4 ms·
Geekbench Result for iPhone5
- icehero 14y agoA comparison would be nice...
- mdasen 14y agohttp://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks http://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks That page is a chart of results for many of the previous models. As one can see, the iPhone 5's results are 2.55x better than the iPhone 4S. However, that should be taken with a grain of salt since we only have one iPhone 5 result.
- ewolf 14y agoThose data are "calibrated against a baseline score of 1,000 (which is the score of a single-processor Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz)".
- guywithabike 14y agoHere's benchmarks from a year ago (iPhone 4S): http://www.anandtech.com/show/4951/iphone-4s-preliminary-benchmarks-800mhz-a5-slightly-slower-gpu-than-ipad-2 http://www.anandtech.com/show/4951/iphone-4s-preliminary-ben... There's more context and links here: http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/16/iphone-5-benchmarks-appear-in-geekbench-showing-dual-core-1ghz-a6-cpu/ http://www.macrumors.com/2012/09/16/iphone-5-benchmarks-appe... TL;DR: iPhone 4S scores 623, iPad 2 scores 751. The iPhone 5, linked here, hits 1,601, according to Geekbench.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- wmf 14y agohttp://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/1030202/1031824 http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/1030202/10...
- olivercameron 14y agoFor comparison, iPhone 5's score of 1601 is better than: • 2004 Power Mac G5 - 1571 • Samsung Galaxy S III - 1560 • Asus Nexus 7 - 1591 • iPad (3rd Generation) - 766 • iPhone 4S - 629
- mtgx 14y agoIt seems a good chunk of that is not coming from the processor itself, but from other stuff like how fast is the memory, the storage, etc. So it might not have a better processor than Galaxy S3 or Nexus 7, but it may have slightly better storage and RAM memory.
- kami8845 14y agoIf you compare the stats under "Integer Performance", things like "Blowfish" and "Text Compress" the iPhone 5 is consistently twice as fast as the 4S. http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1031824 http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1031824 http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1030202 http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1030202
- huxley 14y agoAnandtech is reporting that the iPhone 5 is using dual-channel 32bit LPDDR2 running at 1066MHz, about 33% more peak memory bandwidth than the iPhone 4s. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6297/iphone-5-memory-size-and-speed-revealed-1gb-lpddr21066 http://www.anandtech.com/show/6297/iphone-5-memory-size-and-...
- ewolf 14y agoThe score of 629 for the iPhone 4S and 766 for the iPad is "calibrated against a baseline score of 1,000 (which is the score of a single-processor Power Mac G5 @ 1.6GHz)" (see http://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks http://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks) — not that big a difference, thus.
- TwoBit 14y agoThose numbers are barely better than the SIII and Nexus. I would have expected more, given that Androids much faster than these are coming out any day now.
- dan1234 14y agoIt'll be interesting to see the comparison once Geekbench has been compiled to support armv7s instructions.
- jfpoole 14y agoGeekbench developer here. Out of curiosity I built Geekbench with Xcode 4.5 (it's not available on the App Store yet) and took a look at the code generated for the armv7 and the armv7s architectures. Surprisingly there weren't a lot of differences between the two. The biggest difference I saw was that Xcode uses conditional VFP instructions (e.g., vaddeq.f64) for the armv7s but doesn't use them for the armv7 despite the fact that these instructions are supported by the armv7. My guess is that the A6 implementation of these instructions is much faster, but I won't know for sure until I can run benchmarks on the iPhone 5 myself. Also, I could only find two instructions (sdiv and udiv) that Xcode generates for the armv7s architecture that aren't supported by the armv7 architecture.
- TwoBit 14y agoI know the ARM instruction set fairly well (wrote a dissasembler) and would be surprised if armv7s made a significant difference.
- ck2 14y agoThere has to be a memory bandwidth limit where the number of cores is rendered moot for quad-core arm7 to be slower than dual-core arm7. Either that or the test is somehow being fooled, I noticed that benchmark code is updated frequently.
- wmf 14y agoTegra is known for low memory bandwidth.
- zurn 14y agoGoogling yields a 6.4 GB/s figure for the single channel LPDDR3 supported by Tegra 3. It doesn't sound like the most likely bottleneck for a CPU benchmark given that those A9 cores plod along at about 1/10 the perf of a desktop chip. What sort of bandwidth do other mobile chips provide? edit: Looks more like 1/3 than 1/10, looking at the tests in geekbenchscores. I had the 1/10 figure from looking at Sunspider results (http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?s=502c8933367f315a17f882b45e70fb17&p=1630202&postcount=16 http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?s=502c8933367f315a17f...).
- wmf 14y agoThat's still less bandwidth than any other recent SoC and keep in mind that the GPU is also sharing that bandwidth.
- jfpoole 14y agoWhile Geekbench is updated frequently, the actual benchmark code is virtually unchanged since 2.0.0 was released.
- antihero 14y agoGrr, just stopped all my services and installed Geekbench to be told I have to pay $12 for the privilege of getting a number for my system.