Primate Labs Blog

Yesterday, Apple updated its entire desktop lineup. This update had been a long time coming, especially since the Mac Pro hadn’t been updated since January 2008 and the Mac mini hadn’t been updated since August 2007!

However, a lot of people were disappointed with the updates, since it felt like an incremental update rather than a substantial upgrade. Now that Geekbench results are coming in for the new iMac and Mac mini, we can look at one aspect of the updated hardware — processor performance — and see if the upgrade is incremental or substantial.

Setup

I’ve gathered results for the latest iMacs and Mac minis and compared them against previous generations (note that results for some hardware configurations aren’t available yet; I’ll update the post when they are available). Results were collected from the Geekbench Result Browser for Macs with standard processors (i.e., no processor upgrades or overclocked processors). I’ve reported the average overall score for each model and processor combination.

If you’re unfamiliar with Geekbench and how it measures performance, a score of 1000 is the score a Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz would receive. Higher scores are better. Also, Geekbench 2 only measures processor and memory performance which is why models with the same processors but different video cards have roughly the same score.

iMac Benchmarks

Mac mini Benchmarks

Conclusions

Processor performance hasn’t increased substantially in the latest hardware; the performance increase seems to scale with processor speed. This isn’t surprising, since neither the iMac nor the Mac mini moved to a new processor architecture.

You might want to keep this in mind if you’re looking for a new Mac; you might be better off getting a discontinued (or refurbished) previous-generation Mac rather than one of the new Mac models.

Earlier this week Apple released updated iMacs that, among other things, feature new faster Penryn processors, faster memory, and a faster Santa Rosa chipset.

What do these improvements mean for iMac performance? Let’s take a look.

Setup

We used Geekbench 2, our cross-platform benchmark, to measure the processor and memory performance of the new iMacs. Here is the configuration of the four test machines. Note that each machine hasn’t been upgraded at all (i.e., it was tested with Apple’s default configuration for each model).

• iMac (Early 2008)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 3.06GHz
  • 2.00 GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

• iMac (Early 2008)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.80GHz
  • 2.00 GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

• iMac (Early 2008)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.66GHz
  • 2.00 GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

• iMac (Early 2008)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.40GHz
  • 1.00 GB 800 MHz DDR2 SDRAM

If you’re not familiar with Geekbench 2, scores are calibrated against a baseline score of 1000 (which is the score a Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz would receive). Higher scores are better.

Results

Overall Performance

Integer Performance

Floating Point Performance

Memory Performance

Stream Performance

Conclusions

One question I’m always asked after publishing benchmarks like this is whether it’s worth getting the high-end model or not. Usually the answer comes down to personal preference and budget; in other words, the answer is “it depends”. To help answer that answer this time around I thought I’d try something new; I divided the cost of each iMac by its Geekbench score, coming up with a “Cost Per Point” metric. Below is a chart that lists the Cost Per Point (in cents) for each model, including the base model with a 2GB RAM upgrade. Lower, in this case, is better:

If you’re looking for the best value in terms of raw processing power, the best iMac to get is the base model. Even after upgrading the RAM in the base model it’s still more cost-effective than the mid-range 20-inch iMac.

That said, this analysis only takes processor and memory performance into account. It doesn’t take into account the extra features you get with each model, like larger hard drives and better video cards. Personally, I’d recommend the 2.66 GHz 20-inch iMac; the extra hard drive space and video memory offset the slight disadvantage it has against the 2.4 GHz 20-inch iMac in terms of value.

Update: A number of folks have pointed out that this comparison doesn’t take into account the differences in screens between the 20-inch and 24-inch iMacs; not only is the 24-inch iMac larger, but it also comes with a better display capable of showing more colors. This was something I thought about when I was writing this post, and I came to the conclusion that if you want larger or better screen, you’re going to get it. You’re not going to even consider the 20-inch iMac. You’ll probably want to know whether it’s worth getting the high-end 24-inch iMac, a decision that’s hopefully made easier with the above charts!

I’ve updated the 24-inch iMac Performance (August 2007) article to include Geekbench results for the 24-inch iMac with the Core 2 Extreme processor. It looks like the Core 2 Extreme brings noticeable processor performance gains (take a look at the integer and floating point scores below), but is comparable in terms of memory performance with the 2.4GHz 24-inch iMac (unsurprising, since both iMacs use the same speed memory).

For your convenience, I’ve done a “mini comparison” between the two current 24-inch iMac models below.

Setup

• iMac (24-inch Mid 2007)

  • Intel Core 2 Extreme @ 2.8GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R4031)

• iMac (24-inch Mid 2007)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.40GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R4031)

Results

Overall Performance

Integer Performance

Floating Point Performance

Memory Performance

Stream Performance

Steve Jobs announced new iMacs on Tuesday and while I’m not sure I like the new enclosure, I do like the other improvements that come with the new iMacs like faster processors, more hard drive space, and the Santa Rosa chipset.

I thought I’d compare the performance of the latest 24-inch iMac against the previous generation of 24-inch iMacs using Geekbench 2. While I don’t have any results for the 24-inch iMac with the Core 2 Extreme processor right now, I’ll update this article once I receive results for the Core 2 Extreme processor. I’ve updated the article to include results for the 24-inch iMac with the Core 2 Extreme.

Setup

• iMac (24-inch Mid 2007) New

  • Intel Core 2 Extreme @ 2.80GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R4031)

• iMac (24-inch Mid 2007)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.40GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R4031)

• iMac (24-inch)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.33GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R2218)

• iMac (24-inch)

  • Intel Core 2 Duo @ 2.16GHz
  • 2.00 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM
  • Mac OS X 10.4.10 (Build 8R2218)

I’m reporting the baseline score, rather than the raw score, for each benchmark (where a score of 1000 is the score a Power Mac G5 1.6GHz would receive). Higher is better.

Results

Overall Performance

Integer Performance

Floating Point Performance

Memory Performance

Stream Performance

Conclusions

The latest 24-inch iMacs have two major advantages over the older 24-inch iMacs; they have faster processors, and they use the new Santa Rosa chipset (instead of the Napa chipset used in the older 24-inch iMacs).

The faster processor helps increase both integer and floating point performance, while the faster front-side bus on the Santa Rosa chipset helps increase both memory and stream performance.

So if you’re running memory-intensive applications (like Aperture or Photoshop) you’ll certainly notice an increase in performance with the new 24-inch iMac. Heck, the fact that the new 24-inch iMac supports 4GB of RAM while the old 24-inch iMac supports 3GB of RAM might be enough to convince you to get one!