Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
And the thermals… my only complaint about the 15 pro max is that its thermals are not great.
Makes you wonder if they made MagSafe to attach to AC Vents on purpose…

that said winter is coming in the States, so maybe it’ll be offset?
 
The difference is likely binning being turned into a marketing difference.
Maybe. Although I wonder what is the fractional area of just the GPU, that would lead a significant number of naturally binned chips. Although using a single production stream and disabling chips as needed could be cost effective. (Nothing wrong with that, it is commonplace)
 
  • Love
Reactions: _Mitchan1999
I’m sorry, what?!?!
15%, which is claimed by Apple, not proven yet (at this point we don't know what exactly anything they claim means until tested, like their fake 2x telephoto optical zoom on base model that looked liked crap or claiming to have 10x optical zoom on Pro's spec sheet), is basically nothing.
they also claimed A17 Pro is 3x more efficient than the competition (Nokia 1100?) but 15 Pro turned out to be a molten core with less battery life than base model 15.
Snapdragon on the other hand saw 35-40% CPU performance increase without having access to 3nm silicon last time, so I'm really excited to see if CPU performance is going be another L after display, battery and camera.
 
Any word on how much ram the A18 Pro would have?

I’d like to see 12gb, but I won’t be surprised if it’s 8gb just like the A17 Pro.
 
Good for a physical strength, but not so much for thermal dissipation. Aluminum is a much better thermal conductor than titanium. And there’s a CTE mismatch too, But probably not a big concern for typical iPhone operating temperatures.

The thermal conductivity difference between titanium and aluminum becomes irrelevant the second you slap a plastic/leather/silicone case on the phone….
 
So the A15 in the 13 Pro/13 Pro Max was really the A15 Pro (with the extra gpu)?

😆
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
I find it interesting that Apple would say that the A18 compares well to current desktop chips. With the latest boosts in speed it would comfortably outperform older desktop chips like the M1, which is already a really good level for a mobile chip to be at.

But that means that if they followed the same process as previous years, and developed new performance and efficiency cores first for iPhone, we can expect these large performance gains to come to M-series chips in the M5, which would help keep the M-series ahead of the pack.
 
So 1 GPU, promotion & AOD support, USB3. And some nebulous words About fast video encoding and bigger cache.

Lots of mixed comparisons (some compared to A16 and other to A17 pro) to hide direct comparisons between A18 and A18 Pro.
At the end of the day, they both have to manage similar software tasks competently. There really can’t be a big difference between them which is obviously why Apple obfuscated any direct comparison. In a world without marketing and share prices the engineers would no doubt have just used the one chip across all the phones this year.
 
So 1 GPU, promotion & AOD support, USB3. And some nebulous words About fast video encoding and bigger cache.

Lots of mixed comparisons (some compared to A16 and other to A17 pro) to hide direct comparisons between A18 and A18 Pro.

I don’t expect huge differences. Probably same clock. The core count and cache size will give it a lead, but probably not even in all tasks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
From the Keynote, i found quite evident that the difference between the A18 and A18Pro chips are there essentially to support the video/photo/audio features that the iPhone 16 Pro have and the iPhone 16 have not. So essentially video/image encoders decoders (handling raw in video require good hardware, for exemple) and a few tweaks here and there (that may be just disabled on the A18, or may be there are actually two different silicon, who care after all ?).

And i do not understand why this point is discussed from a negative point of view: Apple decided to give the two families to phones more or less the same general purpose computing power, probably to push Apple Intelligence over the whole new offer. This is a good point, wrt the difference in previous generations, right ?

Maurizio
 
I smoke two efficiency cores in the morning and I smoke two efficiency cores at night. I smoke two performance cores in the afternoon and everything feels alright.
You smoke too much! You know it’s bad for you right? 😄
 
It's getting quite frustrating the amount of times that Apple (and maybe Macrumors, unclear if they wrote this article or not) pick and choose which legacy specs to compare against on a case-by-case basis. Compare to the most recent or don't bother. If you want to write an upgrade article from a 2-year old phone, fine, but bragging about speed increases compared to the iPhone 12 are insane at this point (and I have an iPhone 12).
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: _Mitchan1999
I think this could be the first time in a while that Snapdragon takes the lead in CPU performance since %15 is basically nothing and they were super close even using 4nm silicon.
Yes. The Snapdragon gen 4 single core geekbench score is 5% lower than the A18 pro, but multicore is 20% higher.
 
I think they are wise to show performance differences against a range of iPhones, I remember seeing in the presentations bar graphs showing performance increase against iPhone 12, 13, 14, and 15. The thing is, people are holding onto phones for longer, and it’s convenient for viewers to be able to compare their phone.

whether performance increases are that relevant is another question. It’s been a long time since I’ve thought of my iPhone as ’too slow’ at anything.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.