Apple A17 Pro SoC single-core benchmark score close to the Intel i9-13900K and AMD 7950X

[Michael7]

Synthetics don't mean much. It's real use with software that matters to users and the big problem is that no matter how fast Apple's silicon is, it is limited by the iOS system and limited range of software.

 

[Rudyduu]

While Geekbench is far from the definitive word on performance, it does relate to real world performance. There is not a single example of a processor that scores high on Geekbench that does not also often perform well on numerous CPU intensive tasks.

And those mobile cores can do the same amount of work as desktop cores. Feel free to peruse Andrei Frumusanu’s and Dr. Ian Cutress’s articles on Anandtech from 2018 through 2021 to see detailed data.

In fact Apple uses the identical cores throughout their mobile and desktop product stack, usually clocking them 10 to 20 percent higher on their top desktops where they run cross-platform software at similar top speeds as Intel and AMD’s flagship CPUs.

The recognition of this means many sites will continue to do articles on Geekbench results. People who want to avoid the reality of what these cores can do don’t have to click on them.

A 20% increase in geekbench scores do not equal 20% performance gains or even close in software used to play games or to do work. Additionally a phone that scores the same as a PC will not be able to do the same amount of work as a PC is capable. A 10% improvement in Geek bench scores between two similar computers again don't equal that same amount of performance gains in real world performance.

What software on an iphone is the same exact software running on a Windows powered PC? How is there a valid comparison between Geekbench on IOS and Geekbench on Windows or Mac?

Your welcoming me to peruse articles written by two people over the course of 4 years without quoting any of them is just welcoming me to waste my time. If you couldn't be bothered to find them and quote them I'm not going to waste my time looking them up. The burden of proof is on the guy saying "no that's not true". If a phone can do as much work as geekbench says then why do we still had desktops? If this supposed power can't be used by the limited software and connectivity does it actually exist?

 

[Rudyduu]

The other thing that’s exciting is the new GPU with ray tracing, mesh shading and other features. It seems that Apple will focus its time and attention on the new GPU architecture and it’s adding hardware features found in RDNA3/Lovelace. It appears to me that Apple is laying the ground work for establishing Macintosh as a gaming platform. It’ll be interesting to see what the new GPU will be in M3 Max.

Like or dislike Apple, you have to agree that it is implementing some seriously cool technology, all aboard the 3 nanometer express.

Everytime I got excited about something Apple was doing I was always let down. If Apple ever gets serious about gaming it will be with piles of titles and not just a few and not on a tiny display.

 

[Burty117]

If a phone can do as much work as geekbench says why do we still had desktops?

Following that logic, why do we have Computers when Super Computers are even more powerful and can do even more work?

 

[adamada72]

And this would be useful for....What exactly?

Great points in your post. I've felt we're in peak tech for a few years now. I have an OLED TV from 2016 that's not as bright and probably doesn't have as true colors or frame rate as a 2023 version. I don't care, the 5% difference doesn't move the meter for me. It's amazing as is. Same with my desktop PC from 2 years ago, boots in under a minute plays everything, it's super fast. Upgrading it doesn't interest me anymore. I don't care if a game boots in 30 seconds in some future PC from the 60 seconds or so now. It just doesn't matter. Same with my phone, I don't do anything with it that it needs to really be any faster. More battery would be nice but that too is, meh. It runs all day. I just don't really care about what's in the future for most tech, it's great already. A robot that does the dishes, now that I'd be all in on.

 

[toooooot]

Everytime I got excited about something Apple was doing I was always let down. If Apple ever gets serious about gaming it will be with piles of titles and not just a few and not on a tiny display.

It would never compare to the amount of popular platforms such as PC or PS.
Casual, Apple's gaming service is certainly aiming for casual gaming offering some popular games, some created specifically for Apple.This is the future unless they spend a lot of money on bringing many more games to be work on IOS.
There is one aspect I am curious about. Why have they not done it earlier. Hardware limitation comes to mind as one thing.
But considering customer base, its huge size, they could offer their own steam like store. And people would gladly buy there.

 

[Rudyduu]

Following that logic, why do we have Computers when Super Computers are even more powerful and can do even more work?

You must have misread what I wrote: "as much work as geekbench says..." That's what I said. If geekbench scores for a mobile phone are close to that of a high-end PC then why are we using PCs? Either geekbench scores don't mean anything or mobile phones are more powerful than previous generation high-end computers (not at all likely to ever be true). I'll be more clear: the point I was making was that geekbench scores don't mean anything especially when comparing a mobile phone with a mobile phone OS to a desptop using a desktop OS, they aren't comparable at all.

 

[Burty117]

You must have misread what I wrote: "as much work as geekbench says..." That's what I said. If geekbench scores for a mobile phone are close to that of a high-end PC then why are we using PCs? Either geekbench scores don't mean anything or mobile phones are more powerful than previous generation high-end computers (not at all likely to ever be true). I'll be more clear: the point I was making was that geekbench scores don't mean anything especially when comparing a mobile phone with a mobile phone OS to a desptop using a desktop OS, they aren't comparable at all.

I think you're getting form factors and processing power mixed up.
Just because a Phone has as much processing power as a PC, doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job.

The form factor of a mobile is useless for Excel spreadsheets for example.

But since the phone has the power to run modern games and output to a TV, it's much easier to plug your phone into the TV, Bluetooth a controller and play a game, while a PC you'll need to lug the thing over to your TV.

 

[Rudyduu]

I think you're getting form factors and processing power mixed up.
Just because a Phone has as much processing power as a PC, doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job.

The form factor of a mobile is useless for Excel spreadsheets for example.

But since the phone has the power to run modern games and output to a TV, it's much easier to plug your phone into the TV, Bluetooth a controller and play a game, while a PC you'll need to lug the thing over to your TV.

"Just because a Phone has as much processing power as a PC" I never said that. I said geekbench was saying it.

I also wrote: I'll be more clear: "the point I was making was that geekbench scores don't mean anything especially when comparing a mobile phone with a mobile phone OS to a desptop using a desktop OS, they aren't comparable at all."

 

[Burty117]

"Just because a Phone has as much processing power as a PC" I never said that. I said geekbench was saying it.

I also wrote: I'll be more clear: "the point I was making was that geekbench scores don't mean anything especially when comparing a mobile phone with a mobile phone OS to a desptop using a desktop OS, they aren't comparable at all."

So your only point is that Geekbench is pointless? And particularly pointless when comparing the results to different form factors?
Ok?

I assume you have a particular hatred for Geekbench? Hey you do you man, I see a lot of people hate Geekbench, I'll join the "hate Geekbench" brigade as well! I don't care

 

[Rudyduu]

So your only point is that Geekbench is pointless? And particularly pointless when comparing the results to different form factors?
Ok?

I assume you have a particular hatred for Geekbench? Hey you do you man, I see a lot of people hate Geekbench, I'll join the "hate Geekbench" brigade as well! I don't care

Well this is what you get for assuming. Don't confuse objectivity with hate. It's just a software product some people use, it didn't kick my dog or insult my mother.

My only point? As if it's a minor point. No software anyone actually uses for work or for gaming reflects the performance shown in Geekbench even between similar systems with slightly different hardware.

The issue is people building hype based on flawed benchmarks and people making purchasing decisions then being disappointed the improvements shown in Geekbench don't show up on their new shiny device.

"Ok?" It's all explained in my first two posts and again just now.

 

[damian5000]

I'm confused by the frequency comments. Either the A17 is doing 90% of the same work at ~60% of the frequency, in which case the lower frequency is probably a feature (efficiency) not a bug; or the 90% part only holds if you artificially limit the other CPUs to A17's much lower frequency (in which case it is a very misleading comparison.)

Which is it?

Very confused also, this is an incredible achievement but written as if its a negative.

 

[damian5000]

I think you're getting form factors and processing power mixed up.
Just because a Phone has as much processing power as a PC, doesn't mean it's the right tool for the job.

The form factor of a mobile is useless for Excel spreadsheets for example.

But since the phone has the power to run modern games and output to a TV, it's much easier to plug your phone into the TV, Bluetooth a controller and play a game, while a PC you'll need to lug the thing over to your TV.

Which is why it would work fine for doing spreadsheets also. Not sure about Apple but Samsung has DeX which turns it into a multitasking desktop like environment.

 

[The Hardcard]

A 20% increase in geekbench scores do not equal 20% performance gains or even close in software used to play games or to do work. Additionally a phone that scores the same as a PC will not be able to do the same amount of work as a PC is capable. A 10% improvement in Geek bench scores between two similar computers again don't equal that same amount of performance gains in real world performance.

What software on an iphone is the same exact software running on a Windows powered PC? How is there a valid comparison between Geekbench on IOS and Geekbench on Windows or Mac?

Your welcoming me to peruse articles written by two people over the course of 4 years without quoting any of them is just welcoming me to waste my time. If you couldn't be bothered to find them and quote them I'm not going to waste my time looking them up. The burden of proof is on the guy saying "no that's not true". If a phone can do as much work as geekbench says then why do we still had desktops? If this supposed power can't be used by the limited software and connectivity does it actually exist?

No, the burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim. I obverse first that you have no backup - not a single example and called you out on that. And here, another post with bubkis.

There is documentation to the contrary and I figured you would want to learn facts about things you choose to speak on, but knowledge doesn’t seem to appeal to you. I don’t care if you want to remain ignorant, but if you refuse to get easily available information, then you are wasting my time.

 

[kiwigraeme]

No, the burden of proof is on the person who makes a claim. I obverse first that you have no backup - not a single example and called you out on that. And here, another post with bubkis.

There is documentation to the contrary and I figured you would want to learn facts about things you choose to speak on, but knowledge doesn’t seem to appeal to you. I don’t care if you want to remain ignorant, but if you refuse to get easily available information, then you are wasting my time.

Where is your proof you allude to - Benchmarks are always to be taken with a grain of salt .
The company Apple can be highly selective - we really have no idea how tested - their tests would be rejected in a science paper - as not transparent

Subsequently we have proof - it's a sham the A17 pro is not a AAA gaming device of note - massive throttling - still waiting battery feedback

You believed it - few others here do - because we have real world knowledge

Add in your phone is not really some great work environment
I could be grinding out a heavy AV1 encode now why writing this , doing lots of other things on my PC - ie real world - I don't lose general functioning = I could play a game and do encoding at same time - no overheating , not many issues of note

Are we to believe Intel's new CPUs gaming speed from even more specific applications - real games ? - no it is just as indicator - they chose the games - some not standard

The A17 pro - great SOC - but it ain't changing nothing in the real world - only *****s would buy it mainly for AAA gaming - but as a Vlogger device - it was already great and now probably better - and I hate Apple

Intel kept showing better benchmarks last decade - most of us thought our I5 2500K etc were just going real fine - as waiting for a game changer - to justify spend

A17 pro is not a game changer - from A16 pro in real world