This article may contain affiliate links. Learn more on our Partner Program page.
One week before its launch, the first benchmark result for Apple's M6 appears in the Geekbench database. The entry is unconfirmed, but it aligns with what Apple promised at the launch – and places the base chip at the top of all previously measured Macs in single-core performance.
The Geekbench 7 database entry shows 4,071 points in the single-core test and 22,783 points across all cores. The measurements were taken in a Mac mini, the first device with the 2-nanometer M6 processor. For comparison, the average scores of the M5 are 3,641 and 17,948 points, respectively.
Key Facts at a Glance
- Single core 4,071 points, all cores 22,783 points
- Compared to the M5, that's around 12 percent more in a single core and around 27 percent across all cores.
- Apple's claim of up to 1.2 times the multi-core performance is thus confirmed.
- The single-core score is higher than that of the M5 Max and higher than all Windows chips in the same database.
- The entry is unverified, a single pass, and comes from a desktop case.
Single core at the top, multi-core below the M4 Pro
| Chip | Single core | All kernels |
|---|---|---|
| M6 | 4.071 | 22.783 |
| M5 | 3.641 | 17.948 |
| M4 Pro | – | 24.894 |
| M5 Pro | – | 33.593 |
| M5 Max | 3.731 | 35.119 |
| M3 Ultra | – | 39.059 |
Single-core scores are currently only available for the three chips mentioned in this version of the database. Figures circulating for the other models come from the previous version of Geekbench, are calibrated differently, and therefore cannot be compared.
Two things stand out in this comparison. First, the base chip outperforms the most powerful chip of the previous generation by around 9 percent in a single core – the M5 Max scores 3,731 points. Second, across all cores, the M6 remains a good 8 percent below the M4 Pro, which is below the Pro level of two generations ago. Both of these points are consistent: Apple increases performance per core, while the core count of the base chip, at twelve processing cores, remains significantly lower than that of the Pro and Max models.
The fact that there are no Pro and Max versions of the M6 is no coincidence. This decision has been known since the summer; for now, the top-of-the-line models will remain limited to the M5 variants.
What the value does not show
The M6 score comes from a Mac mini, the M5 comparison scores from a 14-inch MacBook Pro. Desktop cases and notebooks differ in their cooling systems, and Geekbench measures short bursts of stress, not performance over minutes. Furthermore, a single, unverified run provides no information about manufacturing variations – anyone can contribute results to the database.
Graphics specifications are not yet available, nor are there any measurements of the M5 Ultra. The GPU is particularly interesting, as the M6 also sees an increase from ten to twelve cores. The differences in features between the generations can be found in the comparison between the M6 and M5.
What this means for the purchase decision
The Mac mini with M6 and M5 Pro, as well as the Mac Studio with M5 Max and M5 Ultra, will be available on September 22nd. For everyday tasks—office software, photo editing, development environments—single-core performance is paramount, and in this area, the most affordable new Mac outperforms all previous models. However, those who regularly export, render, or compile will benefit from cores that the base chip lacks: even the M4 Pro from the previous generation outperforms the M6 across all cores.
This significantly shifts the old rule of thumb of choosing the Pro model when in doubt, depending on the application. Which of the two case classes best suits your needs is detailed in the comparison between the Mac mini and Mac Studio.
When choosing a Mac, do you prioritize single-core performance for smooth everyday tasks or multi-core performance for long exports? And is the M6 sufficient for you, or will you opt for the Pro model? Let us know in the comments which of the two factors is most important to you.
