iPad A7 vs A10X

Discussion in 'iPad' started by gobikerider, Jun 11, 2017.

  1. gobikerider macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #1
    If anyone was curious how far Apple has come with their 64bit chip architecture.

    A10X 6 Core 2.4Ghz (4th Gen 64bit)
    Multicore: 9200
    Single Core: 3900
    Compute: 29000

    A7 2 Core 1.4Ghz (1st Gen 64bit) ~ 18.3x slower
    Multicore: 2200 4.1x slower
    Single Core: 1300 2.7x slower
    Compute: 600 48.3x slower

    *data obtained from Geekbench 4 database
    *Compute score is the gpu ability to do computational tasks
    *data may not be representative of actual performance
     
  2. shyam09 macrumors 68000

    shyam09

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2010
    #2
    One of the first things I'm going to do is put my new 12.9" Pro next to my iPad 3, Mini 3, and Air 2 and do random speed tests.
     
  3. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #3
    The poor iPad 3 spare it the embarrassment
     
  4. Sparky2012 macrumors 6502

    Sparky2012

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    As I've said before in other threads, Apple are doing some incredible work in terms of performance. I mean it's only 4 years and the CPU and especially the GPU increases are phenomenal.

    I had an iPad Air up until last year when I got my 9.7" Pro, and I always felt like it struggled on games and that compute Geekbench shows how poor GPU wise it was, despite at the time being competitive.
     
  5. Relentless Power macrumors Core

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #5
    I find it impressive how fast in terms of performance newer iPads are to even To more expensive other laptops, which carry a higher price tag. I just purchased a new laptop and these new iPads will likely out perform it. I probably should have waited until after WWDC. Either way, I will still pick up a new iPad.
     
  6. Sparky2012 macrumors 6502

    Sparky2012

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #6
    Oh definitely, performance is catching up or even surpassing laptops now on an iPad which is just crazy. Intel should be increasingly worried at how close the A10X is getting to their single-core performance and in general their i7 chips. As for GPU, it won't be long until the iPad is outperforming the Nvidia GT 750m in this MBP I'm typing on! I do believe seeing that with the A9X, we passed the Xbox 360 in terms of raw performance in gigaflops which amazed me. It'll be interesting to see how many gigaflops the A10X produces. Long may Apple's performance gains continue! Their chip team are truly shaking up the industry.
     
  7. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #7
    The A10X already has single core performance better then skylake chips found in the 13inch MacBook Pro from 6 months ago.
    --- Post Merged, Jun 11, 2017 ---
    What laptop did you purchase?
     
  8. Sparky2012, Jun 11, 2017
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017

    Sparky2012 macrumors 6502

    Sparky2012

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #8
    Yep, I know. I was meaning that Intel should be worried about the A10X and newer reaching their desktop i7 single-core performance. I did see a post showing how close the A10X is to a 2012 iMac with an i7 on single-core. Think the A10X was around 200 off.

    EDIT: Actually we are beating a Desktop class i7 processor from the 2012 iMac despite it being clocked at 3.4GHz vs the A10X 2.4GHz haha.

    Screen Shot 2017-06-11 at 21.07.29.png
     
  9. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #9
    Hah that's practically magical considering the power usage difference bewtween the two.
     
  10. Relentless Power macrumors Core

    Relentless Power

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    #10
    2016 MacBook Pro. I like it. But these new iPads are going to draw me away from using it. However, my laptop will still serve for its purposes for when I need it.
     
  11. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #11
    Nice btw the first 4k game for iPad was just unveiled
    --- Post Merged, Jun 11, 2017 ---
    Its Minecraft :D:cool:
     
  12. 0lf macrumors regular

    0lf

    Joined:
    May 2, 2016
    #12
    That said, intel next milestones could be significant :
    - coffee lake with core number increase,
    - cannon lake with new 10nm process,
    - ice lake with new architecture
     
  13. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #13
    I know but can we just enjoy the brief moment when iPad's outperfom intel high end pc and macbooks
     
  14. AMJ7E macrumors newbie

    AMJ7E

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2017
    Location:
    Tehran
    #15
    Cannon Lake/Ice Lake would be happening at best one/two years from now , apple probably will keep up with the two core i5s (given how much they are growing their CPU's performance).
    The interesting thing for me is the possibility of using ARM based cpus in mac. The A10X's ( a "lowpower" fanless cpu) single core score catches my macbook pro (Late 2015) and destroys it in multicore score. Considering the fact that my laptop is using a CPU with 20+ wattage usage and an air-cooled thermal management , thats just freaking mind blowing.
    I guess there will be a coding mess on developers hand , but its worth it. Microsoft is getting on it with arm cpus , so should apple (more seriously).
    I feel Intel has been screwing us for the past decade...
     
  15. macduke macrumors 604

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #16
    Yeah, the iPad 3 was really the worst of all the iPads. It got the retina display, but didn't really get the speed boost to cope with it, and was replaced within 6 months.
    From what I've seen in the performance charts on Ars Technica, it's a bit faster than the Intel Iris 540 graphics found in the late 2016 13" MBP. Doing some rough math that approximates increases in framerate for increases in GFLOPs given the number of GFLOPs in the 540 (806), it should be around 983 GFLOPs, which is just nasty. Put another way, about twice as powerful as the Nintendo Switch when docked. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong! Maybe we can finally get some current-gen AAA console games now that use the controller.
     
  16. epca12 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2017
    Location:
    UK
    #17
    Very impressive scores, especially graphics. I would like to see Apple make graphics for Macbook now
     
  17. TallManNY macrumors 601

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #18
    It is nasty. But it also costs a good deal more than the Switch. And it comes with a lot less stuff (those controls for the Switch are probably not cheap to make).

    But yes it is too bad we don't get real AAA games. But there just isn't enough storage room on the iPads to really get a lot of games on them.
     
  18. macduke macrumors 604

    macduke

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2007
    Location:
    Central U.S.
    #19
    Well, to be fair my new iPad Pro, which should be arriving any minute now as I anxiously wait here in my living room, has eight times the storage of the Switch, and is configurable to more storage than the Xbox One shipped with. The real problem is the App Store's race to the bottom pricing and freemium taking over everywhere. My wish for 2018 is that we see a massive decline in freemium sales as people finally get bored with it. But with more and more companies hiring psychologists to hook people onto their digital crack button pressing apps, I doubt it will change anytime soon.
     
  19. ShaunAFC3 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2016
    #20
    What game is it?? I would like to know.... o_O:D
     
  20. TallManNY macrumors 601

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #21
    Yep that is the problem. And when Nintendo gets yelled at by the media for releasing Mario Run for $10 but is lauded throughout the land for the Switch and Zelda (which is a masterpiece of gaming), the inclination is go with the console and not get into the App store.
     
  21. d5aqoëp macrumors 6502a

    d5aqoëp

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2016
    #22
    Mario Run was a crap game with the sole intention of grabbing money. But Zelda was made with passion. This shows that passionately made games will always trump freemium made soulless games.
    These days, I automatically ignore any free games. My eyes go on games which have upfront price of 3-5 USD on the App Store.
     
  22. gobikerider thread starter macrumors 68000

    gobikerider

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2016
    Location:
    United States
    #23
    Mine craft
     
  23. TallManNY macrumors 601

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #24
    Well I liked Mario Run.
    But I agree with you, I pretty much never download a freemium game. I'm glad free games are sorted into a different list so that I can easily ignore them.
     

Share This Page