Isn't it embarrassing being this far behind? Seriously,

they'll probably need to take the CPU design into their own hands.

You faggots are all citing a benchmark that was a blatant troll. It actually said "24MHz" for the clock speed.

How fucking stupid can you be?

>geekbench

File: IMG_20170916_195135.jpg (249KB, 1080x1656px) Image search: [Google]

249KB, 1080x1656px

>>62464120
Why are you lying?

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/4011871

>>62464118
Samsung tried that with Exynos. Still nowhere near

File: a11geekbench-800x706.jpg (47KB, 800x706px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 800x706px

>>62464276
Here's the original, retard

>>62464452
Nobody was citing that, asshat

>>62464471
That picture is from macrumors you cum guzzler.

>>62464471
>>62464452
You faggots are being trolled

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/13/a11-bionic-chip-geekbench-scores/

>>62464072
I like how benches matter to Applefans when they are ahead, and benches do not matter when they are behind.

Oh, and aesthetics mattered a lot before, but now with the iPhone X, aesthetics do not matter anymore.

Do Apple have some kind of wizard working for them or something? Every new CPU release is like 40% faster overall than the last, what the fuck?

>>62464550
who said aesthetics don't matter?

>>62464550
Wait for the OneCheatAtBenchmarks Plus 6

>>62464582
yeah, they employed a wizard named "designing your own chips"

Only Google can make a SoC that can catch up to Apple's performance

Qualshit, Samshit are all jokes that are far behind in performance and power efficiency

>>62464072
no ofc its not
remember how good the old iphone was on geekbench? it was demolishing everything

yet in real world task aka literally everything else it was on par and even far behind

woah this really opened my eyes.
I'm totally going to pay $1300 more to open my emails 0.001 seconds faster

>>62464763
sound salty. I remember your ilk trolling these threads with muh benchmarks. how the tables have turned.

>>62464763
lol