![]() This is turn opens up far more everyday tasks that the A11's low-power cores can smoothly handle in between incredibly demanding AR, VR, 3D gaming, image editing, and sooner than later.full-scale AI and ML applications. Despite the additional system overhead that advancing mobile OSes almost certainly bring as the cost of progress, Apple Chipworks has more than managed to keep up by bringing the A11's efficiency cores to, theoretically, an A7 single-core level, and an A8+ multicore-level. It's likely much more about power savings, defying the laws of battery physics and declining peak voltage for as long as technologically possible. Not too shabby.Īt the end of the day, though, this is more than about raw power. If you take a little leap of faith and assume that the A11 quad-core efficiency CPU can multi-core process at least 50% better than the A7 on the iPhone 5s (you know, because twice as many cores), that places the "little" quad-core's (again, yes, theoretical) multi-core power at around the level of a Pixel C, a reasonably high-performance Google tablet from December 2015. Which isn't much of a stretch, because when you refer back to the Geekbench Browser, the iPhone 6 Plus (Apple A8) has a multi-core score of 2423, only 13.2% better than the iPhone 5s (Apple A7) multi-core score of 2140. Since Apple's performance controller is obviously competent at getting the most out of the A11 Bionic from a multi-core standpoint, that also means that Apple's newest low-power cores are almost certainly faster at multi-core operations than the Apple A8. Because there are essentially two Apple A7 CPUs residing within the low-power compute profile of the A11 Bionic. Interpretation 2: whether.as I was thinking, Apple meant that one efficiency core from the A11 Bionic was itself was up to 70% faster than one efficiency core from the A10 Fusion.Īs it turns out, Apple's press contacts confirmed to me that Interpretation 2 was correct.ġ) Apple dramatically speed-boosted the A11 Bionic's efficiency cores versus the A10 Fusion, an dĢ) There are twice as many "up to 70% faster" efficiency cores onboard compared to the A10. Interpretation 1: the claim meant that the four efficiency cores were collectively up to 70% more performant than the A10's two cores, And yet, there's an ambiguity hanging in the air. See, Apple's performance claim for the efficiency cores is: "A11 Bionic has four efficiency cores that are up to 70 percent faster than the A10 Fusion chip".įor whatever reason, seemingly everyone in the tech and blogging sphere focused on the "up to 70% faster" and called it a day. Which is the dual-core Apple A7's relative performance level. That raises the relative performance score from around 4.76 to (as high as) 8.1. Here's where it starts getting more interesting.Īs you saw above, Apple's claimed a (up-to) 70% boost in A11 Bionic efficiency core performance. And since A10, in my semi-power-user experience, at no point ever felt slower than the A9 in the iPhone 6s, even in Low Power Mode, I think it's quite reasonable to place Apple's A10 efficiency cores in the "A6+" compute power class. That's basically a "Apple A6 Plus" CPU score. So, take 1/5 of that, and you end up with a "performance score" of around 4.76. To say nothing of how well A11 Geekbenches on multicore against the closest SoC used by Android OEMs:Īs you can see, based on Apple's performance claims.and year after year, Apple's performance boosts do seem to have been shown as legitimate.the A10 Fusion (high-power CPU) is around 23.8x faster than the A4. One of the notable features in A11 Bionic is the ability for iOS to use a single core, right on up to all six CPU cores simultaneously, thanks to the second-generation performance controller (Linked Source: Lance Ulanoff, Mashable).Īnd when called upon, the entirety of the A11 CPU array can, at least on paper, deliver mind-boggling (theoretical) multi-threaded performance gains over the A10. Apple determined which dual-core CPU took on which tasks via its first-ever performance controller, which apparently didn’t need to exist until the low-power cores did. Yep, I'm looking at the high-efficiency cores, which made their debut as a dual-core duo in the A10 Fusion, prompting many to think that Apple took a big.LITTLE page right out of ARM's playbook ( even if that wasn't actually the case).Īt a basic level (alas, that’s all I think I understand), the first-generation A10 efficiency cores operated as a "mini" dual-core CPU to low-power-compute through certain simpler tasks.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |