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

iPhone 11 iPhone 11/Pro/Max 2.66 GHz, 4 GB RAM - Geekbench 4 >14000, Geekbench 5 >3500

A13 beats A12 in basically everything for single-core. However, it falls down for multi-core. Perhaps it is indeed overheating, or it's just a lower test result by chance, or else the caches really are too small. I'm inclined to believe the cache sizes listed are not representative though, since I don't see Apple making the mistake of under-spec'ing the caches, particularly when previous Ax chip cache sizes were considerably larger.

I'm expecting A13 to score north of 12500 in Geekbench 4 multi-core.

Screen Shot 2019-09-04 at 9.08.25 PM.jpg

Screen Shot 2019-09-04 at 9.08.46 PM.png

Screen Shot 2019-09-04 at 9.09.03 PM.png
 
Last edited:
It's becoming more annoying to get comparative Geekbench 4 scores, since Geekbench has now transitioned to Geekbench 5.

However, last month, possible Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Geekbench 4 scores leaked.

https://www.techradar.com/news/next-gen-qualcomm-snapdragon-865-benchmarks-leak-via-geekbench

uLEd6zpnQYLP9ppLBA7rFe-650-80.png


I had earlier predicted that A13 would be faster than 12500 multi-core, but how much faster I'm not really sure. If these are true Snapdragon 865 results, can A13 catch it? Mind you, Snapdragon 865 isn't due out until 2020 anyway.
 
I'm disappointed. Only 3 more days and still no more benchmark leaks. :( o_O Still looking for stuff on iPhone12,3 D42 Pro and iPhone12,5 D43 Pro Max.

So, who's guessing 6 GB for the iPhone Pros? As mentioned, I had originally guessed 4 GB, but now I'm thinking 6 GB is a decent possibility.
 
EugW said:
I'm expecting 4 GB on the 2019 iPhones with A13, and 6 GB on the 2019 iPad Pros with A13X.

Maybe they'll throw us a bone and provide 128 GB storage on the 2019 entry level tier of the OLED models to ease the sting of the cost of these phones.
Click to expand...


Nasty Single Core beats an iPad Pro 12X by 5030 to 5400 A13 that’s not huge but still.

MultiCore the A12X still crushes it.
 
TheRealAlex said:
Nasty Single Core beats an iPad Pro 12X by 5030 to 5400 A13 that’s not huge but still.

MultiCore the A12X still crushes it.
Click to expand...
Yes, A12X has twice the number of performance cores as A12 and probably A13.

A12X is 8 cores, composed of 4 performance and 4 efficiency cores.
A12 is 6 cores, composed of 2 performance and 4 efficiency cores.
A13 appears to be 6 cores, likely composed of 2 performance and 4 efficiency cores (like A12).

A12X also has twice the memory interface width as A12.
 
TheRealAlex said:
Nasty Single Core beats an iPad Pro 12X by 5030 to 5400 A13 that’s not huge but still.

MultiCore the A12X still crushes it.
Click to expand...

A13 and A12X are realistically identical for single threaded performance. The A13 is just running 170Mhz faster.

2.49Ghz vs 2.66Ghz

So maybe the A13 is really just a refreshed A12+ lol. The IPC is probably not faster. Only the clock speed is faster, and the die has been shrunk so it is more efficient allowing for a 170mhz boost.

I’ll tell ya right now, it doesn’t matter if the multithreaded of A13 isn’t as good as a A12X it was never supposed to compete with pro line iPads. Maybe in 3-4 years the iPhone will catch up to A12X.

But, this faster single threaded A13 at 2.66Ghz is going to kill it in games. Our frame rates will surely boost up drastically as a lot of modern titles out are cpu limited, and well they’re refresh rate limited too lol.
 
Last edited:
tps3443 said:
A13 and A12X are realistically identical for single threaded performance. The A13 is just running 170Mhz faster.

2.49Ghz vs 2.66Ghz

So maybe the A13 is really just a refreshed A12+ lol. The IPC is probably not faster. Only the clock speed is faster, and the die has been shrunk so it is more efficient allowing for a 170mhz boost.
Click to expand...
Well, maybe for A13 vs A12X, but IPC is higher for A13 than A12 though. Not by a huge amount, but higher nonetheless. The performance boost is due to a combination of both the higher clock speed and higher IPC.
 
EugW said:
Well, maybe for A13 vs A12X, but IPC is higher for A13 than A12 though. Not by a huge amount, but higher nonetheless. The performance boost is due to a combination of both the higher clock speed and higher IPC.
Click to expand...

Either way the A13 is fast. I’m curious to see what the android market is going to come up with to compete with iPhone devices.

AMD has just recently signed a deal with Samsung in relation to mobile devices. Now that AMD IPC has finally caught intel or simply surpassed them in not only performance, but price too. Apple might need to step it up even further.

AMD has finally ended intels endless cycle of a measly 3-5% boost every time a new cpu comes out every single year.

If AMD starts building processors for Samsung smartphones, Apple may have some serious competition. This is all probably a long ways out, but still pretty cool.
 
Last edited:
tps3443 said:
Either way the A13 is fast. I’m curious to see what the android market is going to come up with to compete with iPhone devices.

AMD has just recently signed a deal with Samsung in relation to mobile devices. Now that AMD IPC has finally caught intel or simply surpassed them in not only performance, but price too. Apple might need to step it up even further.
Click to expand...
Supposed leaks of Snapdragon 865 have it beating A13 multi-core. In Geekbench 4, Snapdragon 865 almost hits 13000.

No idea about power usage though at those speeds. Oh wait. Maybe we do have some hints about power usage... Snapdragon 865 is 8 cores, not 6 like A13. So, it's possible that leaked score is at higher power than A13, and that test also tells us the single-core speed of Snapdragon 865 is much lower, at less than 4200.
 
tps3443 said:
A13 and A12X are realistically identical for single threaded performance. The A13 is just running 170Mhz faster.

2.49Ghz vs 2.66Ghz

So maybe the A13 is really just a refreshed A12+ lol. The IPC is probably not faster. Only the clock speed is faster, and the die has been shrunk so it is more efficient allowing for a 170mhz boost.
Click to expand...
Also, there are some differences if you look at the sub-categories though. A12X hits about 5475 if you look at its integer score. If you scale that up to 2.66 GHz, that's 5849. The integer score of A13 is 6110, which is almost 5% higher.
 
EugW said:
Supposed leaks of Snapdragon 865 have it beating A13 multi-core. In Geekbench 4, Snapdragon 865 almost hits 13000.

No idea about power usage though at those speeds. Oh wait. Maybe we do have some hints about power usage... Snapdragon 865 is 8 cores, not 6 like A13. So, it's possible that leaked score is at higher power than A13, and that test also tells us the single-core speed of Snapdragon 865 is much lower, at less than 4200.
Click to expand...

People can overclock that Snapdragon 865 even further though. You can usually squeeze about 30% daily stable boost out of the iPhone Galaxy phones, with around 30-40%% more power usage. So, with a healthy overclock that 865 will be probably be over 17,000 multithreaded speed creeping up on the A12X.

Samsung and Apple are both easily capable of putting such power in a phone. It’s just like you’re saying though, “power usage” would only make this a fun luxury to use while being plugged in lol.
 
My iPhone X is still buttery smooth. I’ll be upgrading for the camera but unless there’s an entire new way of using that requires more speed I don’t see the point.
 
EugW said:
It's becoming more annoying to get comparative Geekbench 4 scores, since Geekbench has now transitioned to Geekbench 5.

However, last month, possible Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 Geekbench 4 scores leaked.

https://www.techradar.com/news/next-gen-qualcomm-snapdragon-865-benchmarks-leak-via-geekbench

View attachment 856217

I had earlier predicted that A13 would be faster than 12500 multi-core, but how much faster I'm not really sure. If these are true Snapdragon 865 results, can A13 catch it? Mind you, Snapdragon 865 isn't due out until 2020 anyway.
Click to expand...

I wouldnt bother with early GB scores, as in some cases are quite inaccurate.
Look at this one, it was supposed to be for the XZ4 and we know how it ended.

12,900 sounds realistic for a SoC with a 4200 single core, but if Huawei's explanation on why they didnt used A77 for the kirin 990 are somewhat true (it couldnt scale that much without exceding the power budget of the n7+), then i wouldn expect that neither QC nor Apple going that far (13k).
 
mprime_17 said:
I wouldnt bother with early GB scores, as in some cases are quite inaccurate.
Look at this one, it was supposed to be for the XZ4 and we know how it ended.

12,900 sounds realistic for a SoC with a 4200 single core, but if Huawei's explanation on why they didnt used A77 for the kirin 990 are somewhat true (it couldnt scale that much without exceding the power budget of the n7+), then i wouldn expect that neither QC nor Apple going that far (13k).
Click to expand...
I don’t know what happened with XZ4 but I don’t really care that much either. I’m mainly just interested in Apple Ax chips at this point.

As for Huawei, Geekbench has actually banned a bunch of their devices.
 
EugW said:
I'm disappointed. Only 3 more days and still no more benchmark leaks. :( o_O Still looking for stuff on iPhone12,3 D42 Pro and iPhone12,5 D43 Pro Max.

So, who's guessing 6 GB for the iPhone Pros? As mentioned, I had originally guessed 4 GB, but now I'm thinking 6 GB is a decent possibility.
Click to expand...
Personally unsure of the utility of 6GB in an iPhone? iPad, yes, with the new multitasking features, but the iPhone is still limited to 1 app operational at a time with everything else frozen out. Unless the camera requires it for its image processing (HDR adjustments etc?)
 
EugW said:
I don’t know what happened with XZ4 but I don’t really care that much either. I’m mainly just interested in Apple Ax chips at this point.

As for Huawei, Geekbench has actually banned a bunch of their devices.
Click to expand...
I dont get it then. You posted a supposedly score for the upcoming 865 to which i replied that scores for the 855 were over the roft before the official release.

And Huawei's declaration have some relevance to the topic IF it results somewhat real; N7+ or PRO, or whatever apple is going to use this time does not give much margin for improvement (just like 6-10% better efficiency) to expect a huge jump in performance from either camp. Unless they dont care for throttling.
 
mprime_17 said:
I dont get it then. You posted a supposedly score for the upcoming 865 to which i replied that scores for the 855 were over the roft before the official release.

And Huawei's declaration have some relevance to the topic IF it results somewhat real; N7+ or PRO, or whatever apple is going to use this time does not give much margin for improvement (just like 6-10% better efficiency) to expect a huge jump in performance from either camp. Unless they dont care for throttling.
Click to expand...
Honestly, I don’t know what you’re saying. Part of it is the English. I don’t know what “over the roft” means. I also have no idea what happened with the XZ4, and you didn’t bother to explain it.

As for the Snapdragon 865 score, the values are reasonable but just serve as a relative frame of reference.

BTW, I expect these A13 scores are real but that the MT score will also be well over 12000.

Falhófnir said:
Personally unsure of the utility of 6GB in an iPhone? iPad, yes, with the new multitasking features, but the iPhone is still limited to 1 app operational at a time with everything else frozen out.
Click to expand...
That’s not actually true.

While it’s true that iOS multitasking is not as extensive as iPadOS multitasking, it’s still multitasking, and the restrictions on iOS multitasking have eased over the years as memory amount has gone up.

Unless the camera requires it for its image processing (HDR adjustments etc?)
Click to expand...
Some believe the triple lens camera will benefit from 6 GB RAM, but others are not so sure. However, I do find it interesting that Apple will likely be increasing the “budget” iPhone’s memory from 3 GB to 4 GB after just one year, at the same time it’s going from a 1-lens camera to a 2-lens camera.
 
Last edited:
FlyingTexan said:
My iPhone X is still buttery smooth. I’ll be upgrading for the camera but unless there’s an entire new way of using that requires more speed I don’t see the point.
Click to expand...

Not much performance boost over the A11. The A11 is simply a beast to this day.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nordique
TechRadar's article on the iPhone 11 suggests that the iPhone 11 could have the same RAM as the 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max.

https://www.techradar.com/reviews/hands-on-iphone-11-review

"Like the iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max, it’s also packing the A13 Bionic chipset inside, although we suspect with less RAM, as per last year - even though our Apple demo person said the internal spec was precisely the same."

Also, in terms of the SoC, from the event:

https://www.phonearena.com/news/Apple-A13-Bionic-review-benchmarks_id118847

a13-performance.jpg


https://techcrunch.com/2019/09/10/apples-new-a13-chip-is-faster-according-to-charts-with-no-numbers/

20190910180024_922573.jpg
 
Here are the details on that Geekbench 4 leaked score, including all the processor frequencies:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/14528580.gb4

Code: 
"processor_frequency": {
   "minimum": 2550,
   "maximum": 2659,
   "median": 2629,
   "mean": 2616,
   "stddev": 42.571905644142589,
   "frequencies": [
     2658.8408118770417,
     2657.374713086574,
     2658.7936831493407,
     2658.4520498326833,
     2659.0116675216127,
     2657.6689806842833,
     2630.6184255091066,
     2615.0485145979633,
     2556.6375103463924,
     2557.337641026515,
     2563.1030634421404,
     2572.8657006985331,
     2555.1050999897793,
     2557.2722429408632,
     2550.7330169007314,
     2568.3062448366341,
     2653.3791336053782,
     2658.5816245484566,
     2658.4314368378841,
     2658.4137688110463,
     2658.611075109086,
     2658.4019902569567,
     2657.9456516562877,
     2658.734774589142,
     2650.0830359351257,
     2652.3088348407287,
     2646.2406292760215,
     2619.3552893514475,
     2623.7020873736524,
     2628.0547029586419,
     2588.1703361170539,
     2565.9036310743754,
     2571.1650270133023,
     2560.1638504864304,
     2579.5162762103032,
     2611.6763697698457,
     2575.0326975506073,
     2559.8552828480097,
     2557.5829136410812,
     2556.7246652554963,
     2591.7842598782076,
     2653.8837930634113,
     2658.8113562264375,
     2658.463828830375,
     2658.8437574779978,
     2658.4108241627387,
     2656.4364347966607,
     2658.3107100015613,
     2658.5580645697282,
     2658.3666552209211,
     2657.2746769473665,
     2631.013510254375,
     2611.7843710823231,
     2596.2084539037774,
     2569.4473439943981,
     2572.3114254570946,
     2560.4943461084217,
     2569.9315862795634,
     2569.5353744723084,
     2565.5251148874213,
     2565.319446404063,
     2597.3801092631229,
     2653.6578462028369,
     2658.8791051985513,
     2657.9898066090914,
     2658.5021112937598
   ]
  },
 
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