Benchmarks Show iPhone 5's A6 is Twice as Fast as A5 Chip

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
So your telling me Apple is releasing something brand new that fails to beat the current top Android smart phone in performance?

I though apple usually released new devices that stomped the Android competition in performance and then Android spent the next 6 months catching up and then passing apple?
 
Given that a test of Apple's iPhone 4S users showed that at least some of them thought that an older iPhone 4 was faster than the 4S that they owned, this apparent leap in hardware performance (assuming that it is true) may be lost on deaf ears. Hopefully, the average iPhone customer isn't as stupid as those from that test.
 
Pretty sure ARMv7 is the instruction set not the processor generation. I am fairly certain that the a8, a9, and the a15 uses ARMv7 instructions. And its impossible to make one A9 twice as fast as another at the same clock unless one is totally and utterly crippled. I am 99% certain this is an a15 cpu in the apple a6.
 
why does this surprise people?
apple does not equals performance.
look at the mac pro desktop computers. ATI 5870 is top of the line GPU for $200 additional option

LTE. Android phones supporting this eons ago.
I remember apple big thing was the 4S is just as fast as LTE during their last keynote. What happens? why upgrade to LTE this time?
Funny apple iphone5 is not even 720p.

3 years to make that ugly earphones. Serious music lovers throws away any cheap stock earphones and buy a set of shure or seinhenser
 
"The A6's score of 1608 matches that of the Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300, and ahead of the Intel Celeron 570, the AMD Opteron 148, the AMD Athlon 64 3500+, and the Intel Pentium SU4100"

What... Total... BS!

ARM cores sport about 0.x-2.0MIPS per clock cycle. The core2 duo pumps out ~4-5 MIPS per clock cycle, per core. Don't even get me started on FLOPS per cycle.... an ARM CPU puts out the FLOPS performance of around a 1995 pentium pro, were talking around a few hundred MFLOPS at about 1ghz IF THAT! A Core2 Duo at 3.3Ghz pumps out around 24-25 "G"FLOPS.

Where the hell does "geek bench" gets its numbers from? The numbers fairy?
 
[citation][nom]cknobman[/nom]So your telling me Apple is releasing something brand new that fails to beat the current top Android smart phone in performance?I though apple usually released new devices that stomped the Android competition in performance and then Android spent the next 6 months catching up and then passing apple?[/citation]
That's how myths get busted...
 
[citation][nom]crbrady[/nom]Pretty sure ARMv7 is the instruction set not the processor generation. I am fairly certain that the a8, a9, and the a15 uses ARMv7 instructions. And its impossible to make one A9 twice as fast as another at the same clock unless one is totally and utterly crippled. I am 99% certain this is an a15 cpu in the apple a6.[/citation]
This is what anandtech has to say: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6292/iphone-5-a6-not-a15-custom-core

[citation][nom]justposting18[/nom]"The A6's score of 1608 matches that of the Intel Core 2 Duo SU7300, and ahead of the Intel Celeron 570, the AMD Opteron 148, the AMD Athlon 64 3500+, and the Intel Pentium SU4100"What... Total... BS!ARM cores sport about 0.x-2.0MIPS per clock cycle. The core2 duo pumps out ~4-5 MIPS per clock cycle, per core. Don't even get me started on FLOPS per cycle.... an ARM CPU puts out the FLOPS performance of around a 1995 pentium pro, were talking around a few hundred MFLOPS at about 1ghz IF THAT! A Core2 Duo at 3.3Ghz pumps out around 24-25 "G"FLOPS. Where the hell does "geek bench" gets its numbers from? The numbers fairy?[/citation]
Well that's a 10w, 1.3 GHz Core 2 CPU.

Anyway, AnandTech's interpretation, which is more in depth (haven't read it through fully though) is here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6298/analyzing-iphone5-geekbench-results
 
Us iSheep don't care about such things as benchmarks. We care about the reflectivity of the Apple logo on the rear. That being said, I'd like to see if the iPhone 5's logo is more reflective than the iPhone 4/4s'. People need to be able to see that I have an Apple product from as great a distance as possible. We also care about how much we're overcharged for build materials. That being said, I guess we can settle for a mostly alumiinum backing as opposed to all glass...just make sure other people can see the logo on my phone...okay?
 
All that does not matter.... is good for sheeps... in whatever form and with whatever performance.
You really think they will use it more than their brain ~5% !?!
 
[citation][nom]_Cosmin_[/nom]All that does not matter.... is good for sheeps... in whatever form and with whatever performance.You really think they will use it more than their brain ~5% !?![/citation] No, we iSheep sometimes use our brains...just enough to earn the money for the next Apple toy we're gonna buy. And?
 
[citation][nom]crbrady[/nom]Pretty sure ARMv7 is the instruction set not the processor generation. I am fairly certain that the a8, a9, and the a15 uses ARMv7 instructions. And its impossible to make one A9 twice as fast as another at the same clock unless one is totally and utterly crippled. I am 99% certain this is an a15 cpu in the apple a6.[/citation]

[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]This is what anandtech has to say: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6292 [...] ustom-coreWell that's a 10w, 1.3 GHz Core 2 CPU.Anyway, AnandTech's interpretation, which is more in depth (haven't read it through fully though) is here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/6298 [...] ch-results[/citation]

Thanks for that, ojas. This is something that I did not expect Apple to do, but it's not a huge surprise IMO. Honestly, I think that they did a good job on this apparently custom design (although as I said earlier, most iPhone buyers probably won't make use of that performance unless new software such as good games or something liek that are made that can really use it). Does it beat the best ARM CPUs used in any Android phone in performance per core per MHz? I'll have to do some searching :/
 
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/popular

If we look here, there are Galaxy S3 results with scores over 1900 and over 2050 and that's without overclocking. Does anyone know what causes this discrepancy between all of these Galaxy S3 scores? Also, is this highly threaded performance or lightly threaded performance? If it's highly threaded performance, then although it'd possibly be better for heavy multi-tasking, then the iPhone 5 might have an advantage in single/dual threaded performance if it is only using a dual-core CPU.
 
All the Android fanboi ranting aside.

I think it's amazing that all these smart phones match or slightly beat an Intel Core 2 duo's performance. Talk about the pace of processing power... All in a device that lasts hours.

P.S. Apple's iOS performance on my iPhone 4 is much smoother than Jellybean on my Nexus 7... While I love my Nexus 7 and Project butter made a huge difference but performance isn't all benchmarks, it's how well you use all the CPU. And for all us iSheep having an OS that moves smoothly is important.

xoxo

From my Nexus 7
 
[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]All the Android fanboi ranting aside.I think it's amazing that all these smart phones match or slightly beat an Intel Core 2 duo's performance. Talk about the pace of processing power... All in a device that lasts hours.P.S. Apple's iOS performance on my iPhone 4 is much smoother than Jellybean on my Nexus 7... While I love my Nexus 7 and Project butter made a huge difference but performance isn't all benchmarks, it's how well you use all the CPU. And for all us iSheep having an OS that moves smoothly is important. xoxoFrom my Nexus 7[/citation]

The Core 2 Duo SU7300 is a 10W, 1.3GHz model. Even an FX-4100 has more than double the integer performance per core.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]The Core 2 Duo SU7300 is a 10W, 1.3GHz model. Even an FX-4100 has more than double the integer performance per core.[/citation]
Yeah an add to that, Anand Lal Shimpi mentions that GB isn't good for cross platform comparisons, so i'm not sure if it's a good idea to compare them at all.
 
"sundragon:
I think it's amazing that all these smart phones match or slightly beat an Intel Core 2 duo's performance. Talk about the pace of processing power... All in a device that lasts hours."

They do not match, or beat the slowest Core 2's out there. Read my reply above. They match the floating point performance of a standard PC from the mid-90's thou.... Integer performance is around the speed of a later model Pentium III, or below. Not really a great improvement.
 
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Yeah an add to that, Anand Lal Shimpi mentions that GB isn't good for cross platform comparisons, so i'm not sure if it's a good idea to compare them at all.[/citation]

That's a good point, I didn't realize it wasn't a good cross platform benchmark.

 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]The Core 2 Duo SU7300 is a 10W, 1.3GHz model. Even an FX-4100 has more than double the integer performance per core.[/citation]

The point is not to compare a SU7300 to a FX-4100, but to compare it to CPU in your phone that uses mW instead of W and can work for hours on a small LI battery.

PIII may not be super powerful, but if you look at the trend it's a large improvement in Processing/W just a few years.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom