And no reason to ever respond to you again. Your alternate reality is shown here. Wish I could say it was insightful chatting with you.
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.
Apple Claims TSMC vs Samsung A9 Chip Variants Result in Only 2-3% Difference in 'Real World' Battery Life
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
And no reason to ever respond to you again. Your alternate reality is shown here. Wish I could say it was insightful chatting with you.
the reality distortion field is what made you ignore a couple of Nokia manuals showing the "antennagate" even on their phones ....Just because you say so does not make is so. People are known to convince themselves of things that aren't true all the time. I am willing to wager more people buy iPhones for status than for any other reason. I have seen people who barely had enough money to buy their next meal get an iPhone when other manufacturers are cheaper with the same quality. Believe what you wish and be happy in the reality distortion field
And you too are in denial, even when someone show you Nokia user manuals showing the "hand effect" on their phones
I never held my iphone like shown in that nokia image. I never death gripped my phone. It was proven just touching the little line would take down the reception to an usable point. Totally different phones, and a graphic in an old nokia manual is irrelevant to the iphone design with this spot RIGHT WHERE YOU PUT YOUR HAND.
The only thing that image proves is how truly poorly designed the iphone 4 antenna was if this was common knowledge in phones.
Gah why did I respond. It is like watching a car crash. Just sad, but you can't help but look.
Last edited:
never had a call dropped by the position of my hand, never.
it was proven ? sure, on youtube .... where iPhones bent by itself magically last year
And Consumer Reports proved it, and many other blogs. Funny, looking at your post history, you sure did back consumer reports when they showed their bendgate results. But you "magically" dismiss them for the antenna findings. Very interesting.
And yet other manufacturers were able to design around this potential issue. Oh and people have had issues beyond just antennas. But keep believing the myth of Apple perfection. The apple bean counters depend on you.
Dude, even a network request fires up the cpu quite a lot. Having a UITableView which loads data from the internet + active CLLocation sets the CPU to high. This happens on basically EVERY app that a normal user would have installed: Facebook, Instagram and others. Open xCode, plug a device and try it for yourself.
Also, there were normal tests if i recall, of watching youtube and recording 4k video. Can you imagine how fired up the CPU gets when recording, analysing and stabilising 4k video? Come on! Even 1080p is a hustle...
All this proves is the "new" Apple will accept shoddier components and have lessened once strict requirement and specification tolerances, first in spite to harm Samsung with their long term disputes, and second to reduce overhead and costs to further widen the excess profitability of their phones, and all wrapped in a marketing message that suggests Apple is flippant about their customers concerns and will sell a lower quality version of a phone for the same price as a better quality one, even if the difference is supposedly trivial.
Apple should have fragmented their phones at the model level, iPhone 6s should have TSMC parts, iPhone 6s Plus should have the Samsung. At least then it's not Russian Roulette what quality of iPhone you get when you pull it out of the box. Chances are there would be no noticeable impact on battery had the smaller iPhone used a slightly less efficient CPU and then consumers would not even care.
Apple should have fragmented their phones at the model level, iPhone 6s should have TSMC parts, iPhone 6s Plus should have the Samsung. At least then it's not Russian Roulette what quality of iPhone you get when you pull it out of the box. Chances are there would be no noticeable impact on battery had the smaller iPhone used a slightly less efficient CPU and then consumers would not even care.
lol, you didn't read my post history very well...
I stand my position: antenna gate was a total BS spread by whiners and bashers. The market confirmed that with millions of happy customers all over the world.
I'm still quite baffled of this "Real World" usage term. They advertise "Desktop class CPU" and "Console quality graphics GPU", but are we supposed to use them like 20$ Nokias?
Difference most certainly isn't 2-3% if they are used for Desktop tasks or played Console quality graphics games!
Difference most certainly isn't 2-3% if they are used for Desktop tasks or played Console quality graphics games!
... on me and a few (well, not a few) other millions of happy customers.
Quality is not involved in this issue.
ALL mass production manufacturing has 'tolerances' allowing for variances of anywhere from 2 - 7% depending upon the product and industry. There is nothing to look at here - nothing surprising.
Will we be talking about this next week? Or next month?
There have been examples of outrage for something... but then it eventually goes away because people stop caring about it.
I remember when the iPhone5S came out in 2013 and the Chaos Computer Club proved that you could "hack" the iPhone's TouchID sensor. People went crazy!
But after a few days and 1,000 comments later... nobody talked about it ever again.
They did the same test in 2014 with the iPhone 6. And, once again, the attention was quick and fierce... but it eventually waned. I wonder if they even bothered testing the fingerprint "hack" this year with the iPhone 6S. If they did... it didn't up in any of my RSS feeds. It became obvious that you can fool TouchID with a fake fingerprint.... but no one seems to care after a few days.
So... is this Samsung/TSMC thing a big enough deal for people to return their phones... or for Apple to issue a recall?
Or are we now just a few days into a teapot storm... and next week we'll have something new to discuss?
There have been examples of outrage for something... but then it eventually goes away because people stop caring about it.
I remember when the iPhone5S came out in 2013 and the Chaos Computer Club proved that you could "hack" the iPhone's TouchID sensor. People went crazy!
But after a few days and 1,000 comments later... nobody talked about it ever again.
They did the same test in 2014 with the iPhone 6. And, once again, the attention was quick and fierce... but it eventually waned. I wonder if they even bothered testing the fingerprint "hack" this year with the iPhone 6S. If they did... it didn't up in any of my RSS feeds. It became obvious that you can fool TouchID with a fake fingerprint.... but no one seems to care after a few days.
So... is this Samsung/TSMC thing a big enough deal for people to return their phones... or for Apple to issue a recall?
Or are we now just a few days into a teapot storm... and next week we'll have something new to discuss?
Actually, there are simple math
If use a phone with Heavy Load, just running 3 hours,
If use a phone with Light Load, running 24 hours. [8 times longer]
If use 1 hours heavy load, and running light load ? [20%
TMSC will use 33% so remaining 67%, runtime will be 1hour + 16hours = 17 hours
SAMSUNG will use 39% so remaining 61%, runtime will be 1 hours + 14 hours = 15 hours
17 vs 15 hours, it is not just 1-2% of runtime difference.
If use a phone with Heavy Load, just running 3 hours,
If use a phone with Light Load, running 24 hours. [8 times longer]
If use 1 hours heavy load, and running light load ? [20%
TMSC will use 33% so remaining 67%, runtime will be 1hour + 16hours = 17 hours
SAMSUNG will use 39% so remaining 61%, runtime will be 1 hours + 14 hours = 15 hours
17 vs 15 hours, it is not just 1-2% of runtime difference.
That is mostly if not all done by the Camera DSP fixed-function units and the PowerVR VXE engine (two of the most power-efficient parts of Apple's SoCs) together with the memory subsystem, there's not much CPU involved in your example, which also shows that some actual comparisons are not showing what a normal user does with a phone.
Basically no real GPU or CPU activity at all.
Yet, the TSMC version constantly shows all the benefits the Samsung SoC does not have. It runs cooler, probably WAY less leakage (that's why Samsung needs more battery), performance should therefore be better under use because of less throttling involved and less drainage under mild-use (Safari, Google Maps, other Apps or the UI itself that comes closer to the silicon with iOS 9, typical use by an end customer).
Apple's quoted 2-3% is just downplaying it to their favor, 2-3% would not even be noticeable, yet, real users and not Apple's "data" show completely contradicting results.
Surprising, isn't it?
Last edited:
You do if you want your argument to have credibility.
That doesn't mean anything! Plenty of products with flaws sell well worldwide. The iPad Mini 1 was still selling well in Quarter 1 of 2015 (It was outselling the iPad Mini 2 and 3) despite being ancient. How much a product sells doesn't really mean anything.
I don't have OCD and I am not picky. Jerky and Jittering animations are quite noticeable, especially when a over $1000 phone can not render simple opening and closing animations.
Apple can't please anyone but they sure could have included appropriate hardware in the iPhone 6+ (And 6 for that matter).
I think its hugely obvious that you have very little knowledge of electronics. The iPhone 6 and 6+ 1GB of ram. That was way too little and thats obvious. The 6 and 6+ struggle to keep webpages open, and struggle in multitasking, they should have had 2GB of ram. The iPhone 3G was also under specced. And yes, it is cheap when expensive phones do not have enough ram, due to Apple cutting corners. It is the very definition of 'cheap'.
Do Apple pay you to stand up for them? I find it insane you can't acknowledge mistakes they made.
I had an iPhone 4, it was a good phone but it did have antenna issues when I held it with the death grip. It was very well documented, and obviously something they overlooked.
Millions of happy customers doesn't mean a phone didn't have its flaws. Millions of people eat foods that are bad for them (Including myself). Millions of people buy Cars that have to be recalled because they have flaws. People purchasing something doesn't mean it is free of flaws.
If it wasn't an issue Apple would not have sent people settlement cheques... That would have cost them a lot of money.
A lot of work is handled by the cpu also. Google is blaming the lack of slow mo and image stabilisation of the Nexus 5x on the poor CPU performance. While their claims might not be entirely true, there's a middle ground here were both of us are right.
Are there any new tests?
It would be a major clusterf**k for them if they make false claims. I like their in depth response, even though they haven't posted any results.
Dude, even a network request fires up the cpu quite a lot. Having a UITableView which loads data from the internet + active CLLocation sets the CPU to high. This happens on basically EVERY app that a normal user would have installed: Facebook, Instagram and others. Open xCode, plug a device and try it for yourself.
Also, there were normal tests if i recall, of watching youtube and recording 4k video. Can you imagine how fired up the CPU gets when recording, analysing and stabilising 4k video? Come on! Even 1080p is a hustle...
The CPU is active a very short amount of time, and not close to the edge of its enveloppe; the Apple SOC also has a hell of a lot of co-processing, which means the CPU does nothing at all (though they are on the same die so they would be affected by the CPU heating, but indirectly).
For very heavy users, they're not going to get 2-3%, but they're also not going to get 20% you get in those burn tests.
Somewhere around 10% for those people would probably be usual. The important par though is, is Apple minimally giving the specs advertised to everyone? If so, well why complaint? Jealousy?
Apple has double sourced products in the past, most companies have,
That they're giving even more to some user doesn't mean they're gimping those few power users.
If they were only using the Samsung ones, they'd still respect their spec and nobody would be whining... That's what I find fascinating.
The heavy load to make a difference of 20% has to be sustained for a while close to the edge of the enveloppe, not episodic. Most times, even playing games, you don't get into that area but a small amount of time.
Your scenario doesn't reflect the complex way those chips work under different loads. If you take that into account, because of non linearity, you don't merely get light vs heavy, but many in between with a difference performance. The closer you come to running full out (say a tight loop using both cores and the GPU, ray tracing?) then the closer you get to the 20%.
Just taking into account the non linear gradual change, even in this scenario,
you probably have an 1h difference rather than two in your scenario. So, that's pretty close to their stated 2-3%.
Of course, people doing a lot of Image, video or DSP processing and big FPS users, would probably be close to having a 10% difference.
Last edited:
People vote with their wallets.
The hardware in iPhone 6/6+ was top notch and all this fuss about memory was a BS typical of forums like this (and users like you). My iPhone 6 doesn't struggle to keep anything. I'm using 3 tabs, mail and iTranslate opened in the same time in this very moment, and nothing is reloading.
And as a side note, I have very little knowledge of electronics..... just a degrees, a master and 23 years of experience....