Apple's A11 Bionic is a cyborg: first iPhone 8/X benchmarks crush all Androids, including the S8

Ever since the first benchmarks of Apple's new A11 Bionic chipset leaked out, we saw that it is going to be a beast, yet nothing really prepares you for two times higher scores of the iPhone 8 and iPhone X on the cross-platform Geekbench, compared to even the fastest Androids like the Galaxy S8Note 8, or the S8+.
 
All of the top devices in the Geekbench charts for Android and iOS are now flaunting 10nm chipsets - Android has the Snapdragon 835 and Exynos 8895 on top, while Apple's new phones with A11 topped the charts immediately after their first pass in the benchmark database. As you can see above, the single-core scores of the iPhone 8, 8 Plus, or the iPhone X, are more than twice higher than anything Android has to offer, and more than 50% higher in the multi-core runs. Even if we see a move to the 7/8nm process for the spring flagships next year, they still might not be able to top those result anyway.

This goes to show that Apple's A11 Bionic is a cyborg of a chipset indeed, capable of real-time augmented reality, or recording 4K video at 60fps without a sweat. This time around, Apple also has a custom-made graphics and image processing engines inside, so the Bionic might be with the most optimized power/performance ratio that Apple has ever created, and it really shows both in synthetic benchmarks, and during the announcement event demos that Apple showcased on stage.


source: Geekbench

Related phones

iPhone 8
  • Display 4.7" 750 x 1334 pixels
  • Camera 12 MP / 7 MP front
  • Processor Apple A11 Bionic, Hexa-core, 2390 MHz
  • Storage 256 GB
  • Battery 1821 mAh(14h talk time)
Galaxy S8
  • Display 5.8" 1440 x 2960 pixels
  • Camera 12 MP / 8 MP front
  • Processor Qualcomm Snapdragon 835, Octa-core, 2350 MHz
  • Storage 64 GB + microSDXC
  • Battery 3000 mAh(30h talk time)

FEATURED VIDEO

161 Comments

1. samgsam

Posts: 148; Member since: Mar 24, 2017

Still not worth $999 + paying extra for a fast charger.

11. ibend2

Posts: 159; Member since: Mar 16, 2016

Sept-Dec iPhone get higher antutu+geekbench score Jan-August Android get higher antutu+geekbench score That cycle repeat every year, Nothing new here.. And unless you run android with that A11, you can't compare it with android processors..

16. pixel_ftw

Posts: 84; Member since: Jun 19, 2017

Unless some revolutionary design take places in the android world in the cpu design there is No way android will get higher antutu, geekbench score in jan-aug. A11 cpu performance is almost 2 years ahead of the cpu use in the android world. No shame admitting that Apple design amazing cpu that are way ahead of cpu's used in android phones.

19. toukale

Posts: 625; Member since: Jun 10, 2015

@pixel_ftw - What a lot of folks have always missed in the past is that on multicore, while android would let all their cores run when they did those tests, Apple never did. Even one or two cores running we saw how close they were able to get. I always knew the day Apple let all their cores loose it would be over for Qualcomm and the android camp. This year Apple finally took the leach off their multi cores chips. The android vendors will not touch Apple again now. This is nothing those of us whose been following this space knew once Apple did that they would owned the space. I look for them to do the same with their gpu in the next 2-3 years.

85. saiki4116

Posts: 413; Member since: Mar 31, 2011

They already own GPU... Their GPU's were always better than Android counterparts and to top that OS is also optimized to take advantage of that. Which android phone supports 4K60FPS video

114. nique0201

Posts: 61; Member since: Nov 28, 2011

You mean like the note8 update does?

130. vincelongman

Posts: 5688; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

Qualcomm has had the best GPUs since the 820 The A10 only beat the 820 in short tests, in long sustained tests it lost e.g. 30 fps - OP3 (820, 1080p) 25 fps - iPhone 7 Plus (A10, 1080p)https://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph10685/83895.png Apple have probably over taken Qualcomm with the new A11 since the 540 is just the 530 overclocked But who knows how the 845 will compare

137. saiki4116

Posts: 413; Member since: Mar 31, 2011

I am actually referring to A10X Fusion, the one on the ipad. Definitely Qualcomm will improve their GPU in next iteration.

133. Maseeha

Posts: 1; Member since: Sep 19, 2017

LOL WHICH APPLE OF YOURS HAS A 4K SCREEN TO RUN A 4K VIDEO??? COMES IN SONY.... PLUS WHAT ABOUT THE 960 FPS THEY DELIVER IN THE SAME MODEL.. plus like.. Every single feature was present there since a long time... Lumias had wireless charging years ago

152. VArase

Posts: 37; Member since: Sep 11, 2013

You do realize that an iPhone is actually a Macintosh with a touch GUI instead of Aqua, right? If they wanted to run background tasks, they would - but elected not to since: a) it would unnecessarily chew up battery life b) the form factor is no conducive to real multitasking (multiple windows on screen) 4K at 960 fps? What device has this?

73. sgodsell

Posts: 7323; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

That is so false, especially when Android does real multitasking and it even has split screen multitasking as well. Something that is devoid on all iPhones. Let's compare a single task switching OS which is iOS on iPhones to a real multitasking OS like Android. If iOS is so fast with the new A11 SoC, then why hobble iOS 11 on the new iPhones? Come on this is 2017 an the new iOS 11 on iPhones still doesn't support real multitasking or split screen multitasking. Give me a break.

74. Ninetysix

Posts: 2964; Member since: Oct 08, 2012

What you are looking for doesn't require any real processing power brosephine. Apple enabled split screen on their A8 SoC a while back.

112. sgodsell

Posts: 7323; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

Your proving that your an idiot. iPad yes, iPhone no. Oh, and running multiple tasks simultaneously does effect performance. Especially when the processor is time sliced between multiple tasks.

113. Ninetysix

Posts: 2964; Member since: Oct 08, 2012

Why does it matter if the SoC being used is on the iPad or iPhone? I used A8 as an example because that processor is used on both. If Apple already enabled split screen using an A8 processor, you really think the A11 will not be able to handle it? How dumb can you be? :)

131. sgodsell

Posts: 7323; Member since: Mar 16, 2013

First of all the iPads that use an A8 SoC. Actually the iPads use a different version which of the A8 which is a faster A8X. So clearly it's not the same version that goes into the iPhone. It's like the new IPad pro's don't use an A9 or A10. They use a faster A9X or a A10X. I shouldn't be surprised that ignorant sheeple upvote you. BTW if the A11 is 30% faster than a A10. Then why not use an A11 in Apple's new Apple 4k TV? Instead Apple used their A10X for their new to TV. You ask how dumb can you be. More like how ignorant and stupid can you be.

132. Ninetysix

Posts: 2964; Member since: Oct 08, 2012

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A8https://www.phonearena.com/phones/Apple-iPad-mini-4_id9641https://www.apple.com/ipad-mini-4/specs/http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_ipad_mini_4-7561.php Wrong! It's the same A8 broseph. You have to stop showing your ignorance. The A11 wasn't used because it's reserved for the new Phones which will be in high demand. Are you too dumb to differentiate the difference between A8 and A8X? Now go running to your mom because you got schooled by 96.

165. Munchiemonster

Posts: 1; Member since: Nov 13, 2017

sgodsell: "Your proving that your an idiot. iPad yes, iPhone no. Oh, and running multiple tasks simultaneously does effect performance. Especially when the processor is time sliced between multiple tasks." You're proving that YOU'RE and idiot by not knowing the difference between your and you're. Are you calling him an idiot or are you calling something he owns an idiot? It's unclear from your comment. You can spell simultaneously but not you're? Looks like you're the idiot here.

81. Xilam unregistered

Hey champ, iPad has split screen multitasking that support all apps including all third party, PIP, forcetouch that also supports 3rd party integration. Siri that supports third party. And so on. It also does this flawlessly on a huge screen with performance of A9X which is much lower than A10 and much more lower than A11 bionic. So I'm sure A11 can handle even the worst of android coding.

89. Leo_MC

Posts: 7432; Member since: Dec 02, 2011

Stop writing stupid things: iOS does multitasking like a champion (only yesterday I explained to dark how my phone is now running 10 tasks at the same time).

106. cmdacos

Posts: 4180; Member since: Nov 01, 2016

Sure does. That's why certain apps have to be left open or they give you warnings that they will not function properly if you close them. That's some fine multitasking right there lol.

125. Leo_MC

Posts: 7432; Member since: Dec 02, 2011

How can an app function if you close it?

101. MrHate

Posts: 317; Member since: Feb 09, 2015

Really? Just look at the iPad Pro running on a high resolution (even though this doesn't really matter but for you Android folk I better mention it since that's the number one excuse that you guys seem to go for) and compare it to anything Android related. The iPad Pro blows everything away in terms of multitasking. Android phones and tablets can only dream of what that thing is capable of. And the iPhone 8/X is more powerful CPU wise. But hey better talk without having any idea.

24. mikehunta727 unregistered

Lol of course you can directly compare A11 to Android processors. They are 64 bit ARM processors after all. Just wait for the teardown of the A11 and you will see how much transistors Apple allocated to CPU

57. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

Well, you technically can't, at least not with Geekbench and Antutu. While they may be great for measuring relative real world performance, they are in no way indicative of the compute power of a chip, due to multiple reasons: 1. Features support: Some tests in Geekbench like SHA hash are calculated in fixed-function blocks on A-series of chips. This is the reason Apple chips are able to churn out insane amount of per-core score, comparable to intel CPUs. However in real life, they are about half the performance( which is still impressive!) 2. Compiler and platform differences. For example, my laptop( old one from 2013, using i7-4700MQ) changed single-core from 3600 to 4100 and multi-core from 10500 to 11700 from switching from Windows 10 to Ubuntu 16.04 since the compiler changed. 3. The tests itself is not exactly same. Antutu for example has a bit different test for the UX portion of the test. Even from android version to android version, the score in that section varies greatly. There is no good, consistent benchmark to measure the IPC difference between android and Apple chips. For that, you would need to eliminate the language, compiler and instructions as variables. Either way, that level of performance is largely useless on a phone which will be used for getting notifications, calling and messaging. Which is probably why no good benchmark exists lol.

69. mikehunta727 unregistered

IPC is much wider on the A series chips, 7 way vs 2 way for Snapdragon and Exynos atm. Snapdragon 845 will move to 3 way with A75 cores, size of big performance cores in A SoC's are quite bigger than their competitors, Apple allocating a lot of transistors to CPU design

76. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

I never disagreed to that. I know Apple chips are faster. I'm just saying geekbench is not a reliable way to find out how much faster. Individual scores inside geekbench will be much more reliable. Also, Ax chips are 6-way. You are thinking of Nvidia's Denver cores with 7-way. Anyway, A72 was 3-way and A73 is 2 way. Still A73 is faster. Being wider just means you CAN dispatch more instructions in a cycle, not that you always will.

83. mikehunta727 unregistered

Ah yes 6 way, got it mixed up with Denver lol. And I agree. Geekbench should not be taken as a truth of all truths in determining true overall performance but it does offer a good amount of detail Going wider usually what nets better IPC/single core performance though. Clock for clock a 3 way will outperform a 2 way in single core performance

119. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

Well, the easy gains have been done for Apple, and now I expect 10% every year. I'm hoping Android chipmakers will catch up now.

82. mikehunta727 unregistered

Geekbench can have variance in the overall score, my Ryzen 1700 hits 24000 in multi core score sometimes and than hits 25,000 in multi core score in another run on Windows 10 64 bit That's why you see devices on the database that hit 7,000 for the Galaxy S8 in multi core score and the same device with same SoC in another test by another user scores 6200 in multi core score only

118. Boast_Rider

Posts: 535; Member since: Sep 14, 2017

24k is an incredibly low score for a 1700 and precisely why I hate geekbench. An overclocked 7700k will get around the same score. However, in an actual multi core benchmark like blender/cinebench, the 1700 will absolutely demolish the 7700k. It also depends on the memory a lot. Swap a single channel 2133MHz RAM with a C14 3200 MHz dual channel RAM and see the score skyrocket. About my laptop, there was a consistent difference of 15% or so between Ubuntu and Windows. I did 5+ tests and this was the average.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.