For the first time, processors from Samsung or the media center can be compared with those from AMD and Intel.
Higher scores are better, with double the.
#Geekbench comparison mac os#
It works not only on Windows, Mac OS and Linux operating systems, but also with ARM processors. Geekbench 5 scores are calibrated against a baseline score of 1000 (which is the score of an Intel Core i3-8100). So it can happen that a processor in another notebook (which has better cooling) calculates much faster or stays at higher clock frequencies for much longer.Ī big advantage of Geekbench 5 is that it is available across platforms. The power limit of the processor and the available cooling capacity of the computer also play a major role here.
The data on this chart is gathered from user-submitted Geekbench 5.
#Geekbench comparison pro#
In single-core load scenarios, the individual CPU core is usually clocked much higher than when several CPU cores are used in parallel. Benchmark results for the Mac Pro with an Intel Xeon 5160 processor can be found below. Modern processors no longer have a fixed clock frequency, but clock their CPU cores according to the processor's load. The single-core load is also interesting for short performance peaks and for working within the operating system.
#Geekbench comparison software#
The single-core performance of the processor is still interesting for many applications today, because the software can often only use one CPU core or thread at a time. The single-core part of Geekbench 5 measures the computer's performance using only one CPU core. Geekbench version 5 contains new test fields such as augmented reality applications and calculations for machine learning. However, only the scores within the same software version of Geekbench may be compared. The result is given as a number of points and can be compared with other processors or systems. (the same applies for a given app that may be not optimized for your system, which ruins its performance, no matter the amazing score it has.Geekbench 5 is a multi-system benchmark and measures the performance of a computer. In the end, the most important thing is the day to day ‘feeling’ in current tasks and those benches are not really telling you much about that. In summary the Intel mobile CPU is 17.5 faster. Other trials on a more recent Intel mac gave worse results with OS 10.8 than with 10.6. A quick search found a laptop with AMD Ryzen 9 6900HX CPU to pit against the newfound Intel Core i9-12950HX, and you can see this comparison below. I had to use v220 because it's the last one supporting Tiger and that's funny to notice that my 10.4 partition gave a 1281 score, which appears a lot better than Leopard in v220 and slightly worse in v227.
This is apparently because they introduced new tests for newer computers and OSes. Geekbench typically runs quickly (in minutes) and especially so in our testing where the default workload gaps are removed, whereas SPEC CPU typically runs for hours. I've tried v220 against v227 on an iMac G5 running OS 10.5.8: To all the GB enthusiasts here: One thing to consider is that scores can be very different between two versions of GB! I can see a use for memory benchmarking, as people do buy third party memory and would want to compare brands or the impact of more/less memory. 6.1 inches (2532x1170) Glass / A14 / 4Gb / 256GB / 12Mp / 2775mAh. If one suspected there was a problem with their system, yes, running a benchmark might help troubleshoot a problem, but if it's just to gauge and compare between models, I would think the results posted in Mactracker are sufficient for comparison.īTW, I'm not advocating that you shouldn't use Geekbench. If the answer is yes, it could be significantly (+/- 5%) different, then I would say, why? if the answer is no, i should expect pretty much the same result, then running the same benchmark when test results for a model have already been posted, seems redundant? So if I own a iMac10,1 at 3.06GHz for example, why should I or should I not expect that my benchmark result would be significantly different from that listed in Mactracker, for the same iMac10,1 3.06GHz? Since the list of Apple models is finite (large, but finite) and the specs are consistent between models, I would think there would be little variance in benchmark results for a specific model, once a particular model (for example, a "iMac10,1") is tested and the results posted, whether posted by Mactracker or just other users with the same model. Mactracker provides CPU benchmarks for the majority of the Mac models, including the variants within the same model line, where the CPU speed differs.