41–50 of 1001 posts
Geekbench is designed to test CPU's in short bursts to not get them into thermal throttling (this is by design, it is supposed to be CPU test, not cooling test), so I would be wary of Air's results - at least until other benchmarks results are available. MacBook Pro's results on the other hand should be more representative as it has active cooling and can sustain heavy load for longer.
Anyone have thoughts on where are these benchmarks might be coming from? Part of me wants to put in my order today, and part of me wants to wait until after the YouTube reviews.
And whilst they are under NDA you do often see them running anonymous benchmarks like Geekbench.
The 16GB max ram still seems a head scratcher. Not what would suppose I want for video editing.
Is geekbench accurate at comparing across different architectures?
What's up with these iMacPro results with AMD Ryzen processors? https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4644694 Thought Apple was an Intel-only shop until Apple Silicon.
I'm looking forward to seeing what the top end of this chip can do. 64 cores ought to be nice! 32 cores at least.
For what it's worth, I have a fully specced out 16 inch MacBook Pro with the AMD Radeon Pro 5600m and even with that I'm regularly hitting 100% usage of the card, and not to mention the fan noise.
Looking forward to a version from Apple that is made for actual professionals, but I imagine these introductory M1 based devices are going to be great for the vast majority of people.
Anyone have thoughts on where are these benchmarks might be coming from? Part of me wants to put in my order today, and part of me wants to wait until after the YouTube reviews.
At this point you would expect key developers like Microsoft, Adobe, OmniGroup etc to have retail hardware for testing. And whilst they are under NDA you do often see them running anonymous benchmarks like Geekbench.
How am I supposed to interpret this? A MacBook Air surpasses my i7-8700k in single and (almost) multi core performance?
Intel is now #3
