The Apple iPhone 11, 11 Pro & 11 Pro Max Review: Performance, Battery, & Camera Elevated
by Andrei Frumusanu on October 16, 2019 8:30 AM ESTSPEC2006 Perf: Desktop Levels, New Mobile Power Heights
Given that the we didn’t see too many major changes in the microarchitecture of the large Lighting CPU cores, we wouldn’t expect a particularly large performance increase over the A12. However, the 6% clock increase alongside with a few percent improvement in IPC – thanks to improvements in the memory subsystems and core front-end – could, should, and does end up delivering around a 20% performance boost, which is consistent with what Apple is advertising.
I’m still falling back to SPEC2006 for the time being as I hadn’t had time to port and test 2017 for mobile devices yet – it’s something that’s in the pipeline for the near future.
In SPECint2006, the improvements in performance are relatively evenly distributed. On average we’re seeing a 17% increase in performance. The biggest gains were had in 471.omnetpp which is latency bound, and 403.gcc which puts more pressure onto the caches; these tests saw respective increases of 25 and 24%, which is quite significant.
The 456.hmmer score increases are the lowest at 9%. That workload is highly execution backend-bound, and, given that the Lightning cores didn’t see much changes in that regard, we’re mostly seeing minor IPC increases here along with the 6% increase in clock.
While the performance figures are quite straightforward and not revealing anything surprising, the power and efficiency figures on the other hand are extremely unexpected. In virtually all of the SPECint2006 tests, Apple has gone and increased the peak power draw of the A13 SoC; and so in many cases we’re almost 1W above the A12. Here at peak performance it seems the power increase was greater than the performance increase, and that’s why in almost all workloads the A13 ends up as less efficient than the A12.
In the SPECfp2006 workloads, we’re seeing a similar story. The performance increases by the A13 are respectable and average at 19% for the suite, with individual increases between 14 and 25%.
The total power use is quite alarming here, as we’re exceeding 5W for many workloads. In 470.lbm the chip went even higher, averaging 6.27W. If I had not been actively cooling the phone and purposefully attempting it not to throttle, it would be impossible for the chip to maintain this performance for prolonged periods.
Here we saw a few workloads that were more kind in terms of efficiency, so while power consumption is still notably increased, it’s more linear with performance. However in others, we’re still seeing an efficiency regression.
Above is a more detailed historical overview of performance across the SPEC workloads and our past tested SoCs. We’ve now included the latest high-end desktop CPUs as well to give context as to where the mobile is at in terms of absolute performance.
Overall, in terms of performance, the A13 and the Lightning cores are extremely fast. In the mobile space, there’s really no competition as the A13 posts almost double the performance of the next best non-Apple SoC. The difference is a little bit less in the floating-point suite, but again we’re not expecting any proper competition for at least another 2-3 years, and Apple isn’t standing still either.
Last year I’ve noted that the A12 was margins off the best desktop CPU cores. This year, the A13 has essentially matched best that AMD and Intel have to offer – in SPECint2006 at least. In SPECfp2006 the A13 is still roughly 15% behind.
In terms of power and efficiency, the A13 seemingly wasn’t a very successful iteration for Apple, at least when it comes to the efficiency at the chip’s peak performance state. The higher power draw should mean that the SoC and phone will be more prone to throttling and sensitive to temperatures.
This is the A12, not A13
One possible explanation for the quite shocking power figures is that for the A13, Apple is riding the far end of the frequency/voltage curve at the peak frequencies of the new Lightning cores. In the above graph we have an estimated power curve for last year’s A12 – here we can see that Apple is very conservative with voltage up until to the last few hundred MHz. It’s possible that for the A13 Apple was even more aggressive in the later frequency states.
The good news about such a hypothesis is that the A13, on average and in daily workloads, should be operating at significantly more efficient operating points. Apple’s marketing materials describe the A13 as being 20% faster along with also stating that it uses 30% less power than the A12, which unfortunately is phrased in a deceiving (or at least unclear) manner. While we suspect that a lot of people will interpret it to mean that A13 is 20% faster while simultaneously using 30% less power, it’s actually either one or the other. In effect what this means is that at the performance point equivalent to the peak performance of the A12, the A13 would use 30% less power. Given the steepness of Apple’s power curves, I can easily imagine this to be accurate.
Nevertheless, I do question why Apple decided to be so aggressive in terms of power this generation. The N7P process node used in this generation didn’t bring any major improvements, so it’s possible they were in a tough spot of deciding between increasing power or making due with more meager performance increases. Whatever the reason, in the end it doesn’t cause any practical issues for the iPhone 11’s as the chip’s thermal management is top notch.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
242 Comments
View All Comments
BradleyTwo - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link
My apologies if this has been disclosed already, but would it be possible to ask if Apple supplied these phones for testing?The reason I ask is that there is quite a long thread over at a popular Mac rumors forum where a number of us are concerned at the variable screen quality on the iPhone 11 Pro and Pro Max.
Many of us, myself included, have received a suboptimal screen, in that it was a dim, murky yellow display (the less polite of us have called them p-stained), while others have received screens which are not uniformly lit.
We have generally exchanged them to receive marginally better units, a few of which have been perfect, but a disappointing majority of the exchanges are often still below the apparently impressive characteristics of the displays discussed in the review.
As this is not mentioned in the various iPhone 11 Pro reviews, a number of us have formed suspicions that Apple has cherry picked the best screens to supply to reviewers.
A clarification whether Apple did indeed supply the units, or if they were bought off the shelf, would be much appreciated.
techsorz - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link
Apple calibrates each device, this is what XDR essentially is. However this will create better uniformity across displays than make them as different as you say.Dim, murky yellow is probably caused by you not disabling true-tone and auto-brightness. Otherwhise you have a very faulty unit, as this display should be bright enough to nearly burn out your retina. (Exaggeration)
Not uniformly lit could be an error, just return it in this case. Clearly Apple wouldn't supply faulty hardware to anyone on purpose, not testers or consumers.
Andrei Frumusanu - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link
These are Apple review samples, but in our experience and testing they don't differ from commercial models.BradleyTwo - Monday, October 21, 2019 - link
Thank you for the clarification. It would of course be negligent for Apple PR not to ensure reviewers receive fully tested units.I can assure you, however, that when it comes to the screen, the number of less than optimal units being sold at retail is probably higher than you might think. While these are most likely all within manufacturing tolerances for QC purposes, some of them I highly doubt Apple would send to reviewers.
Oh well, at least the 14 day return period provides the opportunity to exchange. The "screen lottery" we call it.
Andrei Frumusanu - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
Apple would have to be very misleading in providing fully sealed units. It's possible that some retail units perform worse but over the years we've never really encountered such a unit.s.yu - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
"It would of course be negligent for Apple PR not to ensure reviewers receive fully tested units."lol! Samsung Fold.
joms_us - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
It is pity though the so-called fastest SoC is not even close to these Android phones which are typically half the speed of fastest desktops. How do you expect people to believe A13 is faster than i-9900K or Ryzen 3950X? Where GeekBiased and jurassic SP2006? LOLhttps://youtu.be/ay9V5Ec8eiY?t=514
https://youtu.be/DtSgdrKztGk?t=423
https://youtu.be/PkVW5eSXKfw?t=115
I'd say cut the crap and show us real-world results not cherry-picked worthless numbers from benchmarking tools.
Quantumz0d - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
The fanboys man they are so blinded by reality, Apple was able to set a perfect world utopian dream for them. Can't fix stupid.I used to run Sultanxda kernel on my OP3 with SD820 processor the SD821 had higher clock speed over 820 but guess what OP screwed it up or Qualcomm didn't provide fix there was Clockspeed crashing at high freq so he disabled it entirely on both big and small. Guess what ? Benches took a massive hit. But UX ? Nope. Infact it improved a lot how is that possible ? I guess Spec and GB only matters right.
Pixel 3 lagged badly due to the RAM issue no one mentions all say its beautiful wonderful amazing. Guess what ? 1080P 60FPS doesn't exist as an option and its auto as Google deems. 4XL no 4K60FPS because less storage. No press mentions.
Coming to this garbage phone. iOS 13 whatever. Same icons, same springboard since 1.1.4 (I used it and JBed it) no desktop no customization to OS. All iPhones on the planet look same just like the brainwash here of ridiculous comparision of a GB (bullshit bench) and Spec score. Masterpiece of corporate koolaid.
Why don't they mention how the Audio format which records is not in Lossless but in AAC crap unlike my V30 does with the 192KHz 24Bit option in FLAC with Limiter and Gain switch or the Video mode which had full manual Pro controls or even the camera having any Manual options. All ASUS, Samsung, LG, Sony, OnePlus, Huawei offer Pro camera forget Pro Video which only LG and Sony do. But No one cares, simpletons only care about A series marketing BS.
The worst of all no Filesystem. $1000 device which doesn't even have a Filsystem usable by end user or has an option to install the apps off the AppStore. Nor any SD expansion slot to be prepared for emergency. But people are riling up and getting worked over the ARM masterrace LMAO with BGA MacBook Pro with 1 USB C port. Bonus is, to develop iOS app you must pay $99 yearly fee AND own that BGA Soldered KB/Touchpad/Battery/SSD macbook because XCode !!
The abomination design. Display mutilation for 3 years while heralding best colors best display LOL. Very funny.
And no 3.5mm jack. Because Apple wanted to make $5bn off revenue from AirPods (Higher than AMDs entire profit) guess what ? Less than 320kbps data rate LMAO. My LG V30 absolutely destroys this phone to oblivion with its ESS9218P DAC processor only found in Top motherboards from ASUS/GB/MSI. Even Vivo Nex decimates this garbage audio iPhone.
Very very funny how even Qualcomm who spent billions of dollars in R&D for their Centriq ARM server processor by even relegating the teams which worked on post 810, full custom Kryo 820 series and dumping all it out because of the Broadcom M&A (Major beneficiary was Apple due to the Hock Tan connection with Apple, he would sell out all LTE patents) impact and no profit in the ARM server market, forget logistics, capex, ROI, x86 emulation AND 64Bit x86 Emulation legacy code with a massive scale of Linux community around.
But we want ARM A series BGA processor which has world class Spec and GB score and beats Mainstream and HEDT LGA processors.
Claps !
Anand2019 - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
Why are you so angry?Quantumz0d - Tuesday, October 22, 2019 - link
Fed up of the unending talk of x86 vs ARM is one hell even AT forums cpu and oc subforum. Whole thread dedicated to worship this talk.Two Apple ruined smartphones by this policy of removing jack and features while raising the price to moon, Other companies also want greed by forcing people to buy BT earphones which sound garbage, horrid longevity (Need to charge everyday) pushing people to buy trash (Beats) thus making whole market saturated with Apple agenda. Look at Google Pixel 4 they also removed offering Dongle, Samsung, OnePlus. Same thing like Apple very greedy.
Three destroyed the laptops with thin and light obsession. And soldered junk with less and less I/O.
Finally 4th - this corporation is built on American values but is a stooge to cash from China thus enabling more totalitarianship while claiming Liberty on US land. Spineless positiin.