![]() But we can only hope that the Mac chart will be improved and made meaningful again.Įdit: I don’t have access to my e-mail and can’t contact Geekbench right now, but someone (else) should at least inform them about the broken links. Stuff that is uploaded by users, and then get ripped out of the results.Įhm. A tool / website that does not hide significant details. Again, a complete description of the GPU Compute workloads, along with details on Compute API support, runtime and scoring mechanisms, is. I don’t know about you, but for now, I am going to ditch the Geekbench.app and look for something better. Geekbench 4 includes 8 GPU Compute workloads and include tasks such as image processing, computational photography, and computer vision, all of which are a natural fit for highly-parallel GPU architectures. When you visit Mac Benchmark Chart and click on one of the links in the chart, then click on another link, then you’ll find that all links are broken. You cannot compare one (Mac) result with another. There should at least be one reference (link) to a user submitted Geekbench result where all data is visible. Geekbench 4 CPU Search 45,123 results found Jul 2nd, 2023, MacBook Pro (15-inch Late 2016) Intel Core i7-6920HQ 2900 MHz (4 cores), Mac OS X 64-bit, 4364. Now it is meaningless, but it could have been so much better. What does that tell me? Nothing! Without the missing details, that could even be a coffee grinder. But you need to have this data, otherwise the results are completely useless. Geekbench 4.3.0 for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit) Result Information. Top Single-Core Results Top Multi-Core Results Recent Results. There is no information about the installed Operating System, Processor ID, Motherboard, BIOS and Memory. Benchmark results for a MacBook (Early 2016) with an Intel Core m5-6Y54 processor. The screen really pops, with less bezel and wider color range. Much of the important data is removed (from user submitted results). Apple MacBook Pro (13-inch, 2016) The Good A massive touchpad dominates this incredibly skinny, high-powered laptop. As expected, the 2017 10.5-inch iPad Pro came in on the top, followed by the 12.9-inch 2017 iPad Pro.The results of the Mac Benchmark Chart is stripped. When it comes to single-core performance, the MacBook Pro emerged victorious, with both the 20 models beating all the iPad Pro models. The blog site compared the iPads through a series of Geekbench 4 and GFXBench tests, looking at GPU and graphics performance. In fact the 13-inch MacBook Pro models were with top-of-the-line specifications with Intel core i7 processor, 16GB RAM and Intel graphics. You also might be interested in reviewing all single core and multicore Geekbench 4 user submissions for Macs with the MacBookPro10,1 Model Identifier, which may include multiple models. Notably, Bear Feats wasn’t comparing the iPad Pros with the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Intel’s core i5 processor. Both numbers reflect an average of user provided results as submitted to the Geekbench website. The site, Bare Feats put the 20 MacBook Pro models with TouchBar against four different iPad Pros, including the latest ones. ![]() Tech benchmarking website Bare Feats found that the 10.5-inch and 12.9-inch iPad Pros aren’t far behind the 13-inch MacBook Pro in terms of performance. The latest iPad Pro devices are as powerful as the MacBook Pro in some cases. 20151 OpenCL Score: Geekbench 4.4.1 Tryout for Mac OS X x86 (64-bit) Result Information. ![]() The latest iPad Pro devices are as powerful as the MacBook Pro in some cases. Benchmark results for a MacBook Pro (15-inch Late 2016) with an Intel Core i7-6700HQ processor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |