Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch's S8 Chip Features Same CPU as S6 and S7

I have a SS Silver S6. I "upgraded" to the S8 because I wanted a different look so I ordered a SS Graphite model. I get some value on trade in so I ordered a watch with the Graphite Milanese loop band. All I know is, once Apple comes with Blood Glucose monitoring, whatever model or price that is, will be an automatic purchase.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhoenixDown and Student of Life
I ordered the Ultra so a little disappoint to see this, however, my Series 5 is still fast. It hasn’t slowed down at all, so the improvement from S5 to S8 should be at least somewhat noticeable.

However, I also ordered the Ultra for the battery, larger display, cellular connectivity, and new design. We've all got reasons to upgrade or not, but I'm excited, regardless for the Ultra.
 
Last edited:
MichaelMidnight said:
I grabbed an Ultra at launch but have been thinking it over whether it's worth it, especially since I got a SS AW7 last year coming after an AW 4. Now reading this, it pushes me over the edge and I've decided to cancel my Ultra order and just wait until a later iteration.
Click to expand...
That was my view. I had an ultra in my bag for 23rd delivery and I bailed. Considering it’s not a big improvement, and apparently the titanium is raw and not in any way coated, I thought against it.
 
tonie walker said:
…glad i decided to settle with my S4.
Click to expand...
Same one that I still have. I’m not a heavy music or exercise user so my battery life is still fine. I am happy with it, but features that I might be interested in keep being rumors that always fall into the “maybe next year” category. Blood sugar and heart monitoring are probably highest on my wish list. Being able to use all functions without my phone being close or on at all somewhere would also probably get me to upgrade.
 
JNGold said:
I have a SS Silver S6. I "upgraded" to the S8 because I wanted a different look so I ordered a SS Graphite model. I get some value on trade in so I ordered a watch with the Graphite Milanese loop band. All I know is, once Apple comes with Blood Glucose monitoring, whatever model or price that is, will be an automatic purchase.
Click to expand...
I have an S7 graphite and I’ll probs go back to silver SS next if possible. The S7 graphite doesn’t have DLC whereas the S6 did. Odd for what was touted as “the most durable Apple Watch yet” (last year)
 
Honestly, only people with an S4 or earlier need to even consider updating. Everyone else can wait another year.
 
I love how Apple makes fun of customers by resubmitting the same product for years.

Apple Watch 8 is a marginal upgrade of 7, which was a 6 with the 1mm larger screen.

They have been selling the same product for 3 years. And there are people who updated every year because the new one was certainly more expensive than the old one.

In the meantime we are waiting for FDA-certified blood glucose measurement, let's see how many more years. In the meantime we will be able to play with the MEGA ULTRA EXTREME versions.
 
  • Like
  • Angry
Reactions: srknpower, AlexMac89, lucascampelo and 1 other person
The s8 is such a soft update. Maybe if you’re moving from an s5, or earlier, it’s worth it? But as an s5 owner, who was maybe interested in upgrading, this has me pressing pause on those plans.

Maybe the higher price of the Ultra, and all of the new features it ushers in, will off-set what is surely to be softer-than-expected s8 sales? IDK… Feels like the non-Pro 14 line and s8 are taking a page out of the same playbook this cycle in what I can only assume is a move to make the Pro and Ultra offerings that much more enticing. With their larger margins, perhaps Apple is willing to sell less of the entry-level devices. Again, idk.
 
Lounge vibes 05 said:
You realize the series 4 in series 5 both have the same CPU as well? And both were released before any lockdowns.
It’s a Watch, now that they’ve moved on to the 64-bit architecture there’s not much to change that would make any noticeable improvement.
No one complainedback in the day that the iPod classic stuck with the same processor or only got a tiny upgrade year over year.
Click to expand...
Xand&Roby said:
I love how Apple makes fun of customers by resubmitting the same product for years.

Apple Watch 8 is a marginal upgrade of 7, which was a 6 with the 1mm larger screen.

They have been selling the same product for 3 years. And there are people who updated every year because the new one was certainly more expensive than the old one.

In the meantime we are waiting for FDA-certified blood glucose measurement, let's see how many more years. In the meantime we will be able to play with the MEGA ULTRA EXTREME versions.
Click to expand...
I take it you have never dealt with buying a car, it’s the same thing. Minor cosmetic changes.
 
I intend to update my AW every 5 years. Previously went from S1 to S6 last year during Black Friday sale, which was a massive jump in performance. Does not surprise me at all that the S8 chip has the same CPU as the S6, as one is not going to be video editing or doing any kind of cpu intense processes are they?
 
I use my S3 all the time. Wear it overnight, as I need it for alerts, and only charge for an hour during the working day.
Zero interest in upgrading at this rate. Larger screen? Alright... but where's the battery efficiency? Not at all interested in paying the premium $1300 CAD for a basic strap Ultra for the battery life I'm after.
 
siddavis said:
They won't. We will be conditioned to expect the real Apple watch to be the Ultra at it's personal computer-esque starting price of $800. That way the standard is a 'bargain' at just $400.
Click to expand...
The ultra is about as much as the stainless steel watch with 4G. At arguably worse margin. So it’s not totally unreasonable that it could come to the S9, at least stainless steel version.
 
I don’t think this is a huge problem because the Apple Watch has always performed well with the exception of the series 0.

I can’t confirm for series 1,2 and 3 but I had the 0 which was dreadfully slow and the series 4 which performed fine.

Now on the series 7.

The Apple Watch is an accessory first and if it’s current chipset is more than capable of supporting it’s functions and features then there’s no need to push it.

Much prefer apple to focus on features that can improve people’s quality of life which is what’s happening.

We don’t use our watches like iPhones, iPads and Macs.

So we shouldn’t need to treat its chipset likes it’s one of those devices.

Of course I’d be against them branding the chip as a next gen if they haven’t made any tweaks.

I know they have been adding a new number but I’d be curious if the S6, 7 and 8 have suitable differences to justify changing the S number but I guess Apple aren’t the type to get into the nitty gritty of things.

As long as it works right?
 
currocj said:
Same here
Click to expand...
I'm keeping my Series 4 for when I have to dress up, but I'm so tired of not having AOD that I finally caved. The Ultra swayed me with its battery life, improved mics/speakers (yes, I take calls on my Watch when I don't have my phone or AirPods on me), and slightly bigger and much brighter display.
 
Makes you wonder if there is value outside of a number for marketing in releasing an updated model every year. Perhaps every two years would be better
 
Going to be a tough year for apple… think this is the turn of the tide.

Time to innovate.

Trading on coattails of the past.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back