or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Purported iPhone 5 benchmark score doubles fastest iDevices, outperforms Android's best
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Purported iPhone 5 benchmark score doubles fastest iDevices, outperforms Android's best - Page 2

post #41 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by mausz View Post

 

What's impressive with besting a Galaxy S3 with 0.8%, while that S3 has been out for 4 months, or a tegra 3 device with 0.1% while that same tegra 3 has been out for almost a year ?

 

What's impressive is that Apple has managed to top the Android devices' performance, using a CPU which has much lower core count and clock speed. That can only bode well for power usage and hence battery life. The mobile game is about efficiency, not just pure performance - otherwise we'd all just have an i7 in our phones and forget about it!

post #42 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post

 

What's impressive is that Apple has managed to top the Android devices' performance, using a CPU which has much lower core count and clock speed. That can only bode well for power usage and hence battery life. The mobile game is about efficiency, not just pure performance - otherwise we'd all just have an i7 in our phones and forget about it!

 

Something the Qualcomm S4 has already shown to be able to do a couple of months ago.

post #43 of 145

Relax, they are just reporting performance scores, it's all part of evaluating any new device. At the end of the day, those numbers matter very little. The most cores, megahertz, ram, size of your screen etc, does not necessarily dictate the better device. Apple doesn't generally market their material that way, it may get a passing mention, but it's not something that they focus on. Apple focusses on a superior user experience on well-designed and well-built hardware.

 
post #44 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazweeja View Post

So last week when the current iPhone was clocking pathetic scores in this benchmark, the numbers didn't matter because it as all about the user experience. Right now, it's all about the numbers and how fast the new iPhone is. In a month or two, when the first Qualcomm S4 Pro phones are released and smash these scores, the numbers won't matter again because it will be all about the user experience. You can't have it both ways - either the benchmarks mean something and the iPhone is slower than other phones for 10 months of every 12-month release cycle or they don't.

 

Hey, just think they did it with a "disappointing, incremental" update.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #45 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by eAbyss View Post

Those numbers seem bogus. I'll wait for some real numbers after the iPhone has actually been released.


I'm particularly skeptical since this says it's ARMv7 - which is a Cortex core. I don't believe a cortex core at 1.02 GHz would have this performance.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #46 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post


Why the **** wouldn't you use something you're a fan of? And if you don't, how exactly can you be a fan of it, which implies liking it greatly based on your experience with it? Am I missing something? Most irrational thing I've ever read.

 

I spent a couple of decades as a fan of Apple's products but never bought them b/c I had a shit job and couldn't afford them.  Even when I did I started easy w/a Mac Mini for myself after we had bought the first iPad for my wife.  We have shifted to entirely OS X and iOS in the house since then.  Heck I loved the look of the G4 Cube, but it was expensive as hell and then of course the issue of the cracks.  Doesn't mean I didn't admire the product and I was glad to see Jobs back at Apple.  It's entirely possible to be a fan of something but still be from afar.

post #47 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by eAbyss View Post

Those numbers seem bogus. I'll wait for some real numbers after the iPhone has actually been released.

True or not though you'd still be stuck running only what Apple allows you. The great wall of Apple is a real pain in the ass.

 

I'll bet Acer finds "the great wall of Google" a a real pain in the donkey, too!

 

Thou shalt not make Aliyun handsets for Alibaba.

 

We cannot compete so we will anti-compete as Google's iron fist comes crashing down.

 

It's SkyHook all over again.

Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
Better than my Bose, better than my Skullcandy's, listening to Mozart through my LeBron James limited edition PowerBeats by Dre is almost as good as my Sennheisers.
Reply
post #48 of 145

post #49 of 145
And guess what?

When a new iPhone is being released, Fandroids shout that it has nothing new or innovative, just minor improvements. Even when you see scores like these with numerous engineering feats.

But when a new Android Phone is released with (usually) subpar quality casings, stuttery UI… and all that on a 1.5Ghz Quadcore with 2GB ram, they say that it's the fastest phone ever.

Now I might be the only one here, but the above sounds véry odd. And yet every real Fandroid shouts exactly what I've written above :/
post #50 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

LOL the iphone 4S was by far the fastest phone out there (UI). we do not care about processor numbers, we care about specs
No we don't.
Few people care about specs. Most care about how it works.
post #51 of 145

Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago. 

 

What gives? 

post #52 of 145

Granted...... The AppleInsider article was posted 7 hours ago...... so there's a chance that the GeekBench scores were updated right after this article was posted......... WHOM DO WE BELIEVE?!?!?

post #53 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Smell View Post

Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago. 

 

What gives? 

 

 

Still funny that iPhone 5's dual core @ 1.02GHz matched S3's quad core 1.4GHz.

 

 

"Engineering people, engineering. This is all less about specs and more about engineering."
post #54 of 145
"eked out"? I think you mean "edged out".

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply

Philip Machanick creator of Opinionations and Green Grahamstown
Department of Computer Science, Rhodes University, South Africa

Reply
post #55 of 145
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
post #56 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

the iphone was by far the fastest. if you do not understand what you are talking about, that's your problem.

post #57 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

 

Samsung Galaxy S3 was benchmarked 18 hours ago at 1560.

 

You know cpu/gpu specs doesn't matter actually to iPhone. Why? It's because iOS app developers will use an iPhone 5 themselves to test their current and future cpu & gpu-intensive apps. So we are damn well sure that all apps are optimized so there's nothing really to worry about. This is not a desktop or android that have tons of different specs that you have to worry if it's fast enough.

post #58 of 145

I'd like to welcome our new low-post Android Overlords to the forum :)  I do find it very interesting that given how long those phones have been out that they only just now mysteriously have higher scores showing up on geekbench.  You would think those would have already been posted at some point.

post #59 of 145
If true, fandroids just choke on their own specs vomit.
post #60 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post


just a question...do you think a lot of us Android fans (not users, fans) LONG for an iPhone yet somehow are incapable of getting one of the most easily accessible devices ever?

 

Back to the shrill whining, I see.

post #61 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

 There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

If this is not setting the bar, I don't know what is. Think about it for a second. Compared to the Android "elite", the iPhone 5 is under-spec'd, yet still bests them in performance.

 

When winning the spec race is more important than winning the performance race, you've already lost.

post #62 of 145
I'm slightly confused. The benchmarks @ http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks show the S3 with a score of 1628. The bench for the iPhone 5 is 1601.

Regardless though, that difference is intangible and that raw power will be put to much better use on iOS with optimized apps.

EDIT: Nevermind. I commented off the front page article and didn't see the rest of the responses.
Edited by techfox - 9/17/12 at 8:22am
post #63 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


I'm particularly skeptical since this says it's ARMv7 - which is a Cortex core. I don't believe a cortex core at 1.02 GHz would have this performance.

 

It seems quite reasonable to me.  

 

It's a *custom* ARMv7 core running Cortex A-15 compatible instructions whereas Samsung uses generic parts in their SoC's.  Other than Qualcom, no one is even attempting this kind of design in ARM CPUs.  There is only even one other part out there that is even A-15 compatible.  

 

If anyone should be getting weirdly high "over-performance" out of their chips it's the company that is using the best of the ARM technology,and  making customisation of it, the core of their processor strategy.  

post #64 of 145
Relax guys, the gs3 and nexus 7 scores are AVERAGE, meaning every benchmark put together and divided by the number of benchmarks. The iPhone 5 link is for a specific benchmark of 1 device.

That's why you see the s3 numbers rise a few hours later, likely when this news broke out folks with gs3 wanted to try out the benchmark themselves and the average changed.
post #65 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by techfox View Post

I'm slightly confused. The benchmarks @ http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks show the S3 with a score of 1628. The bench for the iPhone 5 is 1601.
Regardless though, that difference is intangible and that raw power will be put to much better use on iOS with optimized apps.

 

 

Samsung Galaxy S3 was benchmarked 19 hours ago at 1560.

 

post #66 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

Good to see that there are blind people available to make a point ;)

That higher benchmark of the SIII and Nexus 7 are because they're quadcore CPU's and have a higher clockrate. So you're basically saying that Android phones can outperform Apple, because Apple isn't so much doing much innovation by cramping more cores on a CPU? So you're forgetting the fact that Apple is capable of getting a similar, álmost highest, benchmark rating with just 2 cores, all the while getting better power management at the same time?

 

Let me think this through for a moment... ;)

post #67 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by makingdots View Post

 

 

Samsung Galaxy S3 was benchmarked 19 hours ago at 1560.

 

Why'd it change?

post #68 of 145
Originally Posted by mausz View Post
What's impressive with besting a Galaxy S3 with 0.8%, while that S3 has been out for 4 months, or a tegra 3 device with 0.1% while that same tegra 3 has been out for almost a year ?

 

Funny how the trolls never said that when the Galaxy S III started outselling the iPhone… Maybe… time has nothing to do with any argument?


Within the next months we'll see the first real A15 dual cores, and even A15 quad cores, which will probably double these figures again and be made available in android/wp8 devices in Q1-2013.

 

1. Is the iPhone's not a "real" A15 chip?

2. How do you expect Android to perform any better when the software can't be written for the hardware?


Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz View Post
this isn't allowed in these here parts...

 

No, lying is allowed. Just don't expect to be taken seriously after.


Originally Posted by eAbyss View Post
True or not though you'd still be stuck running only what Apple allows you. The great wall of Apple is a real pain in the ass.

 

Yeah, how's that software update working for you? Certainly no "artificial limitations" happening on Android!


Originally Posted by You Smell View Post
Why'd it change?

 

Because paid Samsung shills read this forum and others. Now the question is "Can any GSIII on the street, picked at random, still get this same score?"

post #69 of 145
Hmm? This isn't the story that other Apple-related news sites are reporting. Mac Observer reports that while the iPhone 5 scores very well, it is beaten by the Nexus 7 and GSIII. http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/iphone-5-geekbench-results-show-150-increase-over-iphone-4s . See also http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks

But more to the point -- I thought the consensus was that synthetic microbenchmarks don't really matter to consumers. I doubt that a single person bought an iPhone 5 or a GS3 because of its score on GeekBench, Egypt, Browsermark, or any other such test. There seems to be a double standard among (some) Apple fans -- when an Android device outperforms its iOS counterpart, the benchmark is dismissed as irrelevant. But when iOS outperforms Android, we see folks shouting from the rooftops.
post #70 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

 There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

Apple is still setting the bar. Perhaps not is raw speed but surely in usability.  My iPhones have always performed flawlessly. I have never used an Android phone but I certainly don't have any complaints about iPhone. As long as the phone is fast enough for the intended purpose, the advantages of one over the other should be gauged by user experience, fit an finish, battery life, upgradability, ecosystem, and security. You know, the things that actually matter.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #71 of 145
Although a very impressive number, it actually wasn't "outperforming" every "iOS and Android devices on the website." Was the Geekbench article source link omitted from this post by mistake? For the sake of objectivity, there was a mention of the Samsung S3 scoring 1781: http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1026099

I personally don't care for benchmarks, as the user's experience and personal needs determine the best tools.
Edited by Asim Soofi - 9/17/12 at 9:53am
post #72 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post

 

I spent a couple of decades as a fan of Apple's products but never bought them b/c I had a shit job and couldn't afford them.  Even when I did I started easy w/a Mac Mini for myself after we had bought the first iPad for my wife.  We have shifted to entirely OS X and iOS in the house since then.  Heck I loved the look of the G4 Cube, but it was expensive as hell and then of course the issue of the cracks.  Doesn't mean I didn't admire the product and I was glad to see Jobs back at Apple.  It's entirely possible to be a fan of something but still be from afar.

 

In your case, cost was the only issue. I don't see how cost is an issue in the case of being an "Android fan" yet not a user of any device that uses the platform. Makes even less sense when he continually posts on an Apple forum about it. It's like be continuingly trolling Mercedes forums about how their products are garbage, and claiming I'm huge Ford fan, when I don't even own or use a Ford car. What the ****?

post #73 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan View Post

Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.

 

Yet I've tried all flagship Android phones, and the 4S still faster/more responsive then all of them in real world usage. Incredible, eh? Your posts are no shock based on your username, but try to understand that 99.99% of people don't give a shit about specs, only real world performance. The 4S was not lacking in this regard, and the 5 won't either. The only place Apple is playing "catch-up" is in the fictional world in your mind, especially since they're now custom designing their processors. I'd say that puts them ahead of the game,, and they will reap countless advantages from doing so. 

 

Also, please stop comparing "Apple" to "Android". How the hell can Android be "moving faster" when it comes to hardware? It's a damn OS. OEMs use it, then add their own hardware. "Android" has nothing to do with benchmarks. Such an insanely stupid, mindless comparison that shows you don't have a clue of what you're talking about. Heard of the galaxy Note 10.1? Super high specced, quad core, 2GB RAM, runs like complete shit. But please, go right ahead and buy it for the specs, like the educated, enlightened buyer that you are. 


Edited by Slurpy - 9/17/12 at 10:12am
post #74 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post

But more to the point -- I thought the consensus was that synthetic microbenchmarks don't really matter to consumers. I doubt that a single person bought an iPhone 5 or a GS3 because of its score on GeekBench, Egypt, Browsermark, or any other such test. There seems to be a double standard among (some) Apple fans -- when an Android device outperforms its iOS counterpart, the benchmark is dismissed as irrelevant. But when iOS outperforms Android, we see folks shouting from the rooftops.

The consensus is that performance matters, not specs. Which also happens to be what this benchmark validates. You have a Dual core processor besting Quad cores and giving credence to what I've said all along: If your OS and hardware are optimized specs shouldn't matter.

 

Adding a quad core processor doesn't cover up your insufficiencies... When Apple runs circles around you with a dual core processor, it highlights them.

 

Imagine what Apple could do with a quad core processor.


Edited by Postulant - 9/17/12 at 12:55pm
post #75 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePixelDoc View Post

Considering it's the USB connector, the one that Apple championed and was the first to use on all of their products,which they're now throwing under the bus with all of their devices upgraded with Thunderbolt and Lightning... yes.. it will take a year or longer(?) for OEM's both desktop and mobile to realize that once again... they've been run over(!).

 

Apple will be making AND selling the iPhone 4 and/or 4S for at least two more years so if anyone has been thrown under a bus, it's gonna be a very slow bus.

 

In addition Apple will be selling the current and previous iPads, the previous iPod Touch, the iPod shuffle, and the iPod Classic for a year or more as well. 

 

Don't you have anything else to do rather than make an ass out of yourself?

"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #76 of 145

First off, you can always tell when people arent reading the comments before posting.  The timestamp on those newer scores for teh S3 and Nexus are AFTER the timestamp on this article.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by derekmorr View Post

But more to the point -- I thought the consensus was that synthetic microbenchmarks don't really matter to consumers. I doubt that a single person bought an iPhone 5 or a GS3 because of its score on GeekBench, Egypt, Browsermark, or any other such test. There seems to be a double standard among (some) Apple fans -- when an Android device outperforms its iOS counterpart, the benchmark is dismissed as irrelevant. But when iOS outperforms Android, we see folks shouting from the rooftops.

 

Normal consumers, not so much.  Super geeks yes.  I know people who used to buy new videocards every 6 months b/c they wanted the bragging rights of "fastest videocard out there".  I see these same people posting about buying their 5th phone of the year b/c it's now the fastest or added some new feature, etc.  So a very small % indeed, buy saying no one does this kind of thing is silly. 

 

As to the point about the double standard, I think what happens is you have people give their opinions on the OSes being best and then escalation starts to happen.  First it becomes specs or feature comparison, then it moves on to benchmarks.  Once you have moved on to that stage, you get the alternate arguments of "I'm faster no!" "that doesn't matter!" or "Look I'm faster again" "So what I sold way more than you last quarter".  You can attribute eitehr side of these examples to Android or iOS and still be correct, especially if you don't try and apply teh 2nd set to an individual phone model but are going for OS.  Constantly shifting goalposts and new comparisons are always going to happen.

 

Also, given that we only get new iOS phones once a year, expect to see the crowd who normally doesn't give 2 shits about benchmarks go wild about them around launch time just b/c they listen to trash talk all year long.  *shrug*  It's stupid on both sides, but thats kind of human nature.

post #77 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcrs View Post

Nope, it doesn't beat every Android device. Galaxy S3 with Samsung Exynos 4412 1400 MHz Quad core has 1628 score. The Asus Nexus 7 with NVIDIA Tegra 3 T30L 1300 MHz Quad core has 1604 score.

That's fraud most likely.

 

Those devices have been out for a while now, and those scores are very recent additions, probably by some Fandroid or paid shills overclocking or otherwise manipulating the results. When the article was written, those scores didn't exist. 

post #78 of 145

Speaking of Android, openness, etc, this is some funny stuff going on right now:

 

   http://allthingsd.com/20120916/google-and-alibaba-continue-warring-over-acer-phone/

 

Google it seems is now resorting to threats and intimidation to keep Android forks (or is it just another Linux based system) out of the market. So much for "open", "Don't be evil", and all that. What's that you say? Yes, I know, but Google seems awfully upset that someone is, they claim, stealing their IP. Maybe they should just innovate, not intimidate.

post #79 of 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazweeja View Post

So last week when the current iPhone was clocking pathetic scores in this benchmark, the numbers didn't matter because it as all about the user experience. Right now, it's all about the numbers and how fast the new iPhone is. In a month or two, when the first Qualcomm S4 Pro phones are released and smash these scores, the numbers won't matter again because it will be all about the user experience. You can't have it both ways - either the benchmarks mean something and the iPhone is slower than other phones for 10 months of every 12-month release cycle or they don't.

The user experience is the most important factor. But, it is nice that the numbers currently are better than the competition if only because the competition holds those numbers in such high regard.
post #80 of 145

It make me piss to see how much people cares much more for synthetic benchmark and meaning less numbers than real technologies inside tech gadgets.

 

I found somewhat disturbing how much Fandroid dismiss all Dalvik VM atrocity.  To skip all the detail, let's say pure C runtime environment like iOS will be forever more efficient than running Java bytecodes into a VM on a C plateform. 

 

I think people has forget about the early days of NeXT, it was developed on a 33Mhz CISC processor. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Purported iPhone 5 benchmark score doubles fastest iDevices, outperforms Android's best