Just saw 9to5Mac points to an ilounge.com posting from 3 days ago that suggested the possibility.
My observations are qualitative and only based on one use of the 2.1A charger, but it looks like the last 10% (going from 90% to 100% full) goes slow again, as though the speed of charging tapers off. (Likely a programmed behavior to avoid overcharging, overheating or damaging the battery.) Going from 17% to 80% was certainly much faster than with the iPhone charger.
Although I appreciated the article itself, the article title is disingenuous in light of the severely lackluster GPU performance. GPU matters as much as CPU in many cases, even when you are not playing games.
That would be due to the benchmark software not keeping up with the more advanced features of iOS 8, after all it was written for iOS 7 - 7.1.
The Phonearena battery test obviously uses a different methodology. While the 6 still does well, it is not ahead of the pack. I am not sure why anyone would expect the 6 and 6 plus to have extraordinary battery life. They are extraordinarily thin with a very powerful processor, it is unreasonable to expect those two features would deliver class leading battery life.
This is why I and others would have preferred a slightly thicker phone with a bigger battery that didn't have a protruding camera.
The battery life is better than my 5s, a lot better and that's all that counts besides having used smartphone's for a few years now I make sure I am never far from a charger including a portable battery pack I carry in a pocket.
A triangle is stable, this becomes obvious when you lay an iPhone 6 on a table and there is no sign of rocking unless you go out of your way to press outside the screen on the top corner opposite the camera, as there is no need to do this for any purpose it isn't an issue.
There's only so much optimization you can put into a benchmark for specific hardware, you can't just replace huge chunks of code for one device and call it a fair benchmark. It's a test of the hardware's raw performance, not the software. In a way it gives a false view of the end-user performance but it's designed to compare the same software on different hardware.
Check the bottom of the page, takes you to meetgadgets, check the bottom of the page to see affiliates. They list Samsung phones there for some reason.
phonearena: cough, er it turns out that a device from one of our affiliates was benchmarked with a lower score so we're eh, just going to make a slight adjustment to that so now instead of the LG having 30 minutes more battery life, our custom web script now shows that the Samsung (our affiliate) has well over an hour more battery life.
And who just hired Anand Lal Shimpi from Anandtech? I'm not even sure it's possible to find completely unbiased reporting these days.
That said, it looks like the new iPhones are definitely towards the top of the list in terms of battery life no matter which site you prefer. Kudos to them for making the leap to bigger screens and holding their own with the competition.
And who just hired Anand Lal Shimpi from Anandtech? I'm not even sure it's possible to find completely unbiased reporting these days.
That said, it looks like the new iPhones are definitely towards the top of the list in terms of battery life no matter which site you prefer. Kudos to them for making the leap to bigger screens and holding their own with the competition.
Competition, what competition?
Samsung hasn't released one of those pictures with the people holding up the number cards for quite some time now.
But I'm not sure it matters. Core M is also much more expensive than what apple is likely paying for the A8, and most iphone and iPad users are not cpu constrained.
If you're thinking about MacBooks, the A8 is not competitive with Core M.
But apple is gaining fast on Intel. It could be that in another two to three years apple might be making SOCs that really could go in a MacBook air
I think that Intel is gaining faster on ARM's power consumption than ARM is gaining on Intel's performance. Broadwell iCore tablets in passive-cooled 7.2mm case are quite mean... of course, if design proves to be sustainable (not overheating etc. in some usage scenarios).
For that exact reason, I also wonder if the tests are not able to measure Apple's chips accurately.
I would bet on that... Think of it, are these benchmarks actually using the new SpriteKit, or Metal API's, to obtain every last ounce of the GPU, as pertaining to the GPU benchmarks in which the iPhone 6/6+ fall behind competitors?
I'm willing to bet these benchmarks are still using OpenGL as the graphics "middle-man", and thus the true performance of the new A8 is no where NEAR being realized by these benchmarks.
Once the benchmark developers factor in a method for testing the A8's GPU using the new Metal API of iOS 8, I expect the iPhone 6/6+, and even the 5S, to MURDER every Android phone! :smokey:
Although I appreciated the article itself, the article title is disingenuous in light of the severely lackluster GPU performance. GPU matters as much as CPU in many cases, even when you are not playing games.
As I just posted above, likely the lower GPU performance is because these benchmarks are not utilizing the new Metal API of iOS 8, thus not giving the apps direct access to the GPU, to truly showcase the new chips' abilities.
If the benchmark developers update their utilities to take advantage of Metal, I expect these to RADICALLY increase.
The Phonearena battery test obviously uses a different methodology. While the 6 still does well, it is not ahead of the pack. I am not sure why anyone would expect the 6 and 6 plus to have extraordinary battery life. They are extraordinarily thin with a very powerful processor, it is unreasonable to expect those two features would deliver class leading battery life.
My guess is Phonearena just isn't a representative test for the A7 or A8. These are very different processors from the rest (64-bit is just one aspect).
Power consumption of microprocessors correlates well with the square of the clock frequency. Other things being equal, a chip operating at 2x the frequency of another would be expected to consume 4x the power. The A7 and A8 operate at far lower clock rates than the competition, yet outperform them. The A8 has far more transistors (not all of which are necessarily active) but also a smaller feature size (20 nm), which decreases power consumption.
Glad Apple focused so much on power efficiency for the A8. There's barely anything that even taxes the A7 yet. Battery life, for most people, will be much more valuable than horse-power they'll probably never use.
Those are the actual prices of the devices. The figures you give are merely downpayments quoted by some carriers for twenty-four month financing plans as part of a two-year contract.
I would bet on that... Think of it, are these benchmarks actually using the new SpriteKit, or Metal API's, to obtain every last ounce of the GPU, as pertaining to the GPU benchmarks in which the iPhone 6/6+ fall behind competitors?
I'm willing to bet these benchmarks are still using OpenGL as the graphics "middle-man", and thus the true performance of the new A8 is no where NEAR being realized by these benchmarks.
Once the benchmark developers factor in a method for testing the A8's GPU using the new Metal API of iOS 8, I expect the iPhone 6/6+, and even the 5S, to MURDER every Android phone!
True, but since the Android devices dont have anything like metal and used higher DPI screens, the A8 is quite behind in terms of GPU raw power. That being said, the A8 GPU is still very fast.
True, but since the Android devices dont have anything like metal and used higher DPI screens, the A8 is quite behind in terms of GPU raw power. That being said, the A8 GPU is still very fast.
Not necessarily, as I've heard Android devices are now allowing near bare metal access to their GPU's as well, and I'm not sure if these benchmarks take advantage of those.
Comments
You are far from alone apparently. I am super excited to see this. Wish Apple talked about it or included the 2.1A charger.
http://www.macrumors.com/2014/09/22/iphone-6-and-6-plus-charging/
Just saw 9to5Mac points to an ilounge.com posting from 3 days ago that suggested the possibility.
My observations are qualitative and only based on one use of the 2.1A charger, but it looks like the last 10% (going from 90% to 100% full) goes slow again, as though the speed of charging tapers off. (Likely a programmed behavior to avoid overcharging, overheating or damaging the battery.) Going from 17% to 80% was certainly much faster than with the iPhone charger.
Although I appreciated the article itself, the article title is disingenuous in light of the severely lackluster GPU performance. GPU matters as much as CPU in many cases, even when you are not playing games.
That would be due to the benchmark software not keeping up with the more advanced features of iOS 8, after all it was written for iOS 7 - 7.1.
This is why I and others would have preferred a slightly thicker phone with a bigger battery that didn't have a protruding camera.
The battery life is better than my 5s, a lot better and that's all that counts besides having used smartphone's for a few years now I make sure I am never far from a charger including a portable battery pack I carry in a pocket.
A triangle is stable, this becomes obvious when you lay an iPhone 6 on a table and there is no sign of rocking unless you go out of your way to press outside the screen on the top corner opposite the camera, as there is no need to do this for any purpose it isn't an issue.
There's only so much optimization you can put into a benchmark for specific hardware, you can't just replace huge chunks of code for one device and call it a fair benchmark. It's a test of the hardware's raw performance, not the software. In a way it gives a false view of the end-user performance but it's designed to compare the same software on different hardware.
I trust Anandtech more:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Correction-new-battery-life-results-of-G3-and-S5_id57484
Check the bottom of the page, takes you to meetgadgets, check the bottom of the page to see affiliates. They list Samsung phones there for some reason.
phonearena: cough, er it turns out that a device from one of our affiliates was benchmarked with a lower score so we're eh, just going to make a slight adjustment to that so now instead of the LG having 30 minutes more battery life, our custom web script now shows that the Samsung (our affiliate) has well over an hour more battery life.
And who just hired Anand Lal Shimpi from Anandtech?
I'm not even sure it's possible to find completely unbiased reporting these days.
That said, it looks like the new iPhones are definitely towards the top of the list in terms of battery life no matter which site you prefer. Kudos to them for making the leap to bigger screens and holding their own with the competition.
And who just hired Anand Lal Shimpi from Anandtech?
I'm not even sure it's possible to find completely unbiased reporting these days.
That said, it looks like the new iPhones are definitely towards the top of the list in terms of battery life no matter which site you prefer. Kudos to them for making the leap to bigger screens and holding their own with the competition.
Competition, what competition?
Samsung hasn't released one of those pictures with the people holding up the number cards for quite some time now.
Competition, what competition?
Samsung hasn't released one of those pictures with the people holding up the number cards for quite some time now.
Why does that picture make me think of this one?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
That first guy holding up a phone has a comma on it, but the second guy’s phone has a period.
I could guess apple tested a device at this resolution, likely an over 6 inch screen that they have ready when it's asked for, 6S, 7 maybe.
what chance for the A8 nfc 4 inch screen
i don't like the larger sizes
would you think that next round we'd have 4 4.7 5.5 all with touch id nfc, etc
Then how are they going to price them?
5S = free
6 = $99
6+=$199
6?4" = What?
I think that Intel is gaining faster on ARM's power consumption than ARM is gaining on Intel's performance. Broadwell iCore tablets in passive-cooled 7.2mm case are quite mean... of course, if design proves to be sustainable (not overheating etc. in some usage scenarios).
http://www.slashgear.com/intel-outs-stunning-fanless-broadwell-tablet-design-for-2014-2-in-1s-03331832/
That first guy holding up a phone has a comma on it, but the second guy’s phone has a period.
But he's not holding an iPad.
I'm willing to bet these benchmarks are still using OpenGL as the graphics "middle-man", and thus the true performance of the new A8 is no where NEAR being realized by these benchmarks.
Once the benchmark developers factor in a method for testing the A8's GPU using the new Metal API of iOS 8, I expect the iPhone 6/6+, and even the 5S, to MURDER every Android phone! :smokey:
If the benchmark developers update their utilities to take advantage of Metal, I expect these to RADICALLY increase.
The Phonearena battery test obviously uses a different methodology. While the 6 still does well, it is not ahead of the pack. I am not sure why anyone would expect the 6 and 6 plus to have extraordinary battery life. They are extraordinarily thin with a very powerful processor, it is unreasonable to expect those two features would deliver class leading battery life.
My guess is Phonearena just isn't a representative test for the A7 or A8. These are very different processors from the rest (64-bit is just one aspect).
Power consumption of microprocessors correlates well with the square of the clock frequency. Other things being equal, a chip operating at 2x the frequency of another would be expected to consume 4x the power. The A7 and A8 operate at far lower clock rates than the competition, yet outperform them. The A8 has far more transistors (not all of which are necessarily active) but also a smaller feature size (20 nm), which decreases power consumption.
Glad Apple focused so much on power efficiency for the A8. There's barely anything that even taxes the A7 yet. Battery life, for most people, will be much more valuable than horse-power they'll probably never use.
Then how are they going to price them?
5S = free
6 = $99
6+=$199
6?4" = What?
You mean something like
5S = $450
6 = $550
6+=$650
...
Those are the actual prices of the devices. The figures you give are merely downpayments quoted by some carriers for twenty-four month financing plans as part of a two-year contract.
I would bet on that... Think of it, are these benchmarks actually using the new SpriteKit, or Metal API's, to obtain every last ounce of the GPU, as pertaining to the GPU benchmarks in which the iPhone 6/6+ fall behind competitors?
I'm willing to bet these benchmarks are still using OpenGL as the graphics "middle-man", and thus the true performance of the new A8 is no where NEAR being realized by these benchmarks.
Once the benchmark developers factor in a method for testing the A8's GPU using the new Metal API of iOS 8, I expect the iPhone 6/6+, and even the 5S, to MURDER every Android phone!
True, but since the Android devices dont have anything like metal and used higher DPI screens, the A8 is quite behind in terms of GPU raw power. That being said, the A8 GPU is still very fast.
http://axeetech.com/2014/09/23/dont-buy-iphone-6-plus-it-bends-like-beckham-even-in-your-pocket/