The fact they are denying this just makes me even more certain Samsung-gate is real.
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
I bet Apple knew this would flare-up before they even shipped, and had this statement ready-to-go for when the nerds inevitably found out.
They were probably surprised it took two weeks...
The fact that Apple acknowledged this speaks volumes. There is a real issue out there.
I cannot believe how some people here blindly believe every single word said by Apple.
Basically, it's the iPhone 4 antenna-gate all over again!
Yes, maybe browsing the Internet and listening to the music would show the so-called 2-3% difference, but what about playing graphically intensive games or filming high-res video?!
Geekbench perfectly demonstrates that the Samsung chip would last less time. In some cases the difference is way greater than "2-3%".
I'm more than sure that when the supply constrains loosen up, they will phase out the Samsung chips entirely.
I cannot believe how some people here blindly believe every single word said by Apple.
Basically, it's the iPhone 4 antenna-gate all over again!
Yes, maybe browsing the Internet and listening to the music would show the so-called 2-3% difference, but what about playing graphically intensive games or filming high-res video?!
Geekbench perfectly demonstrates that the Samsung chip would last less time. In some cases the difference is way greater than "2-3%".
I'm more than sure that when the supply constrains loosen up, they will phase out the Samsung chips entirely.
You guys really glossed over the details of that YouTube video test. You state the percent differences at the end of your article even.
(That second figure should be 12%, btw because (62%-55%)/((62%+55%)/2) * 100% = 12% not 11%. 6% to 11% difference is a far cry from Apple's stated 2-3%. Come on guys, don't be a parrot for Apple PR -- use some critical thinking skills.
and yet you wouldn't have given it a second thought if you didn't know that two different chips existed.True as it may, I'm still quite happy to have gotten the TMSC model. Even 3% can be critical when you need it.
Looks like they are confirming it, not denying it. They are just stating that the actual percentage difference is not as much as previously tested.
So basically there's an issue, that Samsung processors are not very energy-effective. Apple states, that in real-world usage scenarios battery will be used for screen, radio and other things while processor will mostly idle, so difference between those processors won't make much difference in overall power consumption. That makes sense, but problem is still here and for people who do use their processors a lot, Samsung CPU is a bad option. Gaming with heavy graphics probably is one of these use-cases.
Coming from a regular iPhone 6, I expected to be blown away by the 6S Plus battery, I have not been. It runs down fairly fast.
I don't think this is a big issue, at least both chips are fast! Still, I think one would prefer not to have the Samsung chip, which is the opposite of what people wanted last week. ha.
I don't think this is a big issue, at least both chips are fast! Still, I think one would prefer not to have the Samsung chip, which is the opposite of what people wanted last week. ha.
Um, Apple didn't say which design was better performing, we're just assuming from very rough tests that the Sammy one is better.
The guys at Anandtech are doubling down on their battery testing for the deep dive of the 6S's and hopefully sourcing at least a couple of each SoC model to test against.
The guys at Anandtech are doubling down on their battery testing for the deep dive of the 6S's and hopefully sourcing at least a couple of each SoC model to test against.
If Apple hadn't said anything I would have thought that it's an issue. But now that Apple did say something I think that it's an issue!
Much a do about nothing....
Unreal how the desperate competition is again spreading fud, at a launch of the new iphone..
Thats all it is !
Unreal how the desperate competition is again spreading fud, at a launch of the new iphone..
Thats all it is !
True as it may, I'm still quite happy to have gotten the TMSC model
I feel same, unless Samsung chip completes 4% more in its time :/
In the current form I think that is exactly what we just saw. I also think apple will be shifting that order from Samsung for all future chip production. We have read constantly about tsmc bending over backward for Apple maybe they finally bend clean over
I have the Samsung chip. I do not play high intensity games on it, so I doubt it will affect me much.
I do notice that battery life is not as good as the 6+ though.
I do notice that battery life is not as good as the 6+ though.
Welcome to the MacRumors forums, where Apple is wrong unless they're wrong, and then they're really wrong!
Oh, and Steve would have never, you're *x*ing it wrong, yellow screens are defects, every version of iOS is the worst ever until the next one comes out and it becomes the best ever, etc.
The list would be longer, but I have a Samsung chip so my battery is about to die!
Let's see if chipgate dies down in a week, or does the fact that Apple addressed it blows up in their face. Could go either way.
