Geekbench for mac 1080p#
Geekbench for mac pro#
Geekbench for mac software#
Geekbench for mac mac#
Geekbench for mac windows#

Geekbench for mac pro#

However, here again the new M2 Pro can't match the raw video editing power of the 2021 MacBook Pros, as the 16-inch Pro with M1 Max encoded the same video in under 5 minutes (4:48).Īs good as it is, the M2 can't match the raw editing power of the M1 Max chip inside the 2021 MacBook Pros.

Geekbench for mac windows#

It's way faster than the Dell XPS 13 OLED, one of our favorite Windows laptops that nevertheless took over 18 minutes (18:12) to complete the same test with an 11th Gen Intel Core i7-1185G7 CPU. The M2-equipped Pro completed the task in 6 minutes and 51 seconds, a decent speed that outpaces the M1-equipped 2020 Pro, which took nearly 8 minutes (7:46) to complete the same task.

Geekbench for mac 1080p#

To get a sense of how well the M2 can crunch video we also put the 2022 Pro through our video encoding test, which tasks the laptop with transcoding a 4K video down to 1080p using Handbrake. In Geekbench 5.4 the 14-inch MacBook Pro 2021 with an M1 Pro earned a whopping 12,477, while the M1 Max-based 16-inch MacBook Pro did even better, earning 12,683. So while the M2 is a meaningful improvement over the M1, we've confirmed it still can't touch the upgraded chips in the 2021 Pros. However, the M2 still can't match the scores put up by last year's M1 Pro and M1 Max chips. So for me, that would be more of a reason to get a new computer then the single core speed per say, I'm perfectly fine with GB5 score of 669 single core.but the missing AVX means I can't use a couple things I would like to.The M2 chip outperforms the latest Intel CPUs (like the one inside the Lenovo Yoga 9i Gen 7 seen here) in many benchmarks. The older ones don't have it and can't even run those at all.

Geekbench for mac software#

Some software such as MODODRUMS, MassiveX and some others are starting to require AVX. So what is the low-bar? I don't know what to say, but again this would probably depend a lot on the person, but I am not feeling like I need any more multi-core power then this, but I do wish I had a bit higher single-core score.but not that I'm having any problems with it, I'm not, but I would just like a little more breathing room, plugins are getting more and more hungry.Īlso, newer computers have AVX in their CPU and personally I think if you're buying a new one, that should be a requirement. Some people could even go lower than 500 perhaps and be perfectly fine if you're not using one of the super cpu hungry plugins while in live mode.įor multi-core score.I don't have any idea what the low-bar should be, this machine is up pretty high actually even compared to some modern machines.because it has 2 CPU's, 12 total keeps up just fine when mixing tracks, etc.which uses more cores and no problem. But based on my own experience with this machine I would guess that a GB5 single core score under about 500 would be too low and many people would say my score is too low, and in a couple of years it definitely will be, but as of right now, I'm getting by just fine. There are very few synths that in live mode seem to hit the CPU hard, its very rare.honestly I just have not had a problem with that at all. So is a single core score of 669, is that enough? Most of the time yes. The numbers are different, but my place in the pecking order has not changed. Just like in GB4, it seemed to be something like 1/3 or even 1/4 the single core speed compared to newer computers.

My single core score is only 669, which is not great. I have no problems I can do everything I want to do with LogicPro because of that. I'm using a 5,1 MacPro(see my signature), my multicore score of 6604 is quite good considering how old the machine is. I'm seeing enough older machines listed under GB5 scores to still get a fair idea of where I stand.which is decent multi core performance and pretty lousy single core.īased on the new scales, I don't know what to say is the 'least' I could deal with. Well yea, it looks like Geekbench5 has changed the rating number, so you can't really compare a GB4 score to a GB5 score. I used to aim to recommend machines that have at least 3000 on the single core, and over/around 10k on multi for Logic.įeel a bit sad that it's all changed, tbh. With that in mind, what do people feel is the new 'at least' single and multi-core rating based on the new data?. It kinda kills my previous theories on benchmark scores when people ask me to recommend a good machine to buy secondhand.

Geekbench for mac mac#

I don't know if people are aware or not, but i went to compare CPU's on the Mac Benchmark at (Which i know gets used here a lot), and the ratings have all changed.