Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Well, compared to what... to not having it? I haven't looked at the code so I don't know how expensive it is, but for sure it's more expensive than not having it.

I have an older iPhone still on iOS 18, so I could theoretically run this same kind of test on that device, upgrade it to iOS 26, and run it again if anyone is interested.
 
I have an older iPhone still on iOS 18, so I could theoretically run this same kind of test on that device, upgrade it to iOS 26, and run it again if anyone is interested.
I doubt such a test would have accurate results, though, as it needs time to index things after updating. When running one test before another right after updating, it might make the first test seem slower if it still needs indexing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JohnC1959
So in summary, those who were crying and thought that the tinted option would save them battery life failed 😂. Thank you for doing the test.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KeithBN
I saw that, and it's part of the reason why I did this. I'm pretty sure that's exactly what's happening.
Or, could be whatever minor difference the calculations of the results from one shader (along with the hundreds/thousands of other things the entire system is doing at the same time) WOULD show, is substantially dwarfed by the power hungry OLED.

Anyone trying to find the power impact of a system as sophisticated as this rendering a few low complexity shaders versus not rendering those shaders are going to have to go down to the SoC diagnostic level. As long as the OLED is a part of the equation, the only thing anyone will notice is when the system is going full out rendering a full screen of ACTUAL 3D assets.
 
I was pretty indifferent to the glass transparency visibility issue, until I tried the tinted. Much better! I am glad to know that switching to tinted won't hurt my poor old iPad battery even more 😉
 
That is a very good point you've made there !
People don’t remember (or never knew) that OLED’s came with a significant downside. While non-OLED screens had a specific power draw, OLED screens power draw depended on what’s on the screen. A competitor’s non-OLED screen with a bright background could have all day life while the same background on an OLED phone would be decreased by some amount. It was such a issue that people would create black backgrounds (FFFFFF) to ensure the lowest power draw.

OLED’s has become more efficient, but they still, by far, are the biggest power draw in any smartphone.
 
I don’t know.
Maybe the test should be longer, so that possible trends aren’t just a single percentage point off of each other.
Also, like others mentioned, most apps that were tested don’t have any Liquid Glass effects anywhere anyway, so maybe you could test with first party apps and updated third party apps with more animations over a longer timeframe.
 
People don’t remember (or never knew) that OLED’s came with a significant downside. While non-OLED screens had a specific power draw, OLED screens power draw depended on what’s on the screen. A competitor’s non-OLED screen with a bright background could have all day life while the same background on an OLED phone would be decreased by some amount. It was such a issue that people would create black backgrounds (FFFFFF) to ensure the lowest power draw.

OLED’s has become more efficient, but they still, by far, are the biggest power draw in any smartphone.
Last I checked oled is more efficient than mini led
 
For better battery life remember to turn off Wi-Fi if away from usable Wi-Fi networks for a while (and you don't need the enhanced location accuracy). It's even easy to access in Control Center.

-R
 
I'm not really surprised at the similar results. iOS 26 is still fairly unpolished so we will see the 17 series shine once 26.5 comes around or so.

Usually when Apple is ready to unveil their new major version is when you start to notice the combined effort of months of bugfixing after the (rushed) September launch.
 
It's not a really well designed experiment. You only used 2/5 apps which use Liquid Glass in iOS 26 natively and a few other apps which run on React Native. It doesn't actually accomplish anything. Just lazy.
But that's real life. One option setting for liquid glass could theoretically use twice the processing power but if it's rare compared to all the other processing then you'd never notice it. And the question of noticing it in typical usage is what really matters.
 
I have an older iPhone still on iOS 18, so I could theoretically run this same kind of test on that device, upgrade it to iOS 26, and run it again if anyone is interested.
this would be fascinating, would love to see it :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.