Those numbers are actually quite good. Microsoft surface pro X, that runs on ARM natively(no x86 to ARM translation) has score: 720 / 2800. So apple A12Z runs faster with translation from x86 to arm than microsoft SQ1 ARM chip. That is remarkable. Also, if I compare my macbook pro 15' 2018 with Intel Core i7-8750H it has 961 / 4760 (with turbo and with a lot of noise and heat), with turbo disabled (so it runs at 2.2GHz) score is 573 / 3700 . Considering that mac chips will not have 7W limit iPad has because there is no active cooling, and that TSMC will produce it at 5nm, this cpus are going to destroy everything currently on market.
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.
Rosetta 2 Benchmarks Surface From Mac Mini With A12Z Chip
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Unless you’re deliberately being obtuse, all it means is that they simply put a chip that had already been engineered prior into that Mac mini enclosure.
That’s a rather interesting take on iPad development. You’re saying iPad chip design should be focused on Mac design? 🙄
You can put it ALL CAPS, seizure inducing flashing HTML and/or a blimp in the middle of Times Square and Silicon Valley and people are still going to complain, parse every bit of it and make outrageous claims, but props for you trying to inject any measure of common sense into the discussion!👍🏻
The best chip for a iPad is not the best chip for a Mac. Otherwise before today we would have 28 core Xeon's in our iPads since that is currently the best chip Apple has at their disposal.
No, the differences in the target platform are quite obvious. I am just saying that his statement is too simplistic to be taken seriously. It's just meaningless. He should have used a different wording.
It's translating x86 code. What a bizzare point to make
Launching tiny consumer apps is not a comparison to heavy compute tasks on desktop creative apps.
For the keynote meant to dumb down the week for tech “journalists”? Why? They spoke to the target audience, of which you are not. That type of discussion is what literally the entire rest of the week is for.
And that would be an A14 inside an iPad. A real MacMini will run a much higher clock speed, it will run ARM code, and it will have twice as many or four times as many cores.
Because change is sometimes hard, mostly uncomfortable and drags people kicking and screaming along with it. Unfortunately, it seems the same monolithic behavior that exists in the gaming world is more a function of “x86 Is The Only Way, All Others Must Be Crap” and this move totally destroys the past 15 years of things just moving like a glacier on Intel’s part. AMD doesn’t count because AMD is x86 and so this is their other sacred cow along with NVIDIA for GPUs.
A lot of people simply cannot deal with it and their only reaction to change is negative. Trust me, it isn’t just about computers, this is part of their personality and affects aspects of their lives.
There is a big difference between simulation and translation. It's bizarre to ignore this difference.
Haha. This is soooooo true!
At work, we had really slow machines and everybody used every trick in the book to optimize their files. Then came the massive upgrade: 16 core Zeon with 128GB RAM. Now nobody cares about optimization and things are running slower than ever before...
Clearly not. Now, what kind of usage do you think the vast majority of Mac users partake in?
What is quite fantastic? The first scissor switch keyboard?
True, but his 9-years old PC costs 200 euros. I want to see you paying 10 times more to apple for a comparable performance.
How does it do with half the cores turned off and downclocked by 5% while running non-native apps? You know, like the test you are comparing it to.
Anyone that knows anything about emulation is going to be seriously impressed with those numbers. 27.5% performance loss for Rosetta over native code for single target and 40% for multi threaded is pretty darned insane. With the CPU clock speed being slightly lower and the low power cores not being utilised, it looks like an overall performance loss of about 30% might be possible for emulated versus native code. That is insane. Things are looking pretty good for even emulated x86 code when Apple actually starts rolling out production hardware with current generation ARM chips optimised for desktop use. This thrown together developer machine using 2 year old hardware originally designed for an iPad is already matching the entry level x86 Mac Mini in x86 code.
This is why i say buy a MacBook Pro 16 now, Get Applecare for three years and at the end take the unit into apple store and trade it in for a new model in three years that will have all the hardware and software bugs worked out for the new system. The current i9 is still a very good processsor and with the new AMD 5600 GPU chip it is very capable system.
Yes, actually, i highly recommend buy scissor switch keyboards, like the first gen 16” being sold right now.
It's not that I don't understand all that, but it's still bad considering the 9 year gap in technology.
Pay 3000-4000 dollars for a machine you intend to keep only for 3 years? Maybe you are rich enough to do it.
Do a search on youtube and you will see a lot of comparison tests with Apple's current mobile chips against desktops. Many of these tests are very encouraging. I actually do not know what Apple plans to ship in the future but I am optimistic about the ARM transition.
3 years is a good life span for a laptop regardless of price. And at $3000-$4000 it should be making back that investment in a few months. If you are a consumer thats a bit different, but why would you need a $3000-$4000 laptop in that case?