
First Apple Silicon Benchmarks Destroy Surface Pro X - sharjeelsayed
https://www.thurrott.com/apple/237225/first-apple-silicon-benchmarks-destroy-surface-pro-x#
======
scottlawson
> a Mac Mini-like device with an Apple A12Z system-on-a-chip (SoC), 16 GB of
> RAM, and 512 GB of SSD storage—delivers an average single-core score of 811
> and an average multi-core score of 2871.

> compared to Microsoft’s Surface Pro X, which has the fastest available
> Qualcomm-based ARM chipset and can run Geekbench natively—not emulated—it’s
> amazing: Surface Pro X only averages 764 on the single-core test and 2983 in
> multi-core. Right. The emulated performance of the Apple silicon is as good
> or better than the native performance of the SQ-1-based Surface Pro X.

I'm so confused. The title is that the apple arm chip _destroys_ the Qualcomm
chip in benchmarks. And then the author concluded that the benchmarks show
apple doing at least as good if not better.

But... Am I interpreting these numbers correctly? Looking at the numbers it
seems to show apple having faster single core performance and Microsoft
surface having faster multicore performance. If my understanding is correct
then I can't figure out how the author concluded the apple performance is as
good or better.

One point the author emphasizes is that apple is getting these performance
numbers despite the overhead of emulation. I'm interested to see what the
native performance is given the close performance benchmark numbers with
emulation. However to conclude that these specific benchmarks show apple
destroying the surface chip does seem to me like a bit of reality distortion.

