An Apple processor is at the heart of every Apple device. 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 has far more devices with its own silicon than Intel does now — all that’s left is the Mac Pro — and before the end of 2023, every product Apple makes will likely be powered by a home-made chip.
What sets Apple silicon apart is its performance and energy efficiency. But not all chips are created equal. Understanding the performance differences between each chip will help you in your purchasing decisions, especially when you’re choosing between iPhone 14 or MacBook models. Knowing how each segment performs gives you a better idea of what products to buy and whether or not it’s worth your money to upgrade to a higher model.
Let’s take a look at how the new processors compare to the rest in the iPhone, iPad, and Mac lineup, and see how each one works and what that means for you. For consistency, we used Geekbench5 Standards. Here’s each slide and how the benchmarks compare to each other.
Compare each processor
Before we get into the individual treats, let’s let the chips drop where they can. We only included chips in Apple devices still on sale and it’s a fairly predictable chart, with the fastest Macs at the top, followed by a mix of iPads and iPhones. But there are still some great results: iPad Pro owners can say their tablet is faster than the 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 great as the price difference indicates.
Read about How Apple M1 and M2 processors compare to Intel processors in our Mac processor guide.
iPhone wizards
Let’s take a look at the specifications so that we can understand the differences between them.
| Healer | performance cores | Efficiency cores | graphics cores | neuromotor | memory | transistors | Thermal design power | hardware |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A16 Bionic | 2 at 3.46 GHz | 4 at 2.02 GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 6 watts | iPhone 14 Pro |
| A15 Bionic | 2 at 3.22 GHz | 4 at 1.82 GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 15 billion | 6 watts | iPhone 14 |
| A15 Bionic | 2 at 3.22 GHz | 4 at 1.82 GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 15 billion | 6 watts | iPhone 13 and iPhone SE |
| A14 Bionic | 2 at 3.1 GHz | 4 at 1.8 GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 6 GB | 11.8 billion | 6 watts | iPhone 12 |
Now let’s look at how each processor performs. Not surprisingly, the A16 Bionic in the iPhone 14 Pro is the fastest. The iPhone 14 and iPhone 13 both have the A15 Bionic processor, but the iPhone 13 has a lower GPU than the iPhone 13 Pro, which gives it better graphics performance.
Apple is still selling the iPhone 12, which has the A14 Bionic. It’s actually not much slower than the iPhone 13’s A15 Bionic — the specs between the two processors are practically identical, with the A15 Bionic’s performance cores having a slightly faster clock speed and more RAM. If price is your main priority over camera and other features, consider the iPhone 12 over the iPhone 13.
The speed difference is most noticeable between the iPhone 12’s A14 Bionic and the chips in the iPhone 14 models. This could be the last resort for the A14 Bionic as the iPhone 12 will be replaced as a lower-cost option with Apple’s next major iPhone launch next fall, though It could make its way into the next Apple TV revision.
iPad wizards
The stunning edition of Apple’s iPad lineup creates an odd-looking performance arrangement for the CPU and its hardware.
| Healer | performance cores | Efficiency cores | graphics cores | neuromotor | memory | transistors | Thermal design power | hardware |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| m 2 | 4 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 10 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15 watts | 12.9 ″ and 11″ iPad Pro |
| m 1 | 4 at 3.2 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14 watts | iPad Air |
| A15 Bionic | 2 at 2.93 GHz | 4 at 1.82 GHz | 5 | 16 cores | 4GB | 15 billion | 6 watts | iPad mini |
| A14 Bionic | 2 at 3.1 GHz | 4 at 1.8 GHz | 4 | 16 cores | 6 GB | 11.8 billion | 6 watts | IPAD |
The M2-equipped iPad Pros are the fastest models, and the gap between them and the iPad and iPad mini is huge. Moreover, the M2 is 15 percent faster than the M1 it replaced in previous iPad Pros and is in the current iPad Air.
The new 10th-generation iPad released in the fall of 2022 has the A14 Bionic, which is an upgrade from the A13 Bionic in the previous model. Apple says the new 10th-generation iPad offers a 20 percent increase in CPU and a 10 percent increase in graphics.
Mac processors
With Apple’s M-series chips for Macs, the company’s release schedule includes the base version in the MacBook Air, 13-inch MacBook Pro, and other Macs. Apple then modifies it to create higher versions. Read about How does the M2 compare 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 in these Macs, but Apple may keep the M1 models to offer lower-cost options, such as the 999 M1 MacBook Air. In January 2023, Apple released the M2 Pro in the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro and Mac mini, and the M2 Max in the 14- and 16-inch MacBook Pro along with the M2 Mac mini.
| Healer | performance cores | Efficiency cores | graphics cores | neuromotor | primary memory | transistors | Thermal design power | device |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M2 Max | 8 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 38 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 67 billion | 30 watts | 14″ and 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M2 Max | 8 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 30 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 67 billion | 30 watts | 14″ and 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M2 Pro | 8 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 19 | 16 cores | 16 gigabytes | 40 billion | 30 watts | 14″ and 16″ MacBook Pro |
| M2 Pro | 6 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 16 | 16 cores | 16 gigabytes | 40 billion | 30 watts | 14, the MacBook Pro |
| m 2 | 4 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 10 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15 watts | 13, MacBook Pro, MacBook Air |
| m 2 | 4 at 3.49 GHz | 4 at a frequency of 2.4 GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 20 billion | 15 watts | MacBook Air |
| M1 Ultra | 16 at 3.2 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 64 | 32 cores | 64 GB | 114 billion | 60 watts | mac studio |
| M1 Ultra | 16 at 3.2 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 48 | 32 cores | 64 GB | 114 billion | 60 watts | mac studio |
| M1 Max | 8 at 3.2 GHz | 2 at 2.06 GHz | 32 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 57 billion | 30 watts | mac studio |
| M1 Max | 8 at 3.2 GHz | 2 at 2.06 GHz | 24 | 16 cores | 32 GB | 57 billion | 30 watts | mac studio |
| m 1 | 4 at 3.2 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 8 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14 watts | MacBook Air, 24-inch iMac |
| m 1 | 4 at 3.2 GHz | 4 at 2.06 GHz | 7 | 16 cores | 8 GB | 16 billion | 14 watts | MacBook Air, 24-inch iMac |
with the m 2Apple claims an 18 percent improvement in overall CPU performance compared to m 1. In our multi-core CPU test, we can confirm Apple’s claim. The single-core CPU test showed a smaller 13 percent increase for the M2. With the M2 Pro and M2 Max, Apple claims a 20 percent 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 processor performance of the M1 Max, which has half the number of CPU cores. It hogs up on GPU performance, too. There is no word on when the Apple M2 Ultra will launch, but it will likely debut in the upcoming 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 twice as many GPU cores as the Plus, so graphics performance is greatly improved.
The chip that started it all, the good ol’ M1, may seem sluggish compared to Apple’s more recent chips — but that doesn’t undermine Apple’s original Mac processor. Remember, the M1 outperforms the Intel processors it replaced, resulting in a great price/performance value.