This site may earn affiliate commissions from the links on this page. Terms of use.

A11-Feature

For the by v years, Apple tree has built its own CPU cores and marched to the beat of its ain unique drum. Unlike the various Android vendors, including Samsung and Qualcomm, Apple has eschewed college core counts in favor of amend single-threaded operation. While companies like Qualcomm went wide, with features similar big.Piffling and upwardly to eight CPU cores, Apple tree has stuck to a high-operation dual-core architecture.

That tendency holds true with the A11 Bionic. While it packs six CPU cores, only 2 of them are loftier-performance chips — the other 4 are lower-power cores. Apple has nonetheless to release whatsoever data on exactly when the SoC shifts from one ready of cores to the other, or whether it uses a big.Lilliputian implementation or its own unique architecture. Performance results for the A11 Bionic are hitting the cyberspace, however, and the new SoC looks quite strong.

In Geekbench 4, the new A11 Bionic scores a 4189, putting it ahead of the iPad Pro and ~22 percent faster than the iPhone seven. Multi-core performance for the iPhone viii / 8 Plus / X is near 2x faster than the iPhone seven. Some sites are reporting that this puts the A11 Bionic over even the Intel Core i5-7267U in Apple'due south MacBook Pro thirteen-inch, equally shown in the nautical chart below:

How true this is seems to depend on which Geekbench 4 scores you use for the MacBook Pro xiii-inch. The fastest scores listed on the site'south web browser are a 4571 for unmarried-cadre and a 9443 for multi-core. That'south one reason I've stayed away from using Geekbench in reviews — those scores are viii per centum faster in unmarried-cadre and 5 pct faster in multi-cadre, but it's enough to brand the difference betwixt besting the new A11 in single-core and beating the Apple iPhone X in multi-core and beingness tied in one and surpassed by all three new devices in the other.

It's an unfortunate limit of the platforms that there'south no existent manner to benchmark an Apple tree SoC in applications that more closely resemble the workloads laptop users will actually run. Geekbench's scores imply that Apple'south A11 Bionic has closed the efficiency gap with Intel, a tremendous achievement, simply there are a few caveats. Geekbench 4 just uses AVX2 in one floating-signal workload and doesn't specify which SIMD instruction sets information technology supports for integer code at all. I'm leery of cartoon major conclusions apropos Intel-versus-Apple performance without more comparisons. Merely the overall trends are clear: Regardless of how Intel and Apple tree would compare against each other in unlike tests, Geekbench shows Apple has been steadily adding performance year-on-year at a faster charge per unit than Intel has.

Anyone hungry for Apple to build its ain unilateral CPU architecture beyond its entire production line is going to exist waiting awhile; there are major differences between building fast dual-core architectures and building a chip with eight-24 high-cease CPU cores. Getting the enshroud architecture and bus construction correct is a major elevator, even when the CPU core is potent enough to be worth adopting in a given space, and Windows compatibility is still a major positive for macOS users.In the brusque term, Intel has little to fear. In the long term, that could change: Apple doesn't shift away from or towards new architectures at the driblet of a hat, but it does shift when the advantages are big enough.

The fact that Apple is starting to add more CPU cores should brand Intel a little nervous. Right now, it'southward got zero to worry almost. 4 years from now, things could wait quite dissimilar.