donth8

Wow at the A11 chip, simply unbelievable numbers!!!

The GFXbench scores are not fair the S10 out of the box is running 1080p. You should run the offscreen tests to make it fairer.

Complete obliteration!!! From tom's review: https://www.tomsguide.com/us/iphone-8-and-8-plus,review-4675.html

canukstorm said:

donth8 said:

The A12 being so fast and efficient does matter a lot. People trying to downplay it are just being shortsighted, I hope the author can test apps like Adobe Premiere Clips to really show what advantages Apple has over everyone else in real CPU tests. Opening big games like Fortnite and PUBG will also prove that.

Lastly, the fact the A12 is so fast will affect battery life a lot, if a games is locked at 30fps and uses 50% of the GPU on the Note 9 or the A11 chip that same game might only use 25% GPU on the A12 which would give you more playing time, a very nice thing to have.

What Apple is doing is future proofing their devices making sure they are relevant for 4+ years which is not the case in the Android world, the resale value of iPhones really showcase that stark difference!

According to this, battery life on the Note 9 beats the XS Max by quite a bit

https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/12/iphone-xs-max-battery-life/

This test is very flawed on so many levels. First, 200 nits on the iPhone is 2/3 brightness? that seems way too high for a phone with a 725 nits at max. Also he doesn't show us the level of brightness the Note 9 is on and left it on 1080p resolution. The most blaring one is the fact Alto's adventure runs at a way bigger resolution on the iPhone, you can see the black bars on the Note 9... Second he uses a lot more Google apps that are going to be written better for android, gmail used 13% battery on the max but only 8% on the Note, you could see the resolution mattered because more text of emails fit in the window on the max. Lastly the majority of the content except youtube was different, loading web pages you get different ads on different platforms he should have used an ad blocker. Instagram had completely different content, the iPhone could have shown more videos than the Note affecting battery. I respect the author and what he is trying to do but this can be improved upon greatly by making it way more fair.

Also easy to find other videos showing the opposite: 

Still a flawed test. GFXbench needs to be run in offscreen mode to be fair to both handsets. Also your iPhone is throttling in Geekbench. Multi core score should be over 11000.

The A12 being so fast and efficient does matter a lot. People trying to downplay it are just being shortsighted, I hope the author can test apps like Adobe Premiere Clips to really show what advantages Apple has over everyone else in real CPU tests. Opening big games like Fortnite and PUBG will also prove that.

Lastly, the fact the A12 is so fast will affect battery life a lot, if a games is locked at 30fps and uses 50% of the GPU on the Note 9 or the A11 chip that same game might only use 25% GPU on the A12 which would give you more playing time, a very nice thing to have.

What Apple is doing is future proofing their devices making sure they are relevant for 4+ years which is not the case in the Android world, the resale value of iPhones really showcase that stark difference!

KITA said:

AppleInsider said:

The benchmarks corroborate that the higher-tier iPhone sports 6GB of memory, and indicate that the device scored a 1590 in a single-core Geekbench testing and 3120 in multi-core testing. For comparison, the iPhone 11 Pro tests around 1336 in single-core and 3545 in multi-core.

Because of the discrepancy in multi-core score, it may be smart to be skeptical of the results. Geekbench tests can also easily be faked, and there's no way to verify whether these originated from an actual iPhone 12 Pro unit.

The low multi core score could also be due to throttling - i.e. if the device was still being setup when the benchmark was done and was warmer than usual due to ongoing background tasks.

The 3 GHz clock for that single core score is quite impressive and, despite the debut of Cortex X1, it should still allow Apple to maintain their single core performance lead over Qualcomm and Samsung.

For reference, a supposed benchmark of the Exynos 2100 had it scoring 1323 in single core performance, which is about the same as last year's A13. Of course, the multi core performance was 4215, which is much further ahead of the A13.

Here is one for the iPad Air 4 with the A14:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/4169813

msantti said:

donth8 said:

On non demanding games that may be true but when you have to run a game in 1440p resolution the GPU will have to throttle since it can't reach Vsync even on max power. My question is why put a 1440p screen on a phone when your GPU can't handle it at 30fps? My guess is because they wanted to mitigate the problems associated with Pentile displays and raising the PPI is the only solution. Also, even though they offer a higher resolution the UI doesn't offer more content. If you load a web page on the 6s and the s7 they will show the exact same content. I just don't see the point of having these ultra high resolution displays on phones.

Would you be saying this if Apple released a higher resolution screen tomorrow?

Yes because that just makes no sense, when Apple released the iPad 3 with the retina display it had the exact same problem, that's why the iPad 4 was released shortly after and featured a way better GPU.

No, I think the 7 still has 2 GB. They say the 7 plus has 3 because of the extra processing required for both cameras.