Last month, Apple introduced a new iPad Pro with the same M1 chip found in the latest Macs, and early benchmark results indicate that the M1 iPad Pro is over 50% faster than the previous-generation iPad Pro.
Based on five legitimate Geekbench 5 results (here’s the fifth) for the fifth-generation 12.9-inch iPad Pro with the M1 chip, the device has average single-core and multi-core scores of 1,718 and 7,284, respectively. By comparison, the fourth-generation 12.9-inch iPad Pro with the A12Z chip has average single-core and multi-core scores of 1,121 and 4,656, respectively, meaning that the M1 iPad Pro is around 56% faster.
Geekbench 5: Average Multi-Core Results
- M1 MacBook Air: 7,378
- M1 iPad Pro: 7,284
- Core i9 16″ MacBook Pro: 6,845
- A12Z iPad Pro: 4,656
It’s worth noting that the third-generation 12.9-inch iPad Pro with the A12X chip has a higher average multi-core score of 4,809, likely due to statistical variation, but this still results in the M1 iPad Pro being 51% faster, which lines up with Apple’s marketing claim that the M1 iPad Pro is up to 50% faster than the previous generation.
The benchmark results reveal that the M1 iPad Pro has virtually identical performance as the M1 Macs released last fall. The M1 MacBook Air, for example, has average single-core and multi-core scores of 1,701 and 7,378, respectively. Impressively, this means the M1 iPad Pro is faster than a maxed-out 16-inch MacBook Pro with an Intel Core i9 processor, which has average single-core and multi-core scores of 1,091 and 6,845 respectively.
As for graphics performance, the M1 iPad Pro currently has an average Metal score of 20,578, which is up to 71% faster than the previous-generation iPad Pro with the A12Z chip and roughly equal to the graphics performance of M1 Macs.
The new iPad Pro became available to order starting April 30, with a launch expected on May 21. Reviews of the device are expected to drop next week.
This article, “M1 iPad Pro Over 50% Faster Than Previous Generation in Early Benchmarks” first appeared on MacRumors.com
Discuss this article in our forums