It's hard to know where to begin, because what you just wrote is a bunch of bull.
If three phones (say: Note 4, Nexus 6 and Droid Turbo) have the same SOC and the same version of Android, they'd perform within 5% of each other if you average the benchmarks.
(Heck, even with somewhat dif. versions of Android, they'll be close to each other!)
Running the same SOC means same CPU, GPU, memory, IO system and 95 out of 100 times also the same drivers. You can almost always add the same Qualcomm radio to the not very diverse mix.
The (relatively) minor changes something like Touchwiz makes only has minor impact on performance. And won't do much to affect benchmark averages, if the reviewer does even a half assed job.
And BTW: From my experience with several generations of Android flagships, the problem isn't Touchwiz and other launchers. (And Touchwiz did less to performance than other skins/overlays.)
The problem is Android.
Sure, Samsung might have dressed it up, and made it look different.
But a turd is a turd even if Samsung spray paints it a different color and gives it a little hat. And Android is a turd in my experience. (Though granted, the latest Android 5.0 might be slightly less of a turd. I haven't tested it myself, but I'm really not hopeful after year after year of listening to Googles tired refrain of "THAT issue? Oh don't worry, it'll be fixed in the next version. I know we said that last version, but trust us, it will!")
Dude, chill, I was agreeing with you.
Side topic: Software does effect performance more than you think. iOS8.0.2 on my first gen iPad mini is a dog. Let's hope 8.1 will fix it. Oh wait, you said that.
You write long tirades expressing your hatred and contempt for someone, then turn around and feign outrage when one of your fellow trolls gets corrected down after making a false personal attack.
Clearly, when you apologized for being a terrible person in AI comments you were being phony. Zero respect for that sort of hypocrisy.
About as phony as somebody with three different aliases? Hatred & contempt for you personally? No. Contempt for your juvenile attacks on others with opinions contrary to you? Yes.
About as phony as somebody with three different aliases? Hatred & contempt for you personally? No. Contempt for your juvenile attacks on others with opinions contrary to you? Yes.
I don't cower behind an anonymous identity, mr lord raging hypocrite.
After a dissertation of hardware this, processor that, ram, android blah blah... In the end it looks like DED recognizes the real distinguishment in performance is that the Note 4 is driving roughly double the pixels the iPhone 6 plus is.
I agree its fair to test the phones as delivered, but why beat around the bush with all the hardware rant instead of just saying the iPhone 6 plus runs graphics intensive apps faster because it is doing about half the work the Note 4 is.
You can speed up a computer considerably by lowering the graphics settings, with the tradeoff being you eventually get images looking like Minecraft.
When you are doing things other than playing graphics intensive games, you'll be treated to higher density, sharper images than the iPhone is capable of. Personally I'd rather have the speed or, better yet, have Samsung or Apple innovate the capability to change graphics resolutions into their phones.
The snapdragon 805 is faster than the A8 at similar resolutions, but in the end the 805 has to drive 2 times the pixels, making the nexus 6 and the note 4 slower than iphones.
About as phony as somebody with three different aliases? Hatred & contempt for you personally? No. Contempt for your juvenile attacks on others with opinions contrary to you? Yes.
In case you didn't know it's called 'sock puppeting'.
He should but he won't as it's his m.o. He went after John Gruber in a hissy-fit a while back after Gruber dared to write something critical of DED/Corrections/McLean:
He should but he won't as it's his m.o. He went after John Gruber in a hissy-fit a while back after Gruber dared to write something critical of DED/Corrections/McLean:
I saw the title. I read down to the first chart. Noticed the phone in the title wasn't even in the chart. Scrolled down to the next graph, then next, then next. Then just went to the comments to see if anyone else noticed. Yup! First post!
Now it's just a strange morbid curiosity to see how many are going to cheerleader it simply just because it's pro Apple and rants on Android. I must admit the comments are a better read than the article.
Edit: have to admit, he got my click though. More than one actually because his rebuttals are better than the article.
Google strictly enforced its "18 month" limit as an excuse to stop providing updates for the Galaxy Nexus primarily because it used a TI OMAP chip, which is no longer being developed.
But being excited about a moderate software update going back 2 years (2012-2014) requires that you really be a die hard Android fan. If Apple only supported iOS 8 on iPhone 5 or later, people would find it shocking.
Since when did surprised=excited?
And you truly think it's a "moderate software update" for Android devices. If you considered iOS7 & 8 moderate too I suppose.
Moving from a 32 bit to a 64-bit OS now unified across smartphones, tablets, TV and auto, and delivering more useful notifications, added lock-screen security options, automatic encryption of user data, much-improved power management, multiple user profiles on the same smartphone (those with young children will like that) , separate data spaces for work and personal (enterprises will like that), and big performance gains in the switch from Dalvik to ART. Moderate? Hardly.
This is completely misleading however, because users don't care how fast the device performs at an artificial level; they care about how it will actually work at real world tasks. The Note 4, just like Motorola's Droid Turbo, Nexus 6 every other Adreno 420-powered Android flagship with 2560x1440 graphics, doesn't have the horsepower to pull its own weight.
The only reason for printing just the "offscreen" numbers is to hide the terrible GPU performance of Google's Android implementation of OpenGL, and terrible spec-oriented engineering choices that create products that are designed to win feature checklist reviews rather than to serve as good products for users.
How is 18fps any better? Really?
Offscreen is used to test the same screen resolutions. And in case you didn't know, games don't have to run at the devices native resolution.
"Metal" is irrelevant - opengl 3.x already is close to the metal as it is.
Until the ipad gets whatever a8x, the shield tablet and its K1 SoC kicks its ass in the GPU department, and that's nvidia just getting started.
As the article clearly details, the apples being compared here are smartphones, not theoretical capabilities of the chips inside them, were they not squandered by third rate Android code and incredibly foolish (or perhaps "good enough carrier friendly") decisions to cram 2K screens on a mobile device without also giving it a powerful enough processor.
Your conclusion is unsupported by your data. You cannot make statements about either factor when your comparison doesn't control for other variables. You can only fault the software if you test different software setups on the same hardware. Similarly, the only way to see the effect of hardware is use the same software in all your tests. The only way to justify your statement is to present either benchmarks of Android and iOS *both* running on the A8, or of iOS running on *both* the A8 and the Qualcomm chips.
After a dissertation of hardware this, processor that, ram, android blah blah... In the end it looks like DED recognizes the real distinguishment in performance is that the Note 4 is driving roughly double the pixels the iPhone 6 plus is.
In the end? As in, not throughout the entire article? Did you not even glance at the photos?
I agree its fair to test the phones as delivered, but why beat around the bush with all the hardware rant instead of just saying the iPhone 6 plus runs graphics intensive apps faster because it is doing about half the work the Note 4 is.
You can speed up a computer considerably by lowering the graphics settings, with the tradeoff being you eventually get images looking like Minecraft.
Do you think iPhone 6 looks like Minecraft? Can you see a difference between 2MP and 3.8MP on a 5" device? Do you think it is a good idea for an anemic Application Processor to be driving a mobile screen with nearly the resolution of a Retina Display MacBook Pro?
When you are doing things other than playing graphics intensive games, you'll be treated to higher density, sharper images than the iPhone is capable of. Personally I'd rather have the speed or, better yet, have Samsung or Apple innovate the capability to change graphics resolutions into their phones.
Do you understand what happens when you "innovate the capability to change graphics resolutions"?
Your conclusion is unsupported by your data. You cannot make statements about either factor when your comparison doesn't control for other variables. You can only fault the software if you test different software setups on the same hardware. Similarly, the only way to see the effect of hardware is use the same software in all your tests. The only way to justify your statement is to present either benchmarks of Android and iOS *both* running on the A8, or of iOS running on *both* the A8 and the Qualcomm chips.
That's a lot of talking for having zero point. Do you really not understand the issue?
It isn't some controversial theoretical idea. It's Samsung (and the minority followers in the Android camp) using screens because they have them, and not having an Application Processor capable of driving it. There is no need to benchmark exactly how much difference iOS could make on the same hardware, because the same issue is apparent on the 6 Plus, as linked to in the article. More pixels is more work. The 6 Plus gets a fast enough processor to keep up, albeit not as fast as the 6. The Note 4 and other Android phablets are as terrible in this regard as PenTile displays were when phablets first arrived.
The fact that Android performs poorly in OpenGL ES 3.0 in addition to this problem is a separate point. Blow all the smoke you want, it doesn't change the fact that Android is second rate software, and Samsung/Lenovo/Motorola are coming up with second rate hardware.
In case you didn't know it's called 'sock puppeting'.
actually, that term applies to a bunch of phony accounts that all pretend to be in agreement with each other to suggest credibility to other readers, much like the way that there are a half dozen anonymous accounts on AI who approve and agree with each other's posts for delivering personal attacks with zero legitimate content. Surprise! they all love Android.
That's a lot of talking for having zero point. Do you really not understand the issue?
It isn't some controversial theoretical idea. It's Samsung (and the minority followers in the Android camp) using screens because they have them, and not having an Application Processor capable of driving it. There is no need to benchmark exactly how much difference iOS could make on the same hardware, because the same issue is apparent on the 6 Plus, as linked to in the article. More pixels is more work. The 6 Plus gets a fast enough processor to keep up, albeit not as fast as the 6. The Note 4 and other Android phablets are as terrible in this regard as PenTile displays were when phablets first arrived.
The fact that Android performs poorly in OpenGL ES 3.0 in addition to this problem is a separate point. Blow all the smoke you want, it doesn't change the fact that Android is second rate software, and Samsung/Lenovo/Motorola are coming up with second rate hardware.
Yet your precious Apple followed the lead of those second rate hardware makers.
actually, that term applies to a bunch of phony accounts that all pretend to be in agreement with each other to suggest credibility to other readers, much like the way that there are a half dozen anonymous accounts on AI who approve and agree with each other's posts for delivering personal attacks with zero legitimate content. Surprise! they all love Android.
Yet your precious Apple followed the lead of those second rate hardware makers.
3rd party apps? Android may have been first but it now has third rate options and only half assed ports of only the most popular titles
NFC? Yeah Google got that out first too, but it flopped big time and exposed security problems
Randomly high resolutions? Yes an Android first. and then Retina Display happened.
Fingerprint scanner? A first on the Atrix. Which nobody used because it didn't ever work right. Now Samsung has one that doesn't either.
Digital Compass? Android was first! But they don't work consistently enough for developers to use as they do on iOS.
Smartwatch? Android was first! But they are crap that nobody buys. Google "smartwatches are" and see what Google suggests.
Screen sizes of phones nearly as big as an iPad? Oh wait, that's copying iPad.
Screen sizes of tablets smaller than iPad? Android was first! But no tablet makers are profitable apart from Apple.
For being first all the time, Google sure is bad at being successful or competent.
Of course here the discussion really is: does Apple copy android makers in dumping out third rate phone screens with chips that often aren't able to drive them? and that answer would be no. Apple waited for a high quality display and shipped a 64-bit AP with a high end GPU first.
Comments
Surprise! Don't believe everything you read on the Internet.
It's hard to know where to begin, because what you just wrote is a bunch of bull.
If three phones (say: Note 4, Nexus 6 and Droid Turbo) have the same SOC and the same version of Android, they'd perform within 5% of each other if you average the benchmarks.
(Heck, even with somewhat dif. versions of Android, they'll be close to each other!)
Running the same SOC means same CPU, GPU, memory, IO system and 95 out of 100 times also the same drivers. You can almost always add the same Qualcomm radio to the not very diverse mix.
The (relatively) minor changes something like Touchwiz makes only has minor impact on performance. And won't do much to affect benchmark averages, if the reviewer does even a half assed job.
And BTW: From my experience with several generations of Android flagships, the problem isn't Touchwiz and other launchers. (And Touchwiz did less to performance than other skins/overlays.)
The problem is Android.
Sure, Samsung might have dressed it up, and made it look different.
But a turd is a turd even if Samsung spray paints it a different color and gives it a little hat. And Android is a turd in my experience. (Though granted, the latest Android 5.0 might be slightly less of a turd. I haven't tested it myself, but I'm really not hopeful after year after year of listening to Googles tired refrain of "THAT issue? Oh don't worry, it'll be fixed in the next version. I know we said that last version, but trust us, it will!")
Dude, chill, I was agreeing with you.
Side topic: Software does effect performance more than you think. iOS8.0.2 on my first gen iPad mini is a dog. Let's hope 8.1 will fix it. Oh wait, you said that.
You write long tirades expressing your hatred and contempt for someone, then turn around and feign outrage when one of your fellow trolls gets corrected down after making a false personal attack.
Clearly, when you apologized for being a terrible person in AI comments you were being phony. Zero respect for that sort of hypocrisy.
About as phony as somebody with three different aliases? Hatred & contempt for you personally? No. Contempt for your juvenile attacks on others with opinions contrary to you? Yes.
About as phony as somebody with three different aliases? Hatred & contempt for you personally? No. Contempt for your juvenile attacks on others with opinions contrary to you? Yes.
I don't cower behind an anonymous identity, mr lord raging hypocrite.
I agree its fair to test the phones as delivered, but why beat around the bush with all the hardware rant instead of just saying the iPhone 6 plus runs graphics intensive apps faster because it is doing about half the work the Note 4 is.
You can speed up a computer considerably by lowering the graphics settings, with the tradeoff being you eventually get images looking like Minecraft.
When you are doing things other than playing graphics intensive games, you'll be treated to higher density, sharper images than the iPhone is capable of. Personally I'd rather have the speed or, better yet, have Samsung or Apple innovate the capability to change graphics resolutions into their phones.
Loving my Plus.
What this guy said.
In case you didn't know it's called 'sock puppeting'.
He should but he won't as it's his m.o. He went after John Gruber in a hissy-fit a while back after Gruber dared to write something critical of DED/Corrections/McLean:
http://tracks.ranea.org/post/524619951/dan-dilger-exploding-head
Be careful Lord Amhran, Mr. Corrections likes to delete posts that make him look stupid, just you wait and see.
Wow, good find!
I saw the title. I read down to the first chart. Noticed the phone in the title wasn't even in the chart. Scrolled down to the next graph, then next, then next. Then just went to the comments to see if anyone else noticed. Yup! First post!
Now it's just a strange morbid curiosity to see how many are going to cheerleader it simply just because it's pro Apple and rants on Android. I must admit the comments are a better read than the article.
Edit: have to admit, he got my click though. More than one actually because his rebuttals are better than the article.
Since when did surprised=excited?
And you truly think it's a "moderate software update" for Android devices. If you considered iOS7 & 8 moderate too I suppose.
Moving from a 32 bit to a 64-bit OS now unified across smartphones, tablets, TV and auto, and delivering more useful notifications, added lock-screen security options, automatic encryption of user data, much-improved power management, multiple user profiles on the same smartphone (those with young children will like that) , separate data spaces for work and personal (enterprises will like that), and big performance gains in the switch from Dalvik to ART. Moderate? Hardly.
This is completely misleading however, because users don't care how fast the device performs at an artificial level; they care about how it will actually work at real world tasks. The Note 4, just like Motorola's Droid Turbo, Nexus 6 every other Adreno 420-powered Android flagship with 2560x1440 graphics, doesn't have the horsepower to pull its own weight.
The only reason for printing just the "offscreen" numbers is to hide the terrible GPU performance of Google's Android implementation of OpenGL, and terrible spec-oriented engineering choices that create products that are designed to win feature checklist reviews rather than to serve as good products for users.
How is 18fps any better? Really?
Offscreen is used to test the same screen resolutions. And in case you didn't know, games don't have to run at the devices native resolution.
"Metal" is irrelevant - opengl 3.x already is close to the metal as it is.
Until the ipad gets whatever a8x, the shield tablet and its K1 SoC kicks its ass in the GPU department, and that's nvidia just getting started.
As the article clearly details, the apples being compared here are smartphones, not theoretical capabilities of the chips inside them, were they not squandered by third rate Android code and incredibly foolish (or perhaps "good enough carrier friendly") decisions to cram 2K screens on a mobile device without also giving it a powerful enough processor.
Your conclusion is unsupported by your data. You cannot make statements about either factor when your comparison doesn't control for other variables. You can only fault the software if you test different software setups on the same hardware. Similarly, the only way to see the effect of hardware is use the same software in all your tests. The only way to justify your statement is to present either benchmarks of Android and iOS *both* running on the A8, or of iOS running on *both* the A8 and the Qualcomm chips.
After a dissertation of hardware this, processor that, ram, android blah blah... In the end it looks like DED recognizes the real distinguishment in performance is that the Note 4 is driving roughly double the pixels the iPhone 6 plus is.
You can speed up a computer considerably by lowering the graphics settings, with the tradeoff being you eventually get images looking like Minecraft.
Your conclusion is unsupported by your data. You cannot make statements about either factor when your comparison doesn't control for other variables. You can only fault the software if you test different software setups on the same hardware. Similarly, the only way to see the effect of hardware is use the same software in all your tests. The only way to justify your statement is to present either benchmarks of Android and iOS *both* running on the A8, or of iOS running on *both* the A8 and the Qualcomm chips.
That's a lot of talking for having zero point. Do you really not understand the issue?
It isn't some controversial theoretical idea. It's Samsung (and the minority followers in the Android camp) using screens because they have them, and not having an Application Processor capable of driving it. There is no need to benchmark exactly how much difference iOS could make on the same hardware, because the same issue is apparent on the 6 Plus, as linked to in the article. More pixels is more work. The 6 Plus gets a fast enough processor to keep up, albeit not as fast as the 6. The Note 4 and other Android phablets are as terrible in this regard as PenTile displays were when phablets first arrived.
The fact that Android performs poorly in OpenGL ES 3.0 in addition to this problem is a separate point. Blow all the smoke you want, it doesn't change the fact that Android is second rate software, and Samsung/Lenovo/Motorola are coming up with second rate hardware.
In case you didn't know it's called 'sock puppeting'.
actually, that term applies to a bunch of phony accounts that all pretend to be in agreement with each other to suggest credibility to other readers, much like the way that there are a half dozen anonymous accounts on AI who approve and agree with each other's posts for delivering personal attacks with zero legitimate content. Surprise! they all love Android.
I don't think you guys are fooling anyone though.
Yet your precious Apple followed the lead of those second rate hardware makers.
Wrong answer.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sockpuppet_(Internet)
Google finally admitted that Android is for suckers.
Yet your precious Apple followed the lead of those second rate hardware makers.
3rd party apps? Android may have been first but it now has third rate options and only half assed ports of only the most popular titles
NFC? Yeah Google got that out first too, but it flopped big time and exposed security problems
Randomly high resolutions? Yes an Android first. and then Retina Display happened.
Fingerprint scanner? A first on the Atrix. Which nobody used because it didn't ever work right. Now Samsung has one that doesn't either.
Digital Compass? Android was first! But they don't work consistently enough for developers to use as they do on iOS.
Smartwatch? Android was first! But they are crap that nobody buys. Google "smartwatches are" and see what Google suggests.
Screen sizes of phones nearly as big as an iPad? Oh wait, that's copying iPad.
Screen sizes of tablets smaller than iPad? Android was first! But no tablet makers are profitable apart from Apple.
For being first all the time, Google sure is bad at being successful or competent.
Of course here the discussion really is: does Apple copy android makers in dumping out third rate phone screens with chips that often aren't able to drive them? and that answer would be no. Apple waited for a high quality display and shipped a 64-bit AP with a high end GPU first.