Seth2015

A cross platform benchmark isn't dead accurate. I've already told you why and given an example - unsure why you're missing it?

My i5 at home, I can install Linux and run a benchmark - let's say I get 12,000 little numbers on the screen. I now install Windows 10 on the same chip and get a 10,000. So for those that are slightly slower here (I'm looking at your madtiger) this is the same chip with a different result depending on the OS layer. 

iOS is really efficient OS. It doesn't have the extra bloatware that Android has once a manufacture has got hold of it and put on their own skin. A fair comment would be the chip + OS is delivery these awesome figures ... but to pretend the A11 streets ahead of the Kirin 780 is just silly bias on your side. It really is the combination of the two

And lastly, numbers on the screen aren't going to tell you the real world user performance. Yes - the iPhone s quick and smooth ... but my Mate 20 Pro is just the same. I've had zero issues with regards to speed ... but I guess I place more emphasis on real world than numbers on the screen ?  

@StrangeDays Your argument about the low resolution screen is something that every Apple users has said from 2007.

So basically - any lower than 1,792 x 828 and you'll see the difference?
And any higher, you'll put added strain on the battery (which already battles) and GPU?
So Apple called it, again? Just right? Such an amazing company, this

But next year when they up this resolution, you'll be sitting in the front row of the Keynote and think 'revolutionary!' ...

PS We're used to this loop after 10+ years. Apple launches something late and while they don't have it, none of their users want it ... until Apple tells them they do.

@StrangeDays You're really trying to say I'm ignorant and a false sense of my knowledge? With no disrespect intended here, I've knocked every claim that anyone has on here ? And I'm talking facts here - this battery argument is great example.

I don\t think there is a single review out there that agrees with you I thought I'd found person on here that could actually debate and had knowledge, you you kinda killed it all with that statement. With respect, I think *you* need up to up your knowledge.






While we're on the battery, my Mate 20 Pro has a 40w wired charger and 15w wireless charger. That's 100|% (yes - double!) the iPhone and my wireless charging is only marginally slower than the iPhones wired charging system. I get 70% wired charge in 30 minutes - that's 2,940mAh. That's something like a full iPhone charge in 20 minutes ...

And if you're thinking that'll damage the battery or make it unsafe? The Huwaei Mate 20 Pro battery is certified by TÜV Rheinland - only the 2nd battery in the world that has gone through the certification process (the first, incidentally, was Huawi P20Pro)

So - going back to my main question ... maybe Apple could spend some money beefing up the battery? Either the capacity, or charging speeds or something that can make it match up?

And I have another question ...

These fancy high end chips that are years ahead of the competition - that's benchmarks right? So, cross platform benchmarking? Two totally different OSs?

I can take my Intel i5 and run the same benchmark using three OSs ... With different results. An OS plays a huge difference in the numbers you see on screen benchmarks. So, um, I do find the claims in this super chip unrealistic

Lastly, I use a iPhone X as my work phone every 2nd weekend. It's not a bad phone but it isn't my take home phone. However, real world speed of it and my Huawei are really kinda the same.

Who here has actually used the Huawei? I know you all think I'm trolling, but from the comments I've seen here, I'm actually one of the few with valid statements.

That's a better argument ... Thanks strangedays.

You don't think maybe they could spend some money on a better? Maybe something that lasts a little longer? iPhone batteries die pretty early in in any very tests. 

On the screen - from the outside, it looks like iPhone XR is running a screen from 2013. It can't do FullHD - you reckon this is all the eye can see? There is no need for anything higher?