Tuesday, August 18th 2020

Apple A14X Bionic Rumored To Match Intel Core i9-9880H

The Apple A14X Bionic is an upcoming processor from Apple which is expected to feature in the upcoming iPad Pro models and should be manufactured on TSMC's 5 nm node. Tech YouTuber Luke Miani has recently provided a performance graph for the A14X chip based on "leaked/suspected A14 info + average performance gains from previous X chips". In these graphs, the Apple A14X can be seen matching the Intel Core i9-9880H in Geekbench 5 with a score of 7480. The Intel Intel Core i9-9880H is a 45 W eight-core mobile CPU found in high-end notebooks such as the 2019 16-inch MacBook Pro and requires significant cooling to keep thermals under control.

If these performance estimates are correct or even close then Apple will have a serious productivity device and will serve as a strong basis for Apple's transition to custom CPU's for it's MacBook's in 2021. Apple may use a custom version of the A14X with slightly higher clocks in their upcoming ARM MacBooks according to Luke Miani. These results are estimations at best so take them with a pinch of salt until Apple officially unveils the chip.
Source: @LukeMiani
Add your own comment

85 Comments on Apple A14X Bionic Rumored To Match Intel Core i9-9880H

#1
Vya Domus
No, it wont. God I hate geekbench, literately the only benchmark that you see or hear about whenever there is something Apple related.
Posted on Reply
#2
Xex360
Rubbish, if the chip is used to run specialised code it can run fast but in general purpose they can only dream of coming close to Intel/AMD.
As usual very misleading marketing...
Posted on Reply
#3
Flanker
I'll believe it when it runs some open source benchmark side by side
Posted on Reply
#4
Vayra86
Yes, Apple, as long as you have your slow as molasses IOS to pair with your great CPUs, it all looks very smooth and fast. Meanwhile, latency is pretty high on all your devices. Its a nice hiding trick but in raw performance, its not all that special as many think it is.

I'll take x86 and some real responsiveness, ty

ARM Is a joke


devicelatency
(ms)
year
ipad pro 10.5" pencil302017
ipad pro 10.5"702017
iphone 4s702011
iphone 6s702015
iphone 3gs702009
iphone x802017
iphone 8802017
iphone 7802016
iphone 6802014
gameboy color801998
iphone 5902012
blackberry q101002013
huawei honor 81102016
google pixel 2 xl1102017
galaxy s71202016
galaxy note 31202016
moto x1202013
nexus 5x1202015
oneplus 3t1302016
blackberry key one1302017
moto e (2g)1402015
moto g4 play1402017
moto g4 plus1402016
google pixel1402016
samsung galaxy avant1502014
asus zenfone3 max1502016
sony xperia z5 compact1502015
htc one m41602013
galaxy s4 mini1702013
lg k41802016
Posted on Reply
#5
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
What will be interesting is how well various software will run on the final machines.
Posted on Reply
#6
Searing
It's always funny to watch the anti Apple CPU people crawl out of the cracks and say inane things. Yes Geekbench is perfectly fine for comparisons, and latency is not a problem on Apple devices. We have much more than Geekbench for comparisons, we can do server tests ala SPEC and Apple comes out ahead. We can export video or calculate Pi and it comes out ahead. We can even play games like Fortnite (before) and come out ahead. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the huge dual core CPUs in iPhones are fast when they use more transistors than Intel, and they will also have a 5nm EUV advantage over Intel, making it trivial to beat Intel.

A14X will run Shadow of the Tomb Raider and any other PS4/Xbox game. Not surprising since it will match a GTX 1060 easily enough, but only need 10-15W. The Switch is circa 2014 hardware (Galaxy Note 4 CPU plus half a GTX 750) so imagine a Switch that is 6 years more advanced and there you have it.

ARM is just an instruction set. The FX-8350 from AMD and the Intel 10900k have as much in common (both x86) as any Apple CPU and any other ARM CPU. Barely anything in common. You can't say "ARM is slow or ARM sucks" unless you are truly ignorant. The only thing keeping Intel half decent is high clock speeds, in fact run your 10900k in dual core mode at 2.4ghz and compare with the iPhone and you'll see how slow it really is in comparison. Like for like. And those clock speeds are going to climb massively when Apple sticks the A14X in a desktop or laptop.
Posted on Reply
#7
M2B
Apple's current lightning core inside the iPhone 11 consumes about 5W of power at the maximum 2.6GHz rated frequency.
Assuming it's the same story with the A14X and you have eight of them + bigger caches, you"ll be looking at the same Power draw as the AMD and Intel H series mobile chips.
I'm sure the A14X will be a very strong chip, but it's not going to be beyond what is available from Intel and especially AMD.
Posted on Reply
#8
Vayra86
Searing
It's always funny to watch the anti Apple CPU people crawl out of the cracks and say inane things. Yes Geekbench is perfectly fine for comparisons, and latency is not a problem on Apple devices. We have much more than Geekbench for comparisons, we can do server tests ala SPEC and Apple comes out ahead. We can export video or calculate Pi and it comes out ahead. We can even play games like Fortnite (before) and come out ahead. It shouldn't surprise anyone that the huge dual core CPUs in iPhones are fast when they use more transistors than Intel, and they will also have a 5nm EUV advantage over Intel, making it trivial to beat Intel.

A14X will run Shadow of the Tomb Raider and any other PS4/Xbox game. Not surprising since it will match a GTX 1060 easily enough, but only need 10-15W. The Switch is circa 2014 hardware (Galaxy Note 4 CPU plus half a GTX 750) so imagine a Switch that is 6 years more advanced and there you have it.

ARM is just an instruction set. The FX-8350 from AMD and the Intel 10900k have as much in common (both x86) as any Apple CPU and any other ARM CPU. Barely anything in common. You can't say "ARM is slow or ARM sucks" unless you are truly ignorant. The only thing keeping Intel half decent is high clock speeds, in fact run your 10900k in dual core mode at 2.4ghz and compare with the iPhone and you'll see how slow it really is in comparison. Like for like. And those clock speeds are going to climb massively when Apple sticks the A14X in a desktop or laptop.
Oh no, I have this from my own experience as well. Try doing something alongside your main work on an Apple device... it will slow down to a crawl, it will even hang at times. I have this experience on phones and tablets of the brand. The same thing applies with Android, and there its possibly even worse. You have lots of cores, but any work pushed concurrently is going to drastically impact overall performance. A big part of the equation is like you say, power. Another big one is refresh rates and input device - touch is incredibly slow which is why the pencil Ipad shows the best case scenario for IOS.

The point is mainly... ARM is a very tight ecosystem right now, x86 is pretty broad, but the latter is also much more refined in its versatility. It will certainly handle multiple varying tasks better and maintain responsiveness and its performance scales more linearly instead of dropping off hard at some point.

Keep in mind the general use cases vary along with the different CPUs. The ARM devices get tailor made stuff for their limited resources. And that is also why the Geekbenches are so utterly pointless.
Posted on Reply
#9
Searing
No it is not 5w per core it is 5w total including the GPU and everything. The iPad is 4 main cores and GPU for 10w. 8 cores and double GPU would be less than 20w. No arm does not slow down if you do more tasks. I’m a web developer and I have an iPad Pro and iPhone SE and MacBook Pro and a $5000 PC in front of me. Thank God I can use a mouse and keyboard with my iPad Pro now. And this is two year old hardware the new one will absolutely crush my windows laptop.
Posted on Reply
#10
Dredi
Vayra86
Yes, Apple, as long as you have your slow as molasses IOS to pair with your great CPUs, it all looks very smooth and fast. Meanwhile, latency is pretty high on all your devices. Its a nice hiding trick but in raw performance, its not all that special as many think it is.

I'll take x86 and some real responsiveness, ty

ARM Is a joke


devicelatency
(ms)
year
ipad pro 10.5" pencil302017
ipad pro 10.5"702017
iphone 4s702011
iphone 6s702015
iphone 3gs702009
iphone x802017
iphone 8802017
iphone 7802016
iphone 6802014
gameboy color801998
iphone 5902012
blackberry q101002013
huawei honor 81102016
google pixel 2 xl1102017
galaxy s71202016
galaxy note 31202016
moto x1202013
nexus 5x1202015
oneplus 3t1302016
blackberry key one1302017
moto e (2g)1402015
moto g4 play1402017
moto g4 plus1402016
google pixel1402016
samsung galaxy avant1502014
asus zenfone3 max1502016
sony xperia z5 compact1502015
htc one m41602013
galaxy s4 mini1702013
lg k41802016

30ms total system latency is pretty good though, considering the input device? I bet your system would not be appreciably faster with a comparable input method. Even in games like CS:GO the total system latency (with a 1000Hz mouse) is around thay same 30ms. blurbusters.com/gsync/preview2/

edit: your table has the 60Hz display version of the ipad pro. Just by swapping to the later ones with 120Hz display you should get at least 8ms off that result, making it even more impressive. I mean the 30ms figure you posted for the 2017 model means that the total lag is less than two frames, so assuming the need for a frame buffer (there definitely is one) it can’t realistically really be any faster.
Posted on Reply
#11
Vayra86
Searing
No it is not 5w per core it is 5w total including the GPU and everything. The iPad is 4 main cores and GPU for 10w. 8 cores and double GPU would be less than 20w. No arm does not slow down if you do more tasks. I’m a web developer and I have an iPad Pro and iPhone SE and MacBook Pro and a $5000 PC in front of me. Thank God I can use a mouse and keyboard with my iPad Pro now. And this is two year old hardware the new one will absolutely crush my windows laptop.
Once Apple gets to the point of running x86-equivalent software on ARM we can truly see what's what. Until then, I'm not quite convinced just yet.
Posted on Reply
#12
laszlo
Apple is confident enough to move on arm ;in conclusion - they already know that performance/power will be better than what current(maybe even future) cpu's can offer.

as they'll make it gives them the unique opportunity to create it the best way to be used by i assume a new os ; i don't think we'll see higher latencies maybe lower ....anyway we need to wait the 1st batch leaks..
Posted on Reply
#13
Dredi
Vayra86
Once Apple gets to the point of running x86-equivalent software on ARM we can truly see what's what. Until then, I'm not quite convinced just yet.
The devkit results are pretty good already, with customer devices coming in the fall (with full desktop SW stack).
Posted on Reply
#14
M2B
Searing
No it is not 5w per core it is 5w total including the GPU and everything. The iPad is 4 main cores and GPU for 10w. 8 cores and double GPU would be less than 20w. No arm does not slow down if you do more tasks. I’m a web developer and I have an iPad Pro and iPhone SE and MacBook Pro and a $5000 PC in front of me. Thank God I can use a mouse and keyboard with my iPad Pro now. And this is two year old hardware the new one will absolutely crush my windows laptop.


If you run all the CPU & GPU cores at Max frequency the chip can consume up to 20W, but of course apple doesn't allow that to happen and limits the maximum power available.
Posted on Reply
#15
Vya Domus
Imagine believing that a single digit W SoC will outperform a 45W Intel chip with 4.8 Ghz single core turbo.

Apple fanboys are something else.
Posted on Reply
#16
Dredi
Vya Domus
Imagine believing that a single digit W SoC will outperform a 45W Intel chip with 4.8 Ghz single core turbo.

Apple fanboys are something else.
SPEC has its own issues as a metric, but at least in that they are already within a punching distance. They would not bring a pro series laptop to the market with the new chip unless it would perform.
M2B
Apple's current lightning core inside the iPhone 11 consumes about 5W of power at the maximum 2.6GHz rated frequency.
Assuming it's the same story with the A14X and you have eight of them + bigger caches, you"ll be looking at the same Power draw as the AMD and Intel H series mobile chips.
I'm sure the A14X will be a very strong chip, but it's not going to be beyond what is available from Intel and especially AMD.
New process as well, 5nm EUV vs N7P. According to TSMC it would give 15-25% more frequency at the same power. Assuming that the new chip is designed around a higher maximum power draw we might see even 4GHz in single thread loads, which would push it way beyond skylake in SPEC.
Posted on Reply
#17
Mescalamba
Alternative CPUs are moot until they can dual boot Win. Trying to run x86 games of the past on something else might entertaining for a while, but when you need to work hard to make it work every single time, it becomes really annoying really fast.
Posted on Reply
#18
Dredi
Mescalamba
Alternative CPUs are moot until they can dual boot Win. Trying to run x86 games of the past on something else might entertaining for a while, but when you need to work hard to make it work every single time, it becomes really annoying really fast.
I don’t think that these are meant to be gaming console replacements.
Posted on Reply
#19
Vayra86
laszlo
Apple is confident enough to move on arm ;in conclusion - they already know that performance/power will be better than what current(maybe even future) cpu's can offer.

as they'll make it gives them the unique opportunity to create it the best way to be used by i assume a new os ; i don't think we'll see higher latencies maybe lower ....anyway we need to wait the 1st batch leaks..
No no, they know they can maintain a certain user experience within the boundaries they set for these users.

Apple controls the software side, which is why they can do this and why they can make it seem like ARM is suddenly a magical do-all. They've done the exact same with Intel's x86 CPUs on current software, where they also offer very little hardware for the money but still have a good user experience, and decent enough performance.

At the same time you don't see Apple in HPC for heavy crunch loads and they are non existant in any half serious enterprise landscape, except as individual workstations. Server, data... nope. They offer machines that are great terminals, and pretty shitty at everything else. And even as a terminal, don't you dare think of advanced/power user functionality. Its just not there.
Posted on Reply
#20
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Vayra86
No no, they know they can maintain a certain user experience within the boundaries they set for these users.

Apple controls the software side, which is why they can do this and why they can make it seem like ARM is suddenly a magical do-all. They've done the exact same with Intel's x86 CPUs on current software, where they also offer very little hardware for the money but still have a good user experience, and decent enough performance.

At the same time you don't see Apple in HPC for heavy crunch loads and they are non existant in any half serious enterprise landscape, except as individual workstations. Server, data... nope. They offer machines that are great terminals, and pretty shitty at everything else. And even as a terminal, don't you dare think of advanced/power user functionality. Its just not there.
Are you calling Mac Pros terminals?
Posted on Reply
#21
Dredi
Frick
Are you calling Mac Pros terminals?
I guess he is. :roll:

I’d also like to know why/how apple would enter the HPC market, when they didn’t have any own hardware up until now.
Posted on Reply
#22
Vayra86
Frick
Are you calling Mac Pros terminals?
Might not be the best descriptor, although with the increasing dependance on cloud... hmmm
Posted on Reply
#23
Fourstaff
Given the rate of improvement, even if A14X is even half as powerful as 9880H they will catch up within a few generations.
Posted on Reply
#24
laszlo
Vayra86
No no, they know they can maintain a certain user experience within the boundaries they set for these users.

Apple controls the software side, which is why they can do this and why they can make it seem like ARM is suddenly a magical do-all. They've done the exact same with Intel's x86 CPUs on current software, where they also offer very little hardware for the money but still have a good user experience, and decent enough performance.

At the same time you don't see Apple in HPC for heavy crunch loads and they are non existant in any half serious enterprise landscape, except as individual workstations. Server, data... nope. They offer machines that are great terminals, and pretty shitty at everything else. And even as a terminal, don't you dare think of advanced/power user functionality. Its just not there.
let's not agree to disagree at this point as we don't have a clue what they prepare...
Posted on Reply
#25
Vya Domus
Fourstaff
Given the rate of improvement, even if A14X is even half as powerful as 9880H they will catch up within a few generations.
In a few generations Intel (or AMD) will have new processors as well, the 9880H is still basically an ancient Skylake CPU. Also the rate of improvement has hard limits, there are so many execution units and in-flight instructions you can add before it makes no difference in the real world.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment