4 ms·
Geekbench is a poor tool. Maybe for simple mathematical operations, but x86-64 has a larger instruction set than what the A11 supports
by lykr0n 9y ago
Geekbench is a poor tool. Maybe for simple mathematical operations, but x86-64 has a larger instruction set than what the A11 supports
- Aloha 9y agoI dont think there is strong connection between a larger instruction set, and performance.
- Turing_Machine 9y agoYou are 100% correct.
- lykr0n 9y agoUsing a bad example, let's say x86-64 and A11 can both add numbers up to 3 digits. The a11 can do that faster than x86-64. But I want to add a 5 digit number. The x86-64 can do that with one instruction, but the A11 has to break that 5 digit number into multiple 3 digit numbers in order to process it. From my understanding, which might be wrong, Geekbench only tests what both can do. Comparing a pickup truck and a sports car you need to look at more than just how fast they can do. You can both move furniture, but the sports car will need to do a lot more to be able to what the pickup can.
- deepnotderp 9y agoThis doesn't make any sense. Yes, Geekbench is a terrible CPU benchmark, but both of them are Turing complete, so there is no functionality difference. And complex instructions are broken into uOps in x86 too.
- npunt 9y agoOn the other hand, Apple hasn't been shy about putting fixed function hardware on the Ax chips to eke out the maximum performance for a given power budget. They were much faster at adding h265 decode/encode than Intel, for instance. I would imagine they'd spend their (larger) transistor budget on a lot of this type of dark silicon that would assist in speeding up common operations.
- Dylan16807 9y agoGeekbench doesn't benchmark single instructions.