iPhone 6s Benchmark Thread

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Web based benchmarks do not seem that indicative of overall CPU performance anymore, at least cross-compared across OSes.

While the CPU is certainly faster than before, we can't say how much of that is due to the highly, highly optimized browser and specific optimizations targeted to the common web benchmarks.

You have to give it to Apple though, their latest browser is untouchably well optimized at least for these benchmarks.

Great post. The differences between iOS 8 and 9 are substantial but the CPU performance in iPhone 6/6 Plus is more or less the same.

77650.png

77651.png

77652.png


Software optimizations and integration with Apple's hardware on the mobile side make massive differences.
77661.png


It makes it almost pointless to compare mobile SoCs to Intel/AMD CPUs. Besides, even if Apple's SoC was 1000X faster than an i7 5960X + Quad-GTX980Ti SLI, would you use an iPhone 6S for office productivity or serious 3D gaming?

I have played with iPhone 5, 5S, 6 (soon 6S) and my experience for my smartphone needs is the first 3 phones are all fast enough. I guess I just don't care enough about SoC speed in real world usage? :D Not trying to downplay the performances increases in the iPhone 6S but it's not as if iPhone 5S or 6 are slow phones. To me personally the upgrade to 2GB of RAM matters a LOT more than CPU performance up to 70% faster and GPU performance up to 90% faster.

Eventually, ARM could become a serious threat to Intel's CPUs though in the next 5-10 years if this level of IPC/performance improvements continues. I can see Apple putting an A15X chip into their $1300 Macbook. Intel is not going to be happy.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,583
996
126
I have played with iPhone 5, 5S, 6 (soon 6S) and my experience for my smartphone needs is the first 3 phones are all fast enough. I guess I just don't care enough about SoC speed in real world usage? :D Not trying to downplay the performances increases in the iPhone 6S but it's not as if iPhone 5S or 6 are slow phones. To me personally the upgrade to 2GB of RAM matters a LOT more than CPU performance up to 70% faster and GPU performance up to 90% faster.

Well, here is a differentiator:

In this thread I was going through the process of determining what might be a reasonable way for Apple to improve the video quality of Live Photos, but without making the files huge (vs regular jpg files), while at the same time still maintaining backwards compatibility for older Macs, iPhones, and iPads.

I came to the conclusion that the way to do this would be to switch from the current 720p 12 fps h.264 files to 1080p 24 fps h.265 files. File sizes would increase, but not unreasonably so, and recent iDevices would still be able to play them.

We think we know that the iPhone 6 (and iPad Air 2) and above have hardware h.265 support, but what about playback on the iPhone 5s (and iPad Air)? Well, I downloaded Sintel 1080p and Tears of Steel 1080p from this site:

http://www.divx.com/en/hevc-showcase

These two 1080p 24 fps HEVC h.265 files play perfectly on the iPhone 5s in nPlayer, despite playing completely in software. I haven't tested it on the iPhone 5 yet, but I'm 95% sure these won't work properly on the iPhone 5/5c (and iPad 4). These two files also play fine on my Core 2 Duo 2.26 GHz MacBook Pro too, again entirely in software.

In contrast, a higher bit rate 60 fps clip would not work properly on either the iPhone 5s or the MacBook Pro.

So if Apple were to go to h.265 for Live Photos next year, or perhaps in 2017, the iPhone 5 likely wouldn't be able to cut it. At that point, Apple could just drop iOS support for the iPhone 5 completely.
 
Last edited:

Deders

Platinum Member
Oct 14, 2012
2,401
1
91
How come there is no record of any A9 benchmarks on the geekbench result browser?
 

thunng8

Member
Jan 8, 2013
152
61
101
Eventually, ARM could become a serious threat to Intel's CPUs though in the next 5-10 years if this level of IPC/performance improvements continues. I can see Apple putting an A15X chip into their $1300 Macbook. Intel is not going to be happy.

A15X? Doubt it will be that far off. If Apple keeps its trajectory (that's a big if), it will be faster than Intel with A10X.

Already - A9X is likely to be competitive with Skylake Core M in single thread and higher is multithread CPU performance if they keep the 3 core configuration. The A9X will be a lot faster than the skylake Core M in GPU performance.

My rough estimates for Geekbench 3.3 single thread

A8 -> A9 = 1.7x (Apple claims)
A8X -> A9X = 1.8x

A8X/A8 => 1808/1608=1.124

Therefore A9X => 2489*1.124*1.8/1.7=2960

Let's see if that's accurate in a bit over a months time :)
 
Last edited:

davygee

Junior Member
Oct 22, 2014
21
0
6
A15X? Doubt it will be that far off. If Apple keeps its trajectory (that's a big if), it will be faster than Intel with A10X.

Already - A9X is likely to be competitive with Skylake Core M in single thread and higher is multithread CPU performance if they keep the 3 core configuration. The A9X will be a lot faster than the skylake Core M in GPU performance.

My rough estimates for Geekbench 3.3 single thread

A8 -> A9 = 1.7x (Apple claims)
A8X -> A9X = 1.8x

A8X/A8 => 1808/1608=1.124

Therefore A9X => 2489*1.124*1.8/1.7=2960

Let's see if that's accurate in a bit over a months time :)

The only thing holding back Apple using their A-chip range in MacBooks is ARM at the moment. Once they have a solution to OSX on ARM, then their chips won't hold them back.

I agree that the A9X will perform better in both CPU and GPU than the new Core M Skylake and at a fraction of the cost. Although we aren't sure whether the A9X will be 3 or 4 cores, but they will have the option of a quad-core next year with the A10X and by then we should be seeing a significant difference.

What's next for Intel Core M after Skylake and when is it expected? Well just checked and Cannonlake has been delayed to the 2nd half of 2017, so they have gap-filled with Kabylake, although it's not expected to increase performance considerably. By that stage, Apple could be on 6 or 8 cores with the A11X.
 
Last edited:

ancientarcher

Member
Sep 30, 2013
39
1
66
The only thing holding back Apple using their A-chip range in MacBooks is ARM at the moment. Once they have a solution to OSX on ARM, then their chips won't hold them back.


What's next for Intel Core M after Skylake and when is it expected? Well just checked and Cannonlake has been delayed to the 2nd half of 2017, so they have gap-filled with Kabylake, although it's not expected to increase performance considerably. By that stage, Apple could be on 6 or 8 cores with the A11X.

More than the number of cores, it will be the increase in IPC that Apple brings to the table that has more potential to hurt Intel. Given what A9 can do on a power budget of 2-3W, imagine what they can do right now if the chip can accommodate a power budget of say 10W. It will be more than enough for Macbook pros. Right now. With this level of foundry technology offered by TSMC and Samsung.

You don't need to wait for A15X or A10X. If Apple wanted to (and were able to port their programs to ARM from x86) they can move right now.

And to those who are saying Intel has a special price for Apple, I have news for you! The A series chips will cost Apple $25-35, 10% of Intel's listed price for their M-series chips. I am sure Intel offers Apple special prices, but not 90% discounts!!!

Kick the monopoly supplier out, lower the costs, get higher marketshare, get complete control over your hardware. Thats the way to go Apple. Do it already..
 

Face2Face

Diamond Member
Jun 6, 2001
4,100
215
106
Hopefully the the performance of these new Apple SoCs cause Intel to step it up. Would be nice to have a A9 comparable that was X86 and could run full Windows... Not sure if Broxton will be able to keep up with the A10.
 

stingerman

Member
Feb 8, 2005
100
11
76
Not sure, but there is a slight chance that the next processor will be at 10NM node but either way, the next generation of 14/16NM chip should bump up the IPC further. Maybe like what occurred between A7 and A8. A 20 to 30% IPC bump along with 2GHz+ clock should provide another major leap.
 

dark zero

Platinum Member
Jun 2, 2015
2,655
138
106
Kill me, but the story is repeating... Apple is strong enough to move their hardware to ARM and to make it better is the same story like Power PC and Intel... Only that Intel is now the one who will be kicked out.

The only downside is that they don't have a strong home made GPU... Maybe time to buy AMD GPU division?
 

witeken

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2013
3,899
193
106
Not sure, but there is a slight chance that the next processor will be at 10NM node but either way, the next generation of 14/16NM chip should bump up the IPC further. Maybe like what occurred between A7 and A8. A 20 to 30% IPC bump along with 2GHz+ clock should provide another major leap.

Yeah of course, Apple doesn't have to obey the laws of physics..
 

stingerman

Member
Feb 8, 2005
100
11
76
Yeah of course, Apple doesn't have to obey the laws of physics..

Kill me, but the story is repeating... Apple is strong enough to move their hardware to ARM and to make it better is the same story like Power PC and Intel... Only that Intel is now the one who will be kicked out.

The only downside is that they don't have a strong home made GPU... Maybe time to buy AMD GPU division?

I don't think it's as big a deal. Apple could simply release both ARM and x86 Architecture products until x86 starts selling so low that they end of life it. The iPad Pro I think is the beginning of a multi-year transition. I'd like them to release a full blown headless iOS desktops that would be in the same category as the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro.

If Microsoft, Adobe, Avid, etc doesn't port their key software over, another developer will enjoy the market they ignore. A big move would be Xcode on iOS...
 

davygee

Junior Member
Oct 22, 2014
21
0
6
I don't think it's as big a deal. Apple could simply release both ARM and x86 Architecture products until x86 starts selling so low that they end of life it. The iPad Pro I think is the beginning of a multi-year transition. I'd like them to release a full blown headless iOS desktops that would be in the same category as the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro.

If Microsoft, Adobe, Avid, etc doesn't port their key software over, another developer will enjoy the market they ignore. A big move would be Xcode on iOS...

It does seem, with the release of the iPad Pro, we will start seeing an attempt at proper productivity tools on iOS and a proper alternative to an OSX device.

Maybe I'm thinking the wrong way, and we don't actually need an ARM version of OSX, but a better more productive version of iOS that allows for additional input methods over touch (ie. mouse & keyboard). We are starting to see key attempts by Microsoft and Adobe with iOS versions of software, and I see no reason why Adobe couldn't get a full-blown version of both Photoshop & Illustrator to work on the iPad Pro. Look at Affinity. They have released a comparable version of Photoshop & Illustrator for Mac (called Photo & Designer), and they already have a full version of Designer working in-house on an iPad Air 2. They have stated that they will be announcing apps for the iPad soon. And seeing as they are both £40 a piece, they are significantly cheaper than Adobe's mainstays.

There will always be a want for a laptop style device, but my personal preference would be an iPad Pro like device. One that allows for for touch ability on the move and can be docked with a keyboard and mouse to provide a desktop experience.

I agree that Apple may very well just start pushing their custom ARM chips in the lower-end devices ie. MacBook Air, and 12" MacBook, yet still provide the powerhouse i7-based MacBook Pro's for a few years yet until ARM-based software catches up...but on a personal level, I see no hardware reason why their custom chips can't scale to provide comparable power to what Intel provide at the moment.
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,118
58
91
Not sure, but there is a slight chance that the next processor will be at 10NM node but either way, the next generation of 14/16NM chip should bump up the IPC further. Maybe like what occurred between A7 and A8. A 20 to 30% IPC bump along with 2GHz+ clock should provide another major leap.

If by "next processor" you mean the A10, then no, it will not be 10nm. A10 is 100% 16FF+.
 

stingerman

Member
Feb 8, 2005
100
11
76
If by "next processor" you mean the A10, then no, it will not be 10nm. A10 is 100% 16FF+.

TSMC plans 10nm in full production early 2016. But, with Apple's money, who knows if they can accelerate it.

FF+ with a further refined microArchitecture, and better yields allowing higher clocks, A10 should be nice.
 

stingerman

Member
Feb 8, 2005
100
11
76
Another point that should be taken into consideration, is every processor Apple buys from Intel is indirectly funding R&D and fixed costs that help Apple's Mac competitors. Since Apple has a disproportionate large percentage of the high end notebook market, Apple stands to benefit strategically as well by embracing their own processors. iOS is only a heartbeat difference from OS X...
 
Apr 30, 2015
131
10
81
ARM and partners put the 2020 laptop market at 250 million units per year; I cannot see Apple ignoring this opportunity; I think that they will want to cream off the top of the market, where the biggest profits are, leaving most of the middle and lower end to others, where price competition will be fierce.

ARM believe that 8-core SoCs will suffice; I could see Apple developing 6- or even 8-core SoCs, to compete with Intel in this market.

Intel may respond with up to 8-core SoCs, with cache-coherent interconnects, using single-threaded cores for power efficiency. Other threads refer to these topics. I would think that there will be a convergence on a common design solution.

By 2020, the production process should be 7nm; ARM are already developing "physical" IP for 7nm.

Apple may speed up their development schedule, because ARM will be issuing new designs annually from now on.
 

thunng8

Member
Jan 8, 2013
152
61
101
Just a quick note that 3D mark seems to have finally fixed the physics on their benchmark for iOS devices.

The latest build 3dmark slingshot benchmark shows a close to 90% increase in performance in the physic portion of the benchmark compared to previous build.

Eg Se get 1943 in ice storm unlimited using latest build.
http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/mobile/Apple+iPhone+SE/review

While 6s plus is 1082 using previous build.

Here are all the results

http://www.futuremark.com/hardware/...30_unlimited/filter/android+ios+winrt+windows

I have also confirmed my 6s get 1900+ in the latest build and iPad Air 2 with a8x get a big increase as well.



We also have the underclocked a9x in the 9.7 iPad Pro having much higher results than the 12.9 iPad Pro

Most here were speculating it was a hardware weakness In the a series chip but likely it was a software issue.
 
Last edited: