• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Apple A13: Launch 2019-09-10 - Geekbench 4 & 5 scores available (GB4 multi-core 14070)

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,166
1,171
136
Well, the golden handcuffs of x86 compatibility (large software base), probably means not for a while - if ever.
The Mac line is pretty small compared to the iPhone market, so it may never be worth the effort.
Maybe Apple could literally throw in a basic x86 core for some low-performance software compatibility? Would they need to pay a license for the architecture? I recall hearing that AMD and Intel have a patent sharing agreement, but maybe Apple / ARM has a similar agreement with Intel / AMD?
 

Ajay

Diamond Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,109
2,385
136
Maybe Apple could literally throw in a basic x86 core for some low-performance software compatibility? Would they need to pay a license for the architecture? I recall hearing that AMD and Intel have a patent sharing agreement, but maybe Apple / ARM has a similar agreement with Intel / AMD?
Nothing I've read indicated that Intel has licensed x86 to Apple and I don't see them doing so. AMD is much more limited in it's ability to license much of any x86 technology that it shares with Intel. Intel had the most leverage when the last cross patent license agreement was made. *not a patent attorney* - lol!
 

Thala

Senior member
Nov 12, 2014
999
328
136
Maybe Apple could literally throw in a basic x86 core for some low-performance software compatibility? Would they need to pay a license for the architecture? I recall hearing that AMD and Intel have a patent sharing agreement, but maybe Apple / ARM has a similar agreement with Intel / AMD?
Whats the point? For low-performance software compatibility you can just use emulation. This has been done with every architecture transition before.
Besides with emulation you can use all cores available and even share cores between emulated and native code.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
22,776
329
126
Anand weighs in

So, how does a phone company illustrate these technical gains in a way that resonates with customers? The chip-speak doesn't matter. What matters is having the best camera, the fastest phone, and—oh yes—the biggest battery. The longer we get to use Instagram, Facebook, or YouTube, the more willing we’ll be to spend money on these premium phones. Apple’s new iPhone 11 Pro and iPhone 11 Pro Max check the battery box. The phones will enjoy an additional four and five hours of battery life, respectively. How do they do that?

The answer to that question clearly illustrates the inherent advantage of Apple owning the whole stack. To learn about how that vertical integration manifests itself in a chip like the A13 Bionic, I sat down with Schiller and Anand Shimpi, who in a past life was an influential semiconductor- and systems-focused journalist who founded the website AnandTech. Shimpi is now part of Apple’s Platform Architecture team.


---

"We talk about performance a lot publicly,” Shimpi says, “but the reality is, we view it as performance per watt. We look at it as energy efficiency, and if you build an efficient design, you also happen to build a performance design."

Shimpi and Schiller both were forceful about this maniacal focus on power efficiency and performance. For instance, the CPU team will study how applications are being used on iOS, and then use the data to optimize future CPU designs. That way, when the next version of the device comes out, it will be better at doing the things that most people do on their iPhones.

"For applications that don't need the additional performance, you can run at the performance of last year's and just do it at a much lower power," Shimpi says.

This strategy isn’t just for CPUs. The same performance-per-watt rules apply to machine learning functions and graphics processing. For example, if a developer working on the iPhone's camera software sees a lot of utilization of the GPU, then she can work with a GPU architect to figure out a better way of doing things. This leads to a more efficient design for future graphics chips.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ajay

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
22,776
329
126
Memory is SK Hynix H9HKNNNCRMMVDR-NEH, which means it is 4 GB (as we knew already) LPDDR4X running at 4266 MHz.
 

name99

Senior member
Sep 11, 2010
216
207
116
Memory is SK Hynix H9HKNNNCRMMVDR-NEH, which means it is 4 GB (as we knew already) LPDDR4X running at 4266 MHz.
I expect the SoC can handle LPDDR5, and it's lack of availability of LPDDR5 in the volume Apple needs that's preventing them from moving up.

It will be interesting to see if new iPad Pros are released, and if they move to LPDDR5. There's so little pattern to iPad releases that, even though I think every release so far has used the same type of RAM as the matching iPhone, breaking that shouldn't surprise anyone.
 

dmens

Golden Member
Mar 18, 2005
1,948
240
106
It would be silly to assume that Intel/AMD couldn't do this if they built their own custom mainboard, memory subsystem, etc. and basically threw multi-core performance out the window.
LOL, I can think of plenty of reasons why they cannot.
 
Last edited:

escrow4

Diamond Member
Feb 4, 2013
3,332
113
106
Bought an XR 6 months ago and consequently went all in with Apple tech; having everything in-house is certainly a big benefit. 20% faster than stupid fast is still certainly something though.
 

jpiniero

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2010
7,955
1,216
126
In GB5, the Pro and Pro Max have a slightly higher average score in MT versus the 11 (3329/3325 vs 3197).
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
22,776
329
126
In GB5, the Pro and Pro Max have a slightly higher average score in MT versus the 11 (3329/3325 vs 3197).
That's likely not a significant difference, since there are a few more anomalously low scores for MT for the 11 non-Pro. However, if you look at peak scores, they are similar.
 

the2199

Junior Member
Oct 17, 2019
13
3
11
apple a13 and a12 are the fastest arm cpu in the world is they are about 30% to 50% faster than the pinned 855 there is no denying that .but having the fastest hardware means nothing. if you don't have the software that fully utilizes the hardware. and I am not talking about optimization because ios is optimized it is like giving someone r9 3900x and rtx 2080ti but the machine is running windows 10 S and it can not be changed and most average iphone users install facebook and Instagram and play candy crush. and I really really doubt that these three apps are really benefitting from running on the fastest arm cpu in the world
 

Ichinisan

Lifer
Oct 9, 2002
28,166
1,171
136
apple a13 and a12 are the fastest arm cpu in the world is they are about 30% to 50% faster than the pinned 855 there is no denying that .but having the fastest hardware means nothing. if you don't have the software that fully utilizes the hardware. and I am not talking about optimization because ios is optimized it is like giving someone r9 3900x and rtx 2080ti but the machine is running windows 10 S and it can not be changed and most average iphone users install facebook and Instagram and play candy crush. and I really really doubt that these three apps are really benefitting from running on the fastest arm cpu in the world
What are you getting at? Apple engineers shouldn't make fast / efficient processors because grandma plays Candy Crush?
 

the2199

Junior Member
Oct 17, 2019
13
3
11
What are you getting at? Apple engineers shouldn't make fast / efficient processors because grandma plays Candy Crush
that is not what I meant. my point is good hardware worth nothing if your software can not utilize it. the same situation is with RTX. RTX worth nothing now because of only about 6 or 7 games support it
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY