7 ms·

Not really according to geekbench. a11: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 i7 (rmbp): https://browser.g

Not really according to geekbench. a11: https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5286336 i7 (rmbp): https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/5285899 4.1k vs. 4.8k

Joeri 9y ago
Interesting that the multi-core score is a lot lower. Probably you're seeing thermal management in that multi-core score, meaning a macbook with active cooling should be able to reach much higher multi-core numbers. The A11 is way too overpowered for a phone or tablet. Apple is clearly in the awkward phase where they've almost gotten the right CPU to put in their laptops. The A12 will be a no-brainer. Same performance as i7, way better battery life, way cheaper to produce.
- bigdubs 9y ago
  I think hyperthreading with the i7 also gives it an edge with multi-core
- endorphone 9y ago
  Note that the A11 has two "big" cores, and four much slower but power efficient "little" cores. If they were making an A11 variant for desktop use they would have the power profile to use more big cores.
  - baldfat 9y ago
    I think we are headed into the world of multi-cpu world. I see the ARM being helped by a CUDA power efficient co-processor with I/O similar to Power9. The issue is our tools as developers wouldn't be able to take advantage of this for a while. 95% of people's applications don't take advantage of multi-threaded processors.
baldfat 9y ago
I would love to see a rendering benchmark. This is only single thread comparison and multi-thread isn't close.
tjoff 9y ago
Are you guys serious? Not saying A11 isn't fast, but come on - this is beyond ridiculous. Raw performance is nowhere near intel chips. https://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-the-ipad-pro-really-isnt-as-fast-a-laptop.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-t...
- Tempest1981 9y ago
  Although that article is from Nov 2015, using the A9X. Would like to see an updated test, same benchmarks.
- baldfat 9y ago
  It was ridiculous but I was still surprised how strong the A11 is getting. Apple's A11 (single thread) 4217 (multi) 10164 https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks Intel i7 8700k (single thread) 6089 (multi) 26654 https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks
endorphone 9y ago
4.1k vs. 4.8k The A11 is running at 2.4Ghz. The i7 in the single-thread test at 3.1Ghz (actually up to 4.1Ghz). Cycle for cycle the A11 is faster than the fattest Intel chip. Which is insane. I am no Apple booster, but this is quite an incredible switch up. With a fatter TDP budget (the A11 has a TDP of something like 5W, the i7-7920HQ a TDP of 45W) they could not only increase the clock ceiling, they could start copy-pasting the big core. A few years back people were talking about Apple starting to move their chip designs to their laptops and desktops. It sounded insane. Now it's actually entirely possible if they can get their software stacks and targeting all working.

Joeri 9y ago

Interesting that the multi-core score is a lot lower. Probably you're seeing thermal management in that multi-core score, meaning a macbook with active cooling should be able to reach much higher multi-core numbers. The A11 is way too overpowered for a phone or tablet. Apple is clearly in the awkward phase where they've almost gotten the right CPU to put in their laptops. The A12 will be a no-brainer. Same performance as i7, way better battery life, way cheaper to produce.

bigdubs 9y ago
I think hyperthreading with the i7 also gives it an edge with multi-core
endorphone 9y ago
Note that the A11 has two "big" cores, and four much slower but power efficient "little" cores. If they were making an A11 variant for desktop use they would have the power profile to use more big cores.
- baldfat 9y ago
  I think we are headed into the world of multi-cpu world. I see the ARM being helped by a CUDA power efficient co-processor with I/O similar to Power9. The issue is our tools as developers wouldn't be able to take advantage of this for a while. 95% of people's applications don't take advantage of multi-threaded processors.

baldfat 9y ago

I would love to see a rendering benchmark. This is only single thread comparison and multi-thread isn't close.

tjoff 9y ago

Are you guys serious? Not saying A11 isn't fast, but come on - this is beyond ridiculous. Raw performance is nowhere near intel chips. https://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-the-ipad-pro-really-isnt-as-fast-a-laptop.html https://www.pcworld.com/article/3006268/tablets/tested-why-t...

Tempest1981 9y ago
Although that article is from Nov 2015, using the A9X. Would like to see an updated test, same benchmarks.
baldfat 9y ago
It was ridiculous but I was still surprised how strong the A11 is getting. Apple's A11 (single thread) 4217 (multi) 10164 https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks Intel i7 8700k (single thread) 6089 (multi) 26654 https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks https://browser.geekbench.com/processor-benchmarks

endorphone 9y ago

4.1k vs. 4.8k The A11 is running at 2.4Ghz. The i7 in the single-thread test at 3.1Ghz (actually up to 4.1Ghz). Cycle for cycle the A11 is faster than the fattest Intel chip. Which is insane. I am no Apple booster, but this is quite an incredible switch up. With a fatter TDP budget (the A11 has a TDP of something like 5W, the i7-7920HQ a TDP of 45W) they could not only increase the clock ceiling, they could start copy-pasting the big core. A few years back people were talking about Apple starting to move their chip designs to their laptops and desktops. It sounded insane. Now it's actually entirely possible if they can get their software stacks and targeting all working.