The elephant in the room; 6S vs 7 speed test.

[KPOM]

Does that make you feel better tough guy?
I don't think it's unreasonable to want a newer processor to beat a older processor in real life test. So I'm still trying to figure out why you even posted here? We're on the same team if you care about performance.

At the same time, people harp on Apple for including a Core m chip in the MacBook, saying it is "underpowered" compared to the Core i5/i7. Yet in real-world tests it does just fine.

The fact is that processors have gotten faster than the ability of programmers to use all that power in everyday tasks. The addition of the lower-power cores helps the iPhone 7 run longer than the iPhone 6s. And some things may get marginally faster (e.g. the iMovie conversion) as developers tweak the hardware. However, it seems that future advances in speed will need to come elsewhere (e.g. faster storage, which Apple was out at the forefront last year).
[doublepost=1474324411][/doublepost]

The questions then is why does the A9X in iPad Pro show performance improvements over the 6S in similar test while the 7 does not? The A10 should be the faster than the A9X. It certainly feels like the A10 in iPhone 7 is hold back by something, a bottleneck that the iPad Pro does not have.

And of course, it no question its fast chip. But I still find it interesting to know why we don't see any of this extra power in real world applications

Other factors, such as NAND speed? Also, the 12.9" iPad Pro has 4GB of RAM, which could be a factor in some tests.