I've said this a jullinctimes, spec cheers versus real world use are totally different. My X is worlds ahead of the 6s plus it replaced on paper. In practice? I'm not really doing anything faster or better than I was before.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
AnandTech Calls A12 Bionic in iPhone XS 'Just Margins Off' Best Desktop CPUs in New Review
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Although I think it may be worth investing in TSMC you have to take into consideration that they make tens of millions of iPhones every year and only a few millions Macs, so even if Apple decided to bring their custom chips on the Mac TSMC wouldn't gain a massive order of CPU from Apple, their main product would still be chips for iOS devices.
A12 is amazing by the way
I can't believe nobody has pointed this out yet. The big difference of all of those vs. moving the Mac to ARM: in every single one of those cases, the first CPU to ship with the new architecture was significantly faster than the last CPU with the old architecture.
The PowerPC 601 was significantly faster than the Motorola 68040. The 64-bit PowerPC G5 970 than the 32-bit PowerPC G4 74xx. The Core Duo than the PowerPC G5 970. The 64-bit Core 2 Duo than the 32-bit Core Duo. The 64-bit A7 than the 32-bit A6. The S4 than the S3.
(Note also that none of the the moves to 64-bit require emulation.)
Thus, even when emulating the previous architecture, the old code still ran at reasonable performance.
Now, there is plenty of evidence that an Ax-powered Mac could reach similar performance to an Intel Mac. There is little evidence, however, that it would be faster. We can hypothesize a 18-core Apple A13M CPU for the next MacBook Pro, but we don't know anything about how it would scale. Would it use the same amount of power or less than Coffee Lake-H? Would it offer the same performance or more compared to Coffee Lake-H? Would it be sufficiently better than, even when emulating an x86 app, performance would still be adequate?
The table has turned. It's usually Android users who trashed iPhones with poor benchmarks scores. And now they say that benchmarks are irrelevant when their CPU is half slower.
Behind what? Android?
Don't be silly.
[doublepost=1538994524][/doublepost]
Leave them, it is irrelevant what they say. When they need to trash talk about other side just to feel superior, you know what time it is. For huge part of Android users, owning an Android is a sign of protest against Apple, and that's sad.
Perhaps it's more a demographic thing then. Firstly I use Google Photos as I find it much better than Apple Photos. I am not on social media and never will be as I believe it's a dangerous pernicious phenomenon that requires some heavy regulation.
Given I'm retired it's much easier for me to take my 'snaps' then make any modifications on my Mac/PC. I actually love the Desktop experience and spend hours 'sitting at my computer'.
It’s not a demographic thing. I don’t use google photos because I think Apple photos is better. I have a big extended family and take a lot of pictures with my iPhone that I edit and post to iCloud. I also edit movies with iMovie. No social media needed.
If I want a more extensive experience i take out the dslr and desktop editing software.
Behind what its capable of. iOS can improve in a ton of ways to take advantage of its processor. ITs overpowered for what it can do today.
Sounds like an Apple sponsored piece to get everyone prepped for Macbooks powered with A12 chips! I hope it would also lead to lower pricing at the MacBook 12/Macbook Air end of the market
People have different opinions and prefer different devices for different tasks than you do. Is it impossible to imagine someone having a different opinion than yourself?
nothing, because it runs iOS, render some nonesense in awesome crazy iMovie and GarbageBand
and I've said this a jullincbazillinctimes... your mileage may vary. You lost me when you said nothing you do is better on the X than your 6S plus... maybe if you want to debate the xs and the x.. but the 6s plus?! That experience was night and day different for me, much faster, much more fluid on the X. Clearly what I appreciate is not the same as you. And thats fine. I won't map my expectations on you and please vica versa.. but to claim no real difference between the two? Silly. Now... as far as the XS and X... they are not the same.. close for some people, maybe even identical for those with low expectations, but for me... the XS is faster, hooks up to networks faster for me, and the camera effects are faster more fluid as well. Shrugs. But sure specs don't matter. until they do.
No, I’m not asserting Anandtech’s benchmarks are fake in the slightest. At no point do I imply “fake results” in my post. The review looks so good for Apple - very good performance from A series chips, that I’d look at buying in a heartbeat if such a device (Macbook or Air with an A series chip) existed.
As a daily user of 2 iPad Pro’s and an iPhone X - plus every generation of A series chip up to the A12 so far (which I will be getting in an XS Max very soon). I’m one of those that doesn’t need convincing that an A series chip could power a Macbook. Anandtechs piece may open the eyes of X86/Intel die hards who swear an A series chip couldn’t run a Mac with any form of decent performance.
Last edited:
Given that I launch apps dozens of times per day and export video... basically never... means those types of tests are exactly what I care about.
As a person thinking about moving back to the iPhone, I can tell you that benchmarks aren't exactly the reason why. They're irrelevant.
Given that I infrequently launch apps and spend time working in the apps themselves including video editing, these types of tests are exactly what I DONT care about.
I would never, however, make a purchase decision based on these types of videos. Maybe others would. Who knows?
To be clear, the reason I quoted you is because I believe people saying the X and Xs are the same are saying so from the same mindset that I am, not because they're trying to invalidate your own opinions or experience of a product.
I don't feel I'm doing anything faster on the X than I was in the 6s plus. I used to be the guy that upgraded yearly. And I did feel tangible differences with each annual upgrade. Not anymore. I will concede that photos are a good deal improved without any additional effort from me. That's been a nice change especially since my main camera is my iPhone camera.
We all justify things different ways. Me? I'm happy we are where we are with phones. They've gotten much more expensive, but I also can't find reasons to upgrade like I used to. iOS 12, while it brought very few feature changes, gave me a whole new outlook on iPhone. In many ways I feel it is the best version of iOS we've seen in easily half a decade. And a lot of that has to do with the very fact that I'm seeing older hardware achieve day to day tasks at effectively the same pace as the newer hardware.
As an aside, I have my son's SE right here on iOS 12. Every app I try loads within milliseconds of each other. Amazingly the SE camera even loads a split second faster. And that's all the same hardware the 6s plus had, if I'm not mistaken. That's what's amazing about apple's hardware and software today. It's miles ahead of where it was half a decade ago, and it's longevity proves it.
If you were to go back and read a number of my previous comments in this forum, you'll see the trend that I honestly do feel the X didn't tangible improve my experience aside from getting rid of that pesky home button I had long loathed. It's my experience, and I've stayed consistent. Most phones I replace I don't give a second thought. I think that has to do with where Apple has come with their microprocessors, and of course their software they're all married to. My experience is a much a testament to apple's software design and hardware engineering as is yours, despite us ultimately reaching different conclusions.
Last edited: