Contrary to the article's headline and content, the Galaxy S6 is more powerful in offscreen rendering at the same resolution (1478 vs 1189 and 2636 vs 2391). This article concentrates on the on-screen performance, but that isn't necessarily going to be relevant in the real world.
The issue is that the S6 has a higher resolution display, so it has more pixels to render if the game renders at the full native resolution.
However it is likely that games will render at a target that results in a playable experience, and then upscale to the native resolution. For both the S6 and the iPhone 6 that's likely to be a very similar resolution.
So this whole article is pointless, and it doesn't even mention "offscreen" or "onscreen" in the text, so it's likely the author doesn't understand the test itself.
Besides, when comparing the onscreen figures with the iPhone 6 Plus, the performance isn't that dissimilar, it's in the same ballpark. So the headline is very conflating of the actual issue.
At what resolution does the UI render... Guessing native hey!
Benchmarks try to get to the hardware directly, otherwise comparing would be pointless, you'd be comparing the OS/HW instead.
In real world, Android is STILL a dog no matter what hardware is underneath it.
Again, you're the one claiming "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED. ...and you're the one using data that's not even in the charts of the article, or in the text?
According to the Anandtech Note 4 review, the iPhone 6 beat the Note 4 in 8 out of 9 CPU tests. Even the iPhone 5S beat the Note 4 in 6 out of 9 tests.
On the GPU side the iPhone 6 and Note 4 were pretty close with each device faster in some benchmarks. Same thing for NAND performance.
Please explain how losing in 8 of 9 CPU tests makes the Note 4 "outstanding, beating out all existing devices"?
No there are not. A removable battery is a hallmark feature, particularly when you're out and about and a long way from a power source.
Actually in my view its hilarious that Samsung has dropped two of the key advantages they once had .. removable battery and a removable memory card, while simultaneously managing to become even more expensive than the Apple iPhone 6 and 6+. Seems to me that they simply don't understand the value of differentiation in the market.
Yes I know that some on AI imagine the perfect world as one in which Apple is the only supplier. God help us if that ever happens.
I don't find a removable battery useful. I prefer a portable USB battery pack which allows me freedom to charge any portable electronic device - or in the case of my mophie Juicepack XL, 2 devices at once.
According to the Anandtech Note 4 review, the iPhone 6 beat the Note 4 in 8 out of 9 CPU tests. Even the iPhone 5S beat the Note 4 in 6 out of 9 tests.
On the GPU side the iPhone 6 and Note 4 were pretty close with each device faster in some benchmarks. Same thing for NAND performance.
Please explain how losing in 8 of 9 CPU tests makes the Note 4 "outstanding, beating out all existing devices"?
For the answer to your question, you would have to ask Anandtech, as I didn't make that statement.
Again, you're the one claiming "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED. ...and you're the one using data that's not even in the charts of the article, or in the text?
The 6 Plus actually renders graphics internally at an even higher 2.7M pixel resolution, then scales the results down to the physical resolution of its screen (its internal 2208x1242 rendering resolution is scaled down to fit its 1920x1080 display). So the 6 Plus is always rendering at 2208x1242 and scaling down its graphics to fit the screen it is using at 1920x1080.
I actually like the S6 from a hardware perspective. However, I would never buy anything with Android loaded up on it. Not now, not ever. Perhaps if Microsoft could release an OS that displaces Android, I might consider it. Apple would never release iOS for installation on any other hardware so Microsoft would have to for me to consider the S6. But by the time that happens, the next iPhone with the A9 will be released and Samsung will be forced to go back to the drawing board.
I actually really like the Samsung phone. But Android and Google Play make it a total non-starter.
At this point, it's very unlikely that Mali and Adreno graphics will be able to keep up with Apple's Power VR implementations going forward. Apple's resources and design talent will see to it.
Samsung needs to give up on Android. What Samsung needs to do is develop a technology that extends the voice and data range of mobile devices. That would be a most compelling feature and they could then install Tizen and people would buy their phones. I know I would. I hate dropped signals. And Samsung or LG could do this. Intel could do this also, but I think Samsung is a much more capable company. Google is unable to produce compelling hardware if of any kind. Most of their software design team working on Android likely came from Microsoft in the first place.
Copying Apple is no longer the way to beat them. Apple was burned badly by Microsoft originally and they were only mildly so by Google's Android. But the lessons they learned from Microsoft are now being applied to Google. Samsung was foolish to partner up with Google and Android. Microsoft's mobile strategy is failing and Google's will also. Samsung needs to develop a device that's so compelling that people will clamor to buy one. Beating the iPhone on specs for a short period of time just won't do it. Even if the iPhone is a little slower, android is so poor, I won't buy it. However, release a phone where I can get service in remote places more inexpensively than on anyone else's hardware, I would buy the phone, even with less than 50% performance of the latest and greatest iPhone with the caveat that Google's Android spyware is not included. That's where the action should be in going forward. The sooner someone delivers, the sooner they get in on the ground floor of the next big thing.
There is mention that Microsoft actually have developed a loader that will allow Windows to be loaded onto an android phone. I imagine there might be problems with things like device specific drivers though.
I can't believe i use to be like you guys, clueless. Apple has quad core graphics with Power VR GX6450 just like samsung has with the S6 with Mali-T760. GPU determines graphics performance not how many cores. Two this is just one test that the iPhone won out of how many graphics tests that it lost to the S6,check out the Trex and the rest of other graphics test before you start jumping up.
The only thing poor delivered is the Iphone's battery life. Apple still hasn't got it right.
It's all fine and dandy to have all the bells and whistles in a phone, but when you have to turn them all off just so the phone functions properly, you mine as well just pick up a standard flip phone.
This is why the Galaxy is better, you can use it for it's intended use; you cannot use the Iphone for what it's advertised for. I do not know of anyone anywhere that has an Iphone 5 and above that has a properly working battery. This includes the 1400 iphone 5 and 6's issued to our district employees.
As someone who has played with the S6 a bit, it feels super smooth. Obviously that's subjective, but there wasn't much in the way of stutters or hiccups that exists on the Note 4. We can debate about pixel density all day, but the S6 has a ridiculously gorgeous screen and I couldn't tell you if its pixels or parsecs or gizwhizzles that make it happen but it's gorgeous.
In terms of 3d applications and games, most render at a set resolution of 1080p or less. So the processor shouldn't be having an issue.
I'd buy and ultra hd variant of a 6 plus in a heartbeat, even if that meant performance dropped a bit.
As a game programmer, I consider that the benchmark result on this article is unfair and biased. Higher resolution has its own merit - sharper screen/font/image/movie qualities, which do not necesarilly require full GPU power. Samsung also has GearVR in mind, which requires 2K resolution as a bare minimum, so 2K resolution of S6 is their engineering/business decision. Besides, the fact that the benchmark result of S6 is better than that of S5 means Sammy scaled up the GPU performance gracely considering the increased resolution.
Most games requiring a high framerate draw on a low-res target and blow it up. Thefore, for any practical purpose, it is better to compare S6 and iPhone6 at the same resolution, i.e., S6 with offline rendering and blow-up and iPhone with online rendering.
Based on the results the iphone 6 is faster than the iphone 6 plus?
Very wrong comparison in this article.
To do a proper comparison the 3 smartphones NEED to be running their be
Why? The user will never experience the 6+ at the 6 resolution. The comparison is of user experience of performance, and in that the iPhone 6 comes out best.
Comments
Contrary to the article's headline and content, the Galaxy S6 is more powerful in offscreen rendering at the same resolution (1478 vs 1189 and 2636 vs 2391). This article concentrates on the on-screen performance, but that isn't necessarily going to be relevant in the real world.
The issue is that the S6 has a higher resolution display, so it has more pixels to render if the game renders at the full native resolution.
However it is likely that games will render at a target that results in a playable experience, and then upscale to the native resolution. For both the S6 and the iPhone 6 that's likely to be a very similar resolution.
So this whole article is pointless, and it doesn't even mention "offscreen" or "onscreen" in the text, so it's likely the author doesn't understand the test itself.
Besides, when comparing the onscreen figures with the iPhone 6 Plus, the performance isn't that dissimilar, it's in the same ballpark. So the headline is very conflating of the actual issue.
At what resolution does the UI render... Guessing native hey!
Benchmarks try to get to the hardware directly, otherwise comparing would be pointless, you'd be comparing the OS/HW instead.
In real world, Android is STILL a dog no matter what hardware is underneath it.
Look for the word Plus
The iPhone 6 plus is not in those bar charts.
Again, you're the one claiming "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED. ...and you're the one using data that's not even in the charts of the article, or in the text?
Again, are we looking at the same article?
Anandtech don't seem to think the Exynos in the Note 4 is a POS:
Ok...
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
According to the Anandtech Note 4 review, the iPhone 6 beat the Note 4 in 8 out of 9 CPU tests. Even the iPhone 5S beat the Note 4 in 6 out of 9 tests.
On the GPU side the iPhone 6 and Note 4 were pretty close with each device faster in some benchmarks. Same thing for NAND performance.
Please explain how losing in 8 of 9 CPU tests makes the Note 4 "outstanding, beating out all existing devices"?
luckily the note 5 will be coming out around then. With an even faster processor than the s6.
I don't find a removable battery useful. I prefer a portable USB battery pack which allows me freedom to charge any portable electronic device - or in the case of my mophie Juicepack XL, 2 devices at once.
According to the Anandtech Note 4 review, the iPhone 6 beat the Note 4 in 8 out of 9 CPU tests. Even the iPhone 5S beat the Note 4 in 6 out of 9 tests.
On the GPU side the iPhone 6 and Note 4 were pretty close with each device faster in some benchmarks. Same thing for NAND performance.
Please explain how losing in 8 of 9 CPU tests makes the Note 4 "outstanding, beating out all existing devices"?
For the answer to your question, you would have to ask Anandtech, as I didn't make that statement.
The iPhone 6 plus is not in those bar charts.
Again, you're the one claiming "incredibly egregious selective benchmark picking" by DED. ...and you're the one using data that's not even in the charts of the article, or in the text?
Again, are we looking at the same article?
Correct, it isn't; for the Plus data you have to follow the link I provided in my reply to DED. It was in this form:
The reports are in no overheating or thermal throttling, are present.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/samsung-galaxy-s6-review-the-iphone-6-has-met-its-match-1427825674
She didn't seem to test app performance like games, etc.
For the answer to your question, you would have to ask Anandtech, as I didn't make that statement.
Next time read before you post or stop with your intentional lies and misdirection to try and make claims you know aren't true.
The 6 Plus actually renders graphics internally at an even higher 2.7M pixel resolution, then scales the results down to the physical resolution of its screen (its internal 2208x1242 rendering resolution is scaled down to fit its 1920x1080 display). So the 6 Plus is always rendering at 2208x1242 and scaling down its graphics to fit the screen it is using at 1920x1080.
I actually really like the Samsung phone. But Android and Google Play make it a total non-starter.
At this point, it's very unlikely that Mali and Adreno graphics will be able to keep up with Apple's Power VR implementations going forward. Apple's resources and design talent will see to it.
Samsung needs to give up on Android. What Samsung needs to do is develop a technology that extends the voice and data range of mobile devices. That would be a most compelling feature and they could then install Tizen and people would buy their phones. I know I would. I hate dropped signals. And Samsung or LG could do this. Intel could do this also, but I think Samsung is a much more capable company. Google is unable to produce compelling hardware if of any kind. Most of their software design team working on Android likely came from Microsoft in the first place.
Copying Apple is no longer the way to beat them. Apple was burned badly by Microsoft originally and they were only mildly so by Google's Android. But the lessons they learned from Microsoft are now being applied to Google. Samsung was foolish to partner up with Google and Android. Microsoft's mobile strategy is failing and Google's will also. Samsung needs to develop a device that's so compelling that people will clamor to buy one. Beating the iPhone on specs for a short period of time just won't do it. Even if the iPhone is a little slower, android is so poor, I won't buy it. However, release a phone where I can get service in remote places more inexpensively than on anyone else's hardware, I would buy the phone, even with less than 50% performance of the latest and greatest iPhone with the caveat that Google's Android spyware is not included. That's where the action should be in going forward. The sooner someone delivers, the sooner they get in on the ground floor of the next big thing.
There is mention that Microsoft actually have developed a loader that will allow Windows to be loaded onto an android phone. I imagine there might be problems with things like device specific drivers though.
Very wrong comparison in this article.
To do a proper comparison the 3 smartphones NEED to be running their benchmark on the SAME resolution.
Only Dumb people will believe that the results shows are acurate.
I can't believe i use to be like you guys, clueless. Apple has quad core graphics with Power VR GX6450 just like samsung has with the S6 with Mali-T760. GPU determines graphics performance not how many cores. Two this is just one test that the iPhone won out of how many graphics tests that it lost to the S6,check out the Trex and the rest of other graphics test before you start jumping up.
Performance benchmarks
LOWER IS BETTER
HIGHER IS BETTER
HIGHER IS BETTER
HIGHER IS BETTER
HIGHER IS BETTER
HIGHER IS BETTER
The test you are show here is a lie, these are the actual tests!!!!!!
It's all fine and dandy to have all the bells and whistles in a phone, but when you have to turn them all off just so the phone functions properly, you mine as well just pick up a standard flip phone.
This is why the Galaxy is better, you can use it for it's intended use; you cannot use the Iphone for what it's advertised for. I do not know of anyone anywhere that has an Iphone 5 and above that has a properly working battery. This includes the 1400 iphone 5 and 6's issued to our district employees.
In terms of 3d applications and games, most render at a set resolution of 1080p or less. So the processor shouldn't be having an issue.
I'd buy and ultra hd variant of a 6 plus in a heartbeat, even if that meant performance dropped a bit.
Most games requiring a high framerate draw on a low-res target and blow it up. Thefore, for any practical purpose, it is better to compare S6 and iPhone6 at the same resolution, i.e., S6 with offline rendering and blow-up and iPhone with online rendering.
Based on the results the iphone 6 is faster than the iphone 6 plus?
Very wrong comparison in this article.
To do a proper comparison the 3 smartphones NEED to be running their be
Why? The user will never experience the 6+ at the 6 resolution. The comparison is of user experience of performance, and in that the iPhone 6 comes out best.