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?

| | | | | | |