While some argue this feature isn’t too exciting yet, Apple has still taken what was once its most ridiculed characteristic (the notch) and made it into an intensely useful feature. The latest professional-grade flagship offers a 48MP main camera and a 120Hz always-on display. Instead, they’re looking at the new features. Let’s face it, not many people are buying the iPhone 14 Pro and Pro Max for the name of its SoC. However, this might be an instance in which the Cupertino-based tech giant should have focused just a tad bit more on other differences. To encourage people to buy the latest and greatest, Apple needs to indicate there’s a significant generational difference between devices. Should Apple Have Called Its A16 Bionic Chip the A15+ Instead? With that in mind, we can see that the benchmark scores do, in a sense, tell at least most of the story when comparing the A15 and A16 Bionic chips. In fact, the iPhone 14 consumer models have those exact same features. With the iPhone 14 Pro family, we get some amazing new features that are certainly welcome: Action Mode, Photonic Engine and 4K Cinematic mode.īut wait, these aren’t part of the A16 Bionic. In that sense, we look at whether the A16 truly capitalizes on a particular feature customers will enjoy the most. Instead, smartphone manufacturers focus on specific areas, such as battery life or display performance, that they believe customers will enjoy the most. Brownlee explains that he barely even pays attention to benchmark scores anymore. In fact, he points out that manufacturers in general have come to a point where they aren’t making significant improvements to performance overall. Do Benchmarks Tell the Whole Story?Īccording to YouTuber Marques Brownlee, these numbers don’t tell the whole story. These details, taken with the minuscule increase of just 1 billion transistors between the A15 and A16 chips, seems to suggest a much less significant difference between the two generations of Apple’s Bionic SoCs. The difference, as you can see from the graphic below, was slightly better between the A13 and the A14 chips. When Apple iterated from the A14 Bionic to the A15, the improvement was more substantial: 17.81%. Looking at Geekbench multicore scores, the A16 only sees an 11.76% increase over the A15. Looking back, we can see the difference between the A15 and A16 is significantly smaller than previous generational comparisons. Much Less Significant Difference Than Previous Successors ![]() Any performance improvements, he says, is likely because of increased clock speeds on the same chips. The architecture of both the CPU and Neural Engine, Cross adds, appear to be identical or nearly identical. Apple increased the transistor count, but only barely - from 15 billion to 16 billion. Yes, it has a fabrication process dubbed “N4,” but the semiconductor manufacturer calls it just “an enhanced version of N5 technology.”Ĭross points out, both the A15 and A16 have the same number of CPU, GPU and Neural Engine cores. However, as Macworld’s Jason Cross points out, TSMC doesn’t really advertise a 4nm process. Don’t you think so? Or it would be better to say that they have mixed up iPhone 6 and iPad Air 2 hardware, and brought iPad Mini 4.In fact, Apple touts the A16 chip as using TSMC’s 4nm fabrication process. So Apple has not really used iPad Air 2 hardware, but iPhone 6. It was already known to us that iPad Mini 4 features Apple A8 chipset, but yes, it is not triple core as we guessed. iPad Air 2 went too far leaving Mini 4 behind, and having the same triple-core chip would’ve made iPad Mini 4 score almost the same. What made us believe that iPad Mini 4 usage a dual-core processor is the multi-core performance score of iPad Air 2. So iPad Mini 4 scored little more in Multi-core test compared to iPhone 6. iPhone 6 features the same Apple A8 chip, but clocked at 1.4 GHz, and this is why it scored lower than iPad Air 2 and Mini 4.Īs we said, iPhone 6 has the same chip as iPad Mini 4, but the later one has little more power (1.5 GHz). Single core performance of iPad Mini 4 is slightly low compared to iPad Air 2, because they both feature 1.5 GHz processor. iPad Mini 4 Geekbench 3 Benchmark Single-core Performance However, it is far behind from iPad Air 2 multi-core benchmark score, and this because Apple A8 chip has been used rather than A8X. It features a 1.5 GHz Processor and 2GB RAM.Īpple said in conference that they have used iPad Air 2 hardware and packed it in smaller tablet. It was spotted on Geekbench 3 with model iPad 5,2. IPad Mini 4 Geekbench 3 benchmark score revealed many things about the device.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |