iPhone X tops MacBook Pro

«1

Comments

  • 37 Comments sorted by Date Votes
  • IPhone 10.5? I'm going to need a bigger pocket!!!

  • WTF are Intel up to? They're being overtaken by mobile chips....

  • edited September 13 Vote Up0

    But that's a core i5 2.3 a pretty slow Mac....

    it's certainly fast for mobile but it's all relative :)
    I just did a geek bench on my pc out of curiosity and my my multi-core score is 14337. I built my PC in 2009/10 although I've upgraded the chip and GFX cards etc since then.

  • Yes, the MacBook Pro isn't very "Pro"...

  • This is interesting, but the news here is equal parts "wow iPhone X is awesome" and "2017 MBPro 13 is not awesome"

  • Actually, I take that back. I just ran Geekbench on my workstation (i7 4930K from 2013) and the single-core performance is still below the MacBook Pro and the iPhone X. Even a newer Intel chip wouldn't be that much faster. I think that ARM really is catching up with Intel, Moore's Law seems to have failed in the last 10 years or so.

  • Ok, it's faster than my mac mini. Well, theoretically.

    But 1600 AUD for a phone? Thanks but no :)

  • My perspective is that MacBook Pro can run Logic Pro pretty well. So I’m looking for DAW software vendors to take iOS devices even more seriously.

  • CibCib
    edited September 13 Vote Up0

    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

  • edited September 13 Vote Up0

    @Hmtx said:
    This is interesting, but the news here is equal parts "wow iPhone X is awesome" and "2017 MBPro 13 is not awesome"

    No, the old news is apple mobile chips are amazing,
    and intel mobile chips suck.
    People here are comparing mobile chips to desktop chips,
    to get the picture you need to compare apples a chips to intels m chips. ;)

  • CibCib
    edited September 13 Vote Up0

    They better solve the iPad Pro issues before >:)
    However, it makes no sense to compare a tablet or even worse a smartphone to a notebook.
    Even if that smartphone would be a rocket....doesn't change that you have one finger games and ring-tone app on the top list :#

  • edited September 13 Vote Up0

    @Max23 said:

    @Hmtx said:
    This is interesting, but the news here is equal parts "wow iPhone X is awesome" and "2017 MBPro 13 is not awesome"

    No, the old news is apple mobile chips are amazing,
    and intel mobile chips suck.
    People here are comparing mobile chips to desktop chips,
    to get the picture you need to compare apples a chips to intels m chips. ;)

    Not necessarily. Many musicians use intel mobile chips to get the production job done. The point here is to see if if ARM chips can get this same job done, albeit in tablet form.

    Yes there’s a multi-instancing bug with the newest iPad Pro’s...but beyond that I’m quite impressed with the performance for integrated DAW purposes. It looks like A11 Bionic will make things even better still.

  • edited September 13 Vote Up0

    @Cib said:
    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

    I get it, you’ve given up on iOS, ARM, AU ....the whole kit and kaboodle lol.

    I love where it is now, and where it appears to be going. :)

  • Maybe now we will see more UNIVERSAL APPS!

    (eagerly awaiting Brambos providing iPad vs iPhone net sales by developers) ;)

  • edited September 13 Vote Up0

    @realdavidai said:

    @Cib said:
    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

    I get it, you’ve given up on iOS, ARM, AU ....the whole kit and kaboodle lol.

    I dont think you got it. What he was saying that comparing those scores between so different architectures makes the score nearly irrelevant to what the processor does in reality. There is so much more to this thing than geekbench scores, which can give some indication on how different products with similar processors compare, but you cant use them in comparing an processing power between intel and arm chips. They have different codes running for the benchmark test and that code might be more easily calculated with arm, but when you put something else there, the tables might turn completely. I dont think iphone x is actually more powerful than @richardyot 's desktop computer in a single core task in real world usage.

  • i don't understand any of this stuff. but i was thinkin yesterday that the new iPhone costs so much, may as well just get a new laptop if yer gonna drop that kinda money. ya really need yer phone to do all that shit?

    also, even tho i aint one a them paranoid types, the face-scan thing really kinda creeps me out. putin and trump prolly got enough of my info already, aint no way I'm scanning my damn face for em.

  • @ToMess said:

    @realdavidai said:

    @Cib said:
    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

    I get it, you’ve given up on iOS, ARM, AU ....the whole kit and kaboodle lol.

    I dont think you got it. What he was saying that comparing those scores between so different architectures makes the score nearly irrelevant to what the processor does in reality. There is so much more to this thing than geekbench scores, which can give some indication on how different products with similar processors compare, but you cant use them in comparing an processing power between intel and arm chips. They have different codes running for the benchmark test and that code might be more easily calculated with arm, but when you put something else there, the tables might turn completely. I dont think iphone x is actually more powerful than @richardyot 's desktop computer in a single core task in real world usage.

    I do get it. My assessment is based on the rest of his diatribes. I think he even got rid of his iPad - he’s a cool musician though :D

    Comparing architecture is not perfect, but neither is it useless. Beyond this... these are currently the only numbers we have vs what perennially skeptical people just “think” anyway.

    The chips appear to be getting better and better and iOS music enthusiasts are able to benefit from Apple continuing to push in this area.

  • @RulesOfBlazon said:
    i don't understand any of this stuff. but i was thinkin yesterday that the new iPhone costs so much, may as well just get a new laptop if yer gonna drop that kinda money. ya really need yer phone to do all that shit?

    Or use what you've got and go on a holiday with whole of your family. They're gonna love you for it.

    also, even tho i aint one a them paranoid types, the face-scan thing really kinda creeps me out. putin and trump prolly got enough of my info already, aint no way I'm scanning my damn face for em.

    Right on

  • @RulesOfBlazon said:
    i don't understand any of this stuff. but i was thinkin yesterday that the new iPhone costs so much, may as well just get a new laptop if yer gonna drop that kinda money. ya really need yer phone to do all that shit?

    also, even tho i aint one a them paranoid types, the face-scan thing really kinda creeps me out. putin and trump prolly got enough of my info already, aint no way I'm scanning my damn face for em.

    It's not creepy google
    Your biometric data stays on your device only and is not transmitted into the cloud
    The same way your fingerprints from Touch ID do ...
    It is stored in something apple calls secure enclave on the chip
    So I guess it's not that easy to take away your ID ...

  • @supadom said:

    @RulesOfBlazon said:
    i don't understand any of this stuff. but i was thinkin yesterday that the new iPhone costs so much, may as well just get a new laptop if yer gonna drop that kinda money. ya really need yer phone to do all that shit?

    Or use what you've got and go on a holiday with whole of your family. They're gonna love you for it.

    Y'know, that's exactly how i got my younger daughter to stop buggin me about getting the X - asked if she'd rather go back to Costa Rica next summer...

  • @RulesOfBlazon said:
    i don't understand any of this stuff. but i was thinkin yesterday that the new iPhone costs so much, may as well just get a new laptop if yer gonna drop that kinda money. ya really need yer phone to do all that shit?

    I think you hit the nail on the head - the iPhone has been very very valuable to me for songwriting (garageband is a dream to have in your pocket all the time,etc alone gadget, etc), quick recordings of gigs, etc (Audioshare with measurement mode, or tascam im2 mic), practicing bass to learn songs, sometimes on gig breaks, things like that. Also great for photos and videos (but any smartphone now is fine for my needs in that area). However, I tried using it to dictate case notes for work, things like that but a laptop or iPad is still necessary there (I'm handwriting notes with a bluetooth stylus in goodnotes now and that has been working well). I am typing this post on my phone and going back every other word to correct some damn autocorrect and typing on tiny keys (swiping, still not super efficient). I don't mix records on my phone either.

    At some point its enough, I just bought my 6s off the lease today and I will use it until it won't work, either from mechanical failure or because apple decides its too old, then I'll decide what to replace it with.

  • @ToMess said:

    @realdavidai said:

    @Cib said:
    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

    I get it, you’ve given up on iOS, ARM, AU ....the whole kit and kaboodle lol.

    I dont think you got it. What he was saying that comparing those scores between so different architectures makes the score nearly irrelevant to what the processor does in reality. There is so much more to this thing than geekbench scores, which can give some indication on how different products with similar processors compare, but you cant use them in comparing an processing power between intel and arm chips. They have different codes running for the benchmark test and that code might be more easily calculated with arm, but when you put something else there, the tables might turn completely. I dont think iphone x is actually more powerful than @richardyot 's desktop computer in a single core task in real world usage.

    Yes, you'll never achieve that kind of performance in real world usage. As far as I understand, the mobile performance score indicates only theoretical performance and the mobile and desktop benchmark tests are somewhat different. Under full load, your mobile device will quickly (almost immediately) start to overheat and the OS will start throttling the CPU to prevent overheating.

  • edited September 26 Vote Up0

    iPhone X is the one that makes difference in this year. However, the price is too expensive. I already got an iPhone 8 Plus and luckily got all my old content transferred to the new iPhone.

  • @yug said:

    @ToMess said:

    @realdavidai said:

    @Cib said:
    Those benchmarks are useless....mainly. ARM and X86 are so different and ARM still couldn't handle all the stuff my macbook with i7 can.
    Also iOS still waste that "power" with crippled software, no hyperthreading etc. and it seems a single synth or FX can't use multiple cores if needed.
    If that would be so easy, Apple could put 4 A11 into a macbook :)

    I get it, you’ve given up on iOS, ARM, AU ....the whole kit and kaboodle lol.

    I dont think you got it. What he was saying that comparing those scores between so different architectures makes the score nearly irrelevant to what the processor does in reality. There is so much more to this thing than geekbench scores, which can give some indication on how different products with similar processors compare, but you cant use them in comparing an processing power between intel and arm chips. They have different codes running for the benchmark test and that code might be more easily calculated with arm, but when you put something else there, the tables might turn completely. I dont think iphone x is actually more powerful than @richardyot 's desktop computer in a single core task in real world usage.

    Yes, you'll never achieve that kind of performance in real world usage. As far as I understand, the mobile performance score indicates only theoretical performance and the mobile and desktop benchmark tests are somewhat different. Under full load, your mobile device will quickly (almost immediately) start to overheat and the OS will start throttling the CPU to prevent overheating.

    i'm not sure that's right... will investigate and come back...need some accurate info on the topic... lets stop speculating.

  • I think it's funny people are still thinking about this as if it's the "phone" aspect anyone cares about here. It's the most state of the art portable, personal computer ever made.

  • @Tarekith said:
    I think it's funny people are still thinking about this as if it's the "phone" aspect anyone cares about here. It's the most state of the art portable, personal computer ever made.

    Yup

  • huh? looks like the iphone 8 will be better than the X for us audio peeps...

    https://www.cultofmac.com/503458/iphone-8-beats-iphone-x-early-benchmark-tests/

  • edited September 19 Vote Up0

    @Halftone said:
    huh? looks like the iphone 8 will be better than the X for us audio peeps...

    https://www.cultofmac.com/503458/iphone-8-beats-iphone-x-early-benchmark-tests/

    Well... yeah i think that was expected (at least for me, taking in to account the screen resolution, etc...), if there’s something apple can’t be criticized for its that they don’t put cheaper/ older processors on non-premium models, that’s cool. And the iPhone 8 it’s probably a better buy if you don’t care about the looks and only want a fast device for making music.

  • And obviously if you don't care about the absence of the 3.5mm jack which I use all the time on all my devices...

  • @Munibeast said:
    And obviously if you don't care about the absence of the 3.5mm jack which I use all the time on all my devices...

    Jajajajajaja, that´s done. It’s not coming back, we can keep crying about it or get over it.

    I use it all the time as well on my iPad (where i make music) but on the iPhone...here’s the thing: for daily use (which is what I use it for, no music creation) I really don’t care about the headphone jack but I do wonder how iPhone people manage to use their device, what about connecting a MIDI keyboard and using headphones? MIDI over Bluetooth? Or maybe no one uses a MIDI keyboard with an iPhone?, I’m intrigued by the workflow...

Sign In or Register to comment.