Macopinion

Of MacBooks And Benchmarks, And Other Benchmarks, And Other Things

Funny thing about benchmarks. Last week, Macworld posted a full review of the new Intel Penryn-based Core 2 Duo/2.1GHz and 2.4GHz MacBooks, including benchmark scores obtained using Speedmark 5, the latest incarnation of Macworld Labs' standard performance benchmark test in which scores are relative to those of a 1.5GHz Core Solo Mac mini, and registering what they describe as "moderate yet impressive gains—for example, the black 2.4GHz MacBook scored more than nine percent higher overall than its 2.2GHz predecessor. The 2.1GHz MacBook showed an almost eight percent improvement over the 2GHz MacBook it replaces. Perhaps most interesting, the 2.1GHz MacBook scored one point higher overall than the older 2.2GHz black MacBook, even with a slightly slower processor speed."

Cool. Value added. What's funny about that? Well, nothing on the face of it, but here's the thing. On March 2, Primate Labs posted benchmark results for the new MacBooks based on their Geekbench 2 test standard, which is calibrated against a baseline score of 1000 (which is the score a Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz, and determined that in overall performance, the Penryn 2.40 GHz MacBook scored 3135 as opposed to its 2.2 GHz Santa Rosa predecessor's score of 2890, which is a nine percent and change improvement, which is what Macworld's Speedmark 5 found. However, the apparent anomaly is that in Primate Labs' test of the entry-level MacBooks, the new Penryn 2.1 GHz unit scored 2617, while the older 2.0 GHz machine scored faster at 2668. Curious, what?

Primate Labs noted: "Despite having a slightly faster processor, the smaller L2 cache of the Penryn processors means the base MacBook (Early 2008) is slower than the base MacBook (Late 2007). If you’re considering buying a base MacBook, you might want to shop around and see if you can snag an old one rather than a new one."

Or not, if Macworld's eight percent improvement on the same test comparison is a more accurate representation of what really obtains, but who knows?

Of course, the high-end MacBook (Early 2008) is faster than the high-end MacBook (Late 2007); it seems the increase in processor frequency is enough to overcome the smaller L2 cache in this case.

What's being referenced there is that the new Penryn MacBook's processors have 3MB of L2 cache shared between the processor's two cores, as opposed to the previous models' 4MB of L2 cache, the theory being that Penryn's enhanced efficiencies make up for the smaller cache and a bit more.

Whatever, I'm feeling better about my provisional plan to purchase a base 2.1 GHz MacBook after reading the Macworld test results.

Moving along, Low End Mac's Ben Zalutsky likes his black Santa Rosa MacBook, of which he posted a review last week. Now, one of the things I don't mind at all about the entry-level MacBook, is its white case. I like white computers, and the appearance of my 2002 G3 iBook has worn well with me, and aside from a minor scuff mark or two collected over the past five years, I think the little iBook still looks great.

However, there are evidently a fairly substantial cohort willing to pony up $200 extra over the cost of the white, middle model MacBook in order to get the premium black case (plus another 90 GB of hard drive capacity). Personally, I'm not that partial to matte black laptop cases, whether on my old Pismos or the latest MacBooks, and would go with white by preference. Glossy black, a la the iPod nano or my 500 GB SimpleTech Ferrari external hard drive would be another matter.

As Ben notes himself, "the beautiful black casing attracts fingerprints like the plague. It's a good idea to wipe off your MacBook with a slightly damp cloth each day. (Note to people considering a white MacBook: These things don't apply to you. Your MacBook will just resemble a squashed iBook G4.)" Yes indeed. My "road" Pismo, which has been relatively lightly used before and after I acquired it, looks quite pristine, but my poor old workaday Pismo tends to look a bit grubby, while the white iBook only requires a wet swipe from time to time to restore its glossy "Opaque White" finish to new(ish) appearance, so a squashed iBook (G3 in this case) appearance would suite me fine.

Ben goes on to say, "While we're on the subject of color, it seems that the white MacBooks are seen less in the study hall and at Starbucks. This could be due to the fact that there are simply less of them produced, or the fact that most black MacBook owners don't frequent such establishments (i.e., they are "professional" users). On that topic, the white MacBook certainly does look more juvenile than the black one.

Uh, "juvenile?" Oh well, I suppose at 56 I may be lapsing into my second childhood at that, but I'm inclined to think that color taste has little to do with age, mental or chronological. I liked the colored clamshell iBooks too, especially the Key Lime model, which is a bit odd because I'm not really a big fan of green shades, and the Lime-colored teardrop iMac G3 never really grabbed me ( my fave G3 iMac was the "Snow" model - white again - although I always thought the Sage model was pretty classy-looking. And speaking of juvenile, perhaps some you you fellow grizzled Mac vets will recall the "Flower Power" and "Blue Dalmatian" iMacs, which I emphatically did not like. I digress.

Anyway, I suppose the black MacBook does look a bit more "professional" to some eyes, but I'll still go with white.

Incidentally, for a final thought today, since we've been discussing MacBooks and Pismos, it occurs to me that the MacBook, black or white, is probably the closest approximation of the Pismo available from Apple today. Some might argue that it would be the 15" MacBook Pro, but I would be inclined to disagree. The metal case of the Pro MacBooks (or metal PowerBooks for that matter) makes then a very different sort of animal from the look and feel of the Pismo.

There's the shared characteristic of having a plastic case for one obvious thing, but also consider the respective footprint dimensions:

MacBook 13.3-inch
* Height: 1.08 inches (2.75 cm)
* Width: 12.78 inches (32.5 cm)
* Depth: 8.92 inches (22.7 cm)
* Weight: 5.2 pounds (2.36 kg)

PowerBook G3 FireWire 14'1-inch
Height: 1.7 inches (4.3 cm)
Width: 12.7 inches (32.3 cm)
Depth: 10.4 inches (26.4 cm)
Weight: 6.1 pounds (2.8 kg)

Not "twins" by any means, but there's a ballpark similarity, especially in the width dimension. Since the Pismo still pleases me greatly, partly because of its convenient size, I expect that a MacBook may do so as well, at least in that context.


***



cmoore@macopinion.com


Provisionally, you can access The Road Warrior Archive to Jan. 16, 2006 by clicking here.

Note: Letters to The Road Warrior may or may not be published in The Road Warrior Mailbag at the editor's discretion. Correspondents' email addresses will NOT be published unless the correspondent specifically requests publication. Letters may be edited for length and/or context.

If you would prefer that your message not appear in The Road Warrior Mailbag, we would still like to hear from you. Just clearly mark your message "NOT FOR PUBLICATION," and it will not be published.

CM