A7 performance - equivalent desktop cpu?

heifetz7

macrumors member
Original poster
Oct 5, 2011
51
8
There's a lot of benchmarks on A7 performance versus other mobile cpus. But I can't find anything comparing the A7 against desktop CPUs, and where it falls. It'll be interesting to see what desktop CPUs have the same performance as the A7. Has anyone seen this?
 

pmau

macrumors 68000
Nov 9, 2010
1,555
831
Clock rates and transistors draw power.
Consider the battery size of a phone compared to a MacBook Air, etc.
It would not be a problem to make the ARM A7 as fast as a desktop CPU.
It's all about power consumption, transistors, etc.

The A7 is a CPU for a specific purpose designed to work in constraint environments. The comparison would be pointless.
 

Gav2k

macrumors G3
Jul 24, 2009
9,217
1,606
Geekbench score wise from there site places it just a shade faster that an Intel Core 2 Duo E4400@ 2ghz but honestly comparisons of CPUs of different classes just don't add up.
 

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,554
1,871
Where the 5S scores in the thousands on geek bench score a modern computer scores in the tens of thousands and a computer is pushing around infinitely more pixels.

But like mentioned this isn't a fair comparison. Size and cooling play major rolls in this stuff.

Basically the iPhone isn't a desktop computer so it's apples to oranges.
 

mtneer

macrumors 68030
Sep 15, 2012
2,866
2,033
There's been quite a bit of talk about this, however I have not seen a head-to-head stackup of performance scores versus Intel's Core and Xeon processors. If the A7 is able to get into that field with the Haswell Cores and Ivy Bridge Xeons, then the cat will be amongst the pigeons..
 

Menel

macrumors 603
Aug 4, 2011
6,203
1,136
There's a lot of benchmarks on A7 performance versus other mobile cpus. But I can't find anything comparing the A7 against desktop CPUs, and where it falls. It'll be interesting to see what desktop CPUs have the same performance as the A7. Has anyone seen this?
Define equivalent desktop CPU...

Intel Atom? AMD A4-5000?

Such as used in this Laptop?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6974/amd-kabini-review/2

See Anandtech's 5S review

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/6

iPhone 5s vs. Bay Trail
I couldn't help but run Intel's current favorite mobile benchmark on the iPhone 5s. WebXPRT by Principled Technologies is a collection of browser based benchmarks that use HTML5 and js to simulate a number of workloads (photo editing, face detection, stocks dashboard and offline notes).

iPhone 5s vs. Bay Trail - WebXPRT (Chrome/Mobile Safari)

 

sillywabbit

macrumors 6502a
Nov 10, 2012
592
4
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
 

cynics

macrumors G4
Jan 8, 2012
11,554
1,871
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
I've heard that but only on forums. I'd like to see a detailed link on the subject from a reputable source.
 

KPOM

macrumors Pentium
Oct 23, 2010
15,046
3,448
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
It's of limited usefulness, though certain mathematical calculations are faster on a 64-bit processor. That said, A7 is a big deal because it moved to a much more efficient ARM processor architecture. Think of the difference between the Core 2 Duo and the original Core i3/i5/i7. A "slower" Nehalem Core i5 runs circles around a Core 2 Duo with a higher clock speed.
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,905
1,182
Washington DC
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2013-09-27-arm64-and-you.html

There you go. It requires a fair bit of reading, but if you're not willing to put in that much time then you probably shouldn't be telling people about processor architecture on message boards.

(The conclusion, for those of you not wanting to read it all: The "64-bit" A7 is not just a marketing gimmic, but neither is it an amazing breakthrough that enables a new class of applications. The truth, as happens often, lies in between.)
 

aneftp

macrumors 601
Jul 28, 2007
4,282
481
Bottom line?

Is the A7 about the same as a desktop/laptop processor circa 2006?

Let's keep it that simple?

Laptop processors didn't really catch up to desktop processors until probably 5-6 years ago either.

I don't think mobile phone processors will ever be the same as desktop/laptop processors but maybe they can be 2-3 years behind?
 

gigapocket1

macrumors 68000
Mar 15, 2009
1,701
1,009
Bottom line?

Is the A7 about the same as a desktop/laptop processor circa 2006?

Let's keep it that simple?

Laptop processors didn't really catch up to desktop processors until probably 5-6 years ago either.

I don't think mobile phone processors will ever be the same as desktop/laptop processors but maybe they can be 2-3 years behind?
I completely agree with this statement. There's no way that an iPhone processor or a mobile processor for that matter can compete with present day computer desktop or laptop processors. But maybe if you compare the a7 chip to the core two duo or something earlier than that then comparison can be kind of close
 

MH01

Suspended
Feb 11, 2008
12,107
9,298
CPUs increase in performance.... 5 years from now we will be looking back how slow the A7 is and how amazing/fast the new CPUs are.
 

iAlphard

macrumors regular
Aug 29, 2012
178
0
Bottom line?

Is the A7 about the same as a desktop/laptop processor circa 2006?

Let's keep it that simple?

Laptop processors didn't really catch up to desktop processors until probably 5-6 years ago either.

I don't think mobile phone processors will ever be the same as desktop/laptop processors but maybe they can be 2-3 years behind?
Mobile phone processor can be as fast as desktop processor, even today. The big problem is the power source powered them. You can run A7 at full speed throttle, but it will only last like 1-2 hours usage. Battery tech is stagnant atm, it's still lithium ion afterall. We need nuclear battery now.
 

Menel

macrumors 603
Aug 4, 2011
6,203
1,136
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
Wrong order of logic. Backwards.

You need 64bit to effectively address and utilize 4GB of RAM or more.

That is only one of many 64bit benefits.

"Desktop Class" cpu in feature-set, not performance.

You could maybe compare performance/watt.

----------

Mobile phone processor can be as fast as desktop processor, even today. The big problem is the power source powered them. You can run A7 at full speed throttle, but it will only last like 1-2 hours usage. Battery tech is stagnant atm, it's still lithium ion afterall. We need nuclear battery now.
Nuclear batteries have incredibly low power output.

A quick google revealed a Lockheed prototype from a few years back providing 25 nanoWatts of power. 25nW!

iPhone currently has a 3.8V, 5.73 WHr battery that provides 10 hours of usage. I think measning 573mW of power draw for 10 hours would get you roughly 5.73 WHr.

Compare 573,000 nW of needed usage to a 25 nW battery supply.
 
Last edited:

scaredpoet

macrumors 604
Apr 6, 2007
6,627
342
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
It's actually the other way around: you need 64-bits to "actually and truly" use more than 4GB. Even so, you can still take advantage of 64-bit features without a huge amount of RAM

The truth is though, there isn't a huge advantage to using a 64-bit chip right now, but there will be in the future. It's a chicken-or-egg situation: to take advantage of a 64-bit processor, you need 64-bit apps. But you can't have 64-bit apps without a 64-bit processor. So Apple has to take the first step: start selling phones with 64-bit processors, so that app makers can start developing for it.
 

asleep

macrumors 68040
Sep 26, 2007
3,452
1,404
I have heard the a7 64 bit chip is just a gimmick. Reason: you need at least 4 GB of RAM to actually and truly effectively utilize 64 bits.
Not a gimmick, but...

http://gizmodo.com/iphone-a7-chip-benchmarks-forget-the-specs-it-blows-e-1350717023

So let's turn to one spec Apple did announce on stage: The new 64-bit CPU, which replaces the 32-bit predecessor. This is the key, but not in the way you might think it is. As Anand and others point out, 64-bit transition doesn't really start making a difference until Apple starts building phones with more than 4GB of RAM, which based on current trends, won't happen for years.
 

GoSh4rks

macrumors 6502
Sep 14, 2012
310
41
http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/friday-qa-2013-09-27-arm64-and-you.html

There you go. It requires a fair bit of reading, but if you're not willing to put in that much time then you probably shouldn't be telling people about processor architecture on message boards.

(The conclusion, for those of you not wanting to read it all: The "64-bit" A7 is not just a marketing gimmic, but neither is it an amazing breakthrough that enables a new class of applications. The truth, as happens often, lies in between.)
Should have quoted the immediately following line too:

The simple fact of moving to 64-bit does little. It makes for slightly faster computations in some cases, somewhat higher memory usage for most programs, and makes certain programming techniques more viable. Overall, it's not hugely significant.
 

Mrbobb

macrumors 601
Aug 27, 2012
4,989
194
Suffice to say 64 bit is more evolution than revolution. Deskto performance? That sounds like marketing-speak.
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,905
1,182
Washington DC
Should have quoted the immediately following line too:
But then I'd be quoting the reasons why it doesn't matter and ignoring the reasons why they went ahead and did it. (Which do exist, as you'll see from the part I did quote: " The truth, as happens often, lies in between.")

Doing that would be a disservice to the MacRumors community. If anyone actually cares, they'll read the link and get the whole story. Me trying to slant the opinion of those who don't read it serves no purpose.
 

JulianL

macrumors 65816
Feb 2, 2010
1,139
125
London, UK
My MacBook Air late 2012 scored 5560 on geek bench :/
Just for laughs that's the desktop comparisons that I'd be interested in, i.e. "the A7 has about the same computational performance as Intel's top of the range desktop CPU, the <CPU Model>, that was released in <Year>".

I'd be quite interested to know what CPU model and release year would be the most appropriate ones to fill in those blanks.
 

HarryWild

macrumors 68000
Oct 27, 2012
1,531
395
There's a lot of benchmarks on A7 performance versus other mobile cpus. But I can't find anything comparing the A7 against desktop CPUs, and where it falls. It'll be interesting to see what desktop CPUs have the same performance as the A7. Has anyone seen this?
The Apple A7 SoC would have to back 10 years or more and get close to the performance of a desktop Intel or AMD CPU! I am talking the low end of the desktop to like the Celeron class! LOL!

Intel Atom CPU is in netbooks! It similar to that of an tablet CPU; not a desktop or even notebook!
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.