Originally Posted by samab
It was confirmed later by CPU speed test --- but before that, the thought process was from leaked firmware and the teardown, they found out that the CPU was a Samsung ARM11 chip (and that chip has 620 Mhz).
That is why you can't look at the CPU speed listed and claim that it's not speculation that it's actually running at that speed. You'll just have to wait for testing and breakdown. The only thing we do know for sure is multiple testings of the iPhone's 2G and 3G talk times and other usage tests from various independent testers, the actual speed of the iPhone's CPU and the clocked speed of iPhone's CPU.
All the ev-do smartphones that had longer battery life than the 3G iphone in the PC World article also have Qualcomm chipsets. They are very good with their 3G stuff.
This is a benefit of using CDMA/CDMA2000-based networks. Even with "3G" turned on the phone still uses "2G" to send and receive and calls. GSM/UMTS-based phones aren't capable of this, regardless of the chips used.
Also, you people keep on complaining about how bad AT&T's 3G network is and how bad 2G data speed is --- now you are using the slow 2G stuff to make a argument supporting the iphone.
Pointing out the talk times for both network settings is not an excuse, it's being through with the statistical claims. Even on 3G, the only smartphones tested that actually bested the iPhone in real world usage was a BB handset, and it only barely beat it out. If this phone can do better, then it's a definite plus, but using their listed stats as proof is just speculation with plenty of proof that those numbers are probably excessively high. So far, I only know of Apple and Sony are using real world battery tests. I suspect that others will follow suit here, and maybe HTC has already, but you understand if I am reluctant.