So if these benchmarks are true, there isn't that much difference in speed with Samsung either. I'm curious what speed the foldable Amoled phone of Samsung being introduced next April will have. It comes clear Apple has lost the speed crown too.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Alleged iPhone 7 Plus Geekbench Results Reveal 2.37 GHz Dual-Core A10 Chip, 3GB of RAM [Updated: Fake]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And the PCI-E interface on the internal storage. My Galaxy S6 edge+ got about twice as fast as my Galaxy Note 4 that i had earlier in loading apps and so on. The reason for that speed bump was because the Galaxy S6 series got the UFS storage interface that the Galaxy Note 4 didn't had.
No it doesn't. They basically released it to keep up with the schedule as in accounting, not as in technology.
Not necessarily after years of use on an iPhone the only reason you feel any slow down is because of a big iOS update usually at the very least two years after purchase. You have much less time on a Samsung to really enjoy it's full potential.
Yeah, it IS real multitasking. I can't really call pausing the apps in the background as iOS does for multitasking though.
Yea but the fake update is not part of the article, other things are being discussed now lol
I would like to see real multitasking on iOS with 3gb so the debate can actually be had
I just pointed out that you can run like 4 apps actively at the same time and switch between them with those small bubbles you can turn an app into when you minimizes them without getting the apps to go into a pause mode. You can however only run 2 apps in a multiwindow though.
But in reality, you can run as many apps actively in the background as you would like to as long as there is enough RAM for that.
Tell your significant other that when she ask if you think she is pretty and see the response get Lol. In all honesty though if this is true, the A10 will be a beast!Apple could deliver the fastest processor ever in a smartphone.
And people would complain that it looks the same as their previous phones.
I dunno... I'd rather have the chip engineers get a good workout instead of the designers.
There's that old saying: "It's what's on the INSIDE that counts"
Or maybe you should explain to me what multitasking is?
I'm using multitasking / multiwindow on my Galaxy S6 edge+ on a daily basis.
Exactly and Intel has said so them selves. Tick Tock is basically gone, we simply won't be seeing the rapid improvements in performance that we once did.
One of intel biggest mistakes is not stripping out the legacy hardware in x86, that crap takes up a lot of die space. That die space Apple leverages in the A shire so chips for multiple specialized processors. Somebody made a count of them but I can remember the exact number but there are a number of ARM cores on the A9 that aren't applications processors. I think the number was six but what ever, the point is there is much dis space that Apple dedicates to processors that enhance the performance of the applications processors or allow for very low power usage.
Hardware emulation is basically a waste of transistors. Make you base ARM chips fast enough and emulation will be acceptable. As for PowerPC, nobody is going to go that far backwards at
Apple.
Well if this chip makes it to 10nm we might not need a bigger battery to increase run time.
Dictionary will solve your problem. Ignorance however wil be much harder to get fixed.
I don't think this is true. I am no expert or anything but I think it balances out (sort of). Its like saying if you have two identical cars on a 100 mile road trip, one drives 100mph, hence finish in 1 hour and the other drives at 50mph, finishing in 2 hours...the car driving at 50mph will use less gas.
I think battery savings when it comes to the processor gas more do with the architecture it is built on vs how fast it completes the task. I might be completely wrong though.
Really? Okay then. On a current iPhone you can open many apps and games and come back to them later and they'll still be there. Do that on a Samsung and you'll need to reload the majority of them.
Apple could deliver the fastest processor ever in a smartphone.
And people would complain that it looks the same as their previous phones.
I dunno... I'd rather have the chip engineers get a good workout instead of the designers.
There's that old saying: "It's what's on the INSIDE that counts"
Well I don't know Mike - perhaps the richest company in the world could ensure that BOTH their designers and chip engineers get a work out? Is that asking too much!
The company prides itself on design aesthetics - and a 2 year old shell is not good enough!
ah got it, i thought you meant 4 apps in one window. I was thinking its not really productive having the screen split 4 ways.
Agreed 100%. This is what I have been saying all along. In fact, I think that a few years after our mutual statement comes true the next step is for the watch to replace the phone. But that is probably 10 years out. From a hardware perspective I think the phone has the power to support a large portion of people as you said. My point is that what is lacking is the OS. If Apple strengthens iOS or ports macOS to the ARM chips, I think we will be in business.
Wrong! In the case of the MBP a suitable chip for that machine was only releases a little over a month ago. In the previous iteration of the MBP there was no performance gain to be had from the supposedly faster chip.
Other manufactures released machines aw,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,n second and third tier electronics and themo
I have a 6. My partner has a 6s. I notice the speed difference straight away when I use her phone. Will it change my life no. Do I want it, yes.
However, if you think the performance is identical then you're right for your needs there is no need to upgrade based on performance. I use iMovie quite a bit and that works a fair bit quicker on the 6s too. As always it's down to personal use cases.
Then there's the efficiency that they eek out too between generations. It's funny (not directed at you) but on this board one section moans it's all style over substance. Then another group like yourself want looks over performance. As they old saying goes you can't please everyone all of the time.
Last edited: