The iPhone 17 Pro series allegedly listed on Geekbench; Snapdragon 8 Elite SOC higher score

Apple’s upcoming iPhone 17 series is expected to be launched for some time in September. Near the rumor launch timeline drawing, Leaks has started intensifying. There have been many leaks that suggest the designs of the upcoming iPhone 17 model, and we have also heard rumors about the new iPhone 17 Air that will compete with Samsung’s Galaxy S25 Edge. Now, a tipster has shared the alleged Geekbench benchmark scores of the processor, which is expected to be used in the upcoming iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max models.

Tipster Digital Chat Station has shared the alleged Geekbench listing of iPhone 17 Pro Phone Weibo postAccording to the tipster, the A19 Pro will be announced by the iPhone 17 Pro and the iPhone 17 Pro Max Apple yet. The processor is currently asked to stick to the 3Nm fabrication process, but the current iPhone 16 Pro model will offer a better performance than the A18 Pro SOC in the model.

Tipster also shared the alleged Geekbench benchmark score of iPhone 17 Pro and iPhone 17 Pro Max. According to him, the A19 Pro SOC is very powerful and a single-core score of 4,000+ and a multi-core score of 10,000+.

For comparison, we reviewed the iPhone 16 Pro Max, managing the Geekbench score of 3,203 and 7,846 respectively. If the rumor is true, it indicates a large performance collision for the iPhone 17 Pro series, which is always good.

In our own test of Samsung Galaxy S25 Ultra, which is powered by the latest Qualcomm Snapdragon 8 Elite SOC, we obtained a Geekbench score of 3,054 and 9,832 respectively. Therefore, it seems that Apple’s iPhone 17 Pro Max is not ahead of Qualcomm and Premium Android smartphone in terms of raw benchmark performance.

Apple recently unveiled its new liquid glass-theme experiences for all its device platforms including iOS. The new interface with many transparency effects is sure to increase the load on its processor and therefore a powerful new SOC for the Pro smartphone model definitely makes sense.

More From Author

Access to reach

Access to reach