Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

A16 in iPhone 14 Pro is 17% Faster Than A15 in iPhone 13 Pro in New Benchmark

EntropyQ3 said:
That ads look the way the do is due to the ad agencies - art directors and copy writers, and how they have done their craft over time. They are meant to capture your attention, first and foremost, not provide information. They need to try to cut through the noise, a noise created by themselves. At this point it basically comes down to shouting louder than all the others.

So the ads are, by and large, just ever louder noise clamoring for your attention. There is no particular assumption regarding the recipients level of intelligence other than the content should be brief and simple (by the standards of the ad producers who are typically not particularly informed regarding the specifics of what they are advertising).
Judging the cognitive level of the population by the intellectual level of ads is a very dubious methodology. 😀
Click to expand...
Wrong. Ads are the way they are, because they work. The fact that ads are as stupid as you just explained, yet heavily affects how people actually spend money, speaks volumes about the intellect of the average consumer. If the average consumer was smart, he would ignore the ads. Yet here we are, with ads being big business, because companies pay big money for stupid ads. Because they work. Which makes ads smarter than consumers.
 
EugW said:
I guess you don't follow pre-release Geekbench leaks. Some leaks come from reviewers and are variable, but it's been a pattern for years that there is one early leak that is at the high side of the range, and I suspect they come from Apple itself, to generate press and hype. Geekbench averages for older chips are not very useful as a comparison because they are typically much lower in the curve.

That's besides the point anyway. The main point is that even if you think the single core speed increase is say 9%, 7% of that is attributable to the clock speed difference alone. That leaves all of a 2% difference in IPC. Either that is margin of error from an identical core, or else it's a very similar, tweaked core. Yes, Apple did say there is a potentially a 20% power utilization savings, but we have no idea whatsoever how that's measured and at what spot on the power curve, and it's also on a new process and after a year of improved yields.
Click to expand...
What it says is, Apple stopped optimizing for highest outright performance, and are working on other aspects which are likely to be more impactful on real world use. Which is a GOOD thing. The interesting thing about Apple’s current chips isn’t how much they are killing competition in Geekbench scores, but that they aren’t even trying to.
 
d5aqoëp said:
Not disappointing as such. But Geekbench gas always been biased in favour of Apple Devices.
Click to expand...
Or... put another way, Apple devices perform better than other competing devices. If you've ever followed benchmark performance you'd see that Geekbench is fairly consistent with other well accepted benchmarks such as SPEC, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
techconc said:
Or... put another way, Apple devices perform better than other competing devices. If you've ever followed benchmark performance you'd see that Geekbench is fairly consistent with other well accepted benchmarks such as SPEC, etc.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the complaints against Geekbench were more for older versions like Geekbench 3. The main current complaint is that the test is too short. That's true, but you can't have everything. I don't think very many people would run the test if it took an hour to complete.
 
  • Like
Reactions: techconc
techconc said:
Or... put another way, Apple devices perform better than other competing devices. If you've ever followed benchmark performance you'd see that Geekbench is fairly consistent with other well accepted benchmarks such as SPEC, etc.
Click to expand...

I mean, their complaint doesn't make sense. You can't say "but Geekbench is biased in favor of Apple" in a test that compares… Apple with Apple.

EugW said:
Yeah, the complaints against Geekbench were more for older versions like Geekbench 3. The main current complaint is that the test is too short. That's true, but you can't have everything. I don't think very many people would run the test if it took an hour to complete.
Click to expand...

The two complaints I have at this point are: 1) it doesn't really take heterogenous cores into account*, and 2) it runs too short*. Fixing either of those would make the current nice scoring more complicated, so I'm not sure they will.

*) for example, the A15 vs. A14 is especially advantageous for the e-cores, and we don't really see that in Geekbench.
*) hence seeing virtually identical results on the MBAir and 13-inch MBPro
 
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
iPhoneFan5349 said:
I hadn’t had an iPhone for years until o changed with the iPhone 13 Pro. The slow loading was noticeable easily. At first I tough it was the wifi but in my second device this didn’t happen. So I did the reset and voila, everything was working great again. You might confuse it with slow wifi though, it’s not easy to know the difference
Click to expand...
Being condescending doesn’t further your point, I’m not confusing anything. I haven’t had a slow loading web page issue on my iPhone that wasn’t resolved by simply closing all tabs. Sure Resetting network settings will resolve any issues with open tabs… but that’s a bit overkill.
 
Vyse2020 said:
Being condescending doesn’t further your point, I’m not confusing anything. I haven’t had a slow loading web page issue on my iPhone that wasn’t resolved by simply closing all tabs. Sure Resetting network settings will resolve any issues with open tabs… but that’s a bit overkill.
Click to expand...
It does happen though. You can easily search it and you will find people having the issue
 
bassexpander said:
And the screen at 2000 nit outdoors in the sun.

Can we cook eggs on the ceramic shield?
Click to expand...
What’s that have to do with the GPU? I actually game on my 12PM and would like to see if I can push the graphics more than I do with my current phone.
 
iPhoneFan5349 said:
How if there are no games using the max potential of the iPhone 11?
Click to expand...
Apex legends, Diablo immortal, and Genshin Impact would be three off the top of my head that will tax the GPU at max settings. Diablo immortal in particular taxes the GPU on my phone at 60fps and I was curious to see how the improved heat management and GPU upgrade improve game performance. I will find out Friday.
 
BorisDG said:
I don't think that's the case, since M2 for example are "buffed" (frequency + cache) A15 cores and they still carry the name of the architecture - Avalanche / Blizzard.
Click to expand...
My understanding was that the M2 core is thought to be basically identical, aside from the cache and memory interface, etc.
 
BorisDG said:
That's what I'm saying. We have new cores/architecture.
Click to expand...
My point was that slightly modified cores would still get a new name if it’s more than just something like changing the cache size. It’s an iterative change, but by the sounds of it, less iterative than in previous years.
 
sw1tcher said:
17% faster in synthetic tests, but hardly noticeable in real world use. But some will upgrade regardless.
Click to expand...

Here you can better see better difference between A15 and A16. Good to know frequency is about 7% higher:

ProcessorARM @ 3.46 GHzApple A15 @ 3.23 GHz

Geek bench shows that most of its higher multicore score comes from AES-XTS test. 40% just mimics frequency bump and rest is about 12-14 % faster. But as someone said we do expect a lot and think Apple can defeat physics.


One interesting update: Before Apple was neck to neck with Galasy 22 ultra in AES-XTS test, Now is 50% faster.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back