What do my geekbench scores mean vs. a newer model? (2024)

Long time member here with embarrassingly low post count. I am still using my base model mid 2009 13" MBP albeit with maxed out RAM and a SSD. It is still performing as well as it has ever done, if not better on account of the upgrades. The battery is toast and the machine is generally a bit grubby (I guess 10 years of constant use will do that) but it never leaves my desk.

I'm getting into to more photo editing and DAW usage (this machine particularly starts to struggle with even basic multitrack recording & virtual instruments) and I am considering upgrading.

I ran a Geekbench 4 (GB 5 doesn't work on my ancient machine) scan and I get the following scores:

My question is, how does this compare to newer models? The benchmarks on GB are all based on GB 5 so doesn't seem reasonable to compare GB 4 with GB 5 results.

Thanks in advance.

Without comparing geekbench scores against arbitrary stuff.... i can give you a rough idea. These aren't hard benchmark numbers, but averages from what i've seen and experienced first hand with the macs (and PCs) i've owned since 2009.

That machine is a Core2 Duo (?) machine. CPUs have come a LONG way since then, you'd be looking at

* roughly 3x faster for a modern quad core in terms of CPU - at the same clock speed
* roughly 1.5-2x faster for a modern dual core in terms of CPU - at the same clock speed

Now... that's running stuff that can't take advantage of new cpu features, and isn't limtied by disk throughput or memory, both of which are much faster on new machines. It also doesn't take into account that modern machines can generally burst to 3.5-4 Ghz or more.

This does not take into account applications that can make use of Quicksync (CPU hardware video processing) which was introduced in 2011 from memory. That drastically speeds up video processing (a lot more than the 2-3 times above). Ditto for specialised hardware acceleration instructions for encryption (which will speed up filevault, HTTPS web encryption, etc.) by 30x or more. Or rather use 30x less CPU for those things as they're generally network speed or storage speed limited. But still - it frees the CPU up to do other things (e.g., processing your audio, rather than grinding away on filevault).

The short version is that a CPU from later than 2011 will be a BIG jump (vs. 2009 - intel made a major leap in 2011 with Sandy Bridge) and from 2011 to 2020 you're talking roughly 30-50 percent performance improvement at the same core count for a 2020 machine vs. a machine from 2011-2012.

Here's the #s for a MBP 2019 13 2.4GHz:

single core 4860 multi 17890

throAU gave good info - it's not just the raw gb scores, and gb scores don't necessarily translate directly into 'everything is X faster.' GB is pretty much a CPU computational benchmark, so is more reflective of well - number-crunching only, which not all that many are really doing as their primary computer usage. Having said that, it still shows a generational gap(or more) vs what you have today.

I think throAU is right - I didn't notice a 'generational' speed jump back when I'd moved from my 2011 CTO model to a 2015 - it was faster, but not incredibly so, but I couldn't imagine going back to a C2Duo.

Lots of other improvements from SSD and RAM speeds, CPU codec support, and others would make the jump pretty significant, IMO, although only you can determine if it's something you 'need.'

Thank you all.

What would you say the sweet spot in terms of performance/value? Would something from around 2015-2017 a good starting point for a pre-owned machine? I imagine I could get a higher spec model for a slightly lower price?

Are there any model years to avoid?

OP:

Geekbench scores probably don't mean much in your case.
Your MBP is 11 years old, and I sense that you're itching for a new one.

BUT -- DON'T buy the current version with the awful butterfly keyboard.
To do so will be a SERIOUS BUYING MISTAKE.

WAIT for the upcoming MBP 14". It will have the new "scissors" keyboard (more reliable).
It's unsure right now just when it's coming (because of the virus), but it SHOULD be here before the year is out.

I agree with the post above. If you're going down the newer MBP route, then you want to stick with a model with the newer keyboard (which at the moment is only the 16" MBP and MBA). It's only a matter of time (and most likely this year) that a 13/14 inch model will be released with the newer keyboard. Although, if you're not looking to spend a fortune, luckily enough a 2015 model will be a DRASTIC upgrade in terms of speed for you. I currently use a 2015 15" model for exactly what you intend to use the laptop for. I use Ableton and Logic without any hiccups at all, and I also use Photoshop on a regular basis (Native Instruments Komplete, Sylenth amongst other VST's etc).

When comparing a 2015 and current MBP, yes there has been a drastic leap in terms of power. But, a 2015 model will certainly handle what you're looking to do and it will do it well for years to come IMO. As I mentioned, my 2015 15" is my main workhorse. Use it on the go, and plug into my dual monitor home studio setup primarily.

Fishrrman said:

OP:

Geekbench scores probably don't mean much in your case.
Your MBP is 11 years old, and I sense that you're itching for a new one.

BUT -- DON'T buy the current version with the awful butterfly keyboard.
To do so will be a SERIOUS BUYING MISTAKE.

WAIT for the upcoming MBP 14". It will have the new "scissors" keyboard (more reliable).
It's unsure right now just when it's coming (because of the virus), but it SHOULD be here before the year is out.

Click to expand...

I'm not itching to buy a new one by any means but more demanding applications (DAW/photo editing etc) may be forcing my hand somewhat. I can't justify the ££££ for a brand new model though - certainly not given the current situation.

What other model years should be avoided?

ricof said:

I'm not itching to buy a new one by any means but more demanding applications (DAW/photo editing etc) may be forcing my hand somewhat. I can't justify the ££££ for a brand new model though - certainly not given the current situation.

What other model years should be avoided?

Click to expand...

Preferably, anything with butterfly keyboards (2016-2019 inclusive) not just for the keyboard, they have a couple of significant hardware problems also including a fragile display flex and speaker issues. Unfortunately that doesn't leave a huge world of choice with MacBooks. If no other below options appeal to you, then maybe look

at the 2019 models, these have the final iteration of the butterfly keyboard, which anecdotally seems to be a bit better at not spontaneously failing.

The MBA 13" was sold in virtually it's 2015 condition right through to 2018, that's one option, particularly refurbished from Apple. With that you don't get a retina screen though. May or may not be a dealbreaker for you coming from a 2009.

The 2015 13" Pro (from the used market) is the next obvious choice, though it was last sold in 2016, so any examples will now be getting on a bit. They've held their value a bit too well, so most are probably more than you'd want to be paying for a machine that old just from a battery replacement perspective. With this you get a retina screen without sacrificing port selection, though.

Finally, if you can swing it, the latest MacBook Air will still outperform your model comfortably. Only 2x Thunderbolt 3 ports and you'll be paying at least Apple's ~£999 asking price for the foreseeable future, though.

Mac book pro 13 2009

293 single core, 512 multi core

https://browser.geekbench.com/macs/55

Geekbench notes that "Geekbench 5 scores are calibrated against a baseline score of 1000 (which is the score of an Intel Core i3-8100). Higher scores are better, with double the score indicating double the performance."

however, a mac mini with an i3-8100B officially scores 915/3282.

(also note that the fastest single core-- i9-9900 garners 1245 on single core, and 8228 on multicore. So the single core spread on a modern mac isn't that absurd. It's just that the fastest processors have eight or more cores that contributes to the wider range on multicore.)

ricof said:

Thank you all.

What would you say the sweet spot in terms of performance/value? Would something from around 2015-2017 a good starting point for a pre-owned machine? I imagine I could get a higher spec model for a slightly lower price?

Are there any model years to avoid?

Click to expand...

It depends what you're doing.

If you do a lot of video work, try to get as recent CPU as possible, as the newer models have support (baked into the hardware) to speed up various video codecs by a LOT.

If you aren't so focused on video... in terms of CPU improvement from say 2011 to 2019 you're looking at say 5% improvement per generation (for the same core count). Small steps.

If you can afford it i'd personally prioritise going for something newer rather than older but higher up in the model stack - because of things like security updates, macOS support, battery age/remaining life and the new CPU instructions that come with new versions of the CPU. e.g., new air instead of older 13" pro, newer 13" pro instead of older 15" pro, etc.

The newer CPU instructions are crucial if you do something that is accelerated by them because they can speed up the particular task they handle by so much - you'll see newer small machines outperforming older high end machines if the older machine doesn't have the hardware acceleration built in. Sometimes by a lot.

Sometimes a feature simply won't even be enabled (e.g., my 2015 doesn't support using ipad as a second display because the CPU doesn't support the instructions apple are using to ensure it runs smoothly and doesn't kill battery life).

Also if you're planning to keep the machine a long time, starting with something newer will give you a better chance of it surviving that long.

With modern machines the lack of IO isn't that bad.

Wireless is now fast, bluetooth works, etc.

I bought a USB-C to digital multi-out adapter to go with my air, it has a USB-A, HDMI out and USB-C/TB3 port - which is probably enough to get by with.

I'll likely end up just getting a thunderbolt dock later (for when i'm at my desk) and be done with it. It's very rare i use ports when not at a desk.

throAU said:

With modern machines the lack of IO isn't that bad.

Wireless is now fast, bluetooth works, etc.

I bought a USB-C to digital multi-out adapter to go with my air, it has a USB-A, HDMI out and USB-C/TB3 port - which is probably enough to get by with.

I'll likely end up just getting a thunderbolt dock later (for when i'm at my desk) and be done with it. It's very rare i use ports when not at a desk.

Click to expand...

I personally don’t mind it, I just meant it in a sense that OP may have to buy dongles or new peripherals considering the wide range of ports on their 2009. USB-C/TB3 is great though, finally actually getting to a ‘universal port’.