3 ms·
>4k? Thought not would barely twice that of an 15 year old CPU, but it of course is geekbench 7, not 6 or 5! So this is different and faster than such a result
by a3w 7d ago
>4k? Thought not would barely twice that of an 15 year old CPU, but it of course is geekbench 7, not 6 or 5!
So this is different and faster than such a result in the old scoring would have implied.
- fsh 7d agoIt is not quite twice the score of a 6 year old Apple M1 though. And this is with much higher clock speeds (4.8 GHz vs. 3.2 GHz).
- alasano 7d agoShame, I only upgrade my M1 for chips that are at least twice as fast. It feels like a crime upgrading from this thing tbh.
- rbanffy 7d agoRecently I have upgraded for memory capacity.
- alasano 7d agoJokes aside yeah I'm definitely in need of a ram upgrade. Or I have to learn how to close Firefox tabs. But with a few docker containers, android studio running an emulator + vscode and a ton of Claude code / Pi / Codex instances, I'm basically maxed out all the time now.
- alpaca128 7d ago"Or I have to learn how to close Firefox tabs" I use about:processes to stop processes that eat up too much memory over time. The tabs stay open but get unloaded. YouTube especially acts like a black hole for memory if you let it.
- GeekyBear 7d agoThe M1 is about 1700 on Geekbench 7 single core.
- GeekyBear 7d agoFor context, Intel has yet to ship a core that scores over 3000 on the same test. AMD beats Intel, but only by a couple hundred points. Qualcomm beats them both.
- akmarinov 7d agoTo be fair AMD’s best chips are made on a “5 nanometer” process, that’s from 2020 Apple’s are on a “2 nanometer” from 2025