Apple CPU vs. Intel CPU.. Fight!

The A10X (iPad Pro 2017) benchmarks are out and they’re… impressive.

1.25× improvement over iPhone 7 in single core, 1.9× improvement in multiple core (because they added cores to the tablet version, it is effectively “triple core”).

Compared to Intel CPUs:

Full results visible here, but the summary is:

7700k → 5750
6700k → 5340
6600k → 5100
4770k → 4530
5820k → 4320
3770k → 4100
A10X → 3930
2600k → 3837

3770k is Ivy Bridge so… basically the A10X, and thus the 2017 iPad Pro, is gonna be indistinguishable from a 2012 Intel i7 CPU performance wise. And about the same as a mid-range i5 CPU from the Haswell era.

Plus, we have yet to see the iPhone 8 (A11) drop later this year, which will be even faster still.

Thanks for the post!

That’s…just crazy. It’s literally more than twice the speed of an air 2 across the board. Heck, it’s faster than my gaming PC without the overclock (2500k). Pretty damned amazing.

Looking at prior data

A9, iPhone 6s → 2315
A9X, iPad Pro 2016 → 2955 (1.28×)
A10, iPhone 7 → 3325 (1.12×)

I’m gonna go out on a limb here and estimate that the A11 will be…

A10, iPhone 7 → 3325
A10X, iPad Pro 2017 → 3930 (1.18×)
A11, iPhone 8 → 4422 (1.12×)

4422 puts the A11 at i7-4770k performance levels. 🔥

Conservatively going with 1.18× that means the next iPad Pro based on A11X will be 5218 which is above the i7-6600k and within a beat of the i7-6700k.

It’s already sketchy with A10X today, but at that point in 2018, I don’t even know why Apple would continue to bother with Intel chips at all.

(These estimates might be too optimistic though, as @jsnell pointed out in another topic. I am very very curious to see what the actual A11 numbers look like when iPhone 8 is released.)

I don’t even know why Apple would continue to bother with Intel chips at all.

Wouldn’t that make it harder to port programs to MacOS from Windows? Of course there might be some gains from having iOS and MacOS on the same hardware, eventually.

Wait what? Wasn’t there already a thread?

Bear in mind I am a total noob and have no idea what I am talking about (seriously), but I remember Intel and Apple making a big deal of computers sharing the workload. Isn’t that what made them popular in some sectors? Although maybe any CPU is capable of that, or Apple’s Axx are, for all I know.

We’ll see how well ARM chips compare on the same workload when windows runs on it. I’m skeptical that they compete with intel straight-up at such a dramatically lower power consumption.

I for one finally look forward to finally being able to watch YouTube on my iPad without any jankyness!

You laugh but people are all agog over the 120hz screen updates in the new iPad Pros… even I don’t give a crap about that.

What’s cool about the new display isn’t that it goes to 120Hz; that’s barely noticeable. What’s cool is that it’s adaptive sync, exactly like freesync and gsync, on a mobile device. So you can get perfect 24fps movie playback with no 3:2 pulldown judder, and when playing a game that runs at less than 60fps (but more than 24) it will appear butter velvety smooth. That’s a big deal on lower-powered hardware like a tablet. Even the Nintendo Switch doesn’t do it.

The adaptive refresh should also save battery power, as it doesn’t refresh the screen at all when nothing’s happening. I kinda thought previous generations had that, though, and on Android too. Tough to google for it though.

Eh, I am meh on all that stuff. I won’t kick it out of the house, since I plan to get it for performance reasons anyway – and they ALL have 4GB RAM this time, finally. Freaking RAM misers at Apple.

Edit: I missed your question, iPad Pro original giant edition had adaptive refresh, because otherwise it could not make its battery runtime targets with the ginormous screen. Now all 2017 iPad Pros have this feature.

That’s great, but what can I do with it? I guess you can probably edit videos better on it (I have to my eternal shame actually edited some videos on an iPad before, forgive me prosumers).

That’s the problem that Apple still has - great hardware, only rock solid OS, sorta-kinda software.

I think there is tons of really good iOS software, just finding it is the problem (and it’s often not cheap, but I found it is usually well supported). The thing for me is that my Air 2 runs everything great. That wasn’t always the case, but right now I see no reason to update my 2+ year old iPad, it works great. Initial rumors I have seen on twitter is iOS 11 is really fast on older hardware as well.

@Canuck what jankyness do you mean? Seems to work find for me, through a webpage or the app. I am not a heavy YouTube user though.

Oh, no I agree there is some good software, but not software that requires an i7 class processor.

Lee, my apologies I was just being snarky. I guess my point was that there is no jankyness on current or even older hardware so big whoop. On the other hand, I’m not against hardware getting speedier! Just don’t take me too seriously (at least not in any of Wumpus’ Apple processor speed threads).

These are the ones that impressed me: this iPad ties the 2016 Macbook Pro ($1499 13" model) in the browser test (!), and obliterates it in others – especially multi-core & graphics tests.

That has an Intel Core i5-6360U. Geekbench 4 single core score 3910, multi-core score 7706 – it’s only dual core. 15 watt TDP though versus the ~5 of a tablet CPU.

Huh. So a10x was 10nm, and the smallest die Apple has yet shipped… the bang per watt and size is incredible.

Also that L2 cache yo… even factoring for triple core it is 2x larger than previous gen.

I am quite confident A11 will hit this number @jsnell.

Yea I don’t know much about any of this crap. All I know is my iPad mini 2013 edition is slowly giving me aids. God forbid I try to open up more than 1 tab. You can’t go 4 years without an upgrade it seems. (Well you could if apple let you stay on an old ios for your old hardware without nagging you every fucking day.) So I will buy this ipad and enjoy my adaptive sync tablet, wishing it could play my switch game(s).