My colleagues has visited the Apple Store 4 times, and he have 5th replaced iPhone 6s 64GB.... All Sammy -,,-
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.
Controlled Testing Supports Apple's Claim of Nearly Equal iPhone 6s Battery Life With TSMC and Samsung Chips
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
My colleagues has visited the Apple Store 4 times, and he have 5th replaced iPhone 6s 64GB.... All Sammy -,,-
If everyone had a Samsug chip, there would be no complaints. Yet some of you cannot stand that there are people out there getting 5% better battery life. The injustice! Haha.
Agree with you, even paid same amount of money, but different benefit, it makes to feel as unfair
And what? They just say they want to replace because they want the better chip? You gotta be kidding..
I decided to verify the chip in my phone after I read the articles/comments on the subject. Here is what I determined:
(i) Chip: Samsung
(ii) F*cks that I give: Zero
I can see the responses: "you are just an Apple supporter!" and "you shouldn't let Apple get away with this!"
(i) My phone works great
(ii) It performs within spec
(iii) I do not become jealous (especially, for a phone with a slightly better battery life)
(i) Chip: Samsung
(ii) F*cks that I give: Zero
I can see the responses: "you are just an Apple supporter!" and "you shouldn't let Apple get away with this!"
(i) My phone works great
(ii) It performs within spec
(iii) I do not become jealous (especially, for a phone with a slightly better battery life)
Well glad to see a real world test confirms what most of us knew. It doesn't matter.
The fan, and not an Apple one, is someone doesn't give a crap about this coming every to put his one two cents in. That would be you. BTW, the use of "fanboy" means your massively biased and everything you say can be disregarded. Thanks for playing though.
Right... Youtube under dubious circumstances is better than a lab... Oh, my... Can't believe the things I hear.
I have one of each and my Sammy Chip rocks when it comes to battery life so there are some cases were Samsung chips don't suck. This is based on two phones, same make and model both being used same amount of time in the real world.
chip mfgr. aside i can tell a huge reduction in battery life in this thing compared to my 6. in the morning when i go to the gym i watch a show (45min to 1hour) while on the treadmill. i listen to music (bluetooth headphones) while hitting the weight machines (time varies greatly) with my 6 i was at 90% when i got finished, with my 6S i'm at 80%. and ro pre-dismiss the usual comments no i'm not using it more and yes i've let it die and then charge to full to help calibrate the battery level meter. i think this phone just uses a lot more battery than the 6.
No current games would not give you even close to 60% load. Why?
1) Because this CPU is 70% faster than the last one
The GPU is 90% faster than the last one.
So, a game at 60% peak usage on this, would more than max out the Iphone 6 (so devs woudln't have made it)
3) Developpers don't target their games to the latest phone, but to a minimum spec
( max peek, past throttling doesn't cause stutter on their game)
The most obvious minimum phone for top end games would be the 5s (the first one with the A7), which would be 150% slower CPU/GPU than then the latest.
4) Older Iphones throttled more than this one, which reduced the max CPU use for those phones more than even the peak CPU improvement from the 6s to the 5s. I'd guess, somewhere around 180% from 5s to 6s.
5) Max peak usage in games, is higher than sustained load and devs target to that.
If you put all of this together, I'd expect that there are no current games providing a more than 30% sustained load on the 6s, let alone a 60% one.
There will be very few for at last a year (when the 5s will not longer be there in high numbers) and devs start targetting the Apple TV in great numbers.
The 6 lasted a lot less time than the 6+, you'Re usage seems to about right for the smaller phone.
So, a game that actually plays on the 5s, without stutter, uses 70% of a CPU that's 150% faster than the 5s... There's something pretty weird in this whole thing.
Anything that uses 70% of the 6s should not be considered light gamings (or really crappy oding), games like life is strange don't even use 50% on my old desktop (which is about the same spec as this...).
People were so fixated with putting down samsung they believed this without looking at it rationally. All they heard was samsung bad and ran with it.
You had folks on this thread talking about how they were going to keep on exchanging their iphone until they got a TSMC iphone. Absolutely ridiculous.
You had folks on this thread talking about how they were going to keep on exchanging their iphone until they got a TSMC iphone. Absolutely ridiculous.
I have a 6s with Samsung chip.
I did the geek bench battery test and was , very rightly imho, concerned when I got 4 hrs and a tsmc was getting 6 hours.
BUT IN THE REAL WORLD I GOT OVER 7 hours use time and 53 hours standby and still have 19% left
So I got 2 full days use with ease . Am I happy ? You bet !
Much better than my beloved 5s and what a gorgeous silky smooth experience !
GPS off, background refresh off, screen set low .
I did the geek bench battery test and was , very rightly imho, concerned when I got 4 hrs and a tsmc was getting 6 hours.
BUT IN THE REAL WORLD I GOT OVER 7 hours use time and 53 hours standby and still have 19% left
So I got 2 full days use with ease . Am I happy ? You bet !
Much better than my beloved 5s and what a gorgeous silky smooth experience !
GPS off, background refresh off, screen set low .
Attachments
Last edited:
You cant say that one there is one case where it matters alot.
Do you just ignore that one test? Talk about confirmation bias.
It did strike a nerve didn't it? Proves my point.
I don't mind if you call me anti-Apple fanboy or Apple hater or whatever, I use iPhone 5S and Air 2 myself. I buy the best products. Apple admitted that Samsung chip has 2-3% lower battery performance. My point is Apple will not give me 2-3% discount on phones having Samsung chip. So why should I or any customer for the matter be happy with sub-optimal chip? After paying upwards of $1200 in my country, shouldn't I expect perfection?
What Apple must do to mitigate this issue?
They must announce a software update to fix chip problems on iPhone 6S models. The battery performance of TSMC must be brought down to match the Samsung chips.
Then this problem would be put to rest once and forever.
Anyone taking bets over this?
What Apple must do to mitigate this issue?
They must announce a software update to fix chip problems on iPhone 6S models. The battery performance of TSMC must be brought down to match the Samsung chips.
Then this problem would be put to rest once and forever.
Anyone taking bets over this?
Apple will release an iOS fix to match the both battery performances soon. All PC/Mac/SmartPhones do speed stepping to save power. So do Apple. I bet Apple will put a little more speed stepping on Samsung chips. It will solve the issue.
I was thinking this story: If I buy an expensive sport car, then I find out the engine would burn 30% gas faster at top speed than someone who paid the same with same car but different brand engine, then the car salesman tells me your real life is just drive the sport car in city and get in traffic jam anyway,I would slap the salesman face
You have this completely backwards! The SMALLER SoC chip made by Samsung is the one that gets hotter.
you must have not read my post correctly. i had the 6, not the 6+. i am comparing the old 6 to the new 6s.