OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Apple M4 9-core CPU review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£920PassMark multi-core score:22201N. of physical cores:9CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:N/ATDP (Thermal design power):20 W

Apple M4 9-core CPU Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.4/10

Overall score

Score
7.4/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 75% of models
Score components

40%

7.5

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 75% of processors
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

5.7

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
7.5

Technical score

Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

7.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.6

Power & Thermal

4%

6.0

Platform

1%

7.9

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 78%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £920
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Apple M4 9-core CPU

Technical score
Technical score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 78% of models
Score components:

60%

7.8

Performance

18%

7.5

Architecture

10%

7.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.6

Power & Thermal

4%

6.0

Platform

1%

7.9

Integrated graphics

7.5
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

7.4

Overall score

30%

5.7

Price

6.9
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
N/A
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
ARM64
This processor uses the ARM64 architecture, which is less advanced than that of 98.2% of processors and equal to that of 1.8% of processors.
Apple silicon
Instruction sets
NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME
This processor supports NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME instruction sets, which is narrower support than 70.4% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
9
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 9 CPU cores, which is more than 75.1% of processors.
CPU threads
9
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 9 CPU threads, which is more than 52.3% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 48.6% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
3x 4.40 GHz & 6x 2.90 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 3x4.40 GHz & 6x2.90 GHz which is higher than that of 85.5% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
22,201
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 22,201 in PassMark, which is higher than 74.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
?
Foundry
TSMC 3 nm
This processor is built on the TSMC 3 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 95.7% of processors and equal to that of 4.3% of processors.
L3 cache
?
L2 cache
20 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 20 MB which is larger than that of 92.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.2% of processors.
L1 cache
?
Show more
DDR memory version
LPDDR5X
This processor supports DDR LPDDR5X, which is newer than that of 88.8% of processors and equal to that of 2.2% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
7,500 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 7,500 MHz, which is higher than that of 92.2% of processors and equal to 3.6% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-7500 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5X-7500 MHz, which is higher than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to 3.2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
16 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 16 GB of memory, which is less than 92.2% of processors and equal to 6.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Apple 10-core GPU
Integrated GPU model
Apple 10-core GPU
This processor uses the Apple 10-core GPU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 98.9% of processors and equal to that in 0.2% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
10
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 10 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 72.7% of processors and equal to 1.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
?
Integrated media encoders/decoders
AV1 (HW decode)
This processor supports AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is narrower support than 61.3% of processors and equal to 10.3% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
20 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 20 W which is lower than that of 77.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
?
Boost power (PL2)
N/A
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more

Apple M4 9-core CPU vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 2.57x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (13,405 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    13,405 vs 5,209
  • 2.41x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,694 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,694 vs 1,535
  • 75.2% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,482 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,482 vs 2,558
  • 93.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,201 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,201 vs 11,469
  • 6.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (20 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    20 MB vs 3 MB
  • 3 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (9 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    9 vs 6
  • 2.56x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (120 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    120 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (3x4.4 GHz & 6x2.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    3x4.40 GHz & 6x2.90 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 4 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
    May 2024
    2024 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 2.57x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (13,405 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    13,405 vs 5,209
  • 2.41x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (3,694 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    3,694 vs 1,535
  • 75.2% better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4,482 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    4,482 vs 2,558
  • 93.6% higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (22,201 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    22,201 vs 11,469
  • 3 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (9 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    9 vs 6
  • Higher base clock
    This processor has a higher base clock than the average processor (3x4.4 GHz & 6x2.9 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    3x4.40 GHz & 6x2.90 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 6 wider front-end design
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (10 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    10 vs 4
  • 1 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (9 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    9 vs 8
  • 6.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (20 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    20 MB vs 3 MB
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 3 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    TSMC 3 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • Mixed big and small cores
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    performance + efficiency cores
  • 5.66x more transistors
    This processor has more transistors than the average processor (28 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    28 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • 2.56x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (120 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    120 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 2.34x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (7,500 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    7,500 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Newer DDR support
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (LPDDR5X vs DDR4).
    LPDDR5X vs DDR4
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-7500 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-7500 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Apple 10-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Apple 10-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 55.6% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (20 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    20 W vs 45 W
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (Secure Enclave, PAC, BTI, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    Secure Enclave, PAC, BTI, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • Less advanced architecture
    This processor uses a less advanced architecture than the average processor (ARM64 vs x86-64).
    Apple silicon
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 44.4% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (221.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    221.36 vs 398.015
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 3.68x more expensive
    Apple M4 9-core CPU is more expensive than the average processor (£920 vs £250).
    £920 vs £250
  • 3.68x more expensive
    Apple M4 9-core CPU is more expensive than the average processor (£920 vs £250).
    £920 vs £250
  • 6% worse value for money
    Apple M4 9-core CPU has worse value for money than the average processor (6.87 vs 7.3).
    6.87 vs 7.29
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (Secure Enclave, PAC, BTI, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    Secure Enclave, PAC, BTI, KIP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    NEON, AES, SHA2, SHA3, FP16, AMX, SME vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Less advanced architecture
    This processor uses a less advanced architecture than the average processor (ARM64 vs x86-64).
    Apple silicon
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 44.4% slower Blender rendering
    This processor has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (221.4 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    221.36 vs 398.015
  • 75% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    16 GB vs 64 GB
  • 6 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (8 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    8 vs 2
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • 58.3% fewer GPU execution units
    This processor has fewer GPU execution units than the average processor (10 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    10 vs 24
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Overview video
Hands-on video, no verdict

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Apple M4 9-core CPU

  • Industry-leading single-core performance that rivals top-tier desktop processors.
  • Significant 20-30% multi-core performance jump over previous M2 and M3 base models.
  • Highly efficient power management leading to exceptional battery life in portable devices.
  • Enhanced 16-core Neural Engine provides a future-proof foundation for local AI and 'Apple Intelligence' tasks.
  • Provides a smoother experience for 4K video editing and creative workflows than previous entry-level chips.

What customers don't like about Apple M4 9-core CPU

  • Performance is roughly 10% lower in multi-threaded tasks compared to the full 10-core M4 variant.
  • Susceptible to thermal throttling in thin, fanless chassis like the iPad Pro during sustained heavy workloads.
  • Often locked to lower base memory configurations (e.g., 8GB or 16GB) compared to higher-tier M4 models.
  • GPU clock speeds are reportedly lower than those in the 10-core version, affecting high-end gaming.
  • Limited upgrade appeal for current M3 users as real-world speed gains in daily tasks are often negligible.

Verdict

The 9-core Apple M4 is a 3nm ARMv9-based processor featuring a 3+6 configuration with three performance cores (up to 4.4 GHz) and six efficiency cores (up to 2.9 GHz), paired with a 10-core GPU and a 16-core Neural Engine delivering 38 TOPS for AI. Key pros include industry-leading single-core performance, hardware-accelerated ray tracing, 120 GB/s memory bandwidth, and exceptional power efficiency. However, cons include approximately 10% slower multi-core performance compared to the 10-core M4 variant, a lack of active cooling in its primary iPad Pro implementation leading to thermal throttling under sustained loads, and a fixed 8GB memory limitation in base tablet configurations.

Compare Apple M4 9-core CPU with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Apple M4 9-core CPU and other processors

No results found