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 M5 Pro review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£2,640PassMark multi-core score:48677N. of physical cores:18CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:?TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Apple M5 Pro Review: Compare 168 technical specifications, 7 expert and video reviews and 1 best-of list to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

8.2/10

Overall score

Score
8.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists, owners and ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 15%, Sentiment score 10%, User 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 97% of models
Score components

40%

8.4

Technical score

25%

8.4

Reviews score

15%

8.1

List score

10%

?

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

10%

?

User scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 8.4, the mark of a weaker model in this category

★Better than 97% of processors
6.0

Value for money

Value for money
6.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components

70%

8.2

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

▼Worse than 96%
8.4

Technical score

Technical score
8.4/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 93% of models
Score components

60%

9.2

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

6.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

6.8

Platform

1%

8.8

Integrated graphics

★Better than 93%
8.4

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.4/ 10
✕
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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 90% of models

80%

8.3

Average grade

20%

8.4

Popularity

Grades by review (7)
5 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
★Better than 90%
?

User score

User score
8.4/ 10
✕
What it is
How happy buyers are with this model, based on ratings from across the web.
How we count it
Enough data: A model needs at least 1 rating from across the web. Without one, it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
Share: User score counts 10% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
No ratings from across the web yet, so it counts as 8.4, the mark of a weaker rated model in this category.
No ratings from across the web yet
8.1

List score

List score
8.1/ 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 15% 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 (1)
List score: in 1 of 22 lists (5%)
▲Better than 88%
  • No image
No image
Best prices
    N/A~ £2,640
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 M5 Pro

Technical score
Technical score
8.4/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
★ Better than 93% of models
Score components:

60%

9.2

Performance

18%

8.0

Architecture

10%

6.4

Memory & PCIe

7%

6.8

Power & Thermal

4%

6.8

Platform

1%

8.8

Integrated graphics

8.4
Reviews score
8.4
User score
?
List score
8.1
Value for money
Value for money
6.0/ 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
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Score components:

70%

8.2

Overall score

30%

1.0

Price

6.0
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
?
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.
Instruction sets
ARMv9
Show more
N. of physical cores
18
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 18 CPU cores, which is more than 94.7% of processors and equal to 0.4% of processors.
CPU threads
18
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 18 CPU threads, which is more than 83.7% of processors and equal to 0.5% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
4.6 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.6 GHz which is higher than that of 59.9% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
?
PassMark multi-core score
48,677
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 48,677 in PassMark, which is higher than 95% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Semiconductor size
3 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 3 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 94.6% of processors and equal to that of 4.6% of processors.
Foundry
?
L3 cache
?
L2 cache
32 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 32 MB which is larger than that of 96.1% of processors and equal to that of 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
9,600 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 9,600 MHz, which is higher than that of 99.5% of processors and equal to 0.5% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5X-9600 MHz
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 27.2% of processors and equal to 26.1% of processors.
Show more
What reviewers say
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Apple 20-core GPU
This processor uses the Apple 20-core GPU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 99.4% of processors and equal to that in 0.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
320
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 320 GPU execution units, which is more than 99.9% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
?
Integrated media encoders/decoders
?
Show more
What reviewers say
TDP (Thermal design power)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
45 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
Show more
What reviewers say

Apple M5 Pro vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.97x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (25,906 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    25,906 vs 5,209
  • 4.24x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (48,677 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    48,677 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (18 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    18 vs 6
  • 2.29x better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (5,863 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    5,863 vs 2,558
  • 2.77x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (4,254 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    4,254 vs 1,535
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 10 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (18 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    18 vs 8
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • 25.4% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.4/ 10
    ✕
    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
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ★ Better than 90% of models

    80%

    8.3

    Average grade

    20%

    8.4

    Popularity

    Grades by review (7)
    5 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 2 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Ratings from across the web count in the User score, not in this score.
    8.4 vs 6.7
  • 6 years newer release date
    This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2026 vs 2020).
    2026 vs 2020
  • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
    This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
  • 4.97x higher multi-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (25,906 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    25,906 vs 5,209
  • 4.24x higher PassMark score
    This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (48,677 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    48,677 vs 11,469
  • 12 more CPU cores
    This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (18 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    18 vs 6
  • 2.29x better single-core performance
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (5,863 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    5,863 vs 2,558
  • 2.77x higher single-core score
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (4,254 vs 1,535). The average processor scores 1,535 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    4,254 vs 1,535
  • 8 more performance cores
    This processor has more performance cores than the average processor (12 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    12 vs 4
  • 10 more CPU threads
    This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (18 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    18 vs 8
  • 4.5% higher boost clock
    This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 18 higher clock multiplier
    This processor has a higher clock multiplier than the average processor (46 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    46 vs 28
  • 10.67x larger L2 cache
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (32 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    32 MB vs 3 MB
  • 75% smaller process node
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (3 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    3 nm vs 12 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.
  • 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
  • Newer PCIe version
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3).
    5.0 vs 3.0
  • 6.55x higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (307.2 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    307.2 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 3x higher memory speed
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (9600 MHz vs 3200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3200 MHz.
    9,600 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
  • Better integrated GPU
    This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Apple 20-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Apple 20-core GPU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • 13.33x more GPU execution units
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (320 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    320 vs 24
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Apple M5 vs Kaby Lake).
    Apple M5 vs Kaby Lake
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (ARMv9 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    ARMv9 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • 29.7% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • Less advanced architecture
    This processor uses a less advanced architecture than the average processor (ARM64 vs x86-64).
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • 8 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (8 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    8 vs 16
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-9600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-9600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 10.56x more expensive
    Apple M5 Pro is more expensive than the average processor (£2,640 vs £250).
    £2,640 vs £250
  • 21.1% worse value for money
    Apple M5 Pro has worse value for money than the average processor (6.05 vs 7.3).
    6.05 vs 7.33
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (ARMv9 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    ARMv9 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).
    ARM64 vs x86-64
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • No simultaneous multithreading
    This processor does not support simultaneous multithreading, while the average processor does. 73.8% of processors support it.
  • No speed boosting
    This processor does not support automatic speed boosting, while the average processor does. 87.7% of processors offer this.
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Apple M5 vs Kaby Lake).
    Apple M5 vs Kaby Lake
  • 29.7% less L3 per core
    This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    1.3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 8 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (8 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    8 vs 16
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5X-9600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5X-9600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 2 fewer memory channels
    This processor has fewer memory channels than the average processor (4 vs 2). The average processor supports 2 memory channels.
    4 vs 2
  • 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

9.2
Pagi
✓ explicit
29/07/2026
Hands-on review · daily use, display, speakers and gaming tests
Verdict
Apple M5 Pro is a well-rounded laptop that handles nearly everything, though it is expensive and Windows still leads in gaming.
Overview video

What reviewers agree on

Based on 5 · 2

Reviewers love the performance, display and battery life, but complain about heat, fan noise and limited memory.
Praised
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.6
cnet.com
✓ explicit
09/03/2026
Hands-on test · Pro laptop
Verdict
The MacBook Pro 16 with M5 Pro is the one to buy: it matches the Max chip on everyday work and stays fast, with a top-class screen.
9.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
21/09/2026
Benchmark review · Compact desktop
Verdict
The Mac mini Apple M5 Pro beats rival mini PCs in video editing, 3D rendering and gaming, though it runs a little hot under load.
9.0
fstoppers.com
≈ estimated
09/03/2026
Upgrade review · Pro laptop
Verdict
The MacBook Pro M5 Pro is a clear step up from the M4 Pro, scoring about 55% higher in CPU testing while keeping the same design.
8.0
zdnet.com
✓ explicit
22/09/2026
Hands-on review · Compact desktop
Verdict
The Mac mini Apple M5 Pro is a tiny, versatile desktop suited to creators and developers, though its memory cannot be upgraded later.
9.2
notebookcheck.biz
✓ explicit
10/03/2026
Lab test · Multimedia laptop
Verdict
The MacBook Pro 16 with M5 Pro holds its full speed without slowdowns, though it trails an RTX 5070 in several games.

Third-party reviews

What we like about Apple M5 Pro

  • 18 cores give heavy multi-step work plenty of room.
  • 12 performance cores finish demanding tasks quickly.
  • The 3 nm chip packs 28 billion transistors into 166.85 mm².
  • Memory bandwidth reaches 307.2 GB/s, so large files load fast.
  • Four memory channels keep several apps running at once.
  • A big.LITTLE design mixes fast and efficient cores on one chip.

What we don't like about Apple M5 Pro

  • There is no multithreading, so each core runs just one thread.
  • There is no Turbo Boost.
  • Only 8 PCIe lanes limit how many fast devices connect at once.
  • The multiplier is locked, so the clock cannot be raised by hand.
  • Memory tops out at 64 GB, which is tight for the largest projects.

Verdict

With 18 cores and 320 GPU execution units, the Apple M5 Pro is for people who edit large video, produce music or compile big code projects on a laptop. Twelve of those cores are performance cores, so heavy jobs finish quickly. The 3 nm chip packs 28 billion transistors, and its memory can move 307.2 GB/s, which helps when files are large. Four memory channels and up to 64 GB of memory keep several demanding apps running at once. The chip is rated at 45 W, a figure that suits a laptop. The trade-off is that it has no multithreading, so each core handles one thread, and no Turbo Boost either. It suits a creative professional or developer who wants a lot of speed without moving to a larger machine.

Compare Apple M5 Pro 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 M5 Pro and other processors

No results found