> a Mac Mini-like device with an Apple A12Z system-on-a-chip (SoC), 16 GB of RAM, and 512 GB of SSD storage—delivers an average single-core score of 811 and an average multi-core score of 2871.<p>> compared to Microsoft’s Surface Pro X, which has the fastest available Qualcomm-based ARM chipset and can run Geekbench natively—not emulated—it’s amazing: Surface Pro X only averages 764 on the single-core test and 2983 in multi-core.
Right. The emulated performance of the Apple silicon is as good or better than the native performance of the SQ-1-based Surface Pro X.<p>I'm so confused. The title is that the apple arm chip <i>destroys</i> the Qualcomm chip in benchmarks. And then the author concluded that the benchmarks show apple doing at least as good if not better.<p>But... Am I interpreting these numbers correctly? Looking at the numbers it seems to show apple having faster single core performance and Microsoft surface having faster multicore performance. If my understanding is correct then I can't figure out how the author concluded the apple performance is as good or better.<p>One point the author emphasizes is that apple is getting these performance numbers despite the overhead of emulation. I'm interested to see what the native performance is given the close performance benchmark numbers with emulation. However to conclude that these specific benchmarks show apple destroying the surface chip does seem to me like a bit of reality distortion.