Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

Early MacBook benchmarks show performance well behind Pro, Air

Matthew S. Smith
By

early macbook benchmarks show 2011 era performance new logic board 1
Image used with permission by copyright holder
Apple’s new MacBook is insanely thin, featherweight and doesn’t require a cooling fan, all of which are commendable traits. Yet they don’t come without compromise. To achieve its design goals, Cupertino’s engineers have used Intel Core M processors, which we know are slower than their standard Core equivalents. The only question was how much slower the new MacBook would be.

Now we know. A pair of early results have appeared in the GeekBench database. The single-core figures come in at 1,924 and 2,044, while the multi-core results come in at 4,038 and 4,475. According to the data, these figures were generated by a system with the entry-level 1.1GHz Core M-5Y31 processor.

Recommended Videos

How do those results stack up? The latest MacBook Pro 13 with Retina scored 3,007 in GeekBench’s single-core test and 6,596 in the multi-core test, so it would seem the Pro is about a third quicker than the new MacBook.

Related

The figures are no more favorable when compared to Windows ultrabooks. These scores, if placed in our line-up of GeekBench results, would be the worst that we’ve recorded since the Zotac Zbox OI520, which had an Intel Core i5-4200U processor. Most systems reviewed at least break the 2,000 mark in the single-core benchmark, and the Samsung Ativ Book 9, a close competitor to the Apple MacBook, scored 2,515 when we tested it.

It now seems certain that it will prove substantially slower than even the entry-level Air, perhaps so much so that it impacts the “average” owner. Buyers may have a hard time accepting inferior performance from a machine that’s priced at $1,300. Here’s hoping battery life and build quality blow us away, because these early benchmark results aren’t promising.

Apple will be release its new addition to the MacBook line on April 10th at $1,299 for the base model.

Editors' Recommendations

Topics
Matthew S. Smith
Matthew S. Smith
Former Digital Trends Contributor
Matthew S. Smith is the former Lead Editor, Reviews at Digital Trends. He previously guided the Products Team, which dives…
A major era in MacBook history is finally over
A MacBook Pro 13-inch on a table.

We're living in a golden age for MacBooks.

The MacBook Airs are faster, thinner, and more accessible laptops than ever, while the Pro models have the best display, speakers, keyboard, trackpad, and battery life of any competitive laptop. They're on their A game.

Read more
Here’s why people are raising concerns about the M3 Pro MacBook Pro
The 14-inch MacBook Pro with M3 Max chip seen from behind.

I published my review of the M3 Max MacBook Pro earlier this week, and suffice it to say, I was pretty impressed. I'm fond of the Space Black color, and the GPU performance in particular blew me away.

But one configuration of the new MacBook Pro went a bit more under the radar -- the M3 Pro model. Apple wasn't keen on sending this exact unit out to reviewers, instead leading with its much stronger foot, the M3 Max. And while the M3 Max and Pro were a bit closer in performance in the M2 generation, this time around, it seems as if there's more of a disparity.

Read more
Here’s more proof that Apple is wrong about MacBook memory
The keyboard and trackpad of the MacBook Pro.

Apple has made some big claims about its unified memory over the past few years. That was made explicit this week when an Apple representative was asked why it has begun to sell an 8GB starting configuration of its new M3 Pro MacBook Pro, a laptop that's already been under scrutiny recently. The interviewee responded by saying that 8GB on a MacBook was equivalent to 16GB on a comparable system. But is that really true? It's been hard to test so far, but a recent video posted by Max Tech suggests that in practice, at least, it's not so simple.

M3 MacBook Pro 8GB vs 16GB RAM - How BAD is base model?

Read more