2010 2.8GHz i7 640M to 2011 1.8GHz i7 2677M - wow!

[WardC]

Okay, I was curious so I checked into this. This is a comparison of the 2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7 (top-spec configuration) to the 2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz (top spec configuration) and here is how they stacked up on Geekbench:

2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442435

2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz i7 (Sandy Bridge):

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569

MBP had faster Integer, MBA had faster Floating Point, and better memory scores.

I was pretty amazed seeing the power that the new MBA-beast has! It is comparable to the top-level 2010 MacBook Pro i7 configurations in raw processing power.

 

[theSeb]

Okay, I was curious so I checked into this. This is a comparison of the 2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7 (top-spec configuration) to the 2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz (top spec configuration) and here is how they stacked up on Geekbench:

2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442435

2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz i7 (Sandy Bridge):

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569

MBP had faster Integer, MBA had faster Floating Point, and better memory scores.

I was pretty amazed seeing the power that the new MBA-beast has! It is comparable to the top-level 2010 MacBook Pro i7 configurations in raw processing power.

Check out my thread for the encode test. It mocked it.

 

[nebulos]

on front page

 

[arctic]

Geekbench is useless. High Geekbench scores are not gonna change the fact that the MBA is not for heavy lifting. Processing Tasks that the SB MBP run circles with is still gonna be significantly slower in the MBA i7. Wait for further lab tests on specific Applications and tasks.

 

[LeakedDave]

Okay, I was curious so I checked into this. This is a comparison of the 2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7 (top-spec configuration) to the 2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz (top spec configuration) and here is how they stacked up on Geekbench:

2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442435

2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz i7 (Sandy Bridge):

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569

MBP had faster Integer, MBA had faster Floating Point, and better memory scores.

I was pretty amazed seeing the power that the new MBA-beast has! It is comparable to the top-level 2010 MacBook Pro i7 configurations in raw processing power.

Heh that's my MBA screaming at 6918 there

 

[sdugoten]

I think these two are more interesting...

Macbook air 13" 2011
Intel Core i7-2677M
score (64 bit): 6918
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569


Macbook Pro 13" 2011
Intel Core i7-2620M
score (64 bit): 7192
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/440765

 

[sporadicMotion]

I think these two are more interesting...

Macbook air 13" 2011
Intel Core i7-2677M
score (64 bit): 6918
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569


Macbook Pro 2011
Intel Core i7-2620M
score (64 bit): 7192
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/440765

I agree

 

[PDFierro]

Okay, I was curious so I checked into this. This is a comparison of the 2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7 (top-spec configuration) to the 2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz (top spec configuration) and here is how they stacked up on Geekbench:

2010 MacBook Pro 2.8GHz i7:

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442435

2011 MacBook Air 1.8GHz i7 (Sandy Bridge):

http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569

MBP had faster Integer, MBA had faster Floating Point, and better memory scores.

I was pretty amazed seeing the power that the new MBA-beast has! It is comparable to the top-level 2010 MacBook Pro i7 configurations in raw processing power.

So to the OP, are you now in favor of the refresh? Do the upgrades still not "make sense"?

 

[zunairryk]

I think these two are more interesting...

Macbook air 13" 2011
Intel Core i7-2677M
score (64 bit): 6918
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/442569


Macbook Pro 13" 2011
Intel Core i7-2620M
score (64 bit): 7192
http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/440765

Yeah, can anyone explain why the score is almost identical between these two laptops. They both are using the sandybridge processor, but the MBA is running at 1.8 ghz compared to 2.7 ghz that MBP have.

 

[lukekarts]

Yeah, can anyone explain why the score is almost identical between these two laptops. They both are using the sandybridge processor, but the MBA is running at 1.8 ghz compared to 2.7 ghz that MBP have.

I'm assuming, rightly or wrongly, that clock speed is less relevant, the fact there are so many cores goes a long way to offsetting the difference in clock speed.

 

[MRU]

Yeah, can anyone explain why the score is almost identical between these two laptops. They both are using the sandybridge processor, but the MBA is running at 1.8 ghz compared to 2.7 ghz that MBP have.

I'm assuming, rightly or wrongly, that clock speed is less relevant, the fact there are so many cores goes a long way to offsetting the difference in clock speed.

The i7 1.8 over clocks to 2.9 ghz
The 2.7ghz over clocks to 3.4 ghz

The i7 1.8 turbo boost counts for that big difference and pushes it way higher in these benchmark tests.