Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Personally, I consider 3 GB RAM the new entry level for RAM, meaning us geeks may want more.

<iPhone 6s and SE, iPod Touch and iPad Mini looking over the fence>

“Hey man, we’re still here.”
 
Metal compute benchmark evaluates the GPU cores mainly, supposedly.
Yes. I'm talking about GPU cores of course.

(A14 has the same number CPU cores as A13, so my post wouldn't make sense if I was talking about CPU cores.)

<iPhone 6s and SE, iPod Touch and iPad Mini looking over the fence>

“Hey man, we’re still here.”
Those are all quite old now.

I have both a 6s and orig. SE BTW. They work fine in iOS 14, but they're phones, and for me they're just backup phones. Regarding the 3 GB, I was talking more about the iPads, since it's easier to multitask and run out of memory on the iPads.

That said, I have been starting to notice occasional pauses with my 3 GB iPhone 7 Plus. I look forward to a 6 GB iPhone 12 Pro/Max in 2020 and a 6 GB iPad Pro 11" in 2021.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
The first turbo switch I remember were on some Samsung PC clones with an 80286. Probably around 1988, it was 6MHz normal speed and 8MHz turbo.

The 8MHz turbo would sometimes cause crashes with certain programs—looking at you MS Flight Simulator 2—so we’d have to switch it to 6 sometimes. I don’t think it could be switched on the fly; iirc, you had to reboot it.

(We ran Digital Research’s GEM OS at the time, a Mac-like GUI that ran on top of MS-DOS. Mostly we used GEM Draw and Xerox’s Ventura Publisher, a surprisingly powerful WYSIWYG desktop publishing program.)

the machine i bought when i started my undergrad was, I believe, a 386 with a turbo button, made by “AST.” I had forgotten about it until you mentioned this. It was nice not to have to use the computer labs, though I recall i had to wire up some sort of connector myself to get it to connect to the school’s mainframe (which i needed maybe twice a semester).

I wish i could remember what happened to that machine. No recollection whatsoever. And, weirdly, I can’t remember how long I had it, or what machine i used in grad school (by that point i was using Unix SPARC s and rs-6000s most of the day, but i must have had some machine on which i wrote my dissertation. It had to have supported a Zip drive, because i still have the drive and the discs, but i cannot remember the machine, and this is now going to drive me crazy. Maybe the same one? Zip drive with rs-232?)
 
Do we assume that the A14 fitted in the iPhone 12 will have to run slower than the A14 in the iPad.
Simply due to a MUCH larger battery in the iPad and vastly more space for cooling?
 
  • Like
Reactions: firewood
Do we assume that the A14 fitted in the iPhone 12 will have to run slower than the A14 in the iPad.
Simply due to a MUCH larger battery in the iPad and vastly more space for cooling?
we should expect it to run a bit slower in multicore. With the A12 it was 12% slower, though with A14 might not be as much if the processor efficiency improved a lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
The Pro still owns this thing but the Air is closing the gap. But as we all know the 2021 Pro is set to be a big upgrade with the new LED displays, better cameras and A14X chips. They will be insane.

At that point the Air will settle in nicely as a fairly feature packed iPad for those who don’t need the extra ‘umph’ from the Pro but want something nicer than the base iPad.
 
And it does it with the same number of cores as A13, or half the cores of A12Z.
I think the GPU performance is going to surprise a lot of people.
Do we assume that the A14 fitted in the iPhone 12 will have to run slower than the A14 in the iPad.
Simply due to a MUCH larger battery in the iPad and vastly more space for cooling?
It has been true historically, so you can expect it. Generally not a huge amount, though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
True. 2832 vs. 2497 are actually 13%. The Internet regrets the error.
The iPad Air with A12 has a 12% higher multicore score in geekbench 5 than the iPhone XS with A12
Screen Shot 2020-10-04 at 1.05.13 PM.png



Screen Shot 2020-10-04 at 1.09.40 PM.png


 
View attachment 962906


View attachment 962907

You don’t pick some random test which you don’t have any idea how it was done, under unknown thermal conditions. You pick the average score for the device. Those aren’t the average scores for the devices.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NetMage
You don’t pick some random test which you don’t have any idea how it was done, under unknown thermal conditions. You pick the average score for the device. Those aren’t the average scores for the devices.
No, you should never pick the average scores listed on Geekbench's list. That's exactly why your claim is false.

Ideally, you should make sure nothing else is running, after a fresh reboot, and let the benchmark run. When you do that, you are usually able to get scores within about 5% of the peak scores posted on Geekbench, whether it is an iPad or an iPhone (unless you have a giant thick case on the phone in a 27C room or something).
 
  • Like
Reactions: diandi
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.