Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

macbook 2017 i5 vs i7 benchmarks

benoitc

benoitc

macrumors member
Original poster
Aug 18, 2015
35
2
are there any benchmarks/tests available for these specs? I can only find it for m3 vs i5 at the moment.
 
Geekbench, if you care about that one.

i7: Expect about 4450 / 8400
i5: Expect about 4000 / 7400
m3: Expect about 3800 / 7000

IOW, the jump from m3 to i5 isn't very big, but the jump from i5 to i7 is somewhat bigger. Only problem is theoretically, the i7 might throttle faster, esp. when compared to the m3.

I bought the m3, BTW.
 
EugW said:
Geekbench, if you care about that one.

i7: Expect about 4450 / 8400
i5: Expect about 4000 / 7400
m3: Expect about 3800 / 7000

IOW, the jump from m3 to i5 isn't very big, but the jump from i5 to i7 is somewhat bigger. Only problem is theoretically, the i7 might throttle faster, esp. when compared to the m3.

I bought the m3, BTW.
Click to expand...


what about when compare with m5 2016? big difference?
Thanks
 
tley said:
m5 2016:
3049 / 5884

https://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
Click to expand...
More realistically 3400 / 6400 for 2016 m5 on a good day, but that still means that 2017 m3 is noticeably faster than 2016 m5.

2017 m3 can hit over 7000 multi-core.

One factor not looked at by benches:
2017 all models: Perfect 10-bit 4K HEVC playback
2016 all models: Unusable for high bitrate 10-bit 4K HEVC
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Queen6 and FriendlyMackle
EugW said:
Only problem is theoretically, the i7 might throttle faster, esp. when compared to the m3.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the bench. Is this problem documented somewhere? It was an issue on 2015 versions with the upper cpu, but has it been noticed since?
 
benoitc said:
Thanks for the bench. Is this problem documented somewhere? It was an issue on 2015 versions with the upper cpu, but has it been noticed since?
Click to expand...
Was an issue with the 2016:

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Face-Off-Apple-MacBook-12-Core-m3-Core-m5-and-Core-m7.172046.0.html

Note the fastest in this set of repeated Cinebench R15 runs was consistently the m5.

cb15_schleife_macbooks.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: FriendlyMackle
EugW said:
Geekbench, if you care about that one.

i7: Expect about 4450 / 8400
i5: Expect about 4000 / 7400
m3: Expect about 3800 / 7000

IOW, the jump from m3 to i5 isn't very big, but the jump from i5 to i7 is somewhat bigger. Only problem is theoretically, the i7 might throttle faster, esp. when compared to the m3.

I bought the m3, BTW.
Click to expand...

Why did you buy the m3?
 
  • Like
Reactions: benoitc
Scorcher said:
Why did you buy the m3?
Click to expand...
I only need 256 GB, so I put the extra money towards more RAM. I went with the 256 GB SSD / 16 GB RAM combo.

Also, the m3-7Y32 is very similar in performance specs now compared to the i5-7Y54. The former in a MacBook is 1.2 GHz with Turbo Boost to 3.0 GHz. The latter in a MacBook is 1.3 GHz with Turbo Boost to 3.2 GHz.

The real boost in power on paper was the i7, but it was considerably more expensive, and I didn't need the 512 GB SSD. Furthermore, I was a little concerned we'd see a repeat of the i7 throttling issues, to which the m3 would likely be less susceptible.

If Apple had used the m3-7Y30 with the new MacBooks though, I would have gotten the i5 for sure. The m3-7Y30 is Turbo Boost up to 2.6 GHz.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Queen6
benoitc said:
Thanks! wonder if outside some pick (a software build for ex), the i7 isn't faster on day normal usage. Thoughts? I personally hesitate between the i5 and i7. For now I'm failing to find some feedback about normal usages of machines with this CPU.
Click to expand...
I want to see some comparisons of the i5 and i7 (and m3) for sustained loads. If the i7 throttles down too much again in 2017 then it's pointless. But if they've somehow fixed that, or if the 2016 test was just an anomaly, then it would be a decent upgrade over the m3/i5.

And the i5 upgrade over the m3 upgrade is only marginal in terms of CPU speed. IMO, the main reason to get the i5 is to get the 512 GB SSD.

===

BTW, the other thing is the i7 has the fastest GPU Turbo speed.

m3: 300 MHz and 900 MHz Turbo
i5: 300 MHz and 950 MHz Turbo
i7: 300 MHz and 1050 MHz Turbo

I have no idea what that means in real world terms though.
 
Not sure if it's helpful but I just opened 30 tabs of macrumors forums in chrome on my 2017 i7 16GB RAM and it slowed down to a crawl for about 5 minutes before all the tabs crashed (but stayed). During the whole time though, CPU was only 30-50%, RAM was about 7GB, and all other apps including expose worked fast and smooth. Not sure if this is the cpu not capable of pulling Chrome through these tabs or just a problem with chrome.
 
Last edited:
EugW said:
Geekbench, if you care about that one.

i7: Expect about 4450 / 8400
i5: Expect about 4000 / 7400
m3: Expect about 3800 / 7000

IOW, the jump from m3 to i5 isn't very big, but the jump from i5 to i7 is somewhat bigger. Only problem is theoretically, the i7 might throttle faster, esp. when compared to the m3.

I bought the m3, BTW.
Click to expand...
Last year the m5 was the sweet spot since Intel crippled the Turbo Boost on m3 chip relative to the m5. This year they brought the m3 back up to speed.
 
If you're getting a 2017 model, the M3 is for sure the sweet spot. That's a good thing.
 
EugW said:
I want to see some comparisons of the i5 and i7 (and m3) for sustained loads. If the i7 throttles down too much again in 2017 then it's pointless. But if they've somehow fixed that, or if the 2016 test was just an anomaly, then it would be a decent upgrade over the m3/i5.

And the i5 upgrade over the m3 upgrade is only marginal in terms of CPU speed. IMO, the main reason to get the i5 is to get the 512 GB SSD.

===

BTW, the other thing is the i7 has the fastest GPU Turbo speed.

m3: 300 MHz and 900 MHz Turbo
i5: 300 MHz and 950 MHz Turbo
i7: 300 MHz and 1050 MHz Turbo

I have no idea what that means in real world terms though.
Click to expand...

I ordered the i7 but now I'm not sure :) tempted to cancel it for just the m3 + 16 go (though there may be a reason for the i5 vs m3 since the m3 is over clocked...
 
benoitc said:
I ordered the i7 but now I'm not sure :) tempted to cancel it for just the m3 + 16 go (though there may be a reason for the i5 vs m3 since the m3 is over clocked...
Click to expand...
All of them have have the CPU base speed increased by 100 MHz. However, that isn’t “overclocked”. That’s acceptable if the voltage/power specs are met. Intel allows adjustment like that.
 
EugW said:
All of them have have the CPU base speed increased by 100 MHz. However, that isn’t “overclocked”. That’s acceptable if the voltage/power specs are met. Intel allows adjustment like that.
Click to expand...
oh... you're right :) thanks for the info.

So wondering how much the extra perf of the i5 could play. Maybe it's better for the long term usage?
 
effineji said:
Not sure if it's helpful but I just opened 30 tabs of macrumors forums in chrome on my 2017 i7 16GB RAM and it slowed down to a crawl for about 5 minutes before all the tabs crashed (but stayed). During the whole time though, CPU was only 30-50%, RAM was about 7GB, and all other apps including expose worked fast and smooth. Not sure if this is the cpu not capable of pulling Chrome through these tabs or just a problem with chrome.
Click to expand...

Chrome for macOS is garbage. I cringe every time I see someone using this crappy software on their brand new MacBook. Better buy a Chromebook if you desperately need to use this disgrace of a browser.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatherineVeraGat and c0ppo
gim said:
Chrome for macOS is garbage. I cringe every time I see someone using this crappy software on their brand new MacBook. Better buy a Chromebook if you desperately need to use this disgrace of a browser.
Click to expand...
Safari is definitely faster, but the integration with other machines is pretty sweet, and nothing beats the automatic translation, unless you can tell me a better solution/plug-in.
 
I just got a 2017 i5 with 512SSD and 8GB Ram....
Geekbench 4 - CPU: Single-Core 3927 / Mulit-Core 7507
Geekbench 4 - Compute OpenCL: 17452
Blackmagic Disk: Read 1330 / Write 1245
Cinebench: OpenGL Test: 26.52 fps / CPU: 260 cb
Unigine Heaven: Basic: FPS: 17.6 / Score: 444 / MinFPS 6.8 / MaxFPS 29.2
Unigine Heaven: Custom Medium Quality, 1440x900: FPS: 12.5 / Score: 315 / MinFPS 5.8 / MaxFPS 20.4
 
Alien1969 said:
I just got a 2017 i5 with 512SSD and 8GB Ram....
Geekbench 4 - CPU: Single-Core 3927 / Mulit-Core 7507
Geekbench 4 - Compute OpenCL: 17452
Blackmagic Disk: Read 1330 / Write 1245
Cinebench: OpenGL Test: 26.52 fps / CPU: 260 cb
Unigine Heaven: Basic: FPS: 17.6 / Score: 444 / MinFPS 6.8 / MaxFPS 29.2
Unigine Heaven: Custom Medium Quality, 1440x900: FPS: 12.5 / Score: 315 / MinFPS 5.8 / MaxFPS 20.4
Click to expand...


ı dont understand anything with numbers :/ is it good or not that scores
 
steve60549 said:
What kind of Cinebench score is this and how does it compare to the m3 results here:
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-12-2017-Laptop-Review.230656.0.html

Its the normal cinbench benchmark.... The results in that review seem to be comparison to a baseline...

The graph showing the throttling behavior is really interesting. By any chance, can you produce something like that for your i5? Would love to see it.
Click to expand...

don't have a test for that
[doublepost=1500014253][/doublepost]
wishxmaster said:
ı dont understand anything with numbers :/ is it good or not that scores
Click to expand...
In my opinion it is very good for such a portable device... of course my MacBook Pro 15 i7 late 2013 is faster, but for Mail, Safari, MS Office, Omnifocus, Devonthink pro office (my main programs for working throughout the day) there is no real difference other than of course screen size..... For me it is my everywhere computer... I like having MacOs instead of iOS. I tried a iPad with external Keyboard for 3 month but its not for my computing habits...
Will try how good the macbook handles Logic Pro X for mobile guitar recording with a USB Audio Interface on the weekend. Normally use my MacBook Pro for that...
It's great for listening to music too. The built in speaker do very well for such a small form factor. I don't have any issues with the keyboard....
 
  • Like
Reactions: fireedo
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back