First of all, we have to see what exactly we have here to work with, in terms of hardware.
This MacBook has 15w 2.3ghz Intel Core i5 7360u (2-cores, 4 threads) on it's board, this is Kaby Lake processor from Q1 2017. From it's TDP we already can say that this probably wouldn't be a monster machine in terms of performance, and we also remember that this was a time when Intel haven't changed a lot in their architecture from 2015, from the lack of competition from AMD's side.
It also has integrated GPU - Intel Iris Plus 640, which can be compared to dedicated desktop GPUs as GT 1030 or GTX 650 (2013), GT 740 (2014).
Tested on macOS Ventura 13.6.1.
Let's start our testing from Cinebench r23.
The single-core test only uses one CPU core, the amount of cores or hyperthreading ability doesn't count.
In single-core it scores 940 pts, it is only 34 points lower than Ryzen 5 1600af (974 pts), which is currently used by me, or Apple M1 (987 pts), and 4 points less than Ryzen Threadripper 1950x.
The single-core performance of a processor is crucial for tasks that can only be executed by a single computational core. Here are some aspects influenced by single-core performance:
1) Execution of Single-Threaded Tasks: Certain programs and tasks utilize only one processor core. For instance, many games, older applications, and some operations perform better when they have higher single-core performance.
2) System Responsiveness: The operating system and user interface programs can benefit from fast single-core performance. Swift execution of individual operations contributes to a smooth and responsive system.
3) Short-Term Tasks: Some tasks are brief and may not effectively parallelize work across multiple cores. Such tasks gain from the high performance of a single core.
4) Processor Frequency: Single-core performance is often associated with the processor's clock frequency. Higher frequencies generally result in faster execution of single-threaded tasks.
5) Performance Headroom: If one core operates faster, it can leave some performance headroom for other background tasks or multitasking.
Now, what about multi-core performance in Cinebench r23? Well, it sucks ;)
It scores 1866pts which is 3,6 times slower than 6-core Ryzen 5 1600af (6822pts) and 3,4 times slower than 4-core Apple M1 (6426pts).
Multi core tasks
1) Parallelizable Tasks: Programs and tasks that can be divided into smaller, independent subtasks can benefit significantly from multi-core architectures. Examples include video editing, 3D rendering, scientific simulations, and certain types of data processing.
2) Multitasking: Systems that run multiple applications simultaneously can distribute the workload across multiple cores, leading to better overall system performance and responsiveness.
3) Productivity Applications: Many modern productivity applications, such as web browsers, office suites, and content creation tools, video editing programs, are designed to take advantage of multi-core processors to enhance user experience and efficiency.
My own expirience working in Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop:
1) Premiere Pro - if you use 4k footages in your projects a lot, then it is not the best performance machine overall, as it's 2 cores aren't able to compete with newer processors. In our times, productivity programs started to utilize multi cores processors properly, and almost every app nowadays needs at least 4 core in order to perform well. Or consider using proxy-files in 720p in each project.
If your projects are 1080p tiktoks with transitions, grading and text, then you shouldn't be worried, it runs just ok.
2) After Effects - this program runs well, and you probably wouldn't see any difference between this Macbook and some newer in light projects, because heavier projects require more RAM and if you stuck with only 8gb of memory, then even having Ryzen 7 7800x won't add any performance gains. The nature of bottlenecking.
3) Photoshop - works well. Editing RAW photos is not a problem, however you should take it time to think, when you import your files. GPU acceleration works in each of programs, but the only positive thing about this is enabling harware decoders and encoders, because if there were no any, the process of working would be really painful.
4) Illustrator - the same thing as Photoshop, when you import .svg or other vector files, you have to wait a little before starting to work, then wait applying effects or changes, but that depends on particular project.
Display - its awesome, nothing less. Brighter then current generation MacBook Air, and supports P3 and other gamuts. sRGB >100%, DCI P3 - >90%.
Keyboard - its awful, nothing more.
Trackpad - the best possible, and even bigger then current generation MacBook Air.
Conclusion:
If you use this Mac as some chromebook, for typing scripts, doing light work, then it would be perfect. But why won't you buy an older one, from 2015 for example, for 70% of it's price? ;)
If you would use it as a work machine, for light video editing or doing 4k projects through proxy, then it will be ok.
In this topic, we were talking only about hardware productivity, but let me tell you a little about comfort of using this Mac. Battery stands for 4-5 hours if you do browsing, writing something, and 2,5-3 hours if you do video editing, no matter if its light or heavy project.
However, I'd prefer to buy a desktop PC for the same money, because of the possibility of upgrading your hardware over the time, and buying a Mac, you will stuck with what you have untill you sell it through facebook marketplace as "ultra gaming macbook".