x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • Apple's A11 processor may be a beast, leaked record benchmarks suggest

Apple's A11 processor may be a beast, leaked record benchmarks suggest

Posted: , by Daniel P. Daniel P.

Tags :

Apple's A11 processor may be a beast, leaked record benchmarks suggest
According to developer revelations stemming from mining the iOS 11 code, the upcoming Apple A11 chipset that is about to shine in the iPhones announced today, will feature six processor cores. Two high-powered cores are eventually dubbed Monsoon, and the remaining four Mistral cores handle the lighter housekeeping. The A10 Fusion used on the iPhone 7 and iPhone 7 Plus carries four cores, two for high performance, and two for high efficiency. 

The A10X used on the recently refreshed versions of the iPad Pro comes with three high powered Hurricane cores, and three high efficiency Zephyr cores. In addition, Apple is reportedly pairing the A11 with a co-processor dubbed "Neural Engine," which will handle sensory input and Face ID calculation duties.

What does all this mean? Well, the A11, which will be the second Apple processor built on the modern 10nm process, is shaping up to be a beast, and a mysterious "iPhone 10,5" just popped up in the Geekbench database, as if to confirm this. 

It does list a hexa-core chipset, which would be a first for an iPhone, 3 GB of RAM, as rumored, and, most importantly, record-breaking single and multi-core scores. The alleged A11 processor managed to crank out 4000+ single-core points, and close to the 10,000 threshold in multi-core, indicating one mighty powerhouse might land under the hood of the iPhone 8, 8 Plus, and the iPhone X that are reportedly going to be revealed later today.


source: Geekbench

112 Comments
  • Options
    Close





posted on 12 Sep 2017, 08:11 9

1. dubaiboy78 (Posts: 290; Member since: 19 Sep 2014)


Dats why it costs $1199 for iphone x! -iphonearena

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 08:17 22

3. kiko007 (Posts: 5733; Member since: 17 Feb 2016)


Fine by me. Better than paying $900 bucks for something that'll get two LATE updates and then be forgotten. (I swear to Christ if you Custom ROM neckbeards give me that tired bulls**t...)

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 08:22 4

12. LanjaKodaka (Posts: 159; Member since: 27 Sep 2016)


After sales support is much important than before sales hype.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 08:29 6

18. kiko007 (Posts: 5733; Member since: 17 Feb 2016)


Agreed. That's why my policy is buy Android phones at a discount because of their discount service. I'll pay top dollar for top dollar service only!

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:13 21

36. sgodsell (Posts: 5057; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


Ah, yes Geekbench scores. The worst benchmark test on the market. Not to mention Apple uses a lot of cache, more than anyone else. Running tests that stay in cache proves nothing in the real world.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:20 10

38. trojan_horse (Posts: 5337; Member since: 06 May 2016)


Couldn't have said it better, sgodsell.

Geekbench makes no sense whatsoever... Benchmarks in general ain't my thing.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:32 10

47. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


Geekbench is a purely CPU test where it pushes the CPU to 100% of it's processing capacity via real world computing scenarios such as compressing things, unzipping things, etc. Geekbench is one of the most reliable if not the most reliable CPU benchmark on mobile right now. Apple just really shook up the SoC game now with the A11.

10k multi core score .. up from 6k from the A10... Meanwhile Android OEM'S have been giving such small improvements in CPU in the past few years.

A single Zephyr core from the A10(the small power efficient cores from A10, not the big cores) is just as powerful as a big S835 core. Let that sink in for just a moment

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 14:12 2

94. sgodsell (Posts: 5057; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


If this A11 SoC is really fast, and a lot of you Apple geeks even go so far to say that this new A11 is comparable to a desktop class CPU. If that is the case, then why doesn't Apple have real multitasking or split screen multitasking on its iPhones. Especially when other smartphone OS's support real multitasking and split screen multitasking as well. Is that a real world test. Since these smartphones have hardware comparable to laptops and desktops. I guess Apple doesn't want to show it's true colors to the world. Some of you will bring up crap that smartphone displays are too small. Yet the new iPhone X has a 5.8" display. Only 0.2" away from a 6" phablet. Which is more than enough to run two tasks on screen simultaneously. It's not like it doesn't have a capable resolution to handle it. But I am sure keke007, Apple-Nutz, and Mikey will all say it's useless. Yeah, okay. How do you know if you never tried it. It works well on Android.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 14:21 2

95. sgodsell (Posts: 5057; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


Plus it would give a real world metric on how fast Apple's SoC is in the real world. Something that no benchmark like this shows.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 14:44 1

96. Ninetysix (Posts: 2730; Member since: 08 Oct 2012)


Nice logic. Apple's SoCs are not fast even when the benchmarks says otherwise because it doesn't have split screen. Very nice.

What you want doesn't need a lot of horsepower. If you want to play with split screen, try it on an iPad. Even an ipad with an old processor will be able to handle it just fine. You can also jailbreak.

From 2 years ago
https://youtu.be/-EF1xnLjSZY

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 14:51 1

97. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


Iphone 6 with jailbreak was split Screening apps with fair ease. Plenty of videos on YT show it off. It's obvious that they just arent adding it and are focusing on other features. Yes, Apple SoCs are extremely good and you are just a clueless hater. Please stop. The A11 is extremely impressive and performance leader now

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 21:07

108. sgodsell (Posts: 5057; Member since: 16 Mar 2013)


Wow, just wow. Oh let's jailbreak the iPhone. Do you hear yourselfs Mike and ninety six? Like I said before if it's truly that fast, then include real multitasking and split screen multitasking. Since both of you are defending it to the death. Then why doesn't Apple include it to begin with on the iPhone X or 8's. This is 2017 and every new Android smartphone has that. Nevermind tablets. I guess Apple doesn't want to include it for two reasons. 1) it would cannibalize it's iPads 2) it would reflect the true speed of the iPhone as well.

All you are doing is proving to the world that you are iDiots. What a pair of true Apple zealots, or in other words true iMorons.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 21:18 1

109. Ninetysix (Posts: 2730; Member since: 08 Oct 2012)


Lol. You are dumber than a rock broski. Old A chip can do split screen just fine. Proof is in the video. You are just pulling random stuff from your bum because you are very salty. Enjoy the VR porn.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 21:39 1

110. Ninetysix (Posts: 2730; Member since: 08 Oct 2012)


I just want to know one thing brosephine. Why did Apple enable splitscreen multitasking on the iPad Mini 4 with A8 processor?

posted on 13 Sep 2017, 01:15 1

111. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


My argument is not about why it doesn't have split screen apps, it's about the overall performance and throughput of the SoC, A8 from a few years ago easily can handle split screen apps, why Apple doesn't include it in iOS on their phones? I have no fking clue, but it's not because of lack of processing power to do so, the capability is easily there from a processing standpoint. lmao..

"All you are doing is proving to the world that you are iDiots"

Quite the opposite actually, it's amusing, you don't know what your talking about at all here,

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 15:05

99. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


Please stop it. You been already proved wrong quite a few times in the past few weeks and have shown your ignorance on this topic. You make us actual Android users/technology lovers look bad with your sports team like mentality. Facts and truth prevail.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:15 7

67. apple-rulz (Posts: 561; Member since: 27 Dec 2016)


Let me help translate what you wrote; "benchmarks in general ain't my thing especially when they show the iPhone to be superior."

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 13:57

93. trojan_horse (Posts: 5337; Member since: 06 May 2016)


Even when they show Snapdragon and Exynos superior, benchmarks still ain't my thing. You dkntsee me bragging out benchmark scores, do you?

Get lost.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:22 20

40. Jimrod (Posts: 1464; Member since: 22 Sep 2014)


Let me guess, the only benchmarks that matter are the ones that favour Samsung? I suppose at least Apple, regardless of scores, have never had the need to use cheat software to improve theirs...

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:30 15

45. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


That's because Apple A SoC's have more L2 cache than their competitors, it's part of the CPU design and reason why Apple A SoC' are really good. You are literally blaming Apple for superior CPU design and trying to make it a negative. This A11 blows everything away on the market and will blow away the S845 with its A75 cores

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:33 7

71. RebelwithoutaClue (Posts: 3692; Member since: 05 Apr 2013)


Not only the L2 cache, but don't forget the 6way superscalar (Android SoC's use 3way).This makes the Ax SoC's damn fast, especially in single core benchmarks.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:43 17

48. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


Geekbench confirmed by many developers to be one of the best ways of measuring CPU performance. You just sound absolutely satly that Apple made a extremely beast SoC for everyone to beat now. Aren't you a fan of technology? If this was Samsung who released this SoC, you would be with your mouth on the floor droolin', but since this is Apple , you hate em and try and discredit them as much as possible. Gotta give props were it's due dude. A11 just slayed the SoC game hard

This A11 is extremely impressive and approaches Intel i5 performance from from the Broadwell generation from Intel

The S845 won't be able to beat the A11 with it's A75 cores(that's what the next Kryo core will use)

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:52 15

52. Xperia14 (Posts: 935; Member since: 01 Sep 2015)


Agreed. Not an Apple fan, but man, these Apple haters (Samsung fanboys) are annoying. The A11 is looking great.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:03 11

58. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


Tell me about it lol, do folks seriously lack the capability to just stand back and marvel at it? It's seriously impressive as a technology lover, no clue at all why we have bashers and haters here on a cutting edge SoC that will push competition forward, which makes everything better for all us consumers

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:20

68. Lumberjack (Posts: 258; Member since: 04 May 2017)


XZP and OP5 are as fast as iphone 7+.
And it is way harder to run android than iOS.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:44 3

74. kiko007 (Posts: 5733; Member since: 17 Feb 2016)


They also have 2x the RAM and the ability to turn animations off in the settings. Imagine for a moment that the iPhone 7+ had that much RAM and animation limitations removed. Think of the speed!

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 10:53

76. 47AlphaTango (Posts: 405; Member since: 27 Sep 2015)


kiko007 And storage! God that 512GB of internal storage! Think how many porns that could've stored in there!

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 09:59 3

56. strikerchooooo (Posts: 155; Member since: 25 Sep 2016)


Tell us more oh, you almighty expert! Please!

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 11:32

81. Shubham412302 (Posts: 469; Member since: 09 Nov 2011)


What you are saying is right. If Apple could really design processors why aren't they using self made processors in Macbooks.

posted on 12 Sep 2017, 11:34 3

82. mikehunta727 (Posts: 1402; Member since: 12 Sep 2014)


What he is saying is actually incorrect. And the reason why Apple doesn't put this in their Macbooks is because Intel CPU's are still quite a bit more powerful than these chips going in phones. Different architecture too so many applications on Mac OS wouldn't play nice with

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories