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 almost completed its transition away from Intel chips. Apple now has far more devices with its own silicon than Intel – all that’s left is the Mac Pro – and before the end of 2023 every product Apple makes will likely be powered by an in-house chip.
What’s remarkable about Apple silicon is its performance and energy efficiency. But not all chips are created equal. Understanding the performance differences between each chip will help with your purchasing decisions, especially when deciding between iPhone 14 or MacBook models. Knowing how each chip performs gives you a better idea of which products to buy and whether or not it’s worth upgrading to a higher model.
Let’s see how the new processors stack up against other processors in the iPhone, iPad, and Mac lineup and see how each performs and what it means for you. For consistency, we’ve used Geekbench 5 benchmarks. Here’s each chip and how the benchmarks compare to each other.
Each processor compared
Before we get to the individual processors, let’s let the chips fall where they may. We’ve only included chips in Apple devices that are still on sale and it’s a somewhat predictable picture, with the fastest Macs leading the way, followed by a mix of iPads and iPhones. But there are some fascinating results nonetheless: iPad Pro owners can say their tablet is about as fast as a MacBook Air and that wouldn’t be an exaggeration. And the difference between the $399 iPhone SE and the $899 iPhone 14 isn’t as huge as their price difference suggests.
Find out how Apple’s M1 and M2 processors compare to Intel in our Mac processor guide.
iPhone processors
Let’s take a look at the specifications in order to understand the differences between them.
Processor | Performance Cores | Efficiency Cores | Graphic hearts | neural engine | Memory | Transistors | Thermal design power | Devices |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
A16 bionic | 2 to 3.46GHz | 4 to 2.02GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 6W | iPhone 14 Pro |
A15 bionic | 2 to 3.22GHz | 4 to 1.82GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 15 billion | 6W | iPhone 14 |
A15 bionic | 2 to 3.22GHz | 4 to 1.82GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 15 billion | 6W | iPhone 13, iPhone SE |
A14 bionic | 2 to 3.1GHz | 4 to 1.8GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 6 GB | 11.8 billion | 6W | iPhone 12 |
Now let’s take a look at the performance of each processor. Unsurprisingly, the A16 Bionic in the iPhone 14 Pro is the fastest. Both the iPhone 14 and iPhone 13 have an A15 Bionic processor, but the iPhone 13 has one less GPU core than the iPhone 13 Pro, giving it better graphics performance.
Apple is still selling the iPhone 12, which has an A14 Bionic. It’s actually not much slower than the A15 Bionic in the iPhone 13 – the specs between the two processors are virtually the same, with the A15 Bionic’s performance cores having a slightly faster clock speed and more RAM. If price is the main priority over camera and other features, consider the iPhone 12 instead of the iPhone 13.
The speed difference is more obvious between the A14 Bionic of the iPhone 12 and the chips of the iPhone 14 models. This could be the last hurray for the A14 Bionic since the iPhone 12 will be replaced by the 13 as that low-cost option with Apple’s next major iPhone rollout next fall, though it’s possible it’ll make its way into the next Apple TV revision.
iPad processors
The staggered release of Apple’s iPad line creates an odd order of performance between the processor and its device.
Processor | Performance Cores | Efficiency Cores | Graphic hearts | neural engine | Memory | Transistors | Thermal design power | Devices |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M2 | 4 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | ten | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15W | iPad Pro 12.9″ and 11″ |
M1 | 4 to 3.2GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14W | ipad air |
A15 bionic | 2 to 2.93GHz | 4 to 1.82GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 4GB | 15 billion | 6W | ipad mini |
A14 bionic | 2 to 3.1GHz | 4 to 1.8GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 6 GB | 11.8 billion | 6W | iPad |
M2-equipped iPad Pros are the fastest models, and the gap between them and the iPad and iPad mini is significant. Additionally, the M2 is 15% faster than the M1 it replaced in previous iPad Pros and the current iPad Air.
The new 10th generation iPad released in fall 2022 features an A14 Bionic, an upgrade from the previous model’s A13 Bionic. Apple says the new 10th generation iPad offers a 20% increase in processor and a 10% increase in graphics.
Mac processors
Along with Apple’s M-series of chips for Mac, the company’s release schedule involves the base version of the MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and other Macs. Apple then modifies it to create higher-end versions. Find out how the M2 compares to the M1 Pro and M1 Max.
The latest M-series chip is the M2, which was released with the new 13-inch MacBook Pro and MacBook Air in the summer of 2022, right after WWDC. The M2 replaces the M1 on these Macs, but Apple may keep M1 models to offer as low-cost options, like the $999 MacBook Air M1. In January 2023, Apple released the M2 Pro in 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro and Mac mini, and the M2 Max in 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro with an M2 Mac mini.
Processor | Performance Cores | Efficiency Cores | Graphic hearts | neural engine | Basic memory | Transistors | Thermal design power | Device |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M2 Max | 8 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | 38 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 67 billion | 30W | MacBook Pro 14″ and 16″ |
M2 Max | 8 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | 30 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 67 billion | 30W | MacBook Pro 14″ and 16″ |
M2 Pro | 8 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | 19 | 16 cores | 16 GB | 40 billion | 30W | MacBook Pro 14″ and 16″ |
M2 Pro | 6 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | 16 | 16 cores | 16 GB | 40 billion | 30W | MacBookPro 14″ |
M2 | 4 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | ten | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15W | MacBook Pro 13″, MacBook Air |
M2 | 4 to 3.49GHz | 4 to 2.4GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15W | Macbook Air |
M1 Ultra | 16 @ 3.2GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | 64 | 32 hearts | 64 GB | 114 billion | 60W | mac studio |
M1 Ultra | 16 @ 3.2GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | 48 | 32 hearts | 64 GB | 114 billion | 60W | mac studio |
M1 Max | 8 to 3.2GHz | 2 to 2.06GHz | 32 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 57 billion | 30W | mac studio |
M1 Max | 8 to 3.2GHz | 2 to 2.06GHz | 24 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 57 billion | 30W | mac studio |
M1 | 4 to 3.2GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14W | MacBook Air, iMac 24″ |
M1 | 4 to 3.2GHz | 4 to 2.06GHz | 7 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14W | MacBook Air, iMac 24″ |
With the M2, Apple claims an 18% improvement in overall processor performance over the M1. In the multi-core processor test, we are able to confirm Apple’s claim. The single-core CPU test showed a 13% lower boost for the M2. With the M2 Pro and M2 Max, Apple claims a 20% increase over the M1 Pro (which is no longer in any current Mac) and M2 Max.
The M1 Ultra is a beast of a chip, doubling the multi-core CPU performance of the M1 Max, which has half the CPU cores. It also blazes in GPU performance. It’s unclear when Apple will release an M2 Ultra, but it will most likely debut in the next Mac Pro.
Apple’s Max chips have the same CPU configuration as the Plus versions; the main difference is the GPU. The Max can have double the GPU cores as the Plus, so its graphics performance is much improved.
The chip that started it all, the good old M1, may feel slow compared to Apple’s more current chips, but that doesn’t have to undermine Apple’s original Mac processor. Remember that the M1 outperforms the Intel processors it replaced, resulting in a significant price/performance ratio.
Table of Contents