10 comments

  • GeekyBear 9 minutes ago
  • hncbw02z5a 12 minutes ago
    Spoofing IDs is easy, matching the timing curves isn't. That's the giveaway.
  • a3w 22 minutes ago
    >4k? Thought not would barely twice that of an 15 year old CPU, but it of course is geekbench 7, not 6 or 5!

    So this is different and faster than such a result in the old scoring would have implied.

  • galad87 1 hour ago
    Cool, but Apple didn't announce any M6 Pro yet, so where is this coming from?
    • fartfeatures 23 minutes ago
      I thought they were skipping the M6 pro chips (or is that just the max and ultra?) to accelerate AI focused M7.
    • mdp2021 1 hour ago
      Probably internal tests?

      The software identifies the hardware, performs the benchmarks, and sends the heading and results to the Geekbench DB. Somebody who had the machine at hand must have run it.

    • tristanj 43 minutes ago
      Internal leaks, these happen frequently. Employees have access to these devices for months prior to launch. Someone ran a benchmark and uploaded it on a machine they weren't supposed to.
      • gizajob 6 minutes ago
        I find that hard to believe at Apple. Not even possible that it’s accidental. They have their own internal tools, all packets leaving the network will be interrogated, leaking data is a sackable offence… if it’s in the geekbench database then it’s there because they put it there.
        • swiftcoder 1 minute ago
          > Not even possible that it’s accidental. They have their own internal tools, all packets leaving the network will be interrogated, leaking data is a sackable offence

          This is a story that folks like to tell, but it's not really how things work - at least since they stopped letting Steve Jobs lock all his engineers in the conference venue.

          Leaks are a sackable offence at every tech firm, deep packet inspection firewalls are used all over the place, information leaks like this still happen pretty much every single product cycle.

    • shim__ 26 minutes ago
      How does Geekbench even verify what CPU I'm using? Couldnt you inject forged data and add a even faster M100?
  • aurareturn 1 hour ago
    Wait. What?

    This is actually the M6 Pro and not the M6. It has 18 CPU cores to the M6's 12. The scores line up as well.

    Reports have said all along that Apple is skipping M6 Pro/Max to focus on M7 generation.

    I can't remember the last time an Apple chip got leaked like this.

  • leptons 16 minutes ago
    Under exactly what cooling conditions? And for how long did it sustain this speed?
  • mdp2021 57 minutes ago
    And how much would it cost?

    In the current times performance/price seems to be increasingly important.

    (Not to mention several other factors that once did not even exist, or were irrelevant.)

  • hnd9q09qk4 5 minutes ago
    [dead]
  • wartywhoa23 43 minutes ago
    Highest among what? Is it highest among M* CPUs? Then what's the news, that the next gen is faster than the previous? Now that's a newsflash!

    Or is it just an early advertisement, which it is? As in, "true Apple devotees, start planning your kidney sales to afford buying the M6 Pro among the first".

    • ErneX 19 minutes ago
      Title is “highest single core score” so it’s the highest of every cpu tested on geekbench so far, not just of the subset of Apple CPUs.
    • zer0zzz 37 minutes ago
      Highest among all CPUs. This isn’t new for Apple. Their stuff frequently bests ryzens etc at single threaded perf
    • nottorp 39 minutes ago
      I noticed a whiff of panic at the iphone 18 launch. Opened macrumors and there like 6 articles in a row about preordering the phone, how soon you can get the phone when you preorder, how long the queues are etc.

      Guess they didn't get the expected # of preorders.

      • ErneX 21 minutes ago
        That might be true but they do all those pieces with every iPhone launch. They just churn out content a lot during iPhone launch period.
  • OsrsNeedsf2P 23 minutes ago
    I'm currently in the middle of porting a game from 2004 to run on MacOS via wine. On a 5000$ Macbook Pro, I'm getting about 4 FPS. This has multiple causes, including the game being single threaded and running through Rosetta, but damn is it hard to get good single core performance out of Macbooks.

    Out of curiosity, I also ported the game to arm Linux with fex + upstreamed the wine patches in about a third the time and there's no FPS issues

    • mirsadm 20 minutes ago
      If anything it's the exact opposite. They're ridiculously powerful with more memory bandwidth than pretty much any equivalent PC. It is easy to make sloppy software because you can get away with so much.
    • SXX 10 minutes ago
      What porting you talking about exactly? Packaging existing binaries? Compiling source code making it more compatible with Wine?

      In my experience as game developer and porting C++ code tells such difference usually mean there are something really wrong with syncronization primitives. So 99.99% of the time code does nothing just waiting for something to unlock.