Apple A9X Geekbench

[Thala]

Cool, since the A9X is at this level of performance, the next MacBook should be A9X based right?

From performance point of view they are pretty much there. They don't have to be fan-less for MacBook either so they could clock A9X even higher.

Open issue is the Software side. They hardly can ship a MacBook without any apps available. So are they using emulation for a transition period?

 

[Arachnotronic]

Mondozei brings up a good point.

Apple releases a new SOC every year. Even A8 had a pretty nice boost. However, Intel does the opposite thing. So while Apple will release A10(X) with whatever improvements, Intel will have... Kabylake. Which will simply introduce GT4e as far as I understand. And maybe 5% IPC boost.

Kaby Lake will bring Gen 9.5 GPU which should offer some architectural improvements over Gen. 9. I also expect improved media decode/encode support.

On the CPU side I believe it will basically be Skylake unless they planned this sucker way in advance. I do think they can wring out higher clocks since 14nm should be in better shape by then.

Kaby Lake will be a decent upgrade but nothing groundbreaking.

 

[Arachnotronic]

From performance point of view they are pretty much there. They don't have to be fan-less for MacBook either so they could clock A9X even higher.

Open issue is the Software side. They hardly can ship a MacBook without any apps available. So are they using emulation for a transition period?

Right that's what I'm saying. The performance is there, so where is the A9X MacBook? Why haven't they told developers to gear up to port to ARM for their future Mac OS products?

 

[asendra]

If done right, they wouldn't need to. An future update to Xcode will take care of that (mostly).

But maybe they don't want to just move one product line. If I remember correctly they ported their whole product line in 9 months or so with the Intel transition.
And maybe they didn't consider it a serious possibility until the A8/A9, so given a 2-3 year development schedule for a higher clocked, higher tdp version, that design should be still 1-2 years out. (They can't just use the phone/tablet design, they would need to support a lot more things in a laptop/desktop envelope)

Who knows what have they planned. It's not only a matter of ability.

 

[Nothingness]

What I'd love to see is a laptop based on Ax chip with Xcode running natively (that'd require OS X I guess). What currently prevents me from buying an iDevice is that you need a Mac to develop for it (and also the restrictions on run time generation of iOS...). Playing with AArch64 would be so much funnier than the disgusting x86 ISA.

 

[vissarix]

3dMark benches for the A9X:

Ice Storm Unlimited
A9X:
Overall - 33,467
Physics - 15,2161
Graphics - 50,795
http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/mobile/Apple+iPad+Pro/review

A8x:
Overall - 21,674
Physics - 10,353
Graphics - 31,524
http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/mobile/Apple+iPad+Air+2/review

Core M3 (I think this is SP4):
Overall - 40,995
Physics - 22,842
Graphics - 53,039
http://www.3dmark.com/3dm/9219807
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4EmpbCQ5cY

Core M 5y71 (unclear on TDP setting, Yoga Pro 3):
Overall - 49,619
Physics - 31,473
Graphics - 59,405
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9061/lenovo-yoga-3-pro-review/5

is this benchmark not optimised for apple soc's or what?

it doesnt seem that good to me, got beaten in graphics and completely demolished in physics which is cpu performance...

geekbench is either useless or apple cheats on that particular benchmark...

geekbench shows the a9x as potentially way better then skylake...instead on this other benchmar is a complete failure...15k vs 31k...

 

[Arachnotronic]

What I'd love to see is a laptop based on Ax chip with Xcode running natively (that'd require OS X I guess). What currently prevents me from buying an iDevice is that you need a Mac to develop for it (and also the restrictions on run time generation of iOS...). Playing with AArch64 would be so much funnier than the disgusting x86 ISA.

Buy a cheap Mac along with it?

 

[Thala]

What I'd love to see is a laptop based on Ax chip with Xcode running natively (that'd require OS X I guess). What currently prevents me from buying an iDevice is that you need a Mac to develop for it (and also the restrictions on run time generation of iOS...). Playing with AArch64 would be so much funnier than the disgusting x86 ISA

Agreed. For my purpose I'd love to have Windows RT on A9X Still would need an x86 device for cross compilation with Visual Studio though.

 

[Nothingness]

Windows?!? MS is as bad as x86 At least I can launch a terminal with a proper shell under OS X without having to install Mingw or Cygwin.

 

[Thala]

is this benchmark not optimised for apple soc's or what?

Who knows? Contrary to Geekbench, there is no documentation available for 3dmark, neither what exactly is tested nor what compilation options are used. That even the physics tests outputs gfx does not help either.

 

[Thala]

Windows?!? MS is as bad as x86 At least I can launch a terminal with a proper shell under OS X without having to install Mingw or Cygwin.

OS X?!? At least I can launch a proper shell unter Windows without having to install Mono.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Agreed. For my purpose I'd love to have Windows RT on A9X Still would need an x86 device for cross compilation with Visual Studio though.

Man, the fact that you long for Windows RT + A9X when Windows 10 + Core i7 w/ eDRAM is available really tells me you must really love ARM. Nothing wrong with ARM, everyone has their biases, but Windows RT really, really sucks

 

[Nothingness]

is this benchmark not optimised for apple soc's or what?

it doesnt seem that good to me, got beaten in graphics and completely demolished in physics which is cpu performance...

geekbench is either useless or apple cheats on that particular benchmark...

geekbench shows the a9x as potentially way better then skylake...instead on this other benchmar is a complete failure...15k vs 31k...

Or physics is an utterly non-representative PoS. When a single benchmark is an outlier, doubt it.

SPEC 2000 176.gcc has been shown to be competitive against a similarly clocked Haswell 4770K. And that is certainly way more interesting than what physics is measuring.

 

[Nothingness]

Windows RT really, really sucks

You can remove RT from your sentence :biggrin:

 

[Thala]

Man, the fact that you long for Windows RT + A9X when Windows 10 + Core i7 w/ eDRAM is available really tells me you must really love ARM. Nothing wrong with ARM, everyone has their biases, but Windows RT really, really sucks

Strange attitude. Wanting OS X on A9X is ok while Windows is absurd? There is nothing wrong with Windows RT...it is just Windows nothing more, nothing less. I do not expect everyone liking Windows either.

 

[Arachnotronic]

You can remove RT from your sentence :biggrin:

Aw, it's not that bad. I do prefer Mac OS as a "general purpose" desktop/notebook OS, but I like building my own desktops, and I like gaming, so I'm pretty "locked" into Windows.

Fortunately, I use an iPad and iPhone so my mobile devices are non-Windows*

*I do own a Surface Pro 4 but I don't use it as my main tablet.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Strange attitude. Wanting OS X on A9X is ok while Windows is absurd? There is nothing wrong with Windows RT...it is just Windows nothing more, nothing less. I do not expect everyone liking Windows either.

No, Windows RT won't run all/any of my x86 apps without a recompile. It's a hobbled piece of crap and has no reason to exist.

 

[cytg111]

..Windows RT really, really sucks

- The windows store lock-in and internet explorer's leverage over alternate browsers (hidden/proteced api's only available to ms product) is really a "microsoft is still microsoft" slap right in your face. I bought the surface2, worst buy ever, totally locked down device.

 

[cytg111]

Strange attitude. Wanting OS X on A9X is ok while Windows is absurd? There is nothing wrong with Windows RT...it is just Windows nothing more, nothing less. I do not expect everyone liking Windows either.

RT is defn. NOT your average windows os.

 

[Thala]

No, Windows RT won't run all/any of my x86 apps without a recompile. It's a hobbled piece of crap and has no reason to exist.

Ever came to your mind, that it is not Windows RT, which prevents you running x86 apps but maybe...just maybe... the fact that you are trying running x86 apps on ARM cores?

RT is defn. NOT your average windows os.

For all intents and purposes it is a straight re-compile of Windows for ARM. Just like Linux for ARM is....well Linux.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Ever came to your mind, that it is not Windows RT, which prevents you running x86 apps but maybe...just maybe... the fact that you are trying running x86 apps on ARM cores?

Uh, yeah. That's the point. If you want the full Windows experience, you need x86.

 

[Nothingness]

Aw, it's not that bad. I do prefer Mac OS as a "general purpose" desktop/notebook OS, but I like building my own desktops, and I like gaming, so I'm pretty "locked" into Windows.

You nailed it: Windows is just a gaming OS I have been using UNIX for so long, I just can't stand Windows. All my machines have Linux as main OS (except my gaming PC which is dual boot), even my job workstation and laptop are running Linux. I'm lucky enough to have a job that doesn't need any proprietary stuff only available on Windows.

 

[Exophase]

What I'd love to see is a laptop based on Ax chip with Xcode running natively (that'd require OS X I guess). What currently prevents me from buying an iDevice is that you need a Mac to develop for it (and also the restrictions on run time generation of iOS...). Playing with AArch64 would be so much funnier than the disgusting x86 ISA.

I was thinking the same thing, only I'd probably end up slapping Linux on such a laptop. That would be the ultimate AArch64 development platform for me.

Although there is something to be said about having lots of cores for compiling things...

 

[Thala]

Uh, yeah. That's the point. If you want the full Windows experience, you need x86.

That's a different statement than claiming an OS for architecture X sucks because i does not execute apps compiled for architecture Y.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That's a different statement than claiming an OS for architecture X sucks because i does not execute apps compiled for architecture Y.

You're only arguing semantics at this point.