto Apple al momento giusto | Perle Informatiche Mon, 29 Aug 2011 08:05:21 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-228881 [...] gli effetti. Ero ancora più eccitato dal fatto che questo particolare modello di Macbook Pro, a quanto risulta da alcuni benchmark, ha prestazioni paragonabili se non superiori ad un Mac Pro! Fantastico per me che volevo [...] [...] gli effetti. Ero ancora più eccitato dal fatto che questo particolare modello di Macbook Pro, a quanto risulta da alcuni benchmark, ha prestazioni paragonabili se non superiori ad un Mac Pro! Fantastico per me che volevo [...]

]]> By: chetan http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-216929 chetan Mon, 25 Jul 2011 03:55:03 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-216929 aww are you sad my portable macbook pro is faster than your mac pro poor you aww are you sad my portable macbook pro is faster than your mac pro poor you

]]> By: Jake http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-199533 Jake Thu, 26 May 2011 21:36:05 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-199533 Isn't that just comparing with the 2011 MBP integrated graphics? It certainly is not taking into account (as it says) the top graphics card option the new MBPs have. Isn’t that just comparing with the 2011 MBP integrated graphics? It certainly is not taking into account (as it says) the top graphics card option the new MBPs have.

]]> By: bob http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-183393 bob Fri, 18 Mar 2011 10:22:02 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-183393 The benchmarks clearly scale linearly with the number of cores. So they beat the previous models because they have more. If ur gaming tho, and that game only makes use of one core, ull probably be better off with the higher clockspeed of the previous Macbook pros. Multiple cores are useful for multitasking tho... The benchmarks clearly scale linearly with the number of cores. So they beat the previous models because they have more. If ur gaming tho, and that game only makes use of one core, ull probably be better off with the higher clockspeed of the previous Macbook pros.

Multiple cores are useful for multitasking tho…

]]> By: Paul http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-182866 Paul Wed, 16 Mar 2011 20:12:49 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-182866 Faster than a Mac Pro? Please... http://www.barefeats.com/mbps03.html Faster than a Mac Pro? Please… http://www.barefeats.com/mbps03.html

]]> By: MacBook Pro 2011 Specs & Prices http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-178089 MacBook Pro 2011 Specs & Prices Fri, 04 Mar 2011 22:41:54 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-178089 [...] Update: MacBook Pro 2011 benchmarks are in and they are crazy [...] [...] Update: MacBook Pro 2011 benchmarks are in and they are crazy [...]

]]> By: bc http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-178014 bc Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:21:02 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-178014 Useless information without knowing what model you're talking about. It's not one of the new ones, is it? Useless information without knowing what model you’re talking about. It’s not one of the new ones, is it?

]]> By: Brian http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-177792 Brian Fri, 04 Mar 2011 07:44:16 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-177792 I just ran GeekBench on my MacBook Pro. 2674. Pathetic. I just ran GeekBench on my MacBook Pro.

2674.

Pathetic.

]]> By: 3lemental http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-177295 3lemental Thu, 03 Mar 2011 07:00:30 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-177295 @Rocky The battery life is actually the same (or very close to it), but they changed their testing protocols to give a better "real life" estimation of time. They've done themselves no favours though as many people don't realise this and think they've lost battery life :/ Possibly the first time they've put the consumers over profit :p @Rocky

The battery life is actually the same (or very close to it), but they changed their testing protocols to give a better “real life” estimation of time. They’ve done themselves no favours though as many people don’t realise this and think they’ve lost battery life :/

Possibly the first time they’ve put the consumers over profit :p

]]> By: Nads http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-176917 Nads Wed, 02 Mar 2011 03:17:42 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-176917 Faster Cache Faster Cache

]]> By: Rocky http://osxdaily.com/2011/02/25/macbook-pro-2011-benchmarks-are-fast/#comment-176321 Rocky Mon, 28 Feb 2011 19:33:50 +0000 http://osxdaily.com/?p=13213#comment-176321 What of the battery life? Didn't they loose 20% of the battery life with these new processors? Is that worth it? What of the battery life? Didn’t they loose 20% of the battery life with these new processors? Is that worth it?

]]>