KITA

tmay said:

lkrupp said:

And what is the Android crowd’s reaction? Can’t you guess? They’re babbling on about Intel modems being inferior to Qualcomm modems. You can’t will argue with that crowd. They got it covered from every angle. When they lose in one area they just jump to something else.

We still haven't seen the A12X yet either. Anantech appeared to be hugely impressed with how efficient the A12 was, but noted that Apple needs to apply some changes to iPhone XS when it was cold. That was entirely due To Apple not designing the A12 to excel at benchmarks, even as it does.

It's not just a benchmark issue. 

Anandtech:

I played some Fortnite on the iPhone XS’, and the way that the phones heated up isn’t something that I was very much fan of. Here the must be some kind of way to let actual games and applications which have a characteristic of sustained performance, actually start off with the GPU limited to this sustained performance state.

DuhSesame said:

A lot of PC fanboy I know doesn't like Surface line-up either, most of them only cares about being cost effective and how to put a crap tons of LED in their case.

Heck, Surface Book 2 sucks so bad on CPU-cooling, that 13" (i7) model receives 200 point less than 13" MacBook Pro in 2018 (i5).

The Surface Book 2 13.5" is fanless in the tablet portion and uses 15 W TDP CPU. The 13" MacBook Pro has a fan and uses a 28 W TDP CPU.

Of course, the GTX 1050 in the base of the 13.5" Surface Book 2 does use a fan. It's also considerably more powerful than the Iris Plus 655.

You're paying a premium for the form factor of the Surface Book. If you're not going to take advantage of that form factor, there are well equipped laptops for less money.

Unfortunately that's not the case for Apple. If you want a laptop with macOS, you must pay Apple's premium.

jkichline said:

And the fun part is, the iPhone XS A12 chip runs faster than the chips in these before they add the ‘X’ after it.  The A12X is going to be a beast especially because it’s optimized with Metal and leveraging that for AI and machine learning.

What gave you the idea that the A12 runs faster? 

Mike Wuerthele said:

KITA said:

AppleInsider said:

For these tests, we were rocking a six-core Intel CPU inside our 15-inch MacBook Pro. It a Core i7 processor with a base speed of 2.2GHz with boost speeds up to powerful 4.1GHz.

Geekbench 4 returned 4,884 for single core and 22,179 for the multi-core. Even though we have the base model 15-inch, it still outpaces the top of the line 2017 model which earned 4,360 and 11,979 for single and multi-core scores respectively.

That also is way above the scores we clocked earlier on the base 13-inch pro which earned 4,602 and 16,699 for the single and multi-core tests.

Geekbench is not telling the full story here at all:

You snipped out the rest of the quote in your zeal.

"In the real world, thermal constraints may be limiting the maximum power that the MacBook Pro could have. We've already started looking into this, and how to solve the problem absent of any patch from Apple, and will get back to you about it."

No, my focus was intentional.

I'm simply disappointed at the amount of attention Geekbench is getting when its results are proving to have very little to tell about the device.

Geekbench gives the new 15-inch MacBook Pro a score of 5306 for single-core operations and 22555 for multi-core. 

Yes, when it's not throttling. For those unaware, Geekbench includes pauses to prevent thermal throttling.

Dave Lee's testing preview:



Aaron Zollo also had a similar experience with some interesting results.