At the heart of every Apple device is an Apple processor. Apple has been using its own chips in its iPhones and iPads for some time, while the Mac lineup has completed its transition away from Intel chips. Every product Apple makes is powered by a home-grown chip.
What’s remarkable about Apple silicon is its performance and power efficiency. But all chips aren’t created equally. Understanding the performance differences between each chip will help with your buying decisions, especially when you’re deciding between iPhone 16 or MacBook models. Knowing how each chip performs gives you a better idea of what products to buy and whether or not it’s worth your money to step up to a higher model.
Let’s take a look at how the new processors compare with the rest of the processors in the iPhone, iPad, and Mac lineup and see how each performs and what that means to you. For the sake of consistency, we’ve used Geekbench 6 benchmarks. Here’s every chip and how the benchmarks compare with each other.
Update October 10, 2024: Added benchmarks for the A18 Pro and A18 for the new iPhone 16 lineup.
Every current processor compared
Results are scores. Higher scores/longer bars are faster. Chips in this chart are currently available in Apple devices.
Before we get into the individual processors, let’s let the chips fall where they may. In the above chart, we’ve only included chips that are in Apple’s current product lineups for the sake of keeping the chart manageable. The Mac section below includes all of the chips, from the M1 to the current chip. If you’re looking for scores of chips that are no longer being used in Apple’s active iPhone or iPad lineups (such as the A12 Bionic), check out the Geekbench Browser.
It’s a somewhat predictable chart, with the fastest Mac chips at the top, followed by a mix of iPads and iPhones. But there are still some fascinating results: owners of the iPad Pro can say their tablet is about as fast as a MacBook Air and that wouldn’t be much of a reach. And the difference between the $399 iPhone SE and the $899 iPhone 14 isn’t as huge as their price difference indicates.
If you’re not seeing all the bar chart labels, it may be because your browser font is set larger than the default, or your browser is zoomed in. You’ll need to set the font size and browser view to the default to see all the chart labels.
Read about how Apple’s M1 and M2 processors compare to Intel in our Mac processor guide.
iPhone processors
Results are scores. Higher scores/longer bars are faster. Chips in this chart are currently available in Apple devices.
Let’s look at the specifications of the iPhones currently in Apple’s lineup so we can understand the differences between them.
| Processor | Performance cores | Efficiency cores | Graphics cores | Neural Engine | Memory | Thermal Design Power | Devices |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A18 Pro | 2 at 4.04GHz | 4 at 2.2GHz | 6 | 16-core | 8GB | 10W | iPhone 16 Pro iPhone 16 Pro Max |
| A18 | 2 at 4.04GHz | 4 at 2.2GHz | 5 | 16-core | 8GB | 9W | iPhone 16 iPhone 16 Plus |
| A16 Bionic | 2 at 3.46GHz | 4 at 2.02GHz | 5 | 16-core | 8GB | 6W | iPhone 15 |
| A15 Bionic | 2 at 3.22GHz | 4 at 1.82GHz | 5 | 16-core | 8GB | 6W | iPhone 14 |
| A15 Bionic | 2 at 3.22GHz | 4 at 1.82GHz | 4 | 16-core | 8GB | 6W | iPhone SE |
Not surprisingly, the A18 Pro in the iPhone 16 Pro is the fastest. The difference between the A18 Pro and the A18 in the iPhone 16 is that the A18 has one fewer GPU core.
The iPhone 14 and iPhone SE both have an A15 Bionic processor, but the iPhone 14 has one more GPU core than the iPhone 13, so it offers better graphics performance.
iPad processors
Results are scores. Higher scores/longer bars are faster. Chart includes chips in discontinued Apple devices.
The staggered release of Apple’s iPad lineup creates an odd-looking performance order of CPU and its device.
| Performance cores | Efficiency cores | Graphics cores | Neural Engine | Memory | Transistors | Thermal Design Power | Devices |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4 at 4.4GHz | 6 at 2.85 | 10 | 16-core | 16GB | 28 billion | 20W | 13″ & 11″ iPad Pro |
| 3 at 4.4GHz | 6 at 2.85 | 10 | 16-core | 8GB | 28 billion | 20W | 13″ & 11″ iPad Pro |
| 4 at 3.49GHz | 4 at 2.06GHz | 9 | 16-core | 8GB | 20 billion | 15W | 13″ & 11″ iPad Air |
| 2 at 2.93GHz | 4 at 1.82GHz | 5 | 16-core | 8GB | 15 billion | 6W | iPad mini |
| 2 at 3.1GHz | 4 at 1.8GHz | 4 | 16-core | 6GB | 11.8 billion | 6W | iPad (10th gen) |
| 2 at 2.66GHz | 4 at 1.6GHz | 4 | 8-core | 4GB | 8.5 billion | 6W | iPad (9th gen) |
The M4-equipped iPad Pros are the fastest models, and the gap between them and the iPad and iPad mini is significant. Furthermore, the M4 is 1.5 times faster than the M2 that it replaced in the previous iPad Pros and is in the current iPad Air.
The new 10th-gen iPad that was released in the fall of 2022 has an A14 Bionic, an upgrade from the A13 Bionic in the previous model. Apple says the new 10th-gen iPad offers a 20 percent CPU boost and a 10 percent graphics increase.
Mac processors
Results are scores. Higher scores/longer bars are faster. Chart includes chips in discontinued Apple devices.
With Apple’s M-series of chips for the Mac, the company’s release schedule involves the base version in the MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, Mac mini, and iMac. Apple then modifies it to create higher-end versions.
The latest M-Series chip is the M3, which was released with the new iMac and the MacBook Pro in the fall of 2023. The M3 Pro and Max were also released in the MacBook Pro, replacing the M2 Pro and Max in those laptops. The M3 Ultra has not been released, so the Mac Studio and Mac Pro still use the M2 Ultra.
| Processor | Performance cores | Efficiency cores | Graphics cores | Neural Engine | Base memory | Transistors | Thermal Design Power | Device |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M2 Ultra | 16 at 3.49GHz | 8 at 2.4GHz | 76 | 32-core | 64GB | 134 billion | 60W | Mac Studio, Mac Pro |
| M2 Ultra | 16 at 3.49GHz | 8 at 2.4GHz | 60 | 32-core | 64GB | 134 billion | 60W | Mac Studio, Mac Pro |
| M3 Max | 12 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 40 | 16-core | 36GB | 92 billion | 30W | 14″ & 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M3 Max | 10 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 30 | 16-core | 36GB | 92 billion | 30W | 14″ & 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M2 Max | 8 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 38 | 16-core | 32GB | 67 billion | 30W | Mac Studio |
| M2 Max | 8 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 30 | 16-core | 32GB | 67 billion | 30W | Mac Studio |
| M3 Pro | 6 at 3.7GHz | 6 at 2.4GHz | 18 | 16-core | 18GB | 37 billion | 30W | 14″ & 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M3 Pro | 5 at 3.7GHz | 6 at 2.4GHz | 14 | 16-core | 18GB | 37 billion | 30W | 14″ MacBook Pro |
| M3 | 4 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 10 | 16-core | 8GB | 25 billion | 15W | iMac, 14″ MacBook Pro |
| M3 | 4 at 3.7GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 8 | 16-core | 8GB | 25 billion | 15W | iMac |
| M2 | 4 at 3.49GHz | 4 at 2.4GHz | 8 | 16-core | 8GB | 20 billion | 15W | 13″ MacBook Air |
The M2 Ultra is a beast of a chip, blazing in both CPU and GPU performance. The M2 Ultra is in the Mac Pro, which has PCIe expansion slots. If you don’t need such slots, you can opt for an M2 Ultra Mac Studio. The M2 Max Mac Studio offers a nice combination of price and performance.
The chip that started it all, the good ol’ M1, may seem slow compared to Apple’s more current chips—but that’s not to undermine Apple’s original Mac processor. Remember, the M1 blows past the Intel processors it replaced, resulting in a significant price/performance value.
Source : Macworld
