Starting to get exciting! New iPhones coming soon, hopefully a refresh of other hardware products also!
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.
Possible Benchmark for A12 Processor From 2018 iPhone Surfaces Featuring 10% Faster Speeds, 4GB RAM
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The RAM management in iOS 12 is a pretty good. Even in my iPhone 5S running iOS 12 b1, the app reloading is very less compared to iOS 11. Big games like Real Racing 3 starts where left even after opening 4/5 resource heavy apps and spending more than 45 minutes.
You have to keep in mind these SOCs are passively cooled, while a core i5/7 is fan, or liquid cooled. That means that these chips will have throttling problems, because they cannot sustain peak performance once the temps increase past thermal limits. Looks good for a synthetic benchmark on paper when it only stresses the chip for a minute, or two, but in real world if you where running a program for any length of time your performance would dip big time.
NP, I think a lot of people don't realize this. You have this A11/A12 chip, with probably a very small copper heat sink, given how thin the phones and tablets are. This also goes for the Androids as well. Oh wow, look at the scores they get. The desktops have active cooling, with a huge copper heat sink and a fan on top, so they can sustain peak computing power indefinitely. It would be funny to run a program like prime95 stress test on an iPhone to see how long it takes to overheat, or crash.
May I just remind everyone that it is highly likely iOS 12 doesn't give any current A11 users speed improvements, and merely brings back what pre iOS 11 speed to other iPhone users.
Another point worth mentioning is that the 10% improvement is likely from higher turbo clock speed and larger L1 cache. This likely indicate, assuming the results were true, that these CPU core, both HP and LP variants are the same are its predecessors and only in 7nm.
And the focus is likely going to be GPU design. This also means unless Apple has more new integration in its SoC, this new die is going to be smaller with 7nm, focusing on cost and yield. Which is even more conservative then what I had expected, I thought they would have at least throw in two extra HP core. The new die may be less then 70mm2.
I am not surprised by the 4GB memory, the iPhone X already has more pixel to drive and render and it has been stuck to 3GB Ram. The 6.5", assuming same PPi will require even more memory. It will be especially true if iPhone were to have better cameras or triple lens. Which requires more memory to process the photo taken.
Last edited:
At that time it was true (although not optimal). Now we have augmented reality etc and more memory is needed to get it going. You are aware that a PC used to have 640kb memory? At that point in time completely valid, but caught up in time just as the statement you are referring to. It is called progress
.Reading the comments in this thread, it strikes me that Apple is probably going to be on track to shipping at least a dev Mac mini box at WWDC 2019 - with perhaps the consumer one following soon after.
It also strikes me that the GPU for this year is going to be the big deal - along with the increased RAM in order for the (presumably) upgraded cameras of the two X models.
It also strikes me that the GPU for this year is going to be the big deal - along with the increased RAM in order for the (presumably) upgraded cameras of the two X models.
A12 faster than Core I7 ? It makes no sense to compare a mobile and desktop CPU, once you use a mobile CPU with a Desktop OS it will be dog slow unless major changes are applied to it in terms of cache etc.
[doublepost=1530603022][/doublepost]
At that time it was true (although not optimal). Now we have augmented reality etc and more memory is needed to get it going. You are aware that a PC used to have 640kb memory? At that point in time completely valid, but caught up in time just as the statement you are referring to. It is called progress
No way to defend Apple on that, 1 GB was way too low and it killed the longevity. Apple needs to change on that, I am tired of buying stuff that does not last … if they go to 4 GB then .. well … that is really the minimum acceptable today
And if they put ARM chips in a desktop, it would be able to be actively cooled (and higher voltage). So the big dip might not happen.
It would probably surprise you to find out that there are around 150 million iPhone 6/6 Plus still in use. Apple actually launched a new 32GB iPhone 6 last year for the Asian market.
Early reports have the iOS 12 beta running quite well on it. Seems like the A8/1GB platform, already nearly 4 years old, has another couple years of life, even if iOS 12 ends up being its last supported release.
It's always funny to see people claim that ARM CPUs are comparable in general performance with x86 CPUs based on the terrible Geekbench benchmark.
The iPhone 6 really should have come with 2 gb of ram. Even the Apple TV got that much.
That said, I am not surprised. Apple sold of ton of iPhone 6 in Asian markets when it was released. Given how much these devices cost, I am not surprised that many people are opting to hold on to them for longer periods of time, which in turn means that Apple finds itself obligated to continue supporting them for longer periods of time.
I think iOS 12 is proof of that - people not upgrading as often these days. So the next avenue for more revenue would be more services and accessories.
Apple reaps what they sow. For better and for worse.
That's absolutely not possible. There are only 3 companies allowed to design and produce X86 CPUs and one of those 3 is the one with all the power to control who can make X86 CPUs.
[doublepost=1530613596][/doublepost]
The A11 is a 2 minutes sprint runner. It performs great in bursts so it looks like it was very well optimized for benchmarks like Geekbench. Sustained performance is not it's best point.
Not true. I bought (and still use) a 6S because I was upgrading from a 5C.
Every year there are people who say “why upgrade from last year’s Phone?” I don’t think most people do - or that Apple expects most people to.
That's an interesting point of view. It may as well be an A12 running at a lower clock for the LCD while the X plus gets the fastest version of the chip.
Anyway I'm ok with a minor increase in speed as long as they make it more energy efficient. And more RAM is always a good news, so 4GB is more than welcome.
Well fine, then you support what I was writing - unless you've valid arguments for that 6S beyond 2 GB RAM.
I would be pissed with the standard 5.8 inch iphone X only has 3GB RAM. The current iphone X that I own, which will be replaced with the new version has RAM management issues. I would like apple to be consistent with the RAM. If the plus version has 4GB RAM, make the smaller variant have 4GB RAM as well. If apple can optimize the speed at launching app, the A12, even with a small increase in power could make a noticeable difference. I feel that the current iphones are fast enough, but the power is not used for standard apps as they launch apps like twitter slower than some android phones. They only launch games and render vids faster than most android phones, and not everyone plays games or render/edit their vids. I would like to see this power difference translate to standard apps that we use everyday as well.
The iPhone 6 is perhaps the best, longest-lasting electronic device I’ve ever bought. Prior to the 6, I bought every version of the iPhone Apple released. But after the 6, I’ve seen no truly useful feature or design change that in my opinion and for my use-case would justify the replacement cost.
I probably would have upgraded to the X just for a bit of a speed and memory bump, but I’m always cautious about first iterations and I really didn’t need animated poop emojis for any particular reason. I’ll probably upgrade this year, but the 6 has aged incredibly well for me. Mine even still looks brand new and does every useful thing (for me) the X does.
iPhone 6 was probably the worst iPhone they have released, iphone 6S probably one of the best. Although they look the same, the 6S is vastly superior and still a decent phone, iPhone 6 is not.