Number of cores and clock speed are meaningless when these are all very different types of cores and configurations.
Apple and Samsung's SoCs generally hit the market ~6 months apart from each other. One would expect each SoC to be a performance leader around the time of their respected launches.
iPhone 6 1810 mAh battery
iPhone 6 Plus 2915 mAh battery
Samsung S6 2550 mAh battery
So the S6 has a 35% larger battery than the iPhone 6; might be at least part of the reason that those numbers are better for the S6?
So the S6 has a 35% larger battery than the iPhone 6; might be at least part of the reason that those numbers are better for the S6?
Of course, there are all sorts of factors that can be taken into account, SoC performance, display performance, etc. The end result is generally what people care about.
I've been reading several of these tests, which, I have to remind people, may very well be on unoptimized devices.
However, if they are correct, it's disturbing. Yes, I know some people here will hate what I'm going to say, but too bad.
But, what we see in these tests is that Apple's new chips lag several current chips that have been out for months, almost a year, in the case of several.
No they don't. Single core performance is the most important since there's very little software that can actually utilize multiple cores (and keep all of them working all of the time). This is because outside of benchmarks it's extremely difficult to take an application and divide up the workload to keep so many cores busy. Add to this the fact that software basically just sits around idle waiting for user input before doing something.
And this is before we start getting into how well iOS is optimized vs the inefficient memory hog virtual machine that is Android.
Of course, there are all sorts of factors that can be taken into account, SoC performance, display performance, etc. The end result is generally what people care about.
So, why not compare the S6 to the iPhone 6 Plus then?
So, why not compare the S6 to the iPhone 6 Plus then?
Because of course, it's a Fandroid site and they can't possibly compare an Apple device with another and have the Apple device "win". If they compared it with the 6+ it would be more fair as it has a relatively comparable battery. Still. If the 6 was slightly thicker (OMG NO WAY) it could have a much beefier battery, even if it was 1mm thicker the battery would be ~20% more. Is 1mm thickness worth sacrificing 20% battery life? IMO, nope.
Excuse me, but I've been seeing tests against current SoCs that show these results.
Where if only one SoC [Exynos 7420] is actually available? All the other SoC are several months away from being released, Apple’s A9 is probably the one coming sooner. And those other SoC results have only showed up in the last few days, ipsis verbis, one big amazing coincidence if one is to believe in coincidences.
Of course, there are all sorts of factors that can be taken into account, SoC performance, display performance, etc. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The end result is generally what people care about.</span>
no. battery life per capacity matters, otherwise we could compare the bigger phones to smaller ones.
but the OP on this sub topic was stating that iPhones get better battery life and are leading that area, which you tried to refute by ignoring capacity. your counter point is a failure because of this.
What "win"?... I was pointing out to another user that his or her statements about Samsung's battery life are false.
I'm not interested in some fanboy wars like many other users here seem to be, just clearing up facts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NolaMacGuy
you're comparing a 5.2" device to a 4.7" device -- what intellectually dishonest rubbish! go home.
Thanks to the high screen to body ratio, that 5.2" device isn't that much larger than a 4.7" device. The Galaxy S6 Edge+ is clearly similar in size to the iPhone 6 Plus.
The competition was not there previously. It was pretty much just Qualcomm and the odd Exynos for select markets.
Going into the end of 2015 and start of 2016, we have Qualcomm, LG, Huawei, nVidia, Samsung, MediaTek and Apple all making high end SoC's. All of them use ARMv8 cores, LPDDR4 memory and they should all be on TSMC's 16 nm FF or Samsung's 14 nm FF.
With the exception of NVIDIA (Denver 2 core) and Qualcomm (Hydra core), all of the other non-Apple companies appear to be using Cortex A72 (ARM's new big core) in their upcoming SoC's.
EDIT: Samsung's Exynos M1 might also be using a custom core.
@RobertC : I believe the Exynos M1 uses their first custom core called, "Mongoose," -- a code name created originally in response to Qualcomm's "Krait" core. I guess if the new Exynos is as good as it appears in this 'unconfirmed' chart, Samsung won't have to back to Qualcomm for their flagship APs anymore.
Number of cores and clock speed are meaningless when these are all very different types of cores and configurations.
Apple and Samsung's SoCs generally hit the market ~6 months apart from each other. One would expect each SoC to be a performance leader around the time of their respected launches.
Right... Please check what fracking people using the god damn phone (real userS) are saying about it. its 100% complaints about battery life and heat. Its WALL TO WALL complaints. So, who the hell did those god damn test.
What "win"?... I was pointing out to another user that his or her statements about Samsung's battery life are false.
I'm not interested in some fanboy wars like many other users here seem to be, just clearing up facts.
Thanks to the high screen to body ratio, that 5.2" device isn't that much larger than a 4.7" device. The Galaxy S6 Edge+ is clearly similar in size to the iPhone 6 Plus.
As you would say, "go home."
Well, go on GSMarena and other sites Android and tell people who bought those S6 that they are idiots and not using it right then. Because reviews from people about battery life have been that bad. But, hey, real life doesn't count hmm. Funny, how when Samsung was calling Iphone users wall huggers, it had a worse battery life hmmm.
Right... Please check what fracking people using the god damn phone (real userS) are saying about it. its 100% complaints about battery life and heat. Its WALL TO WALL complaints. So, who the hell did those god damn test.
Really? If you have evidence it would be great of you to share it. After a Google search the only thing related to poor battery life I found was a glitch that was patched around the time of launch (even the review of the S6 mentioned that the battery life test was updated to reflect the fix).
Quote:
Originally Posted by foggyhill
Well, go on GSMarena and other sites Android and tell people who bought those S6 that they are idiots and not using it right then. Because reviews from people about battery life have been that bad. But, hey, real life doesn't count hmm. Funny, how when Samsung was calling Iphone users wall huggers, it had a worse battery life hmmm.
Why would I go around calling people idiots?...
Quote:
Originally Posted by tooltalk
@RobertC : I believe the Exynos M1 uses their first custom core called, "Mongoose," -- a code name created originally in response to Qualcomm's "Krait" core. I guess if the new Exynos is as good as it appears in this 'unconfirmed' chart, Samsung won't have to back to Qualcomm for their flagship APs anymore.
Interesting. Not to spell out a 'dooms day' scenario for Qualcomm, but the competition is growing, fast.
So how does this impact the general user outside of battery life? I've never used my iPhone 6 and thought wow this is incredibly slow and laggy. If anything issues I've had with iOS are more related to RAM than CPU/GPU. Are the new iPhones going to get more RAM?
Good question as you are absolutely correct, apples iOS devices suffer form a lack of RAM more than they do a lack of processor power. Of course processor specs are easy to market to the uniformed an ignorant, which probably explains these structured leaks.
I've been reading several of these tests, which, I have to remind people, may very well be on unoptimized devices.
However, if they are correct, it's disturbing. Yes, I know some people here will hate what I'm going to say, but too bad.
No hate here! First off the results probably aren't correct, they are questionable leaks after all. Second there is far more to system performance that leaks about core performance.
But, what we see in these tests is that Apple's new chips lag several current chips that have been out for months, almost a year, in the case of several.
Previously, Apple's new devices not only led all current devices in performance, but new devices introduced afterwards, several months later, and only near the end of the year had newer devices catching up, and superseding them in some areas.
It is really a question of actual system performance in the users hands. If the systems are lag free it really doesn't matter if the processor performance benchmarks slightly differently.
What we're seeing here is that several older devices are better than Apple's new ones.
this is where I have to call bullshit. What we see is specs that indicate one system slightly out performing another. this is not different than buying a laptop, there are systems that are faster than my new MBP but that certainly doesn't make them better! You are confusing specs with desirability.
Yeah, I know the excuses, we need to consider battery power, thermal throttling, etc. But that still doesn't explain why, this year, Apple seems to be starting at a disadvantage for the first time since they began designing their own SoCs.
So I'm hoping that something is fishy here.
You really can't say anything at this point because we have yet to see the whole shooting match so to speak. Seriously there is a lot more to the SoC than the CPU cores. In this regard Apple is still way ahead of the competition. For example the video/camera processing subsection of the latest SoC is bigger that the CPU sections. Further this doesn't even touch upon the GPU performance more any improvements to OpenCL or other acceleration options. I do expect Apple to go down the same street AMD has with extensive use of GPU acceleration with APU like system structures.
I look at it this way, the thing that will make or break these coming updates aren't CPU related anyways, the amount of RAM is far more important for example when it comes to system usability. If the video processor can do real time 4K video that is another big potential feather in Apple cap. In other words it doesn't matter to most what the CPU's do if the rest of the system is crap.
And why would you guess that? If these are real Apple devices, they would run at the speeds the devices are designed to run at.
A txt platform might find the chips in the same circuit board as the current iPhone for testing purposes. If the leak is real there is no telling what hardware it was tested on, it could be tested on a prototype board for all we know.
And this is a problem for Apple why? 30% gain from last year SOC sounds about right to me. Apart from a few games, there is very little in the store that's even using A6X or 64Bit.
Actually this isn't the case. For one Apple is demanding 64 apps. Another issue si that advanced apps do indeed need the faster chips to work responsively from the users standpoint.
I doubt Apple has a stop watch checking what the Android OEMS are doing - if you are into specs, you are on the wrong platform. The OnePlus 2 will map the floor of anything that Apple will ship next month but they will not outsell 6S models.
Apple still does very well in overall system performance. If you are into specs, specific specs in this case you might have a problem, but the real issue with Apples devices isn't processor performance but rather RAM. That is what the new iPhones need improved the most.
Comments
Fact check:
Number of cores and clock speed are meaningless when these are all very different types of cores and configurations.
Apple and Samsung's SoCs generally hit the market ~6 months apart from each other. One would expect each SoC to be a performance leader around the time of their respected launches.
iPhone 6 1810 mAh battery
iPhone 6 Plus 2915 mAh battery
Samsung S6 2550 mAh battery
So the S6 has a 35% larger battery than the iPhone 6; might be at least part of the reason that those numbers are better for the S6?
iPhone 6 1810 mAh battery
iPhone 6 Plus 2915 mAh battery
Samsung S6 2550 mAh battery
So the S6 has a 35% larger battery than the iPhone 6; might be at least part of the reason that those numbers are better for the S6?
Of course, there are all sorts of factors that can be taken into account, SoC performance, display performance, etc. The end result is generally what people care about.
I've been reading several of these tests, which, I have to remind people, may very well be on unoptimized devices.
However, if they are correct, it's disturbing. Yes, I know some people here will hate what I'm going to say, but too bad.
But, what we see in these tests is that Apple's new chips lag several current chips that have been out for months, almost a year, in the case of several.
No they don't. Single core performance is the most important since there's very little software that can actually utilize multiple cores (and keep all of them working all of the time). This is because outside of benchmarks it's extremely difficult to take an application and divide up the workload to keep so many cores busy. Add to this the fact that software basically just sits around idle waiting for user input before doing something.
And this is before we start getting into how well iOS is optimized vs the inefficient memory hog virtual machine that is Android.
Of course, there are all sorts of factors that can be taken into account, SoC performance, display performance, etc. The end result is generally what people care about.
So, why not compare the S6 to the iPhone 6 Plus then?
So, why not compare the S6 to the iPhone 6 Plus then?
We could, but the S6 Edge+ is closer in size to the 6 Plus, so generally you would compare the two. The S6 is much closer to the iPhone 6 in width.
iPhone 6 (4.7" display) - 67 mm
Galaxy S6 (5.2" display) - 70 mm
Galaxy S6 Edge+ (5.7" display) - 76 mm
iPhone 6 Plus (5.5" display) - 78 mm
Because of course, it's a Fandroid site and they can't possibly compare an Apple device with another and have the Apple device "win". If they compared it with the 6+ it would be more fair as it has a relatively comparable battery. Still. If the 6 was slightly thicker (OMG NO WAY) it could have a much beefier battery, even if it was 1mm thicker the battery would be ~20% more. Is 1mm thickness worth sacrificing 20% battery life? IMO, nope.
We could, but the S6 Edge+ is closer in size to the 6 Plus, so generally you would compare the two. The S6 is much closer to the iPhone 6 in width.
iPhone 6 (4.7" display) - 67 mm
Galaxy S6 (5.2" display) - 70 mm
Galaxy S6 Edge+ (5.7" display) - 76 mm
iPhone 6 Plus (5.5" display) - 78 mm
Enjoy your "win".
Excuse me, but I've been seeing tests against current SoCs that show these results.
Where if only one SoC [Exynos 7420] is actually available? All the other SoC are several months away from being released, Apple’s A9 is probably the one coming sooner. And those other SoC results have only showed up in the last few days, ipsis verbis, one big amazing coincidence if one is to believe in coincidences.
no. battery life per capacity matters, otherwise we could compare the bigger phones to smaller ones.
but the OP on this sub topic was stating that iPhones get better battery life and are leading that area, which you tried to refute by ignoring capacity. your counter point is a failure because of this.
you're comparing a 5.2" device to a 4.7" device -- what intellectually dishonest rubbish! go home.
Enjoy your "win".
What "win"?... I was pointing out to another user that his or her statements about Samsung's battery life are false.
I'm not interested in some fanboy wars like many other users here seem to be, just clearing up facts.
you're comparing a 5.2" device to a 4.7" device -- what intellectually dishonest rubbish! go home.
Thanks to the high screen to body ratio, that 5.2" device isn't that much larger than a 4.7" device. The Galaxy S6 Edge+ is clearly similar in size to the iPhone 6 Plus.
As you would say, "go home."
The competition was not there previously. It was pretty much just Qualcomm and the odd Exynos for select markets.
Going into the end of 2015 and start of 2016, we have Qualcomm, LG, Huawei, nVidia, Samsung, MediaTek and Apple all making high end SoC's. All of them use ARMv8 cores, LPDDR4 memory and they should all be on TSMC's 16 nm FF or Samsung's 14 nm FF.
With the exception of NVIDIA (Denver 2 core) and Qualcomm (Hydra core), all of the other non-Apple companies appear to be using Cortex A72 (ARM's new big core) in their upcoming SoC's.
EDIT: Samsung's Exynos M1 might also be using a custom core.
@RobertC : I believe the Exynos M1 uses their first custom core called, "Mongoose," -- a code name created originally in response to Qualcomm's "Krait" core. I guess if the new Exynos is as good as it appears in this 'unconfirmed' chart, Samsung won't have to back to Qualcomm for their flagship APs anymore.
Fact check:
Number of cores and clock speed are meaningless when these are all very different types of cores and configurations.
Apple and Samsung's SoCs generally hit the market ~6 months apart from each other. One would expect each SoC to be a performance leader around the time of their respected launches.
Right... Please check what fracking people using the god damn phone (real userS) are saying about it. its 100% complaints about battery life and heat. Its WALL TO WALL complaints. So, who the hell did those god damn test.
What "win"?... I was pointing out to another user that his or her statements about Samsung's battery life are false.
I'm not interested in some fanboy wars like many other users here seem to be, just clearing up facts.
Thanks to the high screen to body ratio, that 5.2" device isn't that much larger than a 4.7" device. The Galaxy S6 Edge+ is clearly similar in size to the iPhone 6 Plus.
As you would say, "go home."
Well, go on GSMarena and other sites Android and tell people who bought those S6 that they are idiots and not using it right then. Because reviews from people about battery life have been that bad. But, hey, real life doesn't count hmm. Funny, how when Samsung was calling Iphone users wall huggers, it had a worse battery life hmmm.
Right... Please check what fracking people using the god damn phone (real userS) are saying about it. its 100% complaints about battery life and heat. Its WALL TO WALL complaints. So, who the hell did those god damn test.
Really? If you have evidence it would be great of you to share it. After a Google search the only thing related to poor battery life I found was a glitch that was patched around the time of launch (even the review of the S6 mentioned that the battery life test was updated to reflect the fix).
Well, go on GSMarena and other sites Android and tell people who bought those S6 that they are idiots and not using it right then. Because reviews from people about battery life have been that bad. But, hey, real life doesn't count hmm. Funny, how when Samsung was calling Iphone users wall huggers, it had a worse battery life hmmm.
Why would I go around calling people idiots?...
@RobertC : I believe the Exynos M1 uses their first custom core called, "Mongoose," -- a code name created originally in response to Qualcomm's "Krait" core. I guess if the new Exynos is as good as it appears in this 'unconfirmed' chart, Samsung won't have to back to Qualcomm for their flagship APs anymore.
Interesting. Not to spell out a 'dooms day' scenario for Qualcomm, but the competition is growing, fast.
[IMG]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/61863/width/200/height/400[/IMG]
Good question as you are absolutely correct, apples iOS devices suffer form a lack of RAM more than they do a lack of processor power. Of course processor specs are easy to market to the uniformed an ignorant, which probably explains these structured leaks.
You really can't say anything at this point because we have yet to see the whole shooting match so to speak. Seriously there is a lot more to the SoC than the CPU cores. In this regard Apple is still way ahead of the competition. For example the video/camera processing subsection of the latest SoC is bigger that the CPU sections. Further this doesn't even touch upon the GPU performance more any improvements to OpenCL or other acceleration options. I do expect Apple to go down the same street AMD has with extensive use of GPU acceleration with APU like system structures.
I look at it this way, the thing that will make or break these coming updates aren't CPU related anyways, the amount of RAM is far more important for example when it comes to system usability. If the video processor can do real time 4K video that is another big potential feather in Apple cap. In other words it doesn't matter to most what the CPU's do if the rest of the system is crap.
A txt platform might find the chips in the same circuit board as the current iPhone for testing purposes. If the leak is real there is no telling what hardware it was tested on, it could be tested on a prototype board for all we know.
Apple still does very well in overall system performance. If you are into specs, specific specs in this case you might have a problem, but the real issue with Apples devices isn't processor performance but rather RAM. That is what the new iPhones need improved the most.