Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Full iPad 12.9" Geekbench comparisons...

Kal-037

Kal-037

macrumors 68020
Original poster
Apr 7, 2015
2,031
1,081
Depends on the day, but usually I live all over.
Finally received my iPad Pro and love it, (just need a new ZAGG cover) but anyway, this thing is much more powerful than I thought, it destroys every other tablet on the market, and is even comparable to intel chip scores, (though not the same type of chips, it's still a very impressive feat by Apple.)

wh1cvq.png

http://i65.tinypic.com/wh1cvq.png
iPad's A10X Fusion ARM processor will range between 2.31GHz and 2.39GHz, RAM is 4GB (just like First Generation iPP.) iPad Pro Generation 2 has 6 Cores, (3 High Performance cores and 3 lower power efficiency cores) also has a 12 Core GPU, USB 3 transfer speeds. And to top it all off... the weight is even lighter than first generation iPad Pros.

Here are some comparisons:

iPhone 7+...
iPad Single Core score is 643 points above A10 Fusion. (iPad Pro Single Core= 3949... iPhone 7= 3306.)
iPad Multi Core score is 3872 points above A10 Fusion. (iPad Pro Multi Core=9283... iPhone 7= 5411.)

iPad Pro 12.9" First Generation...
iPad Single Core is 936 points above A9X. (New iPad is=3949... First iPad Pro=3012.)
iPad Multi Core is 4404 points above A9X. (New iPad is=9283... First iPad Pro=4879.)


*Comparing to other brands and devices (yes they are different OS and processors, but this still gives a small idea of the A10X's power.)

Samsung Tab S3...
Single Core score for iPad is 2482 points above Samsung Tab S' Snapdragon 820.
(iPad Pro Single Core= 3949... Samsung Tab S3= 1467.)
(iPad Pro Multi Core= 9283... Samsung Tab S3= 3778.)

Google Pixel C...
Single Core= 1631
Multi Core= 3876

Surface Pro 4...
Single Core (i5 6300U)= 3050
Multi Core (i5 6300U)= 6390


MacBook Pro late 2016 15"...
Single Core (i7-6820HQ)= 4101
Multi Core (i7-6820HQ)= 13201

Samsung S8...
Single Core= 2121
Multi Core= 7101

The new iPad's single core scores are close to the 2017 13' and 15" MacBook Pros single Core scores, but also on par with Surface Books as well. *Yes they are ARM chips and are not capable of the same performance, but the speed and power is still beyond impressive (especially considering they are mobile processors against 7th gen i7 dual and quad-core processors.)


Bravo Apple, you deserve a thumbs up.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko, ascender, rui no onna and 7 others
If you're more used to the 9.7" I might suggest you stick with the 10.5" (but try them out thoroughly before doing a return.) That's what I would do, if I were in your shoes. :)
I originally was going to stick with my air 2 way back when the iPad 12.9" came out as I thought the size was ridiculous... but the specs and screen changed my mind very quickly.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 44267547
Kal-037 said:
If you're more used to the 9.7" I might suggest you stick with the 10.5" (but try them out thoroughly before doing a return.) That's what I would do, if I were in your shoes. :)
I originally was going to stick with my air 2 way back when the iPad 12.9" came out as I thought the size was ridiculous... but the specs and screen changed my mind very quickly.
Click to expand...

I actually own the Air 2. I am interested in both the 10.5 and 12.9. I Plan on using the 12.9 iPad with the attached keyboard and more of a stationary device. And the 10.5 will be more of my mobile device. I still plan on retaining my Air 2, as it still plenty powerful.

I think Apple did an excellent job reviving the iPad to make the Pro more "Pro" if you will and now iOS 11 will be the other half of the contributing factor to warrant for some to upgrade.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CatherineVeraGat
Relentless Power said:
Nice comparisons and break downs. I can't decide. I'm purchasing both the 10.5 and 12.9. But I primarily look forward to using iOS 11 in September with the 12.9 iPad.
Click to expand...
You are right, it makes sense to use with ios11. Meanwhile I saw and played with 10.5 today in Apple Store. (I already have 12.9 gen1). Size is so much better with keyboard as it is not so top heavy as the 12.9 and will rest better on the lap too. Will be great as portable with the pencil too. Very difficult decision though as not impressed with the on-screen 10.5 keyboard which does not show numbers or punctuation though that will change with ios11. Not sure if the split screen is that much of a big deal. For me, it really is just the size issue - 12,9 great at a desk (stationary) but not in the field capturing data and brainstorming. Nice to have both but who can afford that !
 
emembee said:
You are right, it makes sense to use with ios11. Meanwhile I saw and played with 10.5 today in Apple Store. (I already have 12.9 gen1). Size is so much better with keyboard as it is not so top heavy as the 12.9 and will rest better on the lap too. Will be great as portable with the pencil too. Very difficult decision though as not impressed with the on-screen 10.5 keyboard which does not show numbers or punctuation though that will change with ios11. Not sure if the split screen is that much of a big deal. For me, it really is just the size issue - 12,9 great at a desk (stationary) but not in the field capturing data and brainstorming. Nice to have both but who can afford that !
Click to expand...

Got the 10.5 had first gen 12.9 was way too big to be mobile with.
 
gobikerider said:
Why do I have a sneaking suspicion that the A11X will be a 8 core config with a single core score of 4300 and muti of 11,000-12,000
Click to expand...

Because at 10nm, your dreams may come true.

Lower power consumption, higher performance, smaller die (or more cores using same die area)
 
  • Like
Reactions: gobikerider
Kal-037 said:
Finally received my iPad Pro and love it, (just need a new ZAGG cover) but anyway, this thing is much more powerful than I thought, it destroys every other tablet on the market, and is even comparable to intel chip scores, (though not the same type of chips, it's still a very impressive feat by Apple.)

wh1cvq.png

http://i65.tinypic.com/wh1cvq.png
iPad's A10X Fusion ARM processor will range between 2.31GHz and 2.39GHz, RAM is 4GB (just like First Generation iPP.) iPad Pro Generation 2 has 6 Cores, (3 High Performance cores and 3 lower power efficiency cores) also has a 12 Core GPU, USB 3 transfer speeds. And to top it all off... the weight is even lighter than first generation iPad Pros.

Here are some comparisons:

iPhone 7+...
iPad Single Core score is 643 points above A10 Fusion. (iPad Pro Single Core= 3949... iPhone 7= 3306.)
iPad Multi Core score is 3872 points above A10 Fusion. (iPad Pro Multi Core=9283... iPhone 7= 5411.)

iPad Pro 12.9" First Generation...
iPad Single Core is 936 points above A9X. (New iPad is=3949... First iPad Pro=3012.)
iPad Multi Core is 4404 points above A9X. (New iPad is=9283... First iPad Pro=4879.)


*Comparing to other brands and devices (yes they are different OS and processors, but this still gives a small idea of the A10X's power.)

Samsung Tab S3...
Single Core score for iPad is 2482 points above Samsung Tab S' Snapdragon 820.
(iPad Pro Single Core= 3949... Samsung Tab S3= 1467.)
(iPad Pro Multi Core= 9283... Samsung Tab S3= 3778.)

Google Pixel C...
Single Core= 1631
Multi Core= 3876

Surface Pro 4...
Single Core (i5 6300U)= 3050
Multi Core (i5 6300U)= 6390


MacBook Pro late 2016 15"...
Single Core (i7-6820HQ)= 4101
Multi Core (i7-6820HQ)= 13201

Samsung S8...
Single Core= 2121
Multi Core= 7101

The new iPad's single core scores are close to the 2017 13' and 15" MacBook Pros single Core scores, but also on par with Surface Books as well. *Yes they are ARM chips and are not capable of the same performance, but the speed and power is still beyond impressive (especially considering they are mobile processors against 7th gen i7 dual and quad-core processors.)


Bravo Apple, you deserve a thumbs up.
Click to expand...
If there's one thing I take away from your comparison, it's that the Samsung tab S3 is pitiful compared to the rest of the market. Seriously, 3778 multi core is disgusting on a £600 device in 2017.
 
  • Like
Reactions: haruhiko and gobikerider
daijholt said:
If there's one thing I take away from your comparison, it's that the Samsung tab S3 is pitiful compared to the rest of the market. Seriously, 3778 multi core is disgusting on a £600 device in 2017.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's the 1467 single-core score that would affect performance more.

To add some more perspective:
iPad Air (A7) 1369 2319
iPad Air 2 (A8X) 1830 4388
iPad (2017) (A9) 2551 4414
iPad Pro 9.7 (A9X) 3014 5072

Given in my experience, Android tends to have higher overhead compared to iOS, there's a good chance the Tab S3 feels slower than the first generation iPad Air and the $329 budget model iPad (2017) easily trounces it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnnyGo
rui no onna said:
Actually, it's the 1467 single-core score that would affect performance more.

To add some more perspective:
iPad Air (A7) 1369 2319
iPad Air 2 (A8X) 1830 4388
iPad (2017) (A9) 2551 4414
iPad Pro 9.7 (A9X) 3014 5072

Given in my experience, Android tends to have higher overhead compared to iOS, there's a good chance the Tab S3 feels slower than the first generation iPad Air and the $329 budget model iPad (2017) easily trounces it.
Click to expand...
Good to know. What makes it even more troubling is that while benchmarks don't provide a true indication of performance in practice, android always performs worse than iOS in practice anyway, irrespective of the power behind the hardware.
 
Is there a test to compare tablets storage systems? I ask because since that iPad air / iPhone 5 Apple has significantly improved storage speeds and with APFS it is solidifying these gains.

It would be great to compare read/write throughput amongst different tablets. Anyone has this info to share ?
 
Just imagine what Apple's chip team could do if they focused on the Mac.
 
found this:

"iPad Pro 12.9-inch: 2015 vs 2017 There was a good bit of improvement in SSD speed with the new iPad. The new iPad has 40% faster reads and a whopping 324% faster writes. The 2015 iPad Pro has respectable 701MB/sec read and ‘meh’ 89.7MB/sec write speed, as shown in the screenshots below. That pales a fair bit to the 2017 iPad Pro’s 980MB/sec read and 380MB/sec write speeds."
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnnyGo and gobikerider
Spidey12 said:
found this:

"iPad Pro 12.9-inch: 2015 vs 2017 There was a good bit of improvement in SSD speed with the new iPad. The new iPad has 40% faster reads and a whopping 324% faster writes. The 2015 iPad Pro has respectable 701MB/sec read and ‘meh’ 89.7MB/sec write speed, as shown in the screenshots below. That pales a fair bit to the 2017 iPad Pro’s 980MB/sec read and 380MB/sec write speeds."
Click to expand...
What capacities were they comparing? Comparison is kinda invalid if it was 2015 iPP 32GB vs 2017 iPP 256GB or 512GB. Really should be 256GB vs 256GB.

That said, I do wish more articles would focus on random small block read/write. Given you can't even connect the iPad via USB 3.0 to the PC, seems like one of the few use-cases where fast sequential actually makes a difference is iMovie exports. For operating system performance, random makes a bigger impact. That's why SSDs are so much faster than HDDs.
 
rui no onna said:
What capacities were they comparing? Comparison is kinda invalid if it was 2015 iPP 32GB vs 2017 iPP 256GB or 512GB. Really should be 256GB vs 256GB.

That said, I do wish more articles would focus on random small block read/write. Given you can't even connect the iPad via USB 3.0 to the PC, seems like one of the few use-cases where fast sequential actually makes a difference is iMovie exports. For operating system performance, random makes a bigger impact. That's why SSDs are so much faster than HDDs.
Click to expand...

FYI, the two new iPads Pro are USB 3.0.
 
... in other news, newer device outperforms older devices. /s

That being said, of course I'm super pleased with the way my 10.5 is.
 
Elwe said:
FYI, the two new iPads Pro are USB 3.0.
Click to expand...
When functioning as USB Master to Lightning Card Readers and Camera Adapters, yes it's USB 3.0.

When connected to Mac/PC as USB Slave, it seems to default to USB 2.0 even when using a USB-C to Lightning cable.
 
What I’m really curious to see is whether or not the 12.9 scores higher than the 10.5.
 
rui no onna said:
What capacities were they comparing? Comparison is kinda invalid if it was 2015 iPP 32GB vs 2017 iPP 256GB or 512GB. Really should be 256GB vs 256GB.

That said, I do wish more articles would focus on random small block read/write. Given you can't even connect the iPad via USB 3.0 to the PC, seems like one of the few use-cases where fast sequential actually makes a difference is iMovie exports. For operating system performance, random makes a bigger impact. That's why SSDs are so much faster than HDDs.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Test was performed by The Mac Observer. Using the same app they are using (PerformanceTest), I got very different results on my 128GB 2015 12.9" iPad Pro: 185 write, 595 read.

Anandtech obtained similar results last year. They also tested random read/write. See here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9766/the-apple-ipad-pro-review/6
 
canesalato said:
Indeed. Test was performed by The Mac Observer. Using the same app they are using (PerformanceTest), I got very different results on my 128GB 2015 12.9" iPad Pro: 185 write, 595 read.

Anandtech obtained similar results last year. They also tested random read/write. See here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9766/the-apple-ipad-pro-review/6
Click to expand...
I love AnandTech's in-depth reviews. Most reviews just post benchmark scores. For example, last year the Pro 9.7 benchmarked a bit slower than the Pro 12.9. The knowledge that it only has 2GB RAM along with the benchmark scores, educated guess would have been it's running single channel and not dual-channel like the Pro 12.9 but none of the other reviews even posited that.

AnandTech analyzes the why and how. Unfortunately, the reviews are usually released months after I've already bought my device. Still makes for good reading, though. :rolleyes:

By the way, I believe my HDDs have 2MB/s random 4K write. Would really like to see that improved far more than sequential which is already more than fast enough. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: canesalato
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back