Apple A13 SoC
- Thread starter iMacmatician
- Start date
iMacmatician
Regular
On the other hand, Geekbench results only show 4 GB for the three iPhone models currently listed in both the Geekbench 4 and Geekbench 5 databases (see this post for a summary and commentary):
- iPhone12,1 (assumed to be the iPhone 11)
- iPhone12,3 (assumed to be the iPhone 11 Pro)
- iPhone12,5 (assumed to be the iPhone 11 Pro Max)
anexanhume
Veteran
snc
Veteran
There are graphics with score and ram so it's not necessary
iMacmatician
Regular
iFixit has completed a teardown of the iPhone 11 Pro Max and has found only 4 GB RAM.
iFixit said:
A few days ago, there was some speculation that the iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max have 4 GB of system RAM plus an additional 2 GB of RAM that can only be used by the camera (and wouldn't show up in Geekbench etc.).iFixit said:
Not many of the initial batch of reviews gave 3D benchmarks, so I thought I'd run a few to compare to AT's previous A12 iPhone XS results.
3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Unlimited:
After a few runs:
Peak graphics is 8589, which looks like an especially large year over year jump for iPhones in this benchmark.
GFXBench:
After a few runs:
Aztec Ruins High got a ~25% performance jump at peak, which is slightly above what Apple claimed.
3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Unlimited:
After a few runs:
Peak graphics is 8589, which looks like an especially large year over year jump for iPhones in this benchmark.
GFXBench:
After a few runs:
Aztec Ruins High got a ~25% performance jump at peak, which is slightly above what Apple claimed.
mfaisalkemal
Newcomer
Not many of the initial batch of reviews gave 3D benchmarks, so I thought I'd run a few to compare to AT's previous A12 iPhone XS results.
3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Unlimited:
After a few runs:
Peak graphics is 8589, which looks like an especially large year over year jump for iPhones in this benchmark.
GFXBench:
After a few runs:
Aztec Ruins High got a ~25% performance jump at peak, which is slightly above what Apple claimed.
@Nebuchadnezzar tweet
It looks like high sustained performance of A13 caused higher sustained power consumption and device temperature than predecessor. Still need to wait Andrei F. Anandtech review.
Last edited:
anexanhume
Veteran
Same process node as A12. Expecting lower power with higher performance wasn't realistic anyway.
anexanhume
Veteran
5nm is in risk. It’s possible it could support a 2020 iPhone.
The bigger issue with 5G is the design impacts that could threaten battery size. It should only be negative on battery life if people are actually getting 5G connections and using the very high data rates.
TSMC is currently saying 5nm volume production from March 2020.
anexanhume
Veteran
That would support a Fall launch if the dates hold. Most launch iPhones are found to have processors built late Spring or early Summer. 5nm coming from 7nm DUV should be 20-25% power advantage with a 80% density gain.
mfaisalkemal
Newcomer
Nebuchadnezzar
Legend
Still need some time, sorry.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/14892/the-apple-iphone-11-pro-and-max-review
Again some impressive results.
Again some impressive results.
Impressive but:
..., the power and efficiency figures on the other hand are extremely unexpected. In virtually all of the SPECint2006 tests, Apple has gone and increased the peak power draw of the A13 SoC; and so in many cases we’re almost 1W above the A12. Here at peak performance it seems the power increase was greater than the performance increase, and that’s why in almost all workloads the A13 ends up as less efficient than the A12.
If I had not been actively cooling the phone and purposefully attempting it not to throttle, it would be impossible for the chip to maintain this performance for prolonged periods.
anexanhume
Veteran
That’s what happens when you don’t change the node you’re on.