Gofre
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by 41b)
I checked the mid 2014 Macbook pro retina i7 (I7-4578U) when it came out and the score was 5087, while my Dell's i7-3720QM was 8267 (so not twice as much but 63% more) at the same time.

The new generation latitudes (e6440) has a dual core processor so the performance is comparable to the 2014 Macbook's (5117 for the e6440).

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Your Dell's quad core beating a dual core i7 isn't surprising, it takes a few years for mid range CPUs to take over the performance of previously high-end ones, especially when Haswell and Broadwell have been aimed primarily at improving power efficiency in mobile chips. If we make a more logical comparison to the i7-4770HQ, the first quad core to appear in The MacBook Pro line, you'll see an increase of over 10% in Passmark despite the clock speed dipping to a far lower 2.2GHz.

I'm not too tech savvy so I don't understand why they've gone from quad core to dual core.
They haven't changed, Apple have always used dual core CPUs in the 13" models and quad cores in the 15" models since moving to the Retina MBP design.

I read a Microsoft guy saying the system can be more energy efficient running 4 processors at a low load than 2 processors at a medium load, so it doesn't make sense to me.
Because the "Microsoft guy" is wrong here, at least in practical terms. To stick with the 2014 Pros for the sake of this example, the lowest clocked quad core i7 (i7-4770HQ clocked at 2GHz) has a TDP of 47W. Meanwhile the fastest clocked dual core i7 (i7-4758U clocked at 3GHz) has a TDP of only 28W. TDP directly correlates with power consumption.

Plus Intel haven't released their quad core 5th gen mobile CPUs yet, so Apple couldn't have used them even if they wanted to.
0
reply
41b
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by Gofre)
Your Dell's quad core beating a dual core i7 isn't surprising, it takes a few years for mid range CPUs to take over the performance of previously high-end ones, especially when Haswell and Broadwell have been aimed primarily at improving power efficiency in mobile chips. If we make a more logical comparison to the i7-4770HQ, the first quad core to appear in The MacBook Pro line, you'll see an increase of over 10% in Passmark despite the clock speed dipping to a far lower 2.2GHz.
My point was there the cost differential was so great that I was getting a vastly better processor at a much lower cost years before the Macbook. The 13.3inch Retina Display i7 2.9 GHz with 8gb RAM, 512gb flash storage and almost no (is there any) upgradeability goes for 2 grand on amazon or ebay. My 14 inch lattitude e6430, that's 2 years old, with 16gb ram, great upgradability* , a 500gb ssd and a 750gb hdd, a decent graphics card (NVS 5200m, with 1gb dedicated memory) has cost me, in total, £1000 despite being nearly 3 years old at this point. That's half the cost for a superior and far more upgradeable machine.

The latitude e6440 will have an upgradeable processor so people buying it will be able to keep it current for even longer.


They haven't changed, Apple have always used dual core CPUs in the 13" models and quad cores in the 15" models since moving to the Retina MBP design.
I was talking about Dell.



Because the "Microsoft guy" is wrong here, at least in practical terms. To stick with the 2014 Pros for the sake of this example, the lowest clocked quad core i7 (i7-4770HQ clocked at 2GHz) has a TDP of 47W. Meanwhile the fastest clocked dual core i7 (i7-4758U clocked at 3GHz) has a TDP of only 28W. TDP directly correlates with power consumption.

Plus Intel haven't released their quad core 5th gen mobile CPUs yet, so Apple couldn't have used them even if they wanted to.
I'm not sure how that correlates. TDP would only be maximum performance, rather than minimum performance.

Look at the latitude e6440 with a dual core and the e6430 with a quad core. The quad core has a ~2 hour battery life reduction, despite having a lower performance graphics card and equal RAM. Although the review unit e6440 did have a hybrid drive, whereas the e6430 had a ssd.

*for example, I've replaced the cd-rom drive with a hot-swappable hard drive, upgraded the ram from 8gb to 16gb, bought a 500gb ssd
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (57)
23.85%
No (182)
76.15%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed