SPEC2006 & 2017: Industry Standard - ST Performance

Single-threaded performance of the new M1 is certainly one of its key aspects, where the new Firestorm cores definitely punch far above their power class. We had hinted in our preview A14 analysis article that the M1 may well be ending up as not only the top-performing low-power mobile CPU out there, but actually end up as the top-performing absolute performance amongst all CPUs in the market. The A14 fell short of that designation, but the M1 is an even faster implementation of the new Firestorm cores.

It’s to be noted that we’re comparing the M1 to the absolute best desktop and laptop platforms on the market right now, solely looking at absolute best single-threaded performance.

SPECint2006 Speed Estimated Scores

In SPECint2006, we’re now seeing the M1 close the gap to AMD’s Zen3, beating it in several workloads now, which increasing the gap to Intel’s new Tiger Lake design as well as their top-performing desktop CPU, which the M1 now beats in the majority of workloads.

Since our A14 results, we’ve been able to track down Apple’s compiler setting which increases the 456.hmmer by such a dramatic amount – Apple defaults the “-mllvm -enable-loop-distribute=true” in their newest compiler toolchain whilst it needs to be enabled on third-party LLVM compilers. A 5950X with the flag enabled increases its score to 91.64, but also while seeing some regressions in other tests. We haven’t had time to re-test further platforms.

The M1’s performance boost in 462.libquantum is due to the increased L2 cache, as well as the doubled memory bandwidth of the system, something that this workload is very hungry of.

SPECfp2006(C/C++) Speed Estimated Scores

In the fp2006 workloads, we’re seeing the M1 post very large performance boosts relative to the A14, meaning that it now is able to claim the best performance out of all CPUs being compared here.

SPEC2006 Speed Estimated Total

In the overall score, the M1 increases the scores by 9.5% and 17% over the A14. In the integer score, the M1 takes the lead here, although if we were to account for the 456.hmmer discrepancy it would still favour the Zen3-based 5950X. In the floating-point score however, the Apple M1 now takes a large lead ahead, making it the best performing CPU core.

We’ve had a lot arguments about whether 2006 is relevant or not in today’s landscape. We have practical reasons for not yet running SPEC2017 on mobile devices, but given that the new Apple Silicon M1 runs on macOS, these concerns are not valid, thus enabling us to also run the more modern benchmark suite.

It’s to be noted that currently we do not have a functional Fortran compiler on Apple Silicon macOS systems, thus we have to skip several workloads in the 2017 suite, which is why they’re missing from the graphs. We’re concentrating on the remaining C/C++ workloads.

SPECint2017(C/C++) Rate-1 Estimated Scores

The situation doesn’t change too much with the newer SPECint2017 suite. Apple’s Firestorm core here remains extremely impressive, at worst matching up Intel’s new Tiger Lake CPU in single-threaded performance, and at best, keeping up and sometimes beating AMD’s new Zen3 CPU in the new Ryzen 5000 chips.

Apple’s performance is extremely balanced across the board, but what stands out is the excellent 502.gcc_r performance where it takes a considerable leap ahead of the competition, meaning that the new Apple core does extremely well on very complex code and code compiling.

SPECfp2017(C/C++) Rate-1 Estimated Scores

In SPECfp2017, we’re seeing something quite drastic in terms of the scores. The M1 here at worst is a hair-width’s behind AMD’s Zen3, and at best is posting the best absolute performance of any CPU in the market. These are incredible scores.

SPEC2017(C/C++) Rate-1 Estimated Total

In the overall new SPEC2017 int and fp charts, the Apple Silicon M1 falls behind AMD’s Zen3 in the integer performance, however takes an undisputable lead in the floating-point suite.

Compared to the Intel contemporary designs, the Apple M1 is able to showcase a performance leap ahead of the best the company has to offer, with again a considerable strength in the FP score.

While AMD’s Zen3 still holds the leads in several workloads, we need to remind ourselves that this comes at a great cost in power consumption in the +49W range while the Apple M1 here is using 7-8W total device active power.

M1 GPU Performance: Integrated King, Discrete Rival SPEC2017 - Multi-Core Performance
Comments Locked

682 Comments

View All Comments

  • mdriftmeyer - Saturday, November 21, 2020 - link

    Threadripper Zen 3 Q12021. Lisa Su and team have already verified.
  • vlad42 - Tuesday, November 17, 2020 - link

    It is interesting that they might be working on higher end parts. However, I fear that only companies that are dedicated chip manufacturers/designers such as AMD, Intel, Arm, etc. can financially justify maintaining a sufficient update pace for low volume high end chips due to the fact that they have a much larger addressable market. The costs for those high end parts need to be made up after all.

    Since people have complained for a long time about the slow update pace for the iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro and any other desktop/workstation Mac I may be forgetting, maybe it will not matter?

    I wonder if those dedicated high end chips could be a Mac Pro's CPU and GPU?
  • ABR - Wednesday, November 18, 2020 - link

    I'm afraid this is what it looks like. The high end Macs will be updated even less often than they are now and be even further behind – both the lower end models as well as PCs that will be able to use the latest discrete graphics.
  • alexvoda - Wednesday, November 18, 2020 - link

    I anticipate that there will be no Apple Silicon Mac Pro.
    Apple will most probably introduce another M cpu for the MacBook Pro and the iMac simply because this one is capped at 16GB of RAM. It may even be the same chip but clocked higher thanks to the thermal headroom and without on-package RAM.
    But I do not think Apple will develop a chip for a very niche product like the Mac Pro. Apple is not SGI. Apple's core market is not high end workstations.
    We will probably see the Mac Pro continue to be updated as long as new x86 macOS versions are released and as long as Intel offers something worth updating to.

    Or maybe a future Mac Pro will just be a multisocket design with regular iMac CPUs.
  • colinstalter - Wednesday, November 18, 2020 - link

    I would totally agree with you, but they did say that they plan on doing the ENTIRE line. maybe it will just be a chiplette design like AMD. I really don't know, it's hard to imagine them competing in the high-TDP space, but if they say they'll do it i'm sure they will. Their problem will be that that their main strong point is great perf per watt. For the MacPro no one cares about that and just wants the most power possible within a 100-300 watt TDP.
  • jbelkin - Thursday, November 19, 2020 - link

    If Apple says 24 months, they mean in about 15, they will be done with the transition. They have already announced the new Mac Pro will be about half the size of the crrent one. The high end Pro market moves the slowest with plugs in and dongles so it makes sense they'll move slower.
  • jbelkin - Thursday, November 19, 2020 - link

    Apple owns the high end in laptops (the 1K+ market as the industry counts). 80-90% market share. Macs are about the size of McD's or State Farm, ONLY at Apple can a $25 BILLION dollar business unit be dismissed.
  • BushLin - Thursday, November 19, 2020 - link

    "Apple owns the high end in laptops (the 1K+ market as the industry counts). 80-90% market share" [Citation needed] (not really as it's obviously nonsense)
    Apple's valuation and profits largely come from iPhone sales and services.
  • MrCrispy - Tuesday, November 17, 2020 - link

    First chip?? They've spent a decade designing and building iPhone/iPad SOCs which is exactly what M1 is with a different layout.

    This is a natural evolution of those. The most impressive part of this is actually Rosetta 2, and Apples's ability to transition the entire line - which comes from having a walled garden and captive developers/users who feed on hype, and not giving a crap about backwards compatibility.

    Other companies don't have this luxury.
  • TEAMSWITCHER - Wednesday, November 18, 2020 - link

    I don't see Apple hyping these products anymore than Intel, Nvidia, or AMD are hyping their own products. I do think that Apple delivered silicon that is competitive with what AMD and Intel are selling today, and it's now a three way race. I think that's a good thing.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now