What's impressive is that Apple has managed to top the Android devices' performance, using a CPU which has much lower core count and clock speed. That can only bode well for power usage and hence battery life. The mobile game is about efficiency, not just pure performance - otherwise we'd all just have an i7 in our phones and forget about it!
Something the Qualcomm S4 has already shown to be able to do a couple of months ago.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; } Relax, they are just reporting performance scores, it's all part of evaluating any new device. At the end of the day, those numbers matter very little. The most cores, megahertz, ram, size of your screen etc, does not necessarily dictate the better device. Apple doesn't generally market their material that way, it may get a passing mention, but it's not something that they focus on. Apple focusses on a superior user experience on well-designed and well-built hardware.
So last week when the current iPhone was clocking pathetic scores in this benchmark, the numbers didn't matter because it as all about the user experience. Right now, it's all about the numbers and how fast the new iPhone is. In a month or two, when the first Qualcomm S4 Pro phones are released and smash these scores, the numbers won't matter again because it will be all about the user experience. You can't have it both ways - either the benchmarks mean something and the iPhone is slower than other phones for 10 months of every 12-month release cycle or they don't.
Hey, just think they did it with a "disappointing, incremental" update.
Why the **** wouldn't you use something you're a fan of? And if you don't, how exactly can you be a fan of it, which implies liking it greatly based on your experience with it? Am I missing something? Most irrational thing I've ever read.
I spent a couple of decades as a fan of Apple's products but never bought them b/c I had a shit job and couldn't afford them. Even when I did I started easy w/a Mac Mini for myself after we had bought the first iPad for my wife. We have shifted to entirely OS X and iOS in the house since then. Heck I loved the look of the G4 Cube, but it was expensive as hell and then of course the issue of the cracks. Doesn't mean I didn't admire the product and I was glad to see Jobs back at Apple. It's entirely possible to be a fan of something but still be from afar.
When a new iPhone is being released, Fandroids shout that it has nothing new or innovative, just minor improvements. Even when you see scores like these with numerous engineering feats.
But when a new Android Phone is released with (usually) subpar quality casings, stuttery UI… and all that on a 1.5Ghz Quadcore with 2GB ram, they say that it's the fastest phone ever.
Now I might be the only one here, but the above sounds véry odd. And yet every real Fandroid shouts exactly what I've written above
Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago.
Granted...... The AppleInsider article was posted 7 hours ago...... so there's a chance that the GeekBench scores were updated right after this article was posted......... WHOM DO WE BELIEVE?!?!?
Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago.
What gives?
Still funny that iPhone 5's dual core @ 1.02GHz matched S3's quad core 1.4GHz.
"Engineering people, engineering. This is all less about specs and more about engineering."
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
the iphone was by far the fastest. if you do not understand what you are talking about, that's your problem.
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
Samsung Galaxy S3 was benchmarked 18 hours ago at 1560.
You know cpu/gpu specs doesn't matter actually to iPhone. Why? It's because iOS app developers will use an iPhone 5 themselves to test their current and future cpu & gpu-intensive apps. So we are damn well sure that all apps are optimized so there's nothing really to worry about. This is not a desktop or android that have tons of different specs that you have to worry if it's fast enough.
I'd like to welcome our new low-post Android Overlords to the forum I do find it very interesting that given how long those phones have been out that they only just now mysteriously have higher scores showing up on geekbench. You would think those would have already been posted at some point.
just a question...do you think a lot of us Android fans (not users, fans) LONG for an iPhone yet somehow are incapable of getting one of the most easily accessible devices ever?
There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
If this is not setting the bar, I don't know what is. Think about it for a second. Compared to the Android "elite", the iPhone 5 is under-spec'd, yet still bests them in performance.
When winning the spec race is more important than winning the performance race, you've already lost.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by Euphonious
What's impressive is that Apple has managed to top the Android devices' performance, using a CPU which has much lower core count and clock speed. That can only bode well for power usage and hence battery life. The mobile game is about efficiency, not just pure performance - otherwise we'd all just have an i7 in our phones and forget about it!
Something the Qualcomm S4 has already shown to be able to do a couple of months ago.
#next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
Relax, they are just reporting performance scores, it's all part of evaluating any new device. At the end of the day, those numbers matter very little. The most cores, megahertz, ram, size of your screen etc, does not necessarily dictate the better device. Apple doesn't generally market their material that way, it may get a passing mention, but it's not something that they focus on. Apple focusses on a superior user experience on well-designed and well-built hardware.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dazweeja
So last week when the current iPhone was clocking pathetic scores in this benchmark, the numbers didn't matter because it as all about the user experience. Right now, it's all about the numbers and how fast the new iPhone is. In a month or two, when the first Qualcomm S4 Pro phones are released and smash these scores, the numbers won't matter again because it will be all about the user experience. You can't have it both ways - either the benchmarks mean something and the iPhone is slower than other phones for 10 months of every 12-month release cycle or they don't.
Hey, just think they did it with a "disappointing, incremental" update.
I'm particularly skeptical since this says it's ARMv7 - which is a Cortex core. I don't believe a cortex core at 1.02 GHz would have this performance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slurpy
Why the **** wouldn't you use something you're a fan of? And if you don't, how exactly can you be a fan of it, which implies liking it greatly based on your experience with it? Am I missing something? Most irrational thing I've ever read.
I spent a couple of decades as a fan of Apple's products but never bought them b/c I had a shit job and couldn't afford them. Even when I did I started easy w/a Mac Mini for myself after we had bought the first iPad for my wife. We have shifted to entirely OS X and iOS in the house since then. Heck I loved the look of the G4 Cube, but it was expensive as hell and then of course the issue of the cracks. Doesn't mean I didn't admire the product and I was glad to see Jobs back at Apple. It's entirely possible to be a fan of something but still be from afar.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eAbyss
Those numbers seem bogus. I'll wait for some real numbers after the iPhone has actually been released.
True or not though you'd still be stuck running only what Apple allows you. The great wall of Apple is a real pain in the ass.
I'll bet Acer finds "the great wall of Google" a a real pain in the donkey, too!
Thou shalt not make Aliyun handsets for Alibaba.
We cannot compete so we will anti-compete as Google's iron fist comes crashing down.
It's SkyHook all over again.
When a new iPhone is being released, Fandroids shout that it has nothing new or innovative, just minor improvements. Even when you see scores like these with numerous engineering feats.
But when a new Android Phone is released with (usually) subpar quality casings, stuttery UI… and all that on a 1.5Ghz Quadcore with 2GB ram, they say that it's the fastest phone ever.
Now I might be the only one here, but the above sounds véry odd. And yet every real Fandroid shouts exactly what I've written above
Few people care about specs. Most care about how it works.
Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago.
What gives?
Granted...... The AppleInsider article was posted 7 hours ago...... so there's a chance that the GeekBench scores were updated right after this article was posted......... WHOM DO WE BELIEVE?!?!?
Quote:
Originally Posted by You Smell
Um.... THe Geekbench result linked to in the article says THe Galaxy S 3 and the Nexus 7 have scores of 1628 and 1604, respectively. It was updated 4 hours ago.
What gives?
Still funny that iPhone 5's dual core @ 1.02GHz matched S3's quad core 1.4GHz.
"Engineering people, engineering. This is all less about specs and more about engineering."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
the iphone was by far the fastest. if you do not understand what you are talking about, that's your problem.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan
Impressive by Apple standards, not so impressive against Android devices. By the same websites data the Samsung Galaxy S III (1628) and Asus Nexus 7 (1604) outperform the iPhone 5 score of 1601. If anything this shows just how lacking Apple hardware has been compared to Android options. The iPhone 4S got a 631… you realize how long Android devices have been much faster than that using this same data right? From this same website there are 27 Android devices with a score over 800. "no iOS device has surpassed the 800 mark, as last year's iPhone 4S netted a 631 while the third-generation iPad (CDMA) scored 734." There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
Samsung Galaxy S3 was benchmarked 18 hours ago at 1560.
You know cpu/gpu specs doesn't matter actually to iPhone. Why? It's because iOS app developers will use an iPhone 5 themselves to test their current and future cpu & gpu-intensive apps. So we are damn well sure that all apps are optimized so there's nothing really to worry about. This is not a desktop or android that have tons of different specs that you have to worry if it's fast enough.
I'd like to welcome our new low-post Android Overlords to the forum
Quote:
Originally Posted by AbsoluteDesignz
just a question...do you think a lot of us Android fans (not users, fans) LONG for an iPhone yet somehow are incapable of getting one of the most easily accessible devices ever?
Back to the shrill whining, I see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Open Source Fan
There was a time that Apple set the bar, however Android has been moving at a much faster pace and Apple is now only playing catch-up.
If this is not setting the bar, I don't know what is. Think about it for a second. Compared to the Android "elite", the iPhone 5 is under-spec'd, yet still bests them in performance.
When winning the spec race is more important than winning the performance race, you've already lost.