retroremakes
February 6th, 2010, 16:20
http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/4/2010/02/500x_geekbenchpro.jpgThere's a pretty gnarly GeekBench result (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210968) running around which appears to be for a new model MacBook Pro (http://gizmodo.com/tag/macbookpro/)—6,1 to be exact—running a crazyfast 2.66GHz Intel Core i7 620M (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=43560), one of the Arrandale chips Intel announced at CES (http://gizmodo.com/5442659/new-core-i7-i5-and-i3-processor-family-did-we-mention-theyre-fast).
MacBook Pros are definitely in need of fresh guts, and the obvious choice for chips are from the fresh batch of Arrandale processors Intel announced last month. The Core i7 (http://gizmodo.com/tag/corei7/) 620M would definitely fit the bill—it's a fast dual-core chip, and its TDP is in line with what's in the currently shipping MBPs. The GeekBench score is 5260, which MacRumors notes handily bests the current-gen 2.6GHz MBPs, which typically hit around 3700-4000. Not answered by the Geekbench results is what's up with the MacBook Pro's graphics situation (http://gizmodo.com/5436465/whats-inside-the-next-macbooks).
In case you're not familiar with the way model numbers work at Apple, like the MacBook Pro 6,1 here, the first number in the set designates a major revision, and the second number indicates a smaller subset—the first unibody MacBook Pros were 5,1 for instance.
Results posted to GeekBench (now pulled) aren't the most credible evidence of new, gutsier MacBook Pros for obvious reasons, but if even they aren't real, it seems safe to assume we're due for some fresh Core i7 silicon sometime soon. I hope so, anyway. [Geekbench (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210968) (link pulled) via MacRumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/06/unreleased-core-i7-macbook-pro-61-benchmarked-supplies-constrained/)]
http://ads.pheedo.com/img.phdo?p=1 (http://ads.pheedo.com/click.phdo?p=1) http://a.rfihub.com/eus.gif?eui=2226 http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?d=H0mrP-F8Qgo</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:H0mrP-F8Qgo) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?d=yIl2AUoC8zA</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?i=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:D7DqB2pKExk</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:D7DqB2pKExk) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?i=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:V_sGLiPBpWU</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:V_sGLiPBpWU)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~4/Lok1oenSDEE
More... (http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~3/Lok1oenSDEE/are-these-the-first-core-i7-macbook-pro-benchmarks)
MacBook Pros are definitely in need of fresh guts, and the obvious choice for chips are from the fresh batch of Arrandale processors Intel announced last month. The Core i7 (http://gizmodo.com/tag/corei7/) 620M would definitely fit the bill—it's a fast dual-core chip, and its TDP is in line with what's in the currently shipping MBPs. The GeekBench score is 5260, which MacRumors notes handily bests the current-gen 2.6GHz MBPs, which typically hit around 3700-4000. Not answered by the Geekbench results is what's up with the MacBook Pro's graphics situation (http://gizmodo.com/5436465/whats-inside-the-next-macbooks).
In case you're not familiar with the way model numbers work at Apple, like the MacBook Pro 6,1 here, the first number in the set designates a major revision, and the second number indicates a smaller subset—the first unibody MacBook Pros were 5,1 for instance.
Results posted to GeekBench (now pulled) aren't the most credible evidence of new, gutsier MacBook Pros for obvious reasons, but if even they aren't real, it seems safe to assume we're due for some fresh Core i7 silicon sometime soon. I hope so, anyway. [Geekbench (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210968) (link pulled) via MacRumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/02/06/unreleased-core-i7-macbook-pro-61-benchmarked-supplies-constrained/)]
http://ads.pheedo.com/img.phdo?p=1 (http://ads.pheedo.com/click.phdo?p=1) http://a.rfihub.com/eus.gif?eui=2226 http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?d=H0mrP-F8Qgo</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:H0mrP-F8Qgo) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?d=yIl2AUoC8zA</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:yIl2AUoC8zA) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?i=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:D7DqB2pKExk</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:D7DqB2pKExk) http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?i=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:V_sGLiPBpWU</img> (http://feeds.gawker.com/~ff/gizmodo/full?a=Lok1oenSDEE:-v1zM7iCPGI:V_sGLiPBpWU)
http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~4/Lok1oenSDEE
More... (http://feeds.gawker.com/~r/gizmodo/full/~3/Lok1oenSDEE/are-these-the-first-core-i7-macbook-pro-benchmarks)