Potential Benchmark for iPhone XR Successor Shows 4GB RAM, Moderate Performance Gains

[19callum93]

I realize that the iPhone XR successor may be in some ways (camera, screen) a step down even from the original iPhone X (or at least a lateral move as the XR tech improves), but for me I think it may be a real consideration as a previous 6 Plus and 7 Plus owner for a slightly wider screen (I think in many ways that the XR size is the sweet spot in the lineup) as the X can feel a bit small. While I know the XS Max is about the same body size as the prior Plus models, I don’t really want to go putting something of that size back in my pocket all the time and with iPhones now full screen I can’t imagine the top of the XS Max is all that easy to use one handed.

This year I’m planning on getting the XR successor, coming from the XS Max. I find the XS Max too big, and the battery life isn’t that great. I’m happy to sacrifice OLED for the Liquid Retina display, gain better battery life, and the XR feels like the perfect sized phone.

 

[apolloa]

That’s a nice boost, the extra gig of RAM would certainly be welcome, but my XR is anything but slow.. I just want an OLED and better mobile reception.
[doublepost=1567490768][/doublepost]

I’m just moving along waiting for another SE sized phone with reasonable price. Or a stand alone watch.

More chance of a stand alone watch I’d say. Keep an eye on what they say about it next week...

 

[fokmik]

....my logic is, it is nothing but bragging rights since on a mobile phone (specifically one touting IOS) they do nothing with this power, so it’s pointless. Why not give us a DEX like experience and allow the phone to give us “Desktop” like performance with Apps that would suit more screen real estate...after all these chips “are faster than many desktop cpu’s.” We can’t even get real multitasking out of Apple despite all this “power”

Every year we get these synthetic benchmarks and Apple making the same claims about their CPU and GPU performance.....but nothing to exploit it? I agree that FaceID and TouchID might be microseconds faster, but so what, for 99% of users, indistinguishable. I have a 6S and never has it ever been slow, other than, perhaps on boot-up after an IOS upgrade? (So I might see a benefit a couple of times a year!)

Again, take my entire comment not just part...
"It doesnt speed up just your apps...but the algorithm for touciD/faceID...mapping...scaling etc"
Dex is now the ipadOS. Apple wants to sell you two devices...iphone and ipad...so no dex coming soon

 

[The Game 161]

Surely if next XR has 4GB maybe rumours of 6GB for next Pro is correct will see

 

[George Dawes]

I’m more interested in improving the battery life

 

[Cosmosent]

Tim / Phil / Jeff,

Thanks for the Leak !

Much appreciated !

3834 MB now represents the High Watermark for DRAM in ANY iPhone !

BTW, iPhone12,1 could be any of the three, NOT necessarily the Next-Gen XR, & NOT necessarily a number that goes to market.

They can easily fudge the platform string.

 

[Lalatoon]

Wow.. my laptop is only 5256 in Geekbench single core and its Intel i7 9th gen.

 

[realtuner]

Well, the problem is that to increase IPC without increasing the frequency one needs to come up with new architecture/design and I do not think we had any breakthroughs in this area for quite a long time. Most performance increases in A processors lately also may be attributed to increasing the number of cores and better processes.

Patently false. Apple has consistently made significant gains to IPC well over and above what's gained from a new process. That's why their single core scores are not only far ahead of everyone else, but are achieved at lower clock speeds. It's Samsung/Qualcomm that went the "more cores, more GHz" route to increase performance. Now they're hitting a brick wall.

Of course I read your post. I just did not understand what's the relevance of some other type of processors in the thread where we are talking about phone processors. Qualcomm is a newcomer to laptop CPU design and it's a side kick for them anyways. They already failed at CPU design for servers. Perhaps they are failing at CPU design for laptops now but who cares.

You said:

This "stalling" in the A processor performance progress may pour cold water on the dreams of some posters here who expected A processors to overtake Intel/AMD processors in performance very soon.

You're the one who brought AMD and Intel into this discussion, so why are you complaining about me bringing the A12X in and comparing it to Qualcomms 8cx?

Samsung and other Android vendors do not make special CPUs for tablets because they do not pretend that tablets are a suitable replacement for laptops. In fact, Samsung often uses cheaper (and less powerful) processors in their tablets compared to their own phones.

And that's why Android tablets are garbage - nobody takes them seriously. The iPad Pro and Apple making specialized SoCs for tablets is why we have all sorts of useful software on iPads that doesn't exist on Android (like Adobe bringing over full-blown Photoshop to the iPad). Just because Android tablets are useless doesn't make the iPad useless.​

 

[johnyslats]

iOS 13.1 brought down the multi score on my Max. Given it’s beta status and the fact it’s used on this device I don’t think we can read too much into the multi core performance here

 

[M3gatron]

Uh, oh.

This will surely cause anxiety among many. 5,415 single core? That’s an insane result for a phone SoC. What’s the 855+ at? 3,600 or so? There’s even an early rumored 865 score of around 4,150. That’s what the A11 scored.

The S865 is also rumored to score almost 13000 in multicore which would be higher than the A13 leaked score.

The 8cx was tested in a Windows environment so scores are lower in comparison to Geekbench scores in Android.

 

[0837990]

Can someone tell me why there is such a high need for so high performance on phones?
Does anyone do heavy sustained compute, database work or rendering on a phone?
Just curious. My iPhone 7 feels just as fast in regular use as my iPhone XS Max.
Regular use as in phone calls, imessage, safari, email, spotify, podcasts, icloud photo sharing, notes, online banking, instagram, weather, and some other stuff like that.

 

[WatchAndWait]

The iPad Pro and Apple making specialized SoCs for tablets is why we have all sorts of useful software on iPads that doesn't exist on Android (like Adobe bringing over full-blown Photoshop to the iPad). Just because Android tablets are useless doesn't make the iPad useless.​

It's September and it hasn't happened yet

https://www.macworld.com/article/3313881/adobe-introduces-real-photoshop-on-ipad-coming-in-2019.html

"coming in 2019"

 

[Tech198]

I think Apple should skip the number 13. It was bad for macOS 13 with security bugs. iOS 13 sounds ominous. Maybe time for new naming scheme for macOS and iOS and ARM versions.

It was just a coincidence it just happened to be "13" (being unlucky an all.)

 

[alpi123]

These "leak" every year and every year they are proved to be fake.

 

[Michael Scrip]

Can someone tell me why there is such a high need for so high performance on phones?
Does anyone do heavy sustained compute, database work or rendering on a phone?
Just curious. My iPhone 7 feels just as fast in regular use as my iPhone XS Max.
Regular use as in phone calls, imessage, safari, email, spotify, podcasts, icloud photo sharing, notes, online banking, instagram, weather, and some other stuff like that.

On the flipside... can you imagine how people would react if NO improvements were made year-over-year? The blogs would explode!

But to answer your question... it's all to do with efficiency. Getting the most work done while requiring the least amount of battery.

Any task... no matter how small... if you can get it done and return to idle quickly... that's the goal.

Plus there's all sorts of things you can do with a powerful processor: computational photo processing, background system tasks, etc. There's a lot going on under the hood.

I know the joke is "these faster processors won't let me check my email any quicker..."

But I promise you there are gains.

 

[alpi123]

Can someone tell me why there is such a high need for so high performance on phones?
Does anyone do heavy sustained compute, database work or rendering on a phone?
Just curious. My iPhone 7 feels just as fast in regular use as my iPhone XS Max.
Regular use as in phone calls, imessage, safari, email, spotify, podcasts, icloud photo sharing, notes, online banking, instagram, weather, and some other stuff like that.

Why wouldn't they improve the speed? You may not use it fully but some app do require that amount of power and they only become more and more CPU/GPU hungry.

 

[chucker23n1]

Well, but 855+ has a higher multicore score (not by much, but still)

By having 33% more cores

Most apps and especially websites will benefit more from single-core. Almost zero apps will use the 855’s eight cores.

 

[Jsameds]

People are forgetting that the need for such extensive power in iPhones is there in order to sustain 6+ years of OS support comfortably.

This is exactly the same argument everyone was having back when the iPhone 6 had 1GB RAM. Half the people on here were saying it was enough, but a few years down the line it's sluggish as hell and isn't getting iOS 13

 

[deckard666]

I think Apple should skip the number 13. It was bad for macOS 13 with security bugs. iOS 13 sounds ominous. Maybe time for new naming scheme for macOS and iOS and ARM versions.

A tech company believing in ancient superstition...

 

[M3gatron]

By having 33% more cores

Most apps and especially websites will benefit more from single-core. Almost zero apps will use the 855’s eight cores.

The S855 also has a smaller die area especially for the CPU.
It's competitive in multicore with a smaller CPU.
I don't see a reason why apps need to saturate all 8 cores at the same time in order to make multicore performance relevant.

 

[Jsameds]

A tech company believing in ancient superstition...

It's not about the tech company but its potential customers.

iPhone and Windows both skipped 9 supposedly because 9 is an unlucky number in Japan, although it could have been for other reasons too.

Even your username references ancient superstition surrounding numbers.

 

[waquzy]

I think Apple should skip the number 13. It was bad for macOS 13 with security bugs. iOS 13 sounds ominous. Maybe time for new naming scheme for macOS and iOS and ARM versions.

Nah, that’s just superstitious nonsense

 

[pika2000]

Lowest iPhone having 4GB of RAM?...
Thus might mean Apple would drop 2GB RAM devices pretty soon.

 

[Agit21]

What other new app has really required additional horsepower from our iPhones? Pretty much all users are using some combination of push mail/social networking/music streaming/video streaming - which even an iPhone SE can do well.

Seriously?! No s* Sherlock?!

 

[PickUrPoison]

I'll be Keeping my XS Max for a while. I see nothing compelling me to dump it. Maybe in a few more generations.

It really depends on where you are on the “need” vs. “want” continuum.

With an XS Max, you won’t need an upgrade for five or six years, depending on when it falls out of OS support. But you may want a new iPhone in one or two or four years regardless. Or you may need one in two months if you lose it