Anyone else eager to LAUGH at what apple has to offer Sept 12th?

[crackberrytraitor]

It's all certain fanboys have to fall back on. "Oh yeah, well my chip benchmarks faster than yours". Yeah, it might, but if the rest of the phone is garbage who cares?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

Those benchmarks base the results off of software performance as well. That means it has faster hardware and faster software as well. That generally means it that it's a more powerful phone. I also noticed how you were lauding early early chip analysis and benchmarks of ICS devices that showed the iPhone 5 had better performance. I'm tired of the double stardard, and the attempts to downplay the fact that the iPhone 5 was released with inferior hardware to it's competitors.

It seems like a more accurate statement would be "It's all certain fanboys have to fall back on. "Well who cares about stupid benchmarks anyway."
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[joshwithachance]

The fact that this thread is 24 pages long proves just how good the iPhone is.

 

[Tkbredx]

The fact that this thread is 24 pages long proves just how good the iPhone is.

Or how competitive/proprietary Americans are

 

[The Real X Dawg]

The fact that this thread is 24 pages long proves just how good the iPhone is.

More like how good their marketing is. This thread could easily be edited to fit how there is no real difference between MW, 2, 3, Black Ops and, Black Ops 2. Personally I think CoD fanboys make Apple/Android fans look tranquil.

Sent from my Jelly Bean chomping Infuse 4G!

 

[crackberrytraitor]

The fact that this thread is 24 pages long proves just how good the iPhone is.

More like it shows how desperate iPhone fanboys are to justify their purchase. Just my opinion and it's not specific to Apple fans.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[JHBThree]

More like it shows how desperate iPhone fanboys are to justify their purchase.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Who here owns an iPhone 5 besides lodingi?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

 

[funkylogik]

how bout the Exinos in the int' s3 vs the new iphone chip?

global s3, UK. Ask me anything and ill reply even if its just an intelligent (or stupid) guess

 

[crackberrytraitor]

how bout the Exinos in the int' s3 vs the new iphone chip?

global s3, UK. Ask me anything and ill reply even if its just an intelligent (or stupid) guess

The quad core S3 won by nearly 200 points with jellybean and lost by 40 points with ICS. Performed about the same as the T3 against the iPhone.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

What benchmarks is everyone looking at? I'm looking at THIS article from Anandtech, and it's pretty easy to read the charts. The green bar for the iPhone 5 is at the top of pretty much every chart (when it's not, it's the iPad, and in one case the LG Optimus G with S4 Pro). So where is everybody getting any data saying that Tegra3 is faster/more powerful? Even the quad-core Exynos is slow next to the iPhone.

And since when were sites/people not allowed to make educated guesses about products before they're released? Being wrong doesn't discredit them. If anything, I'll give them extra credit for saying they were wrong. But none of that matters now anyway, since they have the phone in hand and have done the benchmarking. The only time nVidia has a chance is with Tegra optimized software, like stuff from the Tegrazone. Otherwise, it shows its age.


Also, how many warnings will it take for the personal attacks/trolling other members to stop? I'm personally done with warnings and will just hand out some temporary vacations next time it happens.

 

[badbrad17]

What benchmarks is everyone looking at? I'm looking at THIS article from Anandtech, and it's pretty easy to read the charts. The green bar for the iPhone 5 is at the top of pretty much every chart (when it's not, it's the iPad, and in one case the LG Optimus G with S4 Pro). So where is everybody getting any data saying that Tegra3 is faster/more powerful? Even the quad-core Exynos is slow next to the iPhone.

And since when were sites/people not allowed to make educated guesses about products before they're released? Being wrong doesn't discredit them. If anything, I'll give them extra credit for saying they were wrong. But none of that matters now anyway, since they have the phone in hand and have done the benchmarking. The only time nVidia has a chance is with Tegra optimized software, like stuff from the Tegrazone. Otherwise, it shows its age.


Also, how many warnings will it take for the personal attacks/trolling other members to stop? I'm personally done with warnings and will just hand out some temporary vacations next time it happens.

Sorry sometimes things get of hand Kevin. We appreciate all of the effort you and the rest of the team put into AC.

Sent from my SGH-T989D using Android Central Forums

 

[crackberrytraitor]

What benchmarks is everyone looking at? I'm looking at THIS article from Anandtech, and it's pretty easy to read the charts. The green bar for the iPhone 5 is at the top of pretty much every chart (when it's not, it's the iPad, and in one case the LG Optimus G with S4 Pro). So where is everybody getting any data saying that Tegra3 is faster/more powerful? Even the quad-core Exynos is slow next to the iPhone.

And since when were sites/people not allowed to make educated guesses about products before they're released? Being wrong doesn't discredit them. If anything, I'll give them extra credit for saying they were wrong. But none of that matters now anyway, since they have the phone in hand and have done the benchmarking. The only time nVidia has a chance is with Tegra optimized software, like stuff from the Tegrazone. Otherwise, it shows its age.


Also, how many warnings will it take for the personal attacks/trolling other members to stop? I'm personally done with warnings and will just hand out some temporary vacations next time it happens.

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/09/geekbench-results-iphone-5-beats-galaxy-s3/

Ubergizmo says with ICS the S3 lost. With Jellybean it won. The actual numbers show that the S3 won by 181 points with JB and lost by 41 with ICS.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

iPhone 5 benchmark: narrowly beats Galaxy S3 [geekbench] | Ubergizmo

Ubergizmo says with ICS the S3 lost. With Jellybean it won. The actual numbers show that the S3 won by 181 points with JB and lost by 41 with ICS.


Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

I'm sorry, but I'm going to trust the Anandtech tests a little more, specifically because they do off-device rendering for the gaming stuff (this is what we care about right?), because we can all agree that the current high-end chips can run a UI smoothly. That particular article is also full of doubt. "weird for a CPU test" " The latter scored 1560 in the test (we suspect that this is the dual-core U.S version of the GS3)" <--- isn't this the same speculation you argued made the Anandtech stuff inaccurate? And then, they ask people to comment with their scores like that's going to be more controlled than the well documented and repeatable tests that Anandtech runs.

In a pure CPU test the OS shouldn't make a difference. Clockspeed would, though. This is why we don't like benchmarks around here and say not to use them to base any decisions of which device to buy on them.

I'm not understanding why this is an issue anyway, Apple doesn't play spec war games. That's why they avoid talking about it, and only say how much faster it is than the previous stuff, and how much better the UI will run, or what users can expect from the performance increase when they get the device. It's marketing, and it works. People don't care about clockspeed, or core counts, or what GPU the phone has, they care about what it will do for them. So Apple makes sure to talk about that (while knowing that they're also probably going to be at the top of the performance heap). What we do know about the GPU (remember, PowerVR is a known quantity in Android devices) it's safe to assume GPU performance is better than what we have so far.

Also knowing what we know about the S4 and what Qualcomm was able to do with the ArmV7 instruction set it's easy to see how the CPU performance can also be so high.

I'm having a hard time figuring out how those two conclusions are in any way being argued by anybody. Brand new architecture > 1 year old architecture (much older actually in the case of A9 designs) EVERY SINGLE TIME. How is it any different now that Apple is also doing it?

 

[SteveISU]

Who here owns an iPhone 5 besides lodingi?

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

I'm trying one.


Sent from my iPhone 4s using Tapatalk

 

[crackberrytraitor]

I'm sorry, but I'm going to trust the Anandtech tests a little more, specifically because they do off-device rendering for the gaming stuff (this is what we care about right?), because we can all agree that the current high-end chips can run a UI smoothly. That particular article is also full of doubt. "weird for a CPU test" " The latter scored 1560 in the test (we suspect that this is the dual-core U.S version of the GS3)" <--- isn't this the same speculation you argued made the Anandtech stuff inaccurate? And then, they ask people to comment with their scores like that's going to be more controlled than the well documented and repeatable tests that Anandtech runs.

In a pure CPU test the OS shouldn't make a difference. Clockspeed would, though. This is why we don't like benchmarks around here and say not to use them to base any decisions of which device to buy on them.

I'm not understanding why this is an issue anyway, Apple doesn't play spec war games. That's why they avoid talking about it, and only say how much faster it is than the previous stuff, and how much better the UI will run, or what users can expect from the performance increase when they get the device. It's marketing, and it works. People don't care about clockspeed, or core counts, or what GPU the phone has, they care about what it will do for them. So Apple makes sure to talk about that (while knowing that they're also probably going to be at the top of the performance heap). What we do know about the GPU (remember, PowerVR is a known quantity in Android devices) it's safe to assume GPU performance is better than what we have so far.

Also knowing what we know about the S4 and what Qualcomm was able to do with the ArmV7 instruction set it's easy to see how the CPU performance can also be so high.

I'm having a hard time figuring out how those two conclusions are in any way being argued by anybody. Brand new architecture > 1 year old architecture (much older actually in the case of A9 designs) EVERY SINGLE TIME. How is it any different now that Apple is also doing it?

Anandtech didn't run tests on any flagships with jellybean. Geekbench tests overall performance, so I'd value a geekbench test more. And they show that the S3 with Jellybean beats the iPhone 5. I'm going to download geekbench and see what my One X with JB scores.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

 

[crackberrytraitor]

My One X with Jellybean scores a 1594 as opposed to the iPhone 5's 1600. When I clock it to 1.7 GHz it scores 1726. That means when not clocked on high, the One X scores 0.3% lower than the iPhone 5, when overclocked it's 7.8 percent faster. I don't have a Tegra 3 phone, but I'll run geekbench on my N7 which has pretty much identical specs to most Tegra phones.

Also, I'd point out that geekbench shows the iPhone 5 having 1gb ram, but the One X having only 673. This lowers the score and suggests that processor vs processor, the S4 handily wins.

Sent from my One X using Android Central Forums

 

[JHBThree]

My One X with Jellybean scores a 1594 as opposed to the iPhone 5's 1600. When I clock it to 1.7 GHz it scores 1726. That means when not clocked on high, the One X scores 0.3% lower than the iPhone 5, when overclocked it's 7.8 percent faster. I don't have a Tegra 3 phone, but I'll run geekbench on my N7 which has pretty much identical specs to most Tegra phones.

Sent from my One X using Android Central Forums

Keep in mind the A6 is underclocked to 1ghz.

 

[Ry]

In a pure CPU test the OS shouldn't make a difference. Clockspeed would, though. This is why we don't like benchmarks around here and say not to use them to base any decisions of which device to buy on them.

I'm not understanding why this is an issue anyway, Apple doesn't play spec war games. That's why they avoid talking about it, and only say how much faster it is than the previous stuff, and how much better the UI will run, or what users can expect from the performance increase when they get the device. It's marketing, and it works. People don't care about clockspeed, or core counts, or what GPU the phone has, they care about what it will do for them. So Apple makes sure to talk about that (while knowing that they're also probably going to be at the top of the performance heap).

Thank you.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Android Central Forums

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

Anandtech didn't run tests on any flagships with jellybean. Geekbench tests overall performance, so I'd value a geekbench test more. And they show that the S3 with Jellybean beats the iPhone 5. I'm going to download geekbench and see what my One X with JB scores.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Android Central Forums

Hmmm...fresh restart on my One X (AT&T) running ParanoidAndroid (Jelly Bean) just got 1566. Which knowing what I know about hardware just doesn't line up. The PowerVR543MP3 is MUCH more powerful than the Adreno 225. Actually, almost any other GPU is (the nvidia and mali included). The CPU cores in the iPhone5 are at least as fast. Maybe later I'll flash an ICS ROM and compare.

This does nothing to explain HOW software can make such a huge difference on a pure CPU benchmark. Anandtech chose the benchmarks they did because they are more consistent from one platform to the next. Even looking at the browser results the software wouldn't make that much of a difference. It appears as though people are cherry picking the one or two benchmarks that will allow them to say that they have a faster phone, when common sense should tell you that the iPhone 5 has some of the fastest hardware inside of it or any other phone released to date.

It's ridiculous to think that anything based on A9 can compete directly with a brand new architecture, knowing for a fact that the GPU is also outclassed. I mean that's a Snapdragon S4 Pro QUAD-CORE that is barely keeping pace with the iPhone 5.

Also, you (not specifically) can't claim that the CPU or GPU is slower, and then use a benchmarks overall result as evidence of that. If you want to argue about a CPU or GPU, use a CPU or GPU specific benchmark. Then you are isolating those particular pieces of hardware for an easier and more direct comparison. Which is why I'll take the Anandtech results. I'm sure they will also test RAM speed and storage speed, too.

Even if the hardware is slower and software makes up the difference, that should AT LEAST prove how well Apple optimizes the hardware for the software and vice versa.

 

[crackberrytraitor]

Keep in mind the A6 is underclocked to 1ghz.

Yes, 1.02ghz to increase battery life. Same with the S4. It can smoothly run at 1.89 GHz, but is clocked at 1.5 GHz for stable battery life. Either way, geekbench makes it pretty clear that the S4 is at the very least equal to and possibly significantly more powerful than the A6. I think it's pretty clear as well that the S4 pro will perform even better.

Sent from my One X using Android Central Forums

 

[Kevin OQuinn]

My One X with Jellybean scores a 1594 as opposed to the iPhone 5's 1600. When I clock it to 1.7 GHz it scores 1726. That means when not clocked on high, the One X scores 0.3% lower than the iPhone 5, when overclocked it's 7.8 percent faster. I don't have a Tegra 3 phone, but I'll run geekbench on my N7 which has pretty much identical specs to most Tegra phones.

Also, I'd point out that geekbench shows the iPhone 5 having 1gb ram, but the One X having only 673. This lowers the score and suggests that processor vs processor, the S4 handily wins.

Sent from my One X using Android Central Forums

Now slow it down to 1.2ghz and see what the result is. Make it fair. Heck, go to 1.3, because for some reason you think RAM is making a huge difference here (it's not, because some of the RAM that isn't being reported is already being used by the GPU).