Got my eye on the new Lenovo X1 Carbon Aura coming in November. 2.16 lbs., more than 18 hr battery, OLED. Sounds real nice.
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.
Here's How Much Faster the A18 Pro Chip is Compared to the A17 Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’m not in the market for a laptop myself, but I’m looking forward to more performant mini PCs that still can be passively cooled (currently using a 1360P).
...except all the phones with snapdragon gen 4 CPUs
while it can be real, that is for sure under light usage...for my use case i need something that works under fully load for more than 4 hours...and on the windows laptop world i never find it...high performance laptop never pass 2 hours, not even those with max battery allowed 100WH. But it is nice to see that intel is coming, but again this is a chart with M3 not M4 that is even more efficient. M4 macs are still to come and see, maybe Apple chose to keep these battery life but pop up the M4 freq to 4.6-4.8 ghz or keep the same 4.4 freq and increase battery life
you need a mini windows PC? or you can do your things with macOS? because probably next Mac Mini can be a thing
IMO lunar lake with its on-package memory is much more interesting.
MacOS is not an option for me. I dislike the UX, and there is too much Windows and Linux software I want to use. Apple makes nice hardware, but the software isn’t for me, for desktop use.
While there's a ton of stuff we don't yet know about the A18s, it is a virtual certainty that Apple did *not* "just move" the A17 to N3E. That would have been more expensive than using design from the M4/A18Pro.
That said, it's safe to say that performance of the A17Pro and A18 will be in the same ballpark.
Ah, I see that your opinion is extremely important because you talk in ALL CAPS. Thanks for making that so clear.
A17Pro has 1 more gpu core and it's multicore score is higher if benchmarks mean anything to you..
I think I'd only be able to notice a difference if it were 19% faster. 
This is the point right here. 20% gains every year on where Apple silicon is right now is big bumps. And each year, a 20% bump is bigger than the precious. And, power consumption is going down as well with the updated processes. If this is all we get, and nothing more, the future is bright. And then when there are breakthroughs, those are just icing on the cake.
I plan to buy an m4 Mac mini (with Asahi https://asahilinux.org/ ) or lunar lake mini-pc this winter.
I guessed 15 percent. close. came out to 18.
then we go to 2nm silicon. all performance gains after this should be small.
then we go to 2nm silicon. all performance gains after this should be small.
Of note, the GPU matches the M1 as well. I predict we have a new baseline processor for games and AI. I suspect, after the sales spike over the next quarter or two, we will see this processor make its way to the AppleTV and iPads.
I disagree. I think increased competition will lead to bigger performance increases.
Funny, my 2020 SE seems to dial my friends at quite acceptable speeds. Same with taking pictures. But yeah, that's all I use the thing for.
For comparison: Snapdragon 8 gen 4 single-core score of 3236 and multi-core score of 10049
OnePlus 13 with Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 processor is faster than the iPhone 16 Pro Max
Qualcomm manged to beat the Apple A18 Pro benchmarks.www.phonearena.com
And about a claim of performance leadership for A18:
There is no single number that can encapsulate the realities of CPU performance. That said, it is well understood that single-thread performance is vastly more important than multi-thread performance for phones. In fact, it's more important in general, in that ST performance will naturally impact MT performance.
Except...
You can get a very high ST score by pushing clocks as hard as possible, but there's a problem with that: power and heat. And it gets much much worse when you try to do that for multiple cores at once. For desktops and some laptop scenarios, heat is more likely to set a practical limit, while in phones, both power and heat can.
Because of all this, the notion that snapdragon g4 chips are superior to the A18 is hilarious. The A18 has superior ST performance, by a *lot* - much more than a quick glance at the GB6 numbers might lead you to believe - because of clock speeds. The two chips are on the same process, but even with its inferior performance, the SDg4 is clocked about 10% higher than the A18, which means it will generate well over 10% more heat (power and heat scale faster than clocks). So it will throttle faster than the A18, and will throttle harder as well, leading to even bigger performance deficits for any sort of sustained load. Of course, most phone loads aren't sustained, but even then the A18 has the advantage in power consumption while maintaining the lead shown in the ST benchmark.
As for MT... What that score means to a phone is not at all clear. Backgrounds tasks are invisible to users, for the most part, so optimizing for power rather than speed is likely to be a win for the user. There are a few foreground tasks that might depend on MT, like some (not most!) games, or video work, but that's an extremely low %age of phone use.
So having a higher MT score is clearly not inherently bad, but you really need to look at the details to see if it's good. SDg4 gets that score with two too-highly-clocked (as explained above) P cores, and six E cores (as opposed to Apple's 4 E cores). As with the P cores, this draws more power than Apple's chip, and thus will throttle faster and harder. The end result is that for background tasks, the difference is meaningless except for Apple's power advantage, while for user-facing tasks, the advantage SDg4 has (from its two extra E cores) will quickly turn into a deficit in any scenario involving sustained use.
Thus the SDg4 will only have a slight MT advantage in scenarios where the user is doing something that requires sustained MT performance for very short periods. What sorts of tasks fit that description? I can't think of any, except for running certain benchmarks! I'm sure such use cases exist- but they're rare.
Bottom line: In virtually all real-world scenarios, the A18Pro is superior. While most people won't notice the performance superiority, it's there. On the other hand, the improvement in power consumption and heat generation (and thus battery life) will be noticeable.
Last edited:
iPhone 16 Gets Re-Tested On Geekbench 6, A18 Performance Properly Reflected With An Almost 28 Percent Increase In Multi-Core Score Compared To Previous Result
The A18 featured in the iPhone 16 was re-run on Geekbench 6, with updated scores showing a significantly better result than before
wccftech.com