CPU benchmark
Our processor / CPU comparison helps you to compare two CPUs. We use benchmark results from Cinebench R20, Cinebench R23 and Geekbench 5 as well as the FP32 raw performance (GFLOPS) of the iGPU.
“They’re real and they’re spectacular.”How real can we assume this is?
How real can we assume this is?
What do you mean variants of the a14x? They will call it something else if they’re not literally an a14x chip in the Macs. Otherwise it would just be confusing.I think the results are not based on actual benchmarks, but they are still a realistic guess.
You get the same results by scaling the performance of the A14 to A14X in the same way it scales from the A12 to the A12X.
This will probably be the base configuration. Rumors say that there are multiple configurations (t6001, t6002, t6003) of the A14X going into the first batch of Apple Silicon Macs. I wonder how fast the top configuration will be.
Wait how would they have this information? Things like the GPU clock and boost being the same as the CPU makes me skeptical to say the least.
You’re totally right. I should have said 3 variants of the A14 SOC made specifically for the Mac. My guess is that these “results” are from base variant that everybody calls “A14X”.What do you mean variants of the a14x? They will call it something else if they’re not literally an a14x chip in the Macs. Otherwise it would just be confusing.
Wouldn’t just be better to call them Icestorm and Firestorm core based SoC’s for the time being?You’re totally right. I should have said 3 variants of the A14 SOC made specifically for the Mac. My guess is that these “results” are from base variant that everybody calls “A14X”.
A14X has become a bit of an umbrella term in the rumors to represent the new family of SOC for the first batch of Apple Silicon Macs. Meaning that this new Mac SOC will be similar to an A14X, but come in three different levels of power and TDP.
My (a little optimistic guess) is that we’re gonna see:
A14X-like 8-core for the MacBook Air with around the same performance as the next iPad Pro.
A14X-like 8-core clocked higher and with better GPU for the MacBook Pro 13”.
A14X-like 12-core for the MacBook Pro 16”.
Hopefully the 12-core will also be available on the top end MacBook Pro 13” because it’s the machine I want to buy, but with the additional thermal and battery headroom available on the 16” it would make sense to restrict the most powerful 12-core version with beefy GPU just to the 16”.
That said, who knows how those SOC will actually be called.
Maybe A14X, A14X Pro and A14X Pro Max?
Or maybe an entirely new different naming scheme, as WWDC event video seems to suggest when they say that “Apple is developing a new family of SOC for the Mac”. New family = new naming scheme.
I think it would be proper to call them "A14-based" Mac SOC until Apple announces the official name, but I kind of understand why everybody talks about "A14X" MacBooks: for most people "A14X" means the same SOC as the iPhone 12 but much more powerful. It's a good approximation to understand what kind of SOC will power the new Apple Silicon Macs.Wouldn’t just be better to call them Icestorm and Firestorm core based SoC’s for the time being?
Mostly because the number is a score of overall performance, not your specific use case tasks.I don't see why folks think that Geekbench 5 isn't a real benchmark. It's what I use to measure our systems and it seems realistic to me.
That could be likely, it could also be a leak, but it's very likely it's projected numbers based on what we know about the A14 chips as of now.Yeah, I've been looking and have yet to find these supposed A14X numbers in the Geekbench results database. None of the stories name sources other than the other sites reporting it. It seems to be rumor or speculation that's been echo-chambered into a news story.
Mostly because the number is a score of overall performance, not your specific use case tasks.
That, and the general tendency for people on the internet to argue about everything.
That could be likely, it could also be a leak, but it's very likely it's projected numbers based on what we know about the A14 chips as of now.
Within the next couple weeks we should have some real numbers, and we will have a best case scenario number on Tuesday. 🤪
I think it would be proper to call them "A14-based" Mac SOC until Apple announces the official name, but I kind of understand why everybody talks about "A14X" MacBooks: for most people "A14X" means the same SOC as the iPhone 12 but much more powerful. It's a good approximation to understand what kind of SOC will power the new Apple Silicon Macs.
I don't see why folks think that Geekbench 5 isn't a real benchmark. It's what I use to measure our systems and it seems realistic to me.
If the new AS MacBook Pro 16" has a 12-core "A14-based" SOC, it will score approximately 1700/11000. That's iMac Pro level of performance in a laptop.I have two main applications which are CPU and RAM intensive and I've found a pretty good correlation between Geekbench 5 and how my programs perform. The other stuff, like email, web browsing, watching videos - I think that performance doesn't matter as much. Zoom? That one tends to be a resource hog.
My new desktop has scores of 1,261/8,251. An AS MacBook Pro 16 is pretty close to that and it would mean that I could run my desktop workload on a laptop. Though I'd still prefer a desktop. I assume that they could add cores to get the numbers even higher for a new Mac Pro.