Potential Benchmark for iPhone XR Successor Shows 4GB RAM, Moderate Performance Gains

A new Geekbench result posted this evening purportedly reveals performance data for the next-generation iPhone XR set to debut at next week's media event.

The result, spotted by forum member EugW, lists a model number of "iPhone12,1" running iOS 13.1 with a motherboard identifier of N104AP. Back in May, Bloomberg reported that the next-generation ‌iPhone XR‌ was internally codenamed N104, while 9to5Mac reported in July that the device would carry the model number iPhone12,1.

If legitimate, the result reveals a few details about the ‌iPhone XR‌ successor and its A13 chip. First, the result shows approximately 4 GB of RAM for the device, which would be an increase over the 3 GB found in the current ‌iPhone XR‌ and in line with predictions from noted analyst Ming-Chi Kuo. The iPhone XS and XS Max already include 4 GB of RAM, and there have not been any solid rumors suggesting their successors will see an increase.

Moving on to the A13 itself, the result indicates it continues to include six cores, presumably in an identical setup compared to the A12 with two high-performance cores and four high-efficiency cores.

The A13's high-performance cores are shown running at 2.66 GHz in today's result, compared to 2.49 GHz in the A12, leading to an approximately 12–13 percent gain in single-core performance for the A13 with a score of 5415, compared to an average 4796 for the A12 in the iPhone XR.

Interestingly, the A13's multi-core score of 11294 is nearly identical to the A12's average score of 11192, although Geekbench's developer John Poole tells us there could be some throttling due to thermal limits as similar situations have been seen with the A12 in the ‌iPhone XS‌ and XR, so we may have to wait for more data to see where the A13 truly tops out.

Careful observers will note oddly low figures for the L1 and L2 caches on this A13, but Poole tells us Geekbench has difficulty telling whether the cache values it reads are for the high-performance or high-efficiency cores, particularly on unreleased hardware for which the software hasn't been optimized.

While we can't confirm whether the Geekbench result is legitimate, as results certainly can be faked, all of the data appears reasonable or explainable and Poole tells us "there's nothing obviously wrong with the result."

We'll know more with the unveiling of all three of the new iPhones at Apple's media event on September 10, although Apple is unlikely to share specifics on chip speeds and RAM amounts. It won't take long, however, for additional data to surface confirming specs for the new devices.

Related Roundup: iPhone 11
Buyer's Guide: iPhone 11 (Neutral)

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

25 weeks ago

Reaching the limits of speed on these tiny devices.

I don’t think it’s a limit of speed, but rather of what we are requiring of these devices.

Between 2011-14 we were really pushing our iPhones with the many new features and apps pushing these limits (1080p then 4K video, 400+ ppi screens, and previous-gen console ports - think GTA 3/VC/SA/LCS, Bully, various NFS releases and even Bioshock).

Since 2015 I think Apple has added Portrait Mode to the iPhone and that’s it. The console port scene is dead. What other new app has really required additional horsepower from our iPhones? Pretty much all users are using some combination of push mail/social networking/music streaming/video streaming - which even an iPhone SE can do well.
Rating: 16 Votes
25 weeks ago
Nice to see the comments from Poole indicating this could be legitimate.

Here's hoping for 6 GB 128 GB OLED iPhones!
Rating: 14 Votes
25 weeks ago
Reaching the limits of speed on these tiny devices.
Rating: 8 Votes
25 weeks ago

They sort of are. New processes do not offer higher performance anymore (at least not the way it happened before). They do let the designers to pack more transistors on the die and indirectly (by using more cores) increase the performance but only for multi-thread/process scenarios. At least this is my impression about the latest process nodes.

This "stalling" in the A processor performance progress may pour cold water on the dreams of some posters here who expected A processors to overtake Intel/AMD processors in performance very soon.

There is no stalling the A-processor performance. We are talking about the XR-successor here. You should expect much more from Pro.

Second, new processes offer higher performance. It’s just dumb to try to increase processor performance by relying too much on clock rate. Power consumption/dissipation = CV^2f. Increasing f also generally requires increasing V. Bad idea. It’s much better, for anything running on batteries and without a fan, to increase performance by more efficiently using each transistor (increase IPC).

This is not a new phenomena - it’s been going on for years. If all that mattered was clock rate you’d end up with something like the GaAs F-RISC research project at Rensselaer. Super-high clock rates at the time, terrible CPU performance.

Meaningless when there's no software (on Android anyway) that could actually run all cores at once.
Rumor is the A13 is TSMC 7nm+ EUV (where some of the chip is done using EUV).

EUV should buy them something like 10-15% performance or power (I imagine they’ll optimize for power, and increase the clock rate a bit by shrinking the critical paths, while also improving IPC with bigger caches/buffers and maybe some minor micro architectural changes. Most of the new stuff will be in the co-processors, which won’t show up in current benchmark testing that isn’t optimized to use the hardware).
Rating: 7 Votes
25 weeks ago
Even if the 2018 XR has a Ram bump from 3GB to 4GB for the 2019 11R, that alone is something worth noting for an upgrade.
Rating: 7 Votes
25 weeks ago
I realize that the iPhone XR successor may be in some ways (camera, screen) a step down even from the original iPhone X (or at least a lateral move as the XR tech improves), but for me I think it may be a real consideration as a previous 6 Plus and 7 Plus owner for a slightly wider screen (I think in many ways that the XR size is the sweet spot in the lineup) as the X can feel a bit small. While I know the XS Max is about the same body size as the prior Plus models, I don’t really want to go putting something of that size back in my pocket all the time and with iPhones now full screen I can’t imagine the top of the XS Max is all that easy to use one handed.
Rating: 7 Votes
25 weeks ago
Already picked up by www.iphonehacks.com ('http://www.iphonehacks.com')


I'll be Keeping my XS Max for a while. I see nothing compelling me to dump it. Maybe in a few more generations.

Of course, it's a flagship phone that isn't even a year old yet.

I typically keep my iPhones 3-4 years... which is why I'll probably wait with my 7 Plus (with 3 GB RAM and 8 month old battery) until 2020, to get 5G. A 120 Hz ProMotion screen would also be a bonus.

You won’t see a substantial performance upgrade until 2021 when the bionic chip goes with 7nm architecture. :apple:

Last year's A12 is already TSMC's 7 nm.
Rating: 7 Votes
25 weeks ago

Standalone Apple Watch already exist when it debuted with Series 3 using cellular capabilities.... You can easily keep you’re iPhone at home while answering calls or text when traveling away from home. I do it as much as I can... I highly doubt Apple creates a Apple Watch that isn’t tied to the iPhone.

Think of it as iMessage, whereas it locks users to the iPhone... Apple Watch tied to the iPhone, gives a similar approach to iMessage... locks in the user.

Being able to briefly untether your watch is a FAR cry from it being “standalone”!
The instructions for updating it begin with “make sure your iPhone is on the latest version.
Standalone would imply that you could own and use an Apple Watch, WITHOUT owning/using an iPhone... which you simply cannot.
It is my understanding that the Apple Watch doesn’t have its own # registered on a network or anything, rather it does a fancy “cloning” of your iPhone SIM & passes the calls/messages/notifications sent to that device... so, if you canceled service on your iPhone, your Apple Watch would not do that anymore.
That is, by definition, a companion device (with limited autonomy), again... NOT a standalone device.
Rating: 4 Votes
25 weeks ago
This focus on benchmark logic grunt is becoming a bit meaningless as the A series from Apple is approaching laptop parity in cpu power.
I suspect that Apple's silicon focus will be in more silicon AI which debuted in the A11 on the iPhoneX for FaceID.
Apple, you must remember, designs the hardware to fit its applications. Unlike its rival smart phone manufacturers who are using off the shelf CPU's and trying to fit the application to someone else's hardware.
That's the advantage Apple has and has been capitalising on for a long time.
Face ID 2 years on has no comparison from any other vendor.
Rating: 4 Votes
25 weeks ago

No. It's impossible for A12 to hit 5415 single core. This is 12% faster than the fastest A12 score ever recorded.

Very unlikely, IMO, for various reasons.

Well, it is clocked 7% higher than the A12, no? Seems unlikely that a new micro architecture, clocked 7% faster, would achieve only 12% improvement? That’s a pretty tiny IPC upgrade - easily explainable by bigger cache, for example. Based on the numbers, doesn’t seem to have much in the way of improved microarchitecture. Makes me think its some sort of A12 derivative.

It’s something that Apple could, if they wanted, use a year-old SoC and still outperform everyone else.

However, I doubt it. When has Apple ever used an older SoC in a brand new iPhone? Or taken an older SoC and given it a clock speed bump?

Plus there’s a rumor of a new co-processor called “Matrix” for image processing. I’m quite sure all iPhones get an A13.

They’ve used old CPUs in the down-market “new” phones before.
Rating: 4 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]