All the new MacBooks unveiled at WWDC have now been benchmarked using Geekbench, and some pretty interesting results have emerged, MacRumors reports.
Believe it or not, in terms of CPU and RAM, the next generation Macbook Pro scores less highly than a standard high end Macbook Pro (which is considerably cheaper), even if Macbook Airs score as expected (the latest models are the best).
The Macbook Pro results are even more surprising, as even the 2.6Ghz standard version is almost identical, to the Retina Display version in terms of power, and so for the difference in price, going by this, you’d be much better buying a standard model if you’re looking for power.
Even the difference between the 17 inch 2011 model and the entry level Retina display version isn’t that big, however you do have to consider the SSD and the Retina display, something that Geekbench doesn’t factor in.
Nevertheless, the difference really isn’t that big if you want power, and if I had a Macbook Pro, I wouldn’t bother upgrading.
Isn’t someone going to point out that the article is wrong, comparing the 2.6GHz Ivy Bridge retina MacBook Pro with the 2.7 GHz Ivy Bridge MacBook Pro. If you compare the two versions with the same clock speed then the Geekbench scores are (unsurprisingly) virtually identical.
Of course a 2.7 Ghz will be faster than a 2.6Ghz, that’s not really the point I was trying to make. The 2.7Ghz standard Macbook Pro is cheaper than the entry level Retina Macbook, so if you want power, it’s stupid buying the latter.