Alleged Apple M4 Geekbench scores show incremental improvement in machine learning over last gen

Apple M4 Neural Engine screenshot
(Image credit: Apple)

Apple yesterday announced the latest iteration of its own silicon with the M4-powered iPad Pros. The company claims that the CPU is 50% percent faster than the M2 on the 12.9-inch iPad Pro (6th-generation), sporting two more cores (4 performance + 6 efficiency) over the last generation’s eight cores (4 performance + 4 efficiency). Although we cannot yet confirm these claims, the M4’s Neural Engine was tested today on Geekbench, with machine learning (ML) benchmarks posted under iPad 16,3. As ever with leaks and unverified benchmarks, take the news with a pinch of salt.

The results do not explicitly say iPad Pro (13-inch), but the specifications noted on the benchmark match that of the higher-end M4-powered iPad: a 10-core ARM processor with 16GB RAM. We also compared it with the 12.9-inch iPad Pro (6th generation)’s machine learning test results to see how it would stack up against, and the results show an incremental improvement over the last gen’s ML performance.

The M4 iPad Pro hit a Geekbench ML 0.6.0 score of 9234, around 22.9% better than the M2-powered iPad Pro’s 7511. We also compared the M4 iPad Pro’s ML performance with an M3 14-inch MacBook Pro, where its gains were a little more modest at 10.4% (8365 vs. 9234). However, the M3 MacBook Pro might have a slight advantage over the M4 iPad Pro owing to its larger chassis and battery.

TOPICS
Jowi Morales
Contributing Writer

Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics.

  • Apple's M3 was rated for 18 TOPS at FP16 precision, but the M4 is rated for 38 TOPS with INT4. That means, if equalized to INT8 precision, we're looking at a 5% improvement in TOPS for the M4 over the M3.

    Not entirely sure if that info is 100% correct. 38 TOPS with INT4 ? Got proof ?

    First off, Apple has NOT confirmed nor listed the exact precision info, as to whether the value is based on INT16, INT8, or even INT4 precision.

    But for ML inference, INT8 would be the most likely option/candidate, since this is what Apple quoted for the A17 chip last year.

    So the 5% improvement claim would also not be accurate.
    Reply
  • Paul Alcorn
    Metal Messiah. said:
    Not entirely sure if that info is 100% correct. 38 TOPS with INT4 ? Got proof ?

    First off, Apple has NOT confirmed nor listed the exact precision info, as to whether the value is based on INT16, INT8, or even INT4 precision.

    But for ML inference, INT8 would be the most likely option/candidate, since this is what Apple quoted for the A17 chip last year.
    Ooops, you are correct. Apple has confirmed to analysts that it is INT8. fixed the typo.

    1787861586285298111View: https://twitter.com/BenBajarin/status/1787861586285298111
    Reply
  • cknobman
    Drink the KoolAid, dont ask questions, and open your wallet.
    Reply
  • brandonjclark
    For those of us who would like to know more...

    https://www.mathworks.com/company/technical-articles/what-is-int8-quantization-and-why-is-it-popular-for-deep-neural-networks.html
    Reply
  • thisisaname
    Or just wait for a independent review of the device, with some nice benchmarks.

    Leaks are nice to speculate on but I would not trust them.
    Reply
  • TechyIT223
    Yesh should better wait for proper third party benchmarks for sure.
    Reply
  • TechyIT223
    Btw, now based on the 38 Tops INT8 metric the claimed performance should be much more than the 5% value the original article claimed ? Right?

    Or something else entirely?
    Reply
  • Another entry spotted :

    1788324153797615687View: https://twitter.com/VadimYuryev/status/1788324153797615687
    Reply