Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
14-17% is still impressive. The jump from A14 to A15 was similar if not less with much more transistors (prob coming from the cache increase)

Usually the most common part of CPU which brings lots of transistors is the cache. Here we have still same L2/SLC pool and we have +1 billion. In the past from every other generation there was uplift of L2/SLC cache ie the big transistor count jump.
 
Last edited:
No. A "buffed" core would still get a new name.

No it wouldn’t. A9X cores didn’t get different names than A9 cores.

I’m not sure why you’re so hung up on “it can’t be a new microarchitecture”. There’s little evidence it isn’t.
 
No it wouldn’t. A9X cores didn’t get different names than A9 cores.

I’m not sure why you’re so hung up on “it can’t be a new microarchitecture”. There’s little evidence it isn’t.
A9X is the same core as A9.

I'm not saying A16 is not different from A15. I'm just saying it's likely a small iterative difference from the previous core, and probably less of a difference than most other core generations. However, if someone can prove it's an ARMv9 core, then that would indicate it's a more significant difference.
 
Steve Jobs Ghost is tap dancing in Tim Cookes brain right now.
If he were here every two generations we would have had something amazingly different
Like what? At some point a product category is mature. I mean... where are the innovations in word processors, huh?
 
I don't know if this is legit or not, but Nanoreview.net is reporting an A16 Antutu score from a few days ago, with a 7.5% increase from A16.

 
I shared this few days ago. Their early information are not up to date. Was same with A14 vs A15. I took them few weeks to put the right resutls. Even the tech data is not actual/right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.