The iPhone 16 Pro risks disappointing a lot


Could the next iPhone be less powerful than expected? At least that’s what a well-known informant seems to be reporting. Apple would have preferred to focus on other elements.

According to recent SoC (systems on a chip) rumors, the Apple A18 Pro, which is expected to launch later this year, may not bring significant performance gains over its predecessor, the A17 Pro. Obviously, some amateurs ask themselves many questions. Will we really be treated to disappointing performance for the next iPhone? In any case, this is one of the big fears.

The next Soc of the iPhone worries

As reported by Wccftech, well-known Apple product insider Nguyen Phi Hung revealed that the A18 Pro may only have a 10% improvement in multi-core performance compared to the A17 Pro. This would put the A18 Pro’s score around 8,000 points on Geekbench 6, a respectable score but one that could seem insufficient against future competitors like Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 and MediaTek’s Dimensity 9400. The latter are in fact expected to greatly surpass this score, with multi-core performance exceeding 10,000 points.

However, it looks like Apple may focus on optimizing battery life. By deliberately limiting the multi-core performance of the A18 Pro. This strategy would be in line with reports that the iPhone 16 Pro and iPhone 16 Pro Max would come with larger batteries than their predecessors. Suggesting that priority could be given to endurance rather than raw power. Another point, much requested by users for several generations.

Despite these potential compromises in multi-core performance, the A18 Pro could still shine in terms of single-core performance. Where it is expected to outperform the Snapdragon 8 Gen 4 and Dimensity 9400. This single-core performance could continue to put Apple’s iPhones in the lead for certain specific uses.

Apple’s current chip development situation could also be impacted by the departure of several talented engineers. Particularly those in the semiconductor division. This could explain why the performance gains are not as high as expected.



Source link -120