28 TECH ADVISOR • MAY 2021REVIEWS
13in MacBook Pro 1.4GHz quad-core
Core i5 (2019): 927
16in MacBook Pro 2.4GHz 8-core Core
i9 (2019): 1,226Geekbench 5 (multi-core)
13in MacBook Pro 8-core M1 (2020):
7,569
13in MacBook Pro 2GHz quad-core Core
i5 (2020): 4,504
13in MacBook Pro 1.4GHz quad-core
Core i5 (2019): 3,954
16in MacBook Pro 2.4GHz 8-core Core
i9 (2019): 7,346The impressive results continued in
our Cinebench R23 testing. In multi-
core testing, the MacBook Pro (M1)
saw improvements of 54 and 87 per
cent over the 2GHz Core i5 MacBook
Pro and 1.4GHz Core i5 MacBook Pro,
respectively. In this test, however, the
16in 2.4GHz Core i9 actually beat the
MacBook Pro (M1) (but not by much).
Our Geekbench 5 and Cinebench R23
scores were collected using ‘Universal’
versions on those benchmarks, which
means the MacBook Pro (M1) was able
to run native versions of the tests, taking
advantage of all the optimizations built
into the Apple silicon chip and macOS
Big Sur. So, to see what performance is
like when running in emulation mode,
we ran Cinebench R20, which onlysupports Intel processors natively. When
this test runs on an Apple-silicon Mac,
themachineusesRosetta2,anon-the-
flytranslator.Cinebench R23 (single-core)
13in MacBook Pro 8-core M1 (2020):
1,513
13inMacBookPro2GHzquad-core
Corei5 (2020): 1,086
13in MacBook Pro 1.4GHz quad-core
Core i5 (2019): 1,002
16in MacBook Pro 2.4GHz 8-core Core
i9 (2019): 1,144Cinebench R23 (multi-core)
13in MacBook Pro 8-core M1 (2020):
7,778
13inMacBookPro2GHzquad-core
Corei5 (2020): 5,014
13in MacBook Pro 1.4GHz quad-core
Core i5 (2019): 4,151
16in MacBook Pro 2.4GHz 8-core Core
i9 (2019): 9,024In Cinebench R20, we did see a hit
in performance, but the MacBook Pro
(M1) was still faster than the other two
13in models we tested. Compared to
the 2GHz Core i5 MacBook Pro, the M1
laptop was only 7 per cent faster. The M1
Pro was still faster than the 1.4GHz Core
i5 MacBook Pro, but was beaten by the
16in 2.4GHz Core i9 laptop.