Apple's iPhone XS Max smashes Google's Pixel 3 in benchmark testing

Posted:
in iPhone edited October 20
AppleInsider is running Apple's iPhone XS Max and Google's brand new Pixel 3 through a gauntlet of tests to see which of the two flagship smartphones reigns supreme. In this first installment of our special video series we compare the iPhone's A12 Bionic processor against the Pixel 3's Snapdragon silicon.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3


Google opted to power its latest Pixel smartphone with Qualcomm's octa-core Snapdragon 845, the same chip found in Samsung's Galaxy Note 9. Both the performance and efficiency cores are clocked slightly slower than the Galaxy at 2.5GHz and 1.5GHz, respectively. The processor is backed by 4GB of RAM, while an Adreno 630 GPU drives graphics for the 5.5-inch handset.

Apple's top-of-the-line iPhone for 2018 is powered by the new A12 Bionic chip, a six-core system-on-chip with two high-performance cores and four efficiency cores running at a clock speed of 2.49GHz. An integrated Apple-designed four-core GPU crunches graphics data.





Starting with the Geekbench 4 CPU test, iPhone XS Max more than doubles the Pixel 3 in single-core performance with a score of 4,816 points compared to only 2,393. The gap is not as wide in multi-core, but the XS Max still handily beats the Pixel 3 with a score of 11,584 compared to 8,312.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 Geekbench 4


Apple's hardware again outperformed in the Geekbench graphics test, scoring 22,278 points to Google's 13,845 points.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 Graphics


Next up is Antutu's graphics intensive benchmark. The Pixel 3 scored quite well with 284,546 points, but it was unable to compete with the iPhone XS Max, which pegged the needle at 363,687. Looking at the detailed results, the iPhone beat the Pixel 3 in every test except for memory.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 Antutu


Moving onto Antutu's HTML 5 test, the XS Max scored around 35 percent higher than the Pixel 3, with respective results of 46,531 and 34,674.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 Antutu HTML 5


In Octane 2.0, another browser benchmark, the difference was massive. The XS Max pulled down a score of 43,220, almost three times the Pixel 3's 16,396. This test is a good illustration of Apple's hardware and software optimization.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 Octane


For our final test, we ran GFXBench OpenGL's 1080p Manhattan Offscreen test. Again, we saw a significantly higher score on the XS Max, which managed 120 frames per second compared to 83fps on the Pixel 3.

iPhone XS Max vs Pixel 3 OpenGL


Based on these results, there's no doubt that the XS Max is the superior device in terms of performance. The Google Pixel 3 put in an underwhelming performance, one that is in some cases bested by the Galaxy Note 9.

Deals on the iPhone XS Max and Google Pixel 3

If you haven't already ordered Apple's iPhone XS Max, wireless carriers are incentivizing the purchase. Want to get your hands on a new device asap? eBay sellers are also shipping units now.

Carrier deals: Those interested in purchasing the Google Pixel 3 can take advantage of a buy one, get one free offer on the 64GB model at Verizon Wireless.

AppleInsider will be running through a number of comparisons in the coming days. Download the AppleInsider iOS app and follow us on YouTube so you don't miss out.
Muntzwatto_cobra
«134567

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 134
    claire1claire1 Posts: 479unconfirmed, member
    In other news, knockoffs aren't as good as the real thing. Shocker!
    magman1979chasmracerhomie3lkruppchiaStrangeDaysMuntzlostkiwiwatto_cobramacseeker
  • Reply 2 of 134
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,736member
    claire1 said:
    In other news, knockoffs aren't as good as the real thing. Shocker!
    Right.  Google's R&D team is busy reverse engineering all things Apple as fast as it can.  Give them a break!
    claire1repressthischiaMuntzlostkiwiwilliamlondonwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 3 of 134
    I'm sure all that extra performance makes Facebook, WhatsApp and phone calls rock, not!

    If you want the smartest smartphone you buy a pixel:





    KITAmuthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 4 of 134
    evilutionevilution Posts: 1,325member
    It is using last year’s processor.
    It’ll be more interesting to see how much the A series chip smashes the next Snapdragon chip.
    avon b7repressthislostkiwiwatto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 134
    magman1979magman1979 Posts: 1,067member
    saltyzip said:
    I'm sure all that extra performance makes Facebook, WhatsApp and phone calls rock, not!

    If you want the smartest smartphone you buy a pixel:





    If you want the smartest creepiest, most privacy invasive smartphone that performs like a dog, you buy a pixel.

    There, fixed that for you.
    king editor the grateSolichasmclaire1Bluntracerhomie3ericthehalfbeemacseekerrepressthistycho_macuser
  • Reply 6 of 134
    bb-15bb-15 Posts: 232member
    saltyzip said:
    I'm sure all that extra performance makes Facebook, WhatsApp and phone calls rock, not!

    The value of speed in a smartphone includes; 1. Intensive games like Fortnite. 2. 4K video at high frame rates in which the latest iPhones lead the industry. 
    RocwurstchiaMuntzlostkiwiwatto_cobrajbdragonjony0
  • Reply 7 of 134
    I still want to see a video that times opening, in sequence, all the “same” apps on each phone (twice) like we used to get every year. Like, start the same game on each and when it’s ready to play move on to rendering out the same video on each device, and then on to the next app, etc. 
    edited October 20 watto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 134
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,766member
    I still want to see a video that times opening, in sequence, all the “same” apps on each phone (twice) like we used to get every year. 
    Their not the "same", you have a huge dependency on how shitty the current release is, and if they're actually doing the same thing on startup.
    There is a hell of a lot of setup that's done on startup of an app and assuming it's the same between releases and OS's is not wise.
    For example, if on IOS/Android you could do a lot of things up front that you can't in Android (and vice versa), it would be penalized using this kind of things.

    That's why you have to go for benchmarks where you actually know they're actually mostly doing the same small tasks and you have access to the source code.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 134
    foggyhill said:
    I still want to see a video that times opening, in sequence, all the “same” apps on each phone (twice) like we used to get every year. 
    Their not the "same", you have a huge dependency on how shitty the current release is, and if they're actually doing the same thing on startup.
    There is a hell of a lot of setup that's done on startup of an app and assuming it's the same between releases and OS's is not wise.
    For example, if on IOS/Android you could do a lot of things up front that you can't in Android (and vice versa), it would be penalized using this kind of things.

    That's why you have to go for benchmarks where you actually know they're actually mostly doing the same small tasks and you have access to the source code.
    Except it shows good real world examples of how fast using each phone is. Like someone mentioned in another thread, it doesn’t matter if your car can go over 200 mph when you’re driving it around town.  
    claire1tycho_macusermuthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobradocno42
  • Reply 10 of 134
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,408member
    Apple is clearly still "gaming the system"... by designing and building superior hardware. ;-)
    chasmradarthekatchiaMuntzredgeminipawatto_cobrajbdragondocno42jony0
  • Reply 11 of 134
    cpsrocpsro Posts: 2,408member
    I still want to see a video that times opening, in sequence, all the “same” apps on each phone (twice) like we used to get every year. Like, start the same game on each and when it’s ready to play move on to rendering out the same video on each device, and then on to the next app, etc. 
    I believe such a video was posted weeks ago on 9to5mac.com. IIRC the XS beat the Note 9 for almost all apps.
    RocwurstMuntzclaire1watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 134
    claire1claire1 Posts: 479unconfirmed, member
    MacPro said:
    claire1 said:
    In other news, knockoffs aren't as good as the real thing. Shocker!
    Right.  Google's R&D team is busy reverse engineering all things Apple as fast as it can.  Give them a break!
    Apple is their R&D. Google's so bad lately they make Samsung jealous.

    bb-15 said:
    saltyzip said:
    I'm sure all that extra performance makes Facebook, WhatsApp and phone calls rock, not!

    The value of speed in a smartphone includes; 1. Intensive games like Fortnite. 2. 4K video at high frame rates in which the latest iPhones lead the industry. 

    Fortnite can only be run on iPhones and Note 9 right?

    Muntzwatto_cobrajbdragon
  • Reply 13 of 134
    chasmchasm Posts: 966member
    The point made above that these scores don't let you take pictures of your food for Instagram significantly faster is valid, BUT we're not the ones who made benchmarks the be-all and end-all of priorities for perceived value.

    That would be the Windows (and later, Android) sheeple.

    That we're beating them at their own game, plus have better integration, plus have longer support, plus have better malware protection, plus have higher resale value, plus get the best apps first or exclusively, plus have the best camera, privacy policy, and operating system ... well that's all just icing on the cake. :)

    Bottom line: when it comes to overall value, the iPhone beats everyone. That doesn't mean it's right for absolutely everyone, and that's a great thing -- competition is good -- but the value proposition for anyone considering a premium smartphone is pretty cut-and-dried at this point, and not something that can be successfully argued at present.
    georgie01Muntzclaire1muthuk_vanalingamlostkiwiwatto_cobrashark5150propodbackstab
  • Reply 14 of 134
    foggyhillfoggyhill Posts: 4,766member
    foggyhill said:
    I still want to see a video that times opening, in sequence, all the “same” apps on each phone (twice) like we used to get every year. 
    Their not the "same", you have a huge dependency on how shitty the current release is, and if they're actually doing the same thing on startup.
    There is a hell of a lot of setup that's done on startup of an app and assuming it's the same between releases and OS's is not wise.
    For example, if on IOS/Android you could do a lot of things up front that you can't in Android (and vice versa), it would be penalized using this kind of things.

    That's why you have to go for benchmarks where you actually know they're actually mostly doing the same small tasks and you have access to the source code.
    Except it shows good real world examples of how fast using each phone is. Like someone mentioned in another thread, it doesn’t matter if your car can go over 200 mph when you’re driving it around town.  
    It's not, I told you why. But, hey, words have no meanings these days...

    Opening an app faster could mean it's slower later on when using the app.
    How is that a real world tests then?
    It could be slower on something no one uses, faster on something used repeatedly.
    It could be slower the first time, faster later on.
    etc.

    Maybe if you open the same version app, do 5-10 of the most used operations, then close it and do this repeatedly so you don't have transient variations (look at average, mode, variances) due to other things happening in the system would that be slightly be slightly more meaningful. At least, you'd balance out the various things that matters to users.

    Just about all those "real" Youtube clips are pure bullshit in 20 different ways; only done for clicks.

    Native OS apps are at least purported to be closer be the best code for the job at hand.
    So, they suffer less than crap third party apps.

    BTW, IOS Safari is always massively faster than any other browsers on Android,
    considering how much time people spend in the browser, that alone is  a real world advantage of IOS.
    georgie01muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 134
    I’d be interested in a comparison (direct or indirect) between AI processing hardware. Hopefully a meaningful test will be developed at some point.
  • Reply 16 of 134
    BluntBlunt Posts: 219member
    My iPhone 7 runs faster then a Pixel 3.
    Muntzclaire1lostkiwiwatto_cobramagman1979jbdragon
  • Reply 17 of 134
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 1,616member
    Lower Pixel 3 performance vs iPhone XS Max is due to it's smaller notch. Lol !!
    StrangeDaysMuntzmwhitelostkiwiwatto_cobra
  • Reply 18 of 134
    BluntBlunt Posts: 219member
    The Pixel 3 is pobably to busy sending data to Google.
    andrewj5790Muntzclaire1lostkiwiwilliamlondonwatto_cobramagman1979jbdragonpropod
  • Reply 19 of 134
    Copying and a 'good enough' approach to business will only get you so far!

    It shows the extraordinary effort Apple puts into every facet of the iPhone. From glass, software, chips, battery, cameras, antennas, etc., etc. 

    And, the syncing of everything across all my devices. 

    I will never have a Google, MS, Samsung, Amazon, or Facebook device in my home or service on my devices! :)

    I can't wait until Apple makes all my devices look "Anonymous" on the internet! 

    It's coming! :)
    edited October 20 Muntzclaire1lostkiwiIreneWwatto_cobramagman1979
  • Reply 20 of 134
    No one actually cares about the Pixel 3 hardware. They're more interested in the stock Android OS and the AI software in the camera. I doubt anyone would buy the Pixel 3 for outright speed and besides that, everyone hates smartphones with display notches and no headphone jack.

    We already know the A12 Bionic is a beast of a processor and there's no Android smartphone with a Qualcomm Snapdragon 845 that can beat it in benchmarks. (I wonder how powerful the Snapdragon 850 is.) Still... Even the Snapdragon 845 produces fast app launches and loads of system RAM makes the Pixel 3 snappy enough for most users. App launches on the iPhone are surely not twice as fast but why should anyone normal be counting in milliseconds on either smartphone.

    Apple needs to find some 'must have' app that can run smoothly on the A12 but stutters like crazy on the Snapdragon 845. Then some critics might sit up and take notice and possibly even praise Apple for having such a powerful processor in its arsenal. Until then, Apple's SoCs are going to produce yawns for most people. In side by side app launch tests with Android smartphones, the iPhone shows almost no real advantage of having all that power. No matter, the A12 does what it needs to do and does it well which is to provide a quick and fluid user experience and benchmarks be damned.

    Google isn't going to be able to sell a huge number of Pixel 3 units, so Apple has nothing to worry about.  There are just too many other Android smartphones for Google to compete against.  Apple has a lot going for it when it comes to premium smartphones being sold in top-tier countries and the Pixel 3 isn't going to change that.
    edited October 20 cropr
Sign In or Register to comment.