There is not a contradiction. Anandtech is comparing Samsung's terrible PenTile screens on the original Galaxy models to their latest, best screens. Yes they are much better! From a baseline of crap, it's easy to make progress.
Anandtech did not extensively compare the Exynos 7 against Apple's A8. However, you misrepresent what that site actually reported (surprise!). In onscreen, real world graphics benchmarks, Anandtech reports that the latest Galaxy S6 has a OpenGL 3 frame rate that is only 60% of iPhone 6. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9111/samsung-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-preview/2
The iphone is in all of the benchmark tests they list on the site, including the screen tests(double check your link that you just posted). Your rediculous hit piece takes 1 piece of information and expands it into many many paragraphs of crap. You call a part cheap, even though it outperforms almost all competitors in terms of absolute performance, and is fabbed at the state of the art 14nm. The mali GPU is outperforming the adreno 430, which is plenty fast. In terms of outright performance, only the most recent Ipad and the Tegra chips are outperforming it.
I still don't understand how onscreen performance is being dismissed. Even if you render everything to an offscreen pixel buffer, you still need to copy the contents of that pixel buffer to the one which is being used for displaying on the screen a certain number of times per second. So you're still limited by the throughput performance of your GPU at that point.
Im not saying it should be disregarded, it is an absolute concern if it effects daily use. THose points are legitimate, its the FUD of calling parts cheap and bad engineering when its simply not the case. Any of the reviews tell you this device is fast and the screen is beautiful. I doubt you would come to that conclusion reading DED's FUD.
Im not saying it should be disregarded, it is an absolute concern if it effects daily use. THose points are legitimate, its the FUD of calling parts cheap and bad engineering when its simply not the case. Any of the reviews tell you this device is fast and the screen is beautiful. I doubt you would come to that conclusion reading DED's FUD.
Right. But, given a scenario where you need to update all of the pixels frequently so that things stay smooth, it's clear that the GPU they have isn't powerful enough to do it.
Sure, games programmers will work around this by forcing the resolution to be lower. And for apps which aren't graphics intensive, it doesn't matter. But it's a bit disingenuous of Samsung to pack more pixels into their displays simply so that they can claim higher pixel density than Apple, when the GPU they have can't really keep up in many cases (forcing many things to run at lower resolution, which defeats the purpose).
Will most people notice or be able to analyze the problem deeply enough to see the root cause? Probably not. But those of us who work in technology recognize a cheap sales tactic a mile away. Which is why there is more respect for Apple than Samsung.
Reality is that Galaxy S5/Note 4 both performed poorly as flagships and as key product introductions for Samsung, and the S6 is essentially a Note 4 scaled down physically, with similar performance. It doesn't move the needle, and won't attract throngs of volume buyers.
And while I will be looking at getting an iPhone 6 when the newer 6x or 7s come out (to get the price drop), I take all these tests with a grain of salt as they are usually biased from the get-go.
But those of us who work in technology recognize a cheap sales tactic a mile away. Which is why there is more respect for Apple than Samsung.
I expect that the president of DisplayMate has more display experience than you do. Care you to post your credentials to back up your claim that's just a cheap sales tactic?
The display on the Galaxy S6 matches and even exceeds the performance of Galaxy Note 4that we measured in 2014 and rated it as the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we had ever tested (see the Comparison section below that includes the iPhone 6).
We recently evaluated and rated the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus as the current Best Mobile LCD Displays, while the Galaxy S6 and Galaxy Note 4 are the current Best Mobile OLED Displays. All are impressive and excellent displays with great state-of-the-art display technology. However, OLED displays have been advancing at a relentless and fast pace with a constant series of systematic and strategic improvements, while LCDs have been coasting on their laurels for years. So although OLEDs started from behind in 2010 they have now pulled ahead on performance and innovation based on the Lab test and measurement results reported here. To get back in the game and become more competitive, LCDs will need to adopt Quantum Dots and Dynamic Color Management.
The Galaxy S6 has more than double the resolution and more than 4 times the number of pixels as the iPhone 6. It also has significantly higher peak Brightness, significantly higher Contrast Ratio in both low and high Ambient Light, significantly higher Absolute Color Accuracy, significantly better Viewing Angel performance, and has 4 selectable screen modes instead of a single fixed one on the iPhones.
Comparison with LCDs and the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus:
While LCDs remain more power efficient for images with mostly full screen white content (like all text screens, for example),
OLEDs are now more power efficient for mixed image content because they are emissive displays so their power varies with the
Average Picture Level (average Brightness) of the image content. For LCDs the display power is fixed and independent of image content.
The Galaxy S6 is in fact 23 percent more power efficient than the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus for mixed image content (that includes
text together with photos, videos, and movies, for example) with a typical 50 percent Average Picture Level, APL. OLEDs have been
rapidly improving in their power efficiency. The balance point has now moved all the way up to 65 percent APL: the OLED Galaxy S6
is more power efficient for all APLs from zero up through 65 percent, and the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus LCDs are more power
Kind of the point I was trying to make. DED picking on screen gpu benchmarks let's some folks here feel good. But he doesn't need to cherry pick data. The iphone is still the best all round phone. Let's be knowledgeable WHY instead of wanting Republican-like talking points.
Who cares if the newest Exynos has caught up to the A8. The overall package is still better. Until games render at 1440p natively, DEDs handpicked stats are the kind of pointless.
I don't think DED intended to make someone "feel better". His point was that Samsung isn't matching resolutions to GPUs capabilities for an optimal experience.
I'm more with DED here. Reading through the Anandtech article and seeing the graphs, I'm surprised that Samsung couldn't have done better with the S6. It's got- what, six or seven months on the iP6? - and is clocked considerably higher, and yet still comes up short on almost all close-to-real-world-scenario benchmarks (and gets well and truly blown away on a few, like browser benchmarks - although really, who would use the web on their phone, right?) Even where it does well (such as max brightness), a little reading shows that it can't/won't actually reach this level in real-world use.
It's a nice enough looking phone (although I think one could argue that Samsung aptly named it's design goals "project zero" in terms of style differences from the iP6). And it's "class-leading" in most areas, if your "class" is clearly limited to Android smartphones. But I doubt it's going to turn around Samsung's smartphone decline to any great degree.
Also, FWIW, early battery life tests show that while battery life is decent, it's considerably less than the S5 (that is, about 77% of the older S5 in this sites' score).
Perhaps not surprising, with the increased pixel count on the S6's pentile screen, but it's not reassuring to Fandroids who are already howling about a non-replaceable battery.
I could less about the gpu/cpu performance. I'd like to see some really good innovation on battery performance. There is some hope with some new battery tech coming down the pipe that allows the same battery life in half the size. My only fear with this will be that manufacturers will make their phones/devices even smaller and thinner with it :-(
You seem to mistake that I am supporting Samsung. I am not. I just despise these DED articles that contain blatant lies. I am not arguing the merits of the OS's(as Touchwiz is garbage), I am simply saying that the DED article contains obvious factual errors that I assume are intentional to further this hit piece. And I guess " the display of the Galaxy S6 is relatively perfect with its dark, inky blacks and amazing color" and "The Exynos 7420 SoC appears to be class-leading in performance" are technobabble on the intrawebbs. If he wants to argue that Touchwiz sucks(it does) and that the bottom chin of the device is an exact duplicate of the iphone(it pretty much is), I would have no comment.
What "obvious factual errors"? That's a pretty large comment to throw out without offering anything but some vague quotes out of context from an article that arrives at the same conclusions of fact, even if Anandtech congratulates Samsung for improving over its previously terrible screens.
Another thing to consider: Apple's A7 introduced 64-bit and Metal development, neither of which is really reflected in these benchmarks. Apple is now insisting that all apps compile to 64-bit on the App Store to take advantage of ARMv8.
Samsung can't do that; it doesn't even control the Android ecosystem. It doesn't optimize Android for its CPU or GPU architectures. It's all generic, and Google is expressly focusing on the "next billion" users of Android, who are in India and developing nations, with price targets even lower than the ~$250 ASP Android now has. Who is going to develop special apps on par with iOS for Samsung's phone, before it even achieves a market, and after two big disappointing years of meah releases?
If Samsung had delivered a MUCH faster device, its hardware would still not be taken advantage of by Android apps. We saw that happen in 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014. This year is another year of Android's fastest devices being slower than Apple's hardware. Do you think things will radically change, and developers will target the people who buy Samsung devices to save money, a demographic that doesn't pay for apps?
If so, why?
Your position makes zero sense. Galaxy S6 could sell well and it would still attract very little optimized app development. The peak of Galaxy occured with the Galaxy S III, and even that phone didn't get any amazing apps optimized for it, nor any real exclusives (apart from some Samsung adware stuff). You think a knock off iPhone 6 look, paired with Cnet backpatting and good sounding specs--at a significantly higher price--is going to shift reality? Let's amicably disagree and then compare notes next quarter!
Samsung's S8000 had a 3.1" screen, smaller than iPhone 4 as the article states. It was also a PenTile screen that looked terrible had did not have the real resolution pixel density you cite, because... PenTile. You can copy and paste from Wikipedia in an attempt to rewrite history, but I was alive when iPhone 4 was released, and it was a big deal. It was something Samsung had not achieved earlier. Samsung was busy copying the iPhone 3GS.
My son actually still has my still perfectly functional S8000, though it is retired. Oh, you were alive when the iPhone 4 was released were you? Wow, I'm so impressed. Did you enjoy watching Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon, live on TV? I must say It was a real privilege to actually shake his hand when he, Michael and Buzz did their world tour after they got back.
As for re-writing history, you seem to be quite practiced in the art. You say the Jet screen looked terrible. For the time, it did not.
Quote:
Speaking of screens, we must say that hands down, the Jet takes the cake. The phone comes with a 3.1-inch, AMOLED screen with WVGA resolution that supports 16 mln colors and image quality is really good
The Jet's front of course is dominated by the display and the 3.1-incher beats the LG Arena screen by a whisker. And with a WVGA resolution of 480 x 800 pixels, the S8000 Jet punches its weight with other devices offering the highest resolution on the market. Now add the AMOLED technology that provides contrast, unrivaled by any LCD and you get the idea that with the Jet you receive top-notch image quality.
You seem to be off in a corner on your own with your opinion.
The screen was 480 x 800 pixels 301 ppi, while the 3GS you mentioned was just 320 x 480 pixels and 165 ppi. Both were released in June 2009. Apple did not better the resolution of the Jet until the following year with the iP4. You can try that Pentile misdirection all you like but as an actual former owner and user I can say with confidence it was not possible to see pixelation at any remotely normal viewing distance.
Quote:
You can cite Ars numbers without context, but it doesn't change the facts. After all, you already admitted that you agree with the article that the problem is pairing a too-high resolution screen with a not-powerful-enough chip.
More factual inaccuracy. I was quoting benchmark figures from Anandtech, which I clearly stated. Yes I did agree with the article comparing on screen benchmarks to the iP6 but not the Plus, which according to Anandtech benchmarks, it betters.
Quote:
There is not a contradiction. Anandtech is comparing Samsung's terrible PenTile screens on the original Galaxy models to their latest, best screens. Yes they are much better! From a baseline of crap, it's easy to make progress.
That is not true. Anandtech said they were blown away by how much AMOLED had improved but their words of praise were not in any way qualified by or comparing its screen to earlier Samsung screens. Their praise was clearly of the screen in it's own right in relation to all other screens currently on the market.
Quote:
Speaking of displays, Samsung has integrated an incredible display into both versions of the Galaxy S6. I’m really blown away at how far AMOLED has come in the past few years, as the Galaxy S6 is one of the best displays we’ve tested for luminance and overall color accuracy. The only real problems I can see are color shifts with viewing angles, and white point tending to be a bit green depending upon the unit we’re looking at. There are some edge-specific issues, namely uneven luminance and odd color shifting towards green hues on white at the edge of the display. Other than this, the display of the Galaxy S6 is relatively perfect with its dark, inky blacks and amazing color.
...
In the saturation sweep, both displays do an incredible job. I really don't have anything else to say here, because there's really no way to improve on the level of calibration Samsung has done on this display. Unless Samsung calibrates every single display in production, which is wildly impractical and effectively impossible to do, this is as good as it gets for a mass-produced device. Improving past this point will also be incredibly difficult to perceive, which means there's no real reason to go any further.
...
Overall, this is probably the best display anyone will be able to get in a smartphone right now. This level of progress is amazing from Samsung, given just how bad things were with the Galaxy S' AMOLED display, even as recent as the display of the Galaxy S4. With the Galaxy S5 review, I said that I wouldn't be surprised to see AMOLED equal, if not exceed LCD within a year or two, and Samsung has managed to finally hit that mark.
You have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth and willfully misinterpret and mis-attribute what others say.
Quote:
Anandtech did not extensively compare the Exynos 7 against Apple's A8. However, you misrepresent what that site actually reported (surprise!). In onscreen, real world graphics benchmarks, Anandtech reports that the latest Galaxy S6 has a OpenGL 3 frame rate that is only 60% of iPhone 6. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9111/samsung-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-preview/2
As I said earlier, I compared Anandtech benchmarks for the iPhone 6 Plus and the Samsung S6, so I have not misrepresented their graphics benchmarks. In the OpenGL 3 frame rate benchmark you mention, the iPhone 6 Plus has only 93.5% the frame rate of the S6, even though the S6 is driving 176% the pixel count of the 6 Plus, and your conclusion arrived at by incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking, both in kind and source, concludes the S6 has poor GPU performance!
Quote:
the S6 is essentially a Note 4 scaled down physically, with similar performance. It doesn't move the needle
I'll repeat myself - You have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth.
What "obvious factual errors"? That's a pretty large comment to throw out without offering anything but some vague quotes out of context from an article that arrives at the same conclusions of fact, even if Anandtech congratulates Samsung for improving over its previously terrible screens.
Another thing to consider: Apple's A7 introduced 64-bit and Metal development, neither of which is really reflected in these benchmarks. Apple is now insisting that all apps compile to 64-bit on the App Store to take advantage of ARMv8.
Samsung can't do that; it doesn't even control the Android ecosystem. It doesn't optimize Android for its CPU or GPU architectures. It's all generic, and Google is expressly focusing on the "next billion" users of Android, who are in India and developing nations, with price targets even lower than the ~$250 ASP Android now has. Who is going to develop special apps on par with iOS for Samsung's phone, before it even achieves a market, and after two big disappointing years of meah releases?
If Samsung had delivered a MUCH faster device, its hardware would still not be taken advantage of by Android apps. We saw that happen in 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014. This year is another year of Android's fastest devices being slower than Apple's hardware. Do you think things will radically change, and developers will target the people who buy Samsung devices to save money, a demographic that doesn't pay for apps?
If so, why?
Your position makes zero sense. Galaxy S6 could sell well and it would still attract very little optimized app development. The peak of Galaxy occured with the Galaxy S III, and even that phone didn't get any amazing apps optimized for it, nor any real exclusives (apart from some Samsung adware stuff). You think a knock off iPhone 6 look, paired with Cnet backpatting and good sounding specs--at a significantly higher price--is going to shift reality? Let's amicably disagree and then compare notes next quarter!
So you just changed the argument from hardware to software? Your now saying android is poorly optimized, which would result in poor performance? Wouldn't that in turn mean the hardware in the S6 is more impressive? And while on screen it benchmarks slower than the iphone 6, it isn't "Extremely poor performance", but that plays so much more to your narrative. I would say if at 79% of the Iphone 6 while pushing many more pixels is extremely poor(in the on screen T-rex benchmark on anand), then that next 20% must make all of the difference.
I would say you agree with at least some of the points that had been made, because(to your credit) the article has been updated since it was originally posted. And contrary to my tone, I have enjoyed many of your articles and think you have provided some very good insights in many articles. I just don't like the ones that seem to me to be clickbait/attack dog pieces. But we can agree to disagree, and we can both hope this phone under-performs in sales(so much is my hatred of all things touchwiz, s voice, crapware in any form).
...and your conclusion arrived at by incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking, both in kind and source, concludes the S6 has poor GPU performance!
I'll repeat myself - You have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth.
Are we looking at the same article? ...cause the onscreen (ie real-world) framerate of the iP6 is waaay above the more expensive and seven-months-newer S6 Edge, in either "Manhattan" or "T-Rex" tests.
I don't see where you can claim this is "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED, when it's the (only!) two on-screen benchmarks listed under Anandtech's "GPU performance" section...
Real world performance is all that matters. And once again the Samdung phones will continue to be slower and more laggy than the iPhone because of a crappy OS and touchWiz.
they may come back to you with the real world usage on Flip app where GS 6 Edge outperformed iPhone 6 on ONE app.
Are we looking at the same article? ...cause the onscreen (ie real-world) framerate of the iP6 is waaay above the more expensive and seven-months-newer S6 Edge, in either "Manhattan" or "T-Rex" tests.
I don't see where you can claim this is "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED, when it's the (only!) two on-screen benchmarks listed under Anandtech's "GPU performance" section...
As I always said: samsung chip is POS since quad cores ( only 2 cores work at a time).
Anandtech don't seem to think the Exynos in the Note 4 is a POS:
Quote:
The scores on the Exynos version of the Note 4 are outstanding, beating out all existing devices in our more complex benchmarks.
...
The Note 4 with the Exynos 5433 is the first of a new generation, taking advantage of ARM's new ARMv8 cores. On the CPU side, there's no contest. The A53 and A57 architectures don't hold back in terms of performance, and routinely outperform the Snapdragon 805 by a considerable amount.
Prove me wrong with data. We're talking about Exynos line.
Ok...
Quote:
Seoul, Korea, September 10, 2013
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., a world leader in advanced semiconductor solutions, today announced its Heterogeneous Multi-Processing (HMP) solution for the Exynos 5 Octa to fully maximize the benefits of the ARM® big.LITTLE™ technology. The HMP capability gives system-level designers the ability to develop solutions that deliver the right combination of high-performance and low-power to carry out tasks such as 3D gaming, complex augmented reality and advanced web browsing.
"It's usually assumed that the big CPU will do all the performance-critical work, however, power-efficient little cores can handle many significant workloads all on their own, so the workload is balanced within the system," said Taehoon Kim, vice president of System LSI marketing, Samsung Electronics. "big.LITTLE processing is designed to deliver the right combination of processors for a specific job. An eight-core processor with HMP is the truest form of the big.LITTLE technology with limitless benefits to the users of high-performance, low-power mobile products."
"ARM® big.LITTLE multi-processing technology delivers the highest performance and efficiency across the widest range of workloads," said Noel Hurley, vice president, Strategy and Marketing, Processor Division, ARM®. "We welcome Samsung's continued commitment to deploying the leading-edge technology on their latest chips featuring the ARM® Cortex™-A series of processors, ARM® Mali™ GPUs and ARM® Artisan™ physical IP."
HMP is the most powerful use model for ARM® big.LITTLE technology, as it enables the use of all physical cores at the same time. Software threads with high priority or high computational intensity can be allocated to the 'big' Cortex-A15 cores while threads with less priority or are less computationally intensive, can be performed by the 'LITTLE' Cortex-A7 cores, enabling a highly responsive, low-energy system to be built.
Comments
There is not a contradiction. Anandtech is comparing Samsung's terrible PenTile screens on the original Galaxy models to their latest, best screens. Yes they are much better! From a baseline of crap, it's easy to make progress.
Anandtech did not extensively compare the Exynos 7 against Apple's A8. However, you misrepresent what that site actually reported (surprise!). In onscreen, real world graphics benchmarks, Anandtech reports that the latest Galaxy S6 has a OpenGL 3 frame rate that is only 60% of iPhone 6. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9111/samsung-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-preview/2
The iphone is in all of the benchmark tests they list on the site, including the screen tests(double check your link that you just posted). Your rediculous hit piece takes 1 piece of information and expands it into many many paragraphs of crap. You call a part cheap, even though it outperforms almost all competitors in terms of absolute performance, and is fabbed at the state of the art 14nm. The mali GPU is outperforming the adreno 430, which is plenty fast. In terms of outright performance, only the most recent Ipad and the Tegra chips are outperforming it.
I still don't understand how onscreen performance is being dismissed. Even if you render everything to an offscreen pixel buffer, you still need to copy the contents of that pixel buffer to the one which is being used for displaying on the screen a certain number of times per second. So you're still limited by the throughput performance of your GPU at that point.
Im not saying it should be disregarded, it is an absolute concern if it effects daily use. THose points are legitimate, its the FUD of calling parts cheap and bad engineering when its simply not the case. Any of the reviews tell you this device is fast and the screen is beautiful. I doubt you would come to that conclusion reading DED's FUD.
Im not saying it should be disregarded, it is an absolute concern if it effects daily use. THose points are legitimate, its the FUD of calling parts cheap and bad engineering when its simply not the case. Any of the reviews tell you this device is fast and the screen is beautiful. I doubt you would come to that conclusion reading DED's FUD.
Right. But, given a scenario where you need to update all of the pixels frequently so that things stay smooth, it's clear that the GPU they have isn't powerful enough to do it.
Sure, games programmers will work around this by forcing the resolution to be lower. And for apps which aren't graphics intensive, it doesn't matter. But it's a bit disingenuous of Samsung to pack more pixels into their displays simply so that they can claim higher pixel density than Apple, when the GPU they have can't really keep up in many cases (forcing many things to run at lower resolution, which defeats the purpose).
Will most people notice or be able to analyze the problem deeply enough to see the root cause? Probably not. But those of us who work in technology recognize a cheap sales tactic a mile away. Which is why there is more respect for Apple than Samsung.
Reality is that the S6 is NOT "essentially a Note4". See http://www.androidheadlines.com/2015/03/phone-comparisons-samsung-galaxy-note-4-vs-samsung-galaxy-s6.html. ; It has a different screen, different cpu, different memory, different modem, and different flash architecture (UFS). See also http://www.ubergizmo.com/products/lang/en_us/devices/galaxy-s6,galaxy-note-4/ ; which adds the iPhone 6 in the benchmark graphs. It easily bests the Note 4 and iPhone 6 in most tests. See also http://highonandroid.com/android-smartphones/galaxy-s6-vs-note-4-antutu-benchmark-test/
Reality is that the S6 is VERY highly regarded in the press, is kicking ass in benchmarks, and is resulting in Samsung increasing production - http://www.digitaltrends.com/mobile/report-samsung-will-ship-55-million-units-of-the-galaxy-s6-and-s6-edge-in-2015/).
What should be said is that Kishonti performed their GFX test, and they are a member of the Khronos Group.
https://kishonti.net/company.jsp
Apple is a member of the Khronos group and Samsung is not.
https://www.khronos.org/about/
And while I will be looking at getting an iPhone 6 when the newer 6x or 7s come out (to get the price drop), I take all these tests with a grain of salt as they are usually biased from the get-go.
I expect that the president of DisplayMate has more display experience than you do. Care you to post your credentials to back up your claim that's just a cheap sales tactic?
http://www.displaymate.com/Galaxy_S6_ShootOut_1.htm
The display on the Galaxy S6 matches and even exceeds the performance of Galaxy Note 4 that we measured in 2014 and rated it as the Best Performing Smartphone Display that we had ever tested (see the Comparison section below that includes the iPhone 6).
We recently evaluated and rated the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus as the current Best Mobile LCD Displays, while the Galaxy S6 and Galaxy Note 4 are the current Best Mobile OLED Displays. All are impressive and excellent displays with great state-of-the-art display technology. However, OLED displays have been advancing at a relentless and fast pace with a constant series of systematic and strategic improvements, while LCDs have been coasting on their laurels for years. So although OLEDs started from behind in 2010 they have now pulled ahead on performance and innovation based on the Lab test and measurement results reported here. To get back in the game and become more competitive, LCDs will need to adopt Quantum Dots and Dynamic Color Management.
The Galaxy S6 has more than double the resolution and more than 4 times the number of pixels as the iPhone 6. It also has significantly higher peak Brightness, significantly higher Contrast Ratio in both low and high Ambient Light, significantly higher Absolute Color Accuracy, significantly better Viewing Angel performance, and has 4 selectable screen modes instead of a single fixed one on the iPhones.
Comparison with LCDs and the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus:
While LCDs remain more power efficient for images with mostly full screen white content (like all text screens, for example),
OLEDs are now more power efficient for mixed image content because they are emissive displays so their power varies with the
Average Picture Level (average Brightness) of the image content. For LCDs the display power is fixed and independent of image content.
The Galaxy S6 is in fact 23 percent more power efficient than the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus for mixed image content (that includes
text together with photos, videos, and movies, for example) with a typical 50 percent Average Picture Level, APL. OLEDs have been
rapidly improving in their power efficiency. The balance point has now moved all the way up to 65 percent APL: the OLED Galaxy S6
is more power efficient for all APLs from zero up through 65 percent, and the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus LCDs are more power
efficient for APLs above 65 percent.
I don't think DED intended to make someone "feel better". His point was that Samsung isn't matching resolutions to GPUs capabilities for an optimal experience.
I'm more with DED here. Reading through the Anandtech article and seeing the graphs, I'm surprised that Samsung couldn't have done better with the S6. It's got- what, six or seven months on the iP6? - and is clocked considerably higher, and yet still comes up short on almost all close-to-real-world-scenario benchmarks (and gets well and truly blown away on a few, like browser benchmarks - although really, who would use the web on their phone, right?) Even where it does well (such as max brightness), a little reading shows that it can't/won't actually reach this level in real-world use.
It's a nice enough looking phone (although I think one could argue that Samsung aptly named it's design goals "project zero" in terms of style differences from the iP6). And it's "class-leading" in most areas, if your "class" is clearly limited to Android smartphones. But I doubt it's going to turn around Samsung's smartphone decline to any great degree.
Also, FWIW, early battery life tests show that while battery life is decent, it's considerably less than the S5 (that is, about 77% of the older S5 in this sites' score).
Perhaps not surprising, with the increased pixel count on the S6's pentile screen, but it's not reassuring to Fandroids who are already howling about a non-replaceable battery.
You seem to mistake that I am supporting Samsung. I am not. I just despise these DED articles that contain blatant lies. I am not arguing the merits of the OS's(as Touchwiz is garbage), I am simply saying that the DED article contains obvious factual errors that I assume are intentional to further this hit piece. And I guess " the display of the Galaxy S6 is relatively perfect with its dark, inky blacks and amazing color" and "The Exynos 7420 SoC appears to be class-leading in performance" are technobabble on the intrawebbs. If he wants to argue that Touchwiz sucks(it does) and that the bottom chin of the device is an exact duplicate of the iphone(it pretty much is), I would have no comment.
What "obvious factual errors"? That's a pretty large comment to throw out without offering anything but some vague quotes out of context from an article that arrives at the same conclusions of fact, even if Anandtech congratulates Samsung for improving over its previously terrible screens.
Another thing to consider: Apple's A7 introduced 64-bit and Metal development, neither of which is really reflected in these benchmarks. Apple is now insisting that all apps compile to 64-bit on the App Store to take advantage of ARMv8.
Samsung can't do that; it doesn't even control the Android ecosystem. It doesn't optimize Android for its CPU or GPU architectures. It's all generic, and Google is expressly focusing on the "next billion" users of Android, who are in India and developing nations, with price targets even lower than the ~$250 ASP Android now has. Who is going to develop special apps on par with iOS for Samsung's phone, before it even achieves a market, and after two big disappointing years of meah releases?
If Samsung had delivered a MUCH faster device, its hardware would still not be taken advantage of by Android apps. We saw that happen in 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014. This year is another year of Android's fastest devices being slower than Apple's hardware. Do you think things will radically change, and developers will target the people who buy Samsung devices to save money, a demographic that doesn't pay for apps?
If so, why?
Your position makes zero sense. Galaxy S6 could sell well and it would still attract very little optimized app development. The peak of Galaxy occured with the Galaxy S III, and even that phone didn't get any amazing apps optimized for it, nor any real exclusives (apart from some Samsung adware stuff). You think a knock off iPhone 6 look, paired with Cnet backpatting and good sounding specs--at a significantly higher price--is going to shift reality? Let's amicably disagree and then compare notes next quarter!
Samsung's S8000 had a 3.1" screen, smaller than iPhone 4 as the article states. It was also a PenTile screen that looked terrible had did not have the real resolution pixel density you cite, because... PenTile. You can copy and paste from Wikipedia in an attempt to rewrite history, but I was alive when iPhone 4 was released, and it was a big deal. It was something Samsung had not achieved earlier. Samsung was busy copying the iPhone 3GS.
My son actually still has my still perfectly functional S8000, though it is retired. Oh, you were alive when the iPhone 4 was released were you? Wow, I'm so impressed. Did you enjoy watching Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon, live on TV? I must say It was a real privilege to actually shake his hand when he, Michael and Buzz did their world tour after they got back.
As for re-writing history, you seem to be quite practiced in the art. You say the Jet screen looked terrible. For the time, it did not.
You seem to be off in a corner on your own with your opinion.
The screen was 480 x 800 pixels 301 ppi, while the 3GS you mentioned was just 320 x 480 pixels and 165 ppi. Both were released in June 2009. Apple did not better the resolution of the Jet until the following year with the iP4. You can try that Pentile misdirection all you like but as an actual former owner and user I can say with confidence it was not possible to see pixelation at any remotely normal viewing distance.
More factual inaccuracy. I was quoting benchmark figures from Anandtech, which I clearly stated. Yes I did agree with the article comparing on screen benchmarks to the iP6 but not the Plus, which according to Anandtech benchmarks, it betters.
That is not true. Anandtech said they were blown away by how much AMOLED had improved but their words of praise were not in any way qualified by or comparing its screen to earlier Samsung screens. Their praise was clearly of the screen in it's own right in relation to all other screens currently on the market.
In the saturation sweep, both displays do an incredible job. I really don't have anything else to say here, because there's really no way to improve on the level of calibration Samsung has done on this display. Unless Samsung calibrates every single display in production, which is wildly impractical and effectively impossible to do, this is as good as it gets for a mass-produced device. Improving past this point will also be incredibly difficult to perceive, which means there's no real reason to go any further.
...
Overall, this is probably the best display anyone will be able to get in a smartphone right now. This level of progress is amazing from Samsung, given just how bad things were with the Galaxy S' AMOLED display, even as recent as the display of the Galaxy S4. With the Galaxy S5 review, I said that I wouldn't be surprised to see AMOLED equal, if not exceed LCD within a year or two, and Samsung has managed to finally hit that mark.
Introduction and System Performance Initial ThoughtsYou have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth and willfully misinterpret and mis-attribute what others say.
As I said earlier, I compared Anandtech benchmarks for the iPhone 6 Plus and the Samsung S6, so I have not misrepresented their graphics benchmarks. In the OpenGL 3 frame rate benchmark you mention, the iPhone 6 Plus has only 93.5% the frame rate of the S6, even though the S6 is driving 176% the pixel count of the 6 Plus, and your conclusion arrived at by incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking, both in kind and source, concludes the S6 has poor GPU performance!
I'll repeat myself - You have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth.
What "obvious factual errors"? That's a pretty large comment to throw out without offering anything but some vague quotes out of context from an article that arrives at the same conclusions of fact, even if Anandtech congratulates Samsung for improving over its previously terrible screens.
Another thing to consider: Apple's A7 introduced 64-bit and Metal development, neither of which is really reflected in these benchmarks. Apple is now insisting that all apps compile to 64-bit on the App Store to take advantage of ARMv8.
Samsung can't do that; it doesn't even control the Android ecosystem. It doesn't optimize Android for its CPU or GPU architectures. It's all generic, and Google is expressly focusing on the "next billion" users of Android, who are in India and developing nations, with price targets even lower than the ~$250 ASP Android now has. Who is going to develop special apps on par with iOS for Samsung's phone, before it even achieves a market, and after two big disappointing years of meah releases?
If Samsung had delivered a MUCH faster device, its hardware would still not be taken advantage of by Android apps. We saw that happen in 2011, 2012, 2013 & 2014. This year is another year of Android's fastest devices being slower than Apple's hardware. Do you think things will radically change, and developers will target the people who buy Samsung devices to save money, a demographic that doesn't pay for apps?
If so, why?
Your position makes zero sense. Galaxy S6 could sell well and it would still attract very little optimized app development. The peak of Galaxy occured with the Galaxy S III, and even that phone didn't get any amazing apps optimized for it, nor any real exclusives (apart from some Samsung adware stuff). You think a knock off iPhone 6 look, paired with Cnet backpatting and good sounding specs--at a significantly higher price--is going to shift reality? Let's amicably disagree and then compare notes next quarter!
So you just changed the argument from hardware to software? Your now saying android is poorly optimized, which would result in poor performance? Wouldn't that in turn mean the hardware in the S6 is more impressive? And while on screen it benchmarks slower than the iphone 6, it isn't "Extremely poor performance", but that plays so much more to your narrative. I would say if at 79% of the Iphone 6 while pushing many more pixels is extremely poor(in the on screen T-rex benchmark on anand), then that next 20% must make all of the difference.
I would say you agree with at least some of the points that had been made, because(to your credit) the article has been updated since it was originally posted. And contrary to my tone, I have enjoyed many of your articles and think you have provided some very good insights in many articles. I just don't like the ones that seem to me to be clickbait/attack dog pieces. But we can agree to disagree, and we can both hope this phone under-performs in sales(so much is my hatred of all things touchwiz, s voice, crapware in any form).
You're wrong. So since that's what you always say you must always be wrong.
Prove me wrong with data. We're talking about Exynos line.
Hehe. Who else should they copy? Because, they're Samsung: they're going to copy someone.
...and your conclusion arrived at by incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking, both in kind and source, concludes the S6 has poor GPU performance!
I'll repeat myself - You have this absolutely shocking tendency to distort the truth.
Are we looking at the same article? ...cause the onscreen (ie real-world) framerate of the iP6 is waaay above the more expensive and seven-months-newer S6 Edge, in either "Manhattan" or "T-Rex" tests.
I don't see where you can claim this is "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED, when it's the (only!) two on-screen benchmarks listed under Anandtech's "GPU performance" section...
Again. Your techno blabber means jack shit.
Real world performance is all that matters. And once again the Samdung phones will continue to be slower and more laggy than the iPhone because of a crappy OS and touchWiz.
they may come back to you with the real world usage on Flip app where GS 6 Edge outperformed iPhone 6 on ONE app.
Are we looking at the same article? ...cause the onscreen (ie real-world) framerate of the iP6 is waaay above the more expensive and seven-months-newer S6 Edge, in either "Manhattan" or "T-Rex" tests.
I don't see where you can claim this is "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED, when it's the (only!) two on-screen benchmarks listed under Anandtech's "GPU performance" section...
Look for the word Plus
As I always said: samsung chip is POS since quad cores ( only 2 cores work at a time).
Anandtech don't seem to think the Exynos in the Note 4 is a POS:
http://anandtech.com/show/8718/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-exynos-review/11
Quote:
Prove me wrong with data. We're talking about Exynos line.
Ok...
Seoul, Korea, September 10, 2013
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., a world leader in advanced semiconductor solutions, today announced its Heterogeneous Multi-Processing (HMP) solution for the Exynos 5 Octa to fully maximize the benefits of the ARM® big.LITTLE™ technology. The HMP capability gives system-level designers the ability to develop solutions that deliver the right combination of high-performance and low-power to carry out tasks such as 3D gaming, complex augmented reality and advanced web browsing.
"It's usually assumed that the big CPU will do all the performance-critical work, however, power-efficient little cores can handle many significant workloads all on their own, so the workload is balanced within the system," said Taehoon Kim, vice president of System LSI marketing, Samsung Electronics. "big.LITTLE processing is designed to deliver the right combination of processors for a specific job. An eight-core processor with HMP is the truest form of the big.LITTLE technology with limitless benefits to the users of high-performance, low-power mobile products."
"ARM® big.LITTLE multi-processing technology delivers the highest performance and efficiency across the widest range of workloads," said Noel Hurley, vice president, Strategy and Marketing, Processor Division, ARM®. "We welcome Samsung's continued commitment to deploying the leading-edge technology on their latest chips featuring the ARM® Cortex™-A series of processors, ARM® Mali™ GPUs and ARM® Artisan™ physical IP."
HMP is the most powerful use model for ARM® big.LITTLE technology, as it enables the use of all physical cores at the same time. Software threads with high priority or high computational intensity can be allocated to the 'big' Cortex-A15 cores while threads with less priority or are less computationally intensive, can be performed by the 'LITTLE' Cortex-A7 cores, enabling a highly responsive, low-energy system to be built.
http://www.samsung.com/global/business/semiconductor/minisite/Exynos/w/mediacenter.html#?v=news_Samsung_Primes_Exynos5Octa_for_ARM_bigLITTLE_Technology_with_Heterogeneous_Multi_Processing_Capability