or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by hjb

 I agree with you that benchmarks do not matter, especially to those anything but Apple people here.  I too see many dirty mouses here, more childish reactions than MacRumors or any other tech site.  You would be called Fandroid, apologist, Android sheep...(you name it all would show up), if you have anything against Apple or anything pro or look-protective for their enemies like Sammy.
That was to murman.
First, Note 3 runs benchmarks at 2.3Ghz that SD800 is advertised for. So, there is no such thing like "benchmark boosting". ie. Note 3 does not overclock when performing benchmark tests. I am not royal to Android. My family still enjoy more than 2 years old iPad2 and recommends iPad to anyone, although I prefer Android for smartphones over iOS. As you might see from above, I do not have any interest what a Windows phone or iPhone scores, for now of course.
Crysisftw. Why manufacturer should use the same power policy across the board? It is up to them for optimisation. What Sammy has done wrong again?
 I will be calling them 'cheater' only if they have overclocked its CPU when performing the benchmark tests.  But they did not as long as I know. And any manufacturer can limit its CPU or any of its components to optimize their user experience for normal users and of course all have been doing it ages.  What is wrong with it?   Car manufactures advertise how fast they could go like 150miles per hour as a benchmark, but would anyone be complaining why they do not set...
 First of all, I am not a Samsung apologist.  And that's fine that you blocked me for whatever the reason.   This limiting CPU speed for some of its applications in Android are not new as Ars notified.  So this is a hardly news.   But calling  'benchmark booster', 'faking performance', 'benchmark shenanigans' to one of Android manuracturers and accusing them as 'cheater' because they tested benchmarks at the CPU speed that was advertised for is pure evil journalism to me.
 Let's be fair to every manufacturer.  I think there is nothing Samsung needs to defend here.  Note 3 does not clock its CPU over 2.3gHz which SD800 is advertised for.  There is no such things like 'benchmark booster', 'faking performance', 'benchmark shenanigans'.  I am not defending Samsung, but simply putting my opinion here.  (I could not see anyone defending Samsung here) I also think that Samsung phones are ugly and I don't like TW, but my wife loves her Note 1 and...
 No it does not overclock it's 2.3gHz CPU.  So, there is no steroid booster nor faking performance here, no matter how you translate it.
Well, when I first saw 'steroid boost', 'faking performance' in this article, I thought that Note 3 would overclock it's CPU somehow for the the benchmark apps.   But it turns out that Note 3 does not overclock it's CPU for the benchmarks.  Sure it clocks, for the benchmarks, at 2.3gHz which is exactly SD800 was advertised for.  Where is 'steroid boost' and 'faking performance'?
No, that did not happen before. We could have purchased iPhone 5 for the same price of iPhone 5c.Why killed iPhone 5? I don't know, but there maybe some major defaults in aluminium material for iPhone 5? Or Apple wants everyone buy 5s instead of iPhone 5 thus repackaging iPhone 5 with plastic and killing iPhone 5? I don't know.
New Posts  All Forums: