fierrotlepou
Member
And next year the Samsung S9 will be the fastest, and then September next year the iPhone 9 will be the fastest. Rinse and repeat...
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
iPhone 8 Is World's Fastest Phone (It's Not Even Close)
- Thread starter mcfrank
- Start date
Except this year the s8 isnt even as fast as the Iphone 7, and maybe just about beats out the 6s..
Uhh, weren't the X margins much lower than the 8 and 8 Plus?
the 6s is still better in single core performance (i.e. overall CPU performance efficiency) than the Galaxy S8. Actually not sure the last time an android phone held the top spot outside of artificial multi-core scores.
https://browser.geekbench.com/android-benchmarks
https://browser.geekbench.com/ios_devices/50
edit - yeah, looking at it, CPU efficiency (single core performance), the iPhone 7 beat the S8, iPhone 6s beat the S7, iPhone 6 beat the S6, etc. Those comparisons are notable because in all cases the iPhone launched the fall before. So when the next iPhone launches, the previous iPhone is still faster than the current Samsung.
That is not a bad thing.
If that happens next year than we should praise Samsung for the speed of their latest phone instead of trying to diminish what they did because we like another brand of phone better.
I do agree in general almost all phones are good enough, but in a thread about CPU performance it is weird for people to come in and try and minimize the improvements Apple gained since their last upgrade.
It is not illegal to praise the 'other guy's' phone...
STILLethal
Member
What if games becoming really good in the future?
Can I connect my PS4 controller to an iPhone X and play all 9 hours on my flight from USA to Europe?
Can I connect my PS4 controller to an iPhone X and play all 9 hours on my flight from USA to Europe?
No, pay attention, Apple now has an absurd power advance.
What new features? Most of the new features on smartphones these days are just fancy gimmicks.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
That's not how widening performance deltas work.
I'd slow down there several paces.
So they went from 16nm to 10nm yet there's only about an 22% increase over the A10 and only 8% over the A10x single core in these first benchmarks. Multicore is a huge increase with the caveat that the previous models were shit.
For reference, the jump from 6(A9) to 7(A10) was 39% single core. Apple's numbers are good for Apple products but they are fastly running into the same walls that Intel/AMD find themselves at today. We need more detailed breakdowns, especially the synthetics that run at the same resolution to really gauge them. People also don't seem to realize that the S8 runs at a higher resolution and a lower clock speed.
Its impressive to see them progress, especially with there own GPU now but they aren't really doing anything remarkable. Qualcomm and Samsung(who most people are sleep on) are both right there with them.
This is extremely misleading and mostly not true. The S8 is faster at certain tasks and the 7 is faster at others. And still the resolution thing applies cause the 7, even the 8 are still pretty low resolution.
Yeah, like 4K video.
4K video on a tiny screen? What's the point?
Are you doing this on purpose? Think.
while nice, I do nothing on my phone that actually warrants all the extra power.
I'd imagine the iPhone X is even faster. It would be cool if you could hook up your phone to a monitor and run OSX, or a desktop version of IOS. That would sell me on an iPhone. But I doubt Apple will ever do it.
I'd imagine the iPhone X is even faster. It would be cool if you could hook up your phone to a monitor and run OSX, or a desktop version of IOS. That would sell me on an iPhone. But I doubt Apple will ever do it.
I mean, do you not understand that this is literally taking your phone for granted? Even something as simple as Facebook would likely grind to a halt on an iPhone 4s or 4. Even just basic camera image signal processing takes advantage of a lot of hardware directly in the processors these days.
aka "the most basic tasks" take a surprising amount of computing power, all things considered, even if the actual task comes of as mundane or every day.
edit - ah, just shit posting... missed that.
Nah.
https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks
This is mostly because the X has a slightly higher resolution.
eyeball_kid
Member
Here's a bit more high-level info about the A11. They've also added a machine learning section to the A11, used in Face ID and ARKit. There's also a section for ECC checks on the flash storage, and a custom DSP for audio processing.
Feels a bit like the Mac vs. PC wars of the 90's. I think some Android users hate the idea that a "phone for casuals" blows away the performance of their high-spec Android phones. I guess Android fans should place their faith in Google and hope that the HTC aqui-hire can lead to a soup-to-nuts smartphone with custom hardware.
Feels a bit like the Mac vs. PC wars of the 90's. I think some Android users hate the idea that a "phone for casuals" blows away the performance of their high-spec Android phones. I guess Android fans should place their faith in Google and hope that the HTC aqui-hire can lead to a soup-to-nuts smartphone with custom hardware.
multicore was previously "shit" whereby "shit" you mean "competitive with qualcomm and samsung's SoCs that had twice (or more) as many cores because their single-core performance lead (arguably the single most important metric) has been comically far ahead of everyone else since 2013 and is now roughly on par with intel"
also, display resolution matters approximately absolutely nothing for geekbench
No I am not doing anything "on purpose". 4K on a tiny screen is pointless.
LordOfChaos
Member
"Benchmarks don't matter" "Geekbench is biased" - the best part of this is the real world result was a /bigger/ difference then the benchmarked result 
Being able to record and encode it on your phone is not
No I am not shit-posting. We've reached a point where phones pack more power than the average user uses.
Out of curiosity (sorry if this has already been asked), but how has the A11 in comparison to the Kirin 970? Or is it too early to bench?
I kinda expected the A11 to be head and shoulders above the snapdragon/exynos offerings, but i'm more interested in comparisons with the 970.
I kinda expected the A11 to be head and shoulders above the snapdragon/exynos offerings, but i'm more interested in comparisons with the 970.
but they don't. Flagship phones? Sure, but eventually that tech filters down to the $200-400 phones, and as that happens "basic" software uses more and more processing power. so almost all of the "trivial" stuff today exists because of the tech packed into flagship phones likely 3-4 years ago.
EverVigilant
Neo Member
There are these things called televisions.
And this thing you can do on you phone called streaming...
MugiwaraCole
Member
Ehh bigger cores will outperform smaller ones, this isn't new. They are still about the same size overall. Single core isn't more important either. IOS' previously shitty multitasking is a testament to this. I wonder if apps still run in that shitty suspend flag they have.
Also, display resolution does matter in alot of Geekbench's tests and Apple hasn't been as far ahead considering.
https://www.geekbench.com/doc/geekb...eekbench.com/doc/geekbench4-cpu-workloads.pdf
EverVigilant
Neo Member
The X isn't out yet. But it runs the same silicon. No one knows if it runs at the same clockspeeds yet.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
A10X is a different class product -- it has a superior LLC setup. A10 to A11 is the fair comparison and the advancement is commendable -- when did Intel last deliver 22% over same-class subsequent gens? But sure, if top-sku is your thing then wait for A11X for X-class comparisons.
Sure Apple are subject to the same diminishing advancements, but they are ahead of Intel in IPC now, and Intel are further ahead on the curve, so I don't see how they would catch up.
So let's talk about what Apple do remarkably well -- CPUs.
Palette Swap
Member
Feeling good about that 8+ upgrade.
Theres this simple approach to things on the one hand, and their tendency to oversell minor stuff on the other that makes people overlook how genuinely top of the class they can be. Its not just that dumb overpriced hardware trope.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
The gap has been there for years but this years gap is the one that cements it. The rest are left in the dust. Even that is an understatement.
single core performance is absolutely more important, as the vast majority of end-user computing today is still single threaded. most perceived speed will be on IPS which is where the vast majority of single core performance is derived from.
also the entire point to Apple's "multi-tasking" was "what do users expect" vs. "how has computing traditionally handled it". And it paid off for them (giving users largely what they expect from multi-tasking) Oh and hey, Google ultimately copied a whole ton of it as well (RAM suspend states, dedicated background task threads, etc).
really? where? outside of multi-core benchmarks (which samsung has been uncovered multiple times for gaming) where both companies have traditionally offered double Apple's cores, real world performance ALWAYS heavily favors apple. and even real world multi-core performance (where throttling exists), apple frequently outpaces samsung and qualcomm.
BlastProcessing
Member
Do you understand that Snapchat is a thing that exists? You don't seem to have a clear concept of what average users are doing with their phones.
Palette Swap
Member
nm
Diprosalic
Banned
Good for people doing video editing on their phone. I have an iPhone 7 and i don't really see what more power i could need.
dragonelite
Member
Wait those cpu test are doing rendering work?
You would think those benchmark would split the work up?
re: display resolution and geekbench. i just ran geekbench on my MBP both at 1024x768 and 3360x2100. the final score difference was around 5% in multicore which is practically margin of error between tests. the resolution difference between an iphone and a galaxy s8 does not remotely account for the gaps in performance.
Multi core is vastly more important as we continue to head to brickwalls in advancement. Die shrinks are less and less effective. The fact that developers continue to push single core to the limit doesn't change this.
Secondly, real world performance will always favor Apple, who's flagships run at almost half the resolution of Samsung's. Not to mention the fact that tech wise there is only one SKU to develop to versus dozens of different Andrioids.
I dunno how the Ax's scale though . I will have to see a desktop class CPU from Apple before I put them over intel. Xeon's are amazing.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Display resolution does not matter in any of the CPU geekbench tests.
Mechanized
Member
I loved my S6 but the performance difference of the S8+, as sexy as it is, sells me way more on the iphone.
but this doesn't mean shit unless developers actually extensively thread their apps. The OS has practically no way to help this.
when you are talking games and GPU benchmarks, sure. I've moved on from that. Strictly computing tasks (image editing/manipulation, video editing), or even things like AR (which is compute heavy) have little bearing on resolution. Gaming and pixel throughput are such a minor part of what I'm talking about.. you keep focusing on it because apple is running lower res screens, but even real world computing workflows are significantly faster on iPhones and iPads, where the pixels have virtually no play in it.
but Xeons aren't desktop CPUs.. I don't think anyone is arguing that the AXX series is nowhere near workstation or server performance yet. we are talking about desktops, which the geekbench results show that in a burst performance.. the AXX can keep up with mid range desktop CPUs. We probably won't see them reach workstation levels until/unless apple ever decides that they are then "good enough" for desktop use. I'd have to believe that is their first milestone.
yeah, his focus on the resolution difference is..... odd. iphone beats qualcomm and samsung handily in real world computing tasks (i.e. no graphics), and then with graphics beats them in onscreen performance at a greater rate than is accounted for in the pixel difference. "samsung is pushing x% more pixels", "umm.. ok, but iphone beats samsung by x+n% in framerate/score"
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
That split is between mobile and desktop. There are no power users on mobile OSs because the software isn't there.
The numbers in the OP aren't just CPU tests.
https://browser.geekbench.com/ios-benchmarks/
I think 3D is by far the best overall judge of the power of hardware. Also, I never said Xeon is desktop class?
Where?
http://www.ubergizmo.com/products/lang/en_us/devices/galaxy-s8,iphone-7/
Note, only offscreen tests use the same resolution. And the S8 wins about every time...
Jazzy Network
Member
Qualcomm is really hindering any sort of android cpu progression. It's sad. Samsungs's Exynos and Huawei's Kirin are closer to the Apple A CPUs than Qualcomm's shitty Snapdragons. Fuck Qualcomm.