iPhone 6s more powerful than Retina MacBook.

[Kendo]

http://www.ibtimes.com/iphone-6s-a9-chip-benchmark-shows-it-more-powerful-apples-macbook-2107936

Alpern ran the Geekbench benchmarking app to test the iPhone 6S and the results showed that it was easily the most powerful iPhone to date and even outperformed the iPad Air 2. The new iPhone is so powerful in fact that it outperforms the new MacBook laptop which was released earlier this year -- though admittedly this is Apple's least powerful laptop for some time. In a single-core performance test, the iPhone 6S scored 2413, which compares to the 2327 for the MacBook.

 

[AppleRobert]

It remains to be seen as far as the part about the woman. Folks were dismissing that Tweet. Who gets an iPhone that early?

 

[hutrebug]

We have Samsung to thank for this. No, really.

TSMC couldn't make 14nm chips, so Apple switched over to Samsung's foundries.

And the rest is history.

Maybe that additional 1Gb of RAM also helped.




Apple’s A8 SoC analyzed: The iPhone 6 chip is a 2-billion-transistor 20nm monster
September 10, 2014

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...6-chip-is-a-2-billion-transistor-20nm-monster

 

[dmx]

It remains to be seen. Folks were dismissing that Tweeter as seller bait. Who gets an iPhone that early?

No, it's accurate. Official reviews are out and the 6S plus scores over 2500 single core.

 

[hutrebug]

It remains to be seen. Folks were dismissing that Tweeter as seller bait. Who gets an iPhone that early?

It's not too hard to get units if Apple provides them to selected individuals for testing and reviews.

 

[dmx]

We have Samsung to thank for this. No, really.

TSMC couldn't make 14nm chips, so Apple switched over to Samsung's foundries.

And the rest is history.

Maybe that additional 1Gb of RAM also helped.




Apple’s A8 SoC analyzed: The iPhone 6 chip is a 2-billion-transistor 20nm monster
September 10, 2014

http://www.extremetech.com/computin...6-chip-is-a-2-billion-transistor-20nm-monster

TSMC has 16nm FF that is supposed to be handling some of the A9 orders as well. As for the 14nm vs 16nm naming, they are just names. In actuality, the performance is probably pretty close.