Macbook Pro 13" 2018 Geekbench scores

[SBruv]

Just wondering what kind of Geekbench 4 scores people with the 2018 2.7GHz i17 13" MBP are getting. In the results table on the GB site, it comes in at 5121 for Single Core and 17657 for Multi-Core.

I'm getting about 5000-5500 for Single Core on repeated runs, and low-to-mid 16000s for Multi-Core, which seems quite a bit lower for the latter.

Anyone else?

 

[Cardino]

My 8559u only reach 4.17g at single core which is significantly lower than 4.5g.

 

[estabya]

You're results are less than 10% off of the results posted on Geekbench. I feel like that is well within the margin of being reasonable when you consider the difference in chips and margin of error on the tests.

Maybe you got a chip that requires a bit more voltage to hit certain clock speeds, causing it to create more heat, and thus throttling sooner and resulting in the sustained clock speed being slightly lower.

It could be a bunch of other things too, but I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. They're still solid scores.

 

[Cardino]

It could be a bunch of other things too, but I wouldn't worry about it if I were you. They're still solid scores.

[doublepost=1532571007][/doublepost]
But then why I spend $300 to upgrade the chip?

 

[upandown]

i7 16gb 1tb 10.13.16 (17G2208)

single 5333 multi 18239

 

[estabya]

[doublepost=1532571007][/doublepost]

But then why I spend $300 to upgrade the chip?

Advertised max boost speeds are just that. Max boost. That doesn’t mean that you will get those speeds all of the time. There are so many variables that come into play and can affect your performance.

If you aren’t happy with the performance of the machine you could try exchanging it or returning it for an i5 model.

 

[Cardino]

Advertised max boost speeds are just that. Max boost. That doesn’t mean that you will get those speeds all of the time. There are so many variables that come into play and can affect your performance.

If you aren’t happy with the performance of the machine you could try exchanging it or returning it for an i5 model.

The problem is that the chip Never reach 4.3g. I only need the intermittent peak performance if single core. I hope the cpu can cut waiting time by half compare to my 12 inch macbook, while the frequency issue is disappoint. The only reason I upgrade the chip is to run latex with live preview. I will watch in next few days before returning the machine to wait 2019 or later.

 

[mmomega]

[doublepost=1532571007][/doublepost]

But then why I spend $300 to upgrade the chip?

To do benchmark racing?

Is the potential lack of high end scores directly negatively effecting the purpose the laptop was purchased?

Wait. The decision to purchase and then spend extra cash was based off of a benchmarking website results page?

 

[throAU]

i7 16gb 1tb 10.13.16 (17G2208)

single 5333 multi 18239

That's actually a significant upgrade.

For reference, my 2015 13" with i5-5287U

Single-Core Score Multi-Core Score
3498 7524

Might pull the trigger one one of these if the keyboard issues end up being sorted out.

 

[Cardino]

To do benchmark racing?

You can imagine that it takes 8 seconds to edit a word to see the result. This is the case if you write a math paper in a living preview latex editor. Even the feeling of falling from 8 seconds to 4 seconds and 5 seconds is not the same.

 

[mmomega]

You can imagine that it takes 8 seconds to edit a word to see the result. This is the case if you write a math paper in a living preview latex editor. Even the feeling of falling from 8 seconds to 4 seconds and 5 seconds is not the same.

Yeah I don't have a clue what you're saying.

A question was asked.
Why did "I" do something?

That would be an answer for that person to make. Everyone outside of that person can only speculate potential answers to the question.

 

[mr.anthonyramos]

[doublepost=1532571007][/doublepost]

But then why I spend $300 to upgrade the chip?

Sorry but you really do NOT need to fussed about Geekbench Scores and other benchmarking applications for that matter.

Best to do real life testing with what you intend to do with your computer. You will find that these benchmarking are well, informative, but definitely not directly indicative of a system's true potential.

 

[mikethebigo]

What are you getting for GPU performance? I'm hitting around 39.5 FPS with Cinebench with the i7, or 36,500 with Geekbench OpenCL.

I'd love to know how those graphics numbers compare with the i5, which has a slightly lower clocked GPU.

 

[SBruv]

Sorry but you really do NOT need to fussed about Geekbench Scores and other benchmarking applications for that matter.

Best to do real life testing with what you intend to do with your computer. You will find that these benchmarking are well, informative, but definitely not directly indicative of a system's true potential.

Yes, I understand that, but if my GB4 score is lower than it's meant to be, that's of interest to me. I'm not unhappy with the machine, just looking to see how out of line my score is.
[doublepost=1532588095][/doublepost]

i7 16gb 1tb 10.13.16 (17G2208)

single 5333 multi 18239

That's impressive! Is that the 13"?

 

[NBAasDOGG]

My 8559u only reach 4.17g at single core which is significantly lower than 4.5g.

I hope you do know that 4.5Ghz is only for single core boost....?

 

[Cardino]

I hope you do know that 4.5Ghz is only for single core boost....?

I only run a single thread application. If this workflow cant reach maximal frequency, what is the meaning of single core turbo boost?

 

[DeepIn2U]

People forget that Macs didn’t even have F-keys until relatively recently. I think that the TB has nice potential. I wish they had kept the ESC key though.

Um ... dude ... Apple PowerBook 5300 had Function (Fn or F-Keys)!
Have a look these look like Function keys to me ... and I used this VERY machine many many years ago.

Sorry but you really do NOT need to fussed about Geekbench Scores and other benchmarking applications for that matter.

Best to do real life testing with what you intend to do with your computer. You will find that these benchmarking are well, informative, but definitely not directly indicative of a system's true potential.

Sad part is ... Apple USED to show, publicly, real world testing against equal software on both platforms ... usually Pro software during WWDC. That changed when WWDC ceased to be a venue for Apple business, Core OS, and Hardware. Now it's all about Apple business, the CEO's heart felt causes to discuss matters, and iOS/OSX/WatchOS/TVOS.

Since Apple stopped showcasing real world improvements ... the typical user will refer to benchmark scores as it's VERY easy for the average PC user to determine more is better on a line graph. I agree the OP should NOT have to go by benchmark scores to validate his/her purchase, yet I cannot blame the OP for going to benchmark scores as a point of reference.

Yes, I understand that, but if my GB4 score is lower than it's meant to be, that's of interest to me. I'm not unhappy with the machine, just looking to see how out of line my score is.
[doublepost=1532588095][/doublepost]

That's impressive! Is that the 13"?

Who ... exactly who stated that the GB4 scores are what YOUR machine is supposed to be hitting? How did you come up with that reasoning and was it to hit the scores 1 time or as an average? what is your reasonable level of Plus/Minus in reaching the score you've referenced?

" .. it's actually more like guidelines ..." to coin a sentence from The Pirates of the Caribbean; seems a bit suitable.

I saw have a look, try maybe 4x and then close the site and GB4 app. Start using your new toy and fully enjoy it. If you can noticeably witness poor performance ... return it within your buyers remorse window for a refund. There is a LOT more you can be concerned with.

Again ... no hard feelings and FULLY enjoy your new machine

 

[CodeJoy]

But then why I spend $300 to upgrade the chip?

Pretty much all data available both before and after release, indicated that the processor upgrades deliver zero performance gain, or close to it. Not sure why anyone would expect anything else.

 

[upandown]

Yes, I understand that, but if my GB4 score is lower than it's meant to be, that's of interest to me. I'm not unhappy with the machine, just looking to see how out of line my score is.
[doublepost=1532588095][/doublepost]

That's impressive! Is that the 13"?

This thread is only for 13 inch. So yes

 

[BayouTiger]

Um ... dude ... Apple PowerBook 5300 had Function (Fn or F-Keys)!
Have a look these look like Function keys to me ... and I used this VERY machine many many years ago.

I was, somewhat jokingly, referring the the original Macs from the introduction until the mid 90’s when they changed the keyboard to be more PC like.

The simple keyboard without F-keys or page keys. Was one of the things that made the Mac different. It was part of the “Think Different” aspect of the Mac that drove the PC converts a little batty!

 

[SBruv]

This thread is only for 13 inch. So yes

Yeah, it being my thread, I realise that. I was just checking as your results are so much higher than the norm.
[doublepost=1532607719][/doublepost]Anyhoo, if I can just un-hijack the thread, has anyone else got any results they can share?

 

[upandown]

Yeah, it being my thread, I realise that. I was just checking as your results are so much higher than the norm.
[doublepost=1532607719][/doublepost]Anyhoo, if I can just un-hijack the thread, has anyone else got any results they can share?

Hm mine seems to be ballpark to what I've seen on Geekbench.com and a review or two.

I just ran it 3 more consecutive times.

13inch i7 16gb 1tb 10.13.16 (17G2208) Clean install OS

1) Single: 5323 Multi: 18215
2) Single: 5247 Multi: 17882
3) Single: 5384 Multi: 18269

 

[SBruv]

Hm mine seems to be ballpark to what I've seen on Geekbench.com and a review or two.

I just ran it 3 more consecutive times.

13inch i7 16gb 1tb 10.13.16 (17G2208) Clean install OS

1) Single: 5323 Multi: 18215
2) Single: 5247 Multi: 17882
3) Single: 5384 Multi: 18269

Yeah, yours is making me slightly jealous.

Mine's never gone higher than about 17100, and that was in Safe Mode.

Anyone else?

 

[mikethebigo]

Yeah, yours is making me slightly jealous.

Mine's never gone higher than about 17100, and that was in Safe Mode.

Anyone else?

Just ran my system 3x.

5,331/18,331

5,397/18,230

5,368/18,367

I had Intel Power Gadget running and did catch a full 4.3 GHz turbo burst

What's amazing to me is that even after running a full benchmark the system was still cool enough (55C) that the fans were still off!

Now I would love if someone could compare OpenCL GPU/compute scores, to see how my GPU is doing. It’s not scoring at the 38,000 mark which Geekbench is showing as the average. Over 3 runs I got:

35,597

35,713

35,827

I hope I didn’t get a crummy GPU compared to other chips.

 

[upandown]

Just ran my system 3x.

5,331/18,331

5,397/18,230

5,368/18,367

I had Intel Power Gadget running and did catch a full 4.3 GHz turbo burst

What's amazing to me is that even after running a full benchmark the system was still cool enough (55C) that the fans were still off!

Now I would love if someone could compare OpenCL GPU/compute scores, to see how my GPU is doing. It’s not scoring at the 38,000 mark which Geekbench is showing as the average. Over 3 runs I got:

35,597

35,713

35,827

I hope I didn’t get a crummy GPU compared to other chips.

OpenCL / Metal
36256 / 37240
35985 / 37489
36278 / 37468