Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 16 of 28

Thread: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

  1. #1
    HEXUS.admin
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    31,709
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2,073 times in 719 posts

    Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Single and multi-core GB5 tests outpace the 16-inch MacBook Pro with Intel Core-i9 CPU.
    Read more.

  2. #2
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,889
    Thanks
    3,849
    Thanked
    5,144 times in 3,967 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Meh,more useless benchmark suites. Apple also is know for profiling certain applications to tune performance in,so it won't be repesentative of all software IMHO. Also the fact Apple is basically thowing transistors at their SOCs. How much of the improvement is because Apple is on 5NM and Intel is still stuck on 14NM??

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    2,207
    Thanks
    15
    Thanked
    114 times in 102 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Meh, all that tells me is that the a14x has more cores than the a14, I'd say 10 versus the 6 in the a14.

    I've said it before geekbench is only really good for comparing like for like but I'm sure Apple will wheel out some slides with huge gains in carefully selected situations.

    While I'm sure the transition will be smoother on os-x than windows (os architectural differences and 'complete control over hardware' help) I still wouldn't count on arm being faster with 'professional' programs.

  4. #4
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,667
    Thanks
    744
    Thanked
    1,496 times in 1,261 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Quote Originally Posted by LSG501 View Post
    Meh, all that tells me is that the a14x has more cores than the a14, I'd say 10 versus the 6 in the a14.
    Or maybe they swapped out the 4 energy efficient ".little" cores for 4 more big ones. A sort of "big.big" variant

    Edit: I've thought Apple CPUs were overly wide issue for just mobile use for years, I presumed leading up to this moment. They probably had a bunch of knobs they could tune for this die lined up, so it could actually be quite quick. It won't get me buying into the Apple ecosystem, but I have to be impressed with their CPU design skills so far.

    ofc the benchmarks are probably going to be "at 10W power level" or similar, a game Intel have been known to play when it was at their advantage.
    Last edited by DanceswithUnix; 06-11-2020 at 02:29 PM.

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    100
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    10 times in 8 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Macs are great computers for doing very little. As soon as you start pushing, they show they were not made to work hard. Changing the silicon wont make any difference to most users, as current Mac owners do little more than browse and read emails.
    Anyone that still does more than text on a Mac really should reconsider their life choices.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    400
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked
    13 times in 12 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    I can't wait to see comments elsewhere from people saying that the Apple chips are faster than i9s... Of course the numbers are still interesting to see.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    2,385
    Thanks
    181
    Thanked
    304 times in 221 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Ah yes, a geekbench benchmark versus a thermally throttling i9, truly indicative of how far they've come!

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    231
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    8 times in 8 posts
    • globalwarning's system
      • CPU:
      • AMD 1090T
      • Memory:
      • RIP JAW DDR3 1600 4x4GB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Sapphire 7950 OC (Boost)
      • PSU:
      • Seasonic 750W
      • Case:
      • Old crap
      • Operating System:
      • Window 7 Ultimate 64bit
      • Monitor(s):
      • Hanns-G 281DPB

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Great... an ecosystem locked device is somewhat better than a gimped, overheating, under performing chip in a synthetic benchmark. I'm going to go back to windows and AMD, now.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    267
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked
    17 times in 15 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Geekbench really is just nonsense across platforms, isn't it?

  10. #10
    Registered+
    Join Date
    Nov 2020
    Posts
    25
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    1 time in 1 post

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Just makes you wonder how efficient these huge ARM cores will be. Intel struggled with atom to get a low powered competitive SOC going for the handheld market. I can imagine Apple will have the same issue upscaling their design to fit the need for high end. Might be fine for a reg MacBook.

  11. #11
    Moosing about! CAT-THE-FIFTH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Not here
    Posts
    31,889
    Thanks
    3,849
    Thanked
    5,144 times in 3,967 posts
    • CAT-THE-FIFTH's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Less E-PEEN
      • CPU:
      • Massive E-PEEN
      • Memory:
      • RGB E-PEEN
      • Storage:
      • Not in any order
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVEN BIGGER E-PEEN
      • PSU:
      • OVERSIZED
      • Case:
      • UNDERSIZED
      • Operating System:
      • DOS 6.22
      • Monitor(s):
      • NOT USUALLY ON....WHEN I POST
      • Internet:
      • FUNCTIONAL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Quote Originally Posted by protagonist View Post
    Just makes you wonder how efficient these huge ARM cores will be. Intel struggled with atom to get a low powered competitive SOC going for the handheld market. I can imagine Apple will have the same issue upscaling their design to fit the need for high end. Might be fine for a reg MacBook.
    I would like to see how many transistors are in each core compared to something like Zen3 for example.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    180
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked
    2 times in 2 posts
    • deepblue08's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Gigabyte Z170X Ultra Gaming
      • CPU:
      • i7 6700K @ 4.2 + Noctua D15
      • Memory:
      • Corsair Vengeance 4x8GB @ 3000mhz
      • Storage:
      • Samsung 950 PRO 256GB, Crucial MX500 1TB
      • Graphics card(s):
      • EVGA 1080Ti FTW3
      • PSU:
      • EVGA Supernova G2 850W
      • Case:
      • Corsair 750D
      • Operating System:
      • Win10 Pro
      • Internet:
      • DSL 50D/10U

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Excellent performance, but in a super specific test. My concern as a Software Dev, is its compatibility with various compilers, development environments, tools, etc... Something tells me I will have to stick with the Intel variant of Macbook Pro.

  13. #13
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,667
    Thanks
    744
    Thanked
    1,496 times in 1,261 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Quote Originally Posted by protagonist View Post
    Intel struggled with atom to get a low powered competitive SOC going for the handheld market. I can imagine Apple will have the same issue upscaling their design to fit the need for high end.
    TLDR: x86 is a mess that doesn't scale down; ARM is comparatively clean and has no theoretical barrier to scaling up.

    To be fair the later Atom cores are a fair bit better (as were the equivalent AMD Cat cores), the ones after Intel gave up on phones and tablets and generally labelled "Celeron". But that is partly because they aren't so scaled down as the early Atom chips. AMD64 is a really bad instruction set, which also drags the even worse 386 and the truly dire 286 modes behind it.

    The dreadful variable length CISC instruction set and ancient baggage is what stops x86 from scaling down. Even if you can manage with the energy requirement to decode those instructions, it takes more silicon and the low end market is *really* price sensitive and won't tolerate an extra square mm.

    ARM V8 is OTOH a more recent instruction set. You can't run all code from the original ARM chips, they don't even try. Throwing out the old baggage allows a cleaner approach aided by the fact that the starting point of ARM V1 is a heck of a lot better than starting from the 8086.

    We haven't seen a *really* fast ARM implementation yet, but it is very possible and seems to be now very much on the cards. ARM have just been talking about the A78C where they take the usual 4+4 big.LITTLE setup and make it 8 core big.big with maxed out L3 cache. Amazon have their 64 core Graviton server chips, and as that chip is now a year old I presume they will have a Graviton 3 with a more recent N2 core. For desktop/laptop style use we now have the V1 cores.

    https://www.anandtech.com/show/16073...neoverse-v1-n2

    I look forward to my ARM V1 based Raspberry Pi

  14. #14
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,667
    Thanks
    744
    Thanked
    1,496 times in 1,261 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Quote Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH View Post
    I would like to see how many transistors are in each core compared to something like Zen3 for example.
    I've not seen core estimates broken out, but you have to remember the A14 chips have a really big tensor co processor and pretty big GPU as well as all the camera DSPs etc in their transistor count that the likes of Zen 3 just doesn't have making comparison hard.

    If you want to do some back of the envelope really rough calculations, there are some numbers here you can multiply out: https://www.tomshardware.com/uk/news...ionic-revealed

    I would myself, but it's the weekend and I'm eager to finish Crysis 3. I've been playing through my backlog of never played Steam games bought on sale, and when I've finished Crysis it might be FO4 next. You wouldn't want to keep me from that

  15. #15
    Goron goron Kumagoro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    3,132
    Thanks
    37
    Thanked
    163 times in 136 posts

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    I have wondered before if it is possible to produce a pseudo x86 based cpu with some of the legacy instructions removed and still have a largely functional PC.

    If Windows and office work then that is 95% off people covered. I wonder what software out there uses instructions that are considered obsolete.

    Have Intel or AMD worked on something like that in the past?

  16. #16
    root Member DanceswithUnix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    In the middle of a core dump
    Posts
    12,667
    Thanks
    744
    Thanked
    1,496 times in 1,261 posts
    • DanceswithUnix's system
      • Motherboard:
      • Asus X470-PRO
      • CPU:
      • 3700X
      • Memory:
      • 32GB 3200MHz ECC
      • Storage:
      • 1TB Linux, 2TB Games (Win 10)
      • Graphics card(s):
      • Asus Strix RX Vega 56
      • PSU:
      • 650W Corsair TX
      • Case:
      • Antec 300
      • Operating System:
      • Fedora 35 + Win 10 Pro 64 (yuk)
      • Monitor(s):
      • Benq XL2730Z 1440p + Iiyama 27" 1440p
      • Internet:
      • Zen 80Mb/20Mb VDSL

    Re: Apple A14X benchmarks leak ahead of Apple Silicon Mac event

    Quote Originally Posted by Kumagoro View Post
    Have Intel or AMD worked on something like that in the past?
    I've heard unsubstantiated rumours, but nothing I believe and not for a long time (like a 386 that couldn't do 8086 mode).

    The thing is, it is the variable instruction length and available addressing modes that hurt you. The very CISC essence of x86/AMD64, not just the baggage.

    Any attempts to run old Windows software on modern hardware always fails for me, so I don't think it would be any practical loss, just not a real win either.

    VIA did do a RISC mode in their CPUs, some 7 byte fixed length thing that gave better access to the underlying uOPS for testing purposes.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •