If you’re talking about the scores from April, they are fake. I haven’t seen any scores recently. Or have you?whatever they do their CPUs turn out to be fast, I think even A7 is still very respectable.
if those leaked geekbench scores are real, well, it's time to make Macbooks with their own CPUs.
That's interesting...I literally was going to post the exact opposite. What use cases are you finding it slow?
I kept my iPhone 5 for three years...thinking I will keep my 6s even longer.
If you’re talking about the scores from April, they are fake. I haven’t seen any scores recently. Or have you?
It's almost as if they're experimenting or something, I wonder why?
Yup. My 6S is already feeling very slow. Apple loves planned obsolescence, it's the cornerstone to their business plan.
Check my post above (#59).If you’re talking about the scores from April, they are fake. I haven’t seen any scores recently. Or have you?
Interesting. That's new as of today. However, I wonder why I couldn't find it. If I do Geekbench Browser searches for iPhone10,1 through iPhone10,5, nothing shows up.This Geekbench 4.1.1 score was spotted today for an "iPhone10,5"
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3967901
Single-Core Score: 4061
Multi-Core Score: 9959
This Geekbench 4.1.1 score was spotted today for an "iPhone10,5"
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3967901
Single-Core Score: 4061
Multi-Core Score: 9959
It's real, because that's also what the iOS GM leak indicates for the 4.7" model iPhone 8. And it's lame. That's the same as the iPhone 6s from 2015. That's one reason I'm skipping this generation to replace my wife's 6s. Luckily we managed to get her broken mute button fixed for CAD$40. Apple wanted something like $380.2GB are you freaking serious? That has to be a fake.
They should, but then again pretty much all my main non-Apple software would stop working. I'm still clinging to Office 2011 and Adobe Photoshop CS6 for example. They still work in High Sierra, and no subscriptions necessary. I also have Adobe Lightroom 5, although I'm sticking with Photos instead. Photos would likely easily make the transition to ARM.Holy crap that's about as fast as a new 13" macbook PRO
I get that OS X runs on x86, but perhaps they should port it or something. They could get 5 day battery life using A11 instead of some furnace intel junk.
Different model. 2 GB model is iPhone10,4. 3 GB model is iPhone10,5.^ But the Geekbench reports 3GB?
I usually just wait an extra year (or longer depending upon my needs).So now I guess it's time to nerd out about whatever inane spec the nerds have decided they "must have".
Last time it was 1/8th inch stereo jacks. The time before it was 2GB ram. Now it's 3GB ram.
*sigh*
Apple should just give the nerds what they want because they'll never be happy unless they have their thing. Make a 3rd iPhone model with 3x 1/8th in stereo jacks and 10GB ram and a 6" AMOLED display and sell it to them. Doesn't even have to have iOS. In fact, make it run android. They'll love it.
This Geekbench 4.1.1 score was spotted today for an "iPhone10,5"
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/3967901
Single-Core Score: 4061
Multi-Core Score: 9959
I guess they are finally running into to the IPC performance increase wall... so they increased the number of cores.This looks low -- only a 16% improvement in ST perf? But interesting that they changed up the cache structure; L1 cache sizes cut in half, but L2 much larger.
I guess they are finally running into to the IPC performance increase wall... so they increased the number of cores.
I wonder how big is the A11 chip.
10nm doesn't bring that large of a benefit.Nah. I would be shocked if they couldn't wring out more performance by increasing clocks + IPC. Let's wait for more reliable results.
^ But the Geekbench reports 3GB?
10nm doesn't bring that large of a benefit.
Not without severely throttling. Rumours are that thermals are going to be an issue, keep an eye on long-term CPU performance and throttling.Combination of new architecture (the totally reworked cache structure seems to indicate a big overhaul) and 10nm (even if it's not a huge performance jump) should allow Apple to do significantly better than the A10X in single-core perf.
Combination of new architecture (the totally reworked cache structure seems to indicate a big overhaul) and 10nm (even if it's not a huge performance jump) should allow Apple to do significantly better than the A10X in single-core perf.