Great. How about some improvements to the zoom capabilities on my iPhone. Samsung is getting pretty good at it.
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.
iPhone 13 is Significantly Faster Than Samsung's New Galaxy S22 in Benchmarks
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
C’mon now Bud. Siri is a steaming Thurman clogging up the bowl. If we don’t call out the garbage it won’t get better.
Technically, last year's iPhone 12 series models can also beat the S22 in multi-core scores, and even the iPhone 11 series models beat it in single-core scores. (Reference)
Easily researched. Looks like Xiaomi wins out in multi-core scores against Samsung, but Samsung wins in single-core scores.
All that power and I still can't put an app at the bottom of the screen next to the quick launch icons.
In other words, all the power in the world doesn't replace usability and functionality.
In other words, all the power in the world doesn't replace usability and functionality.
Not at all surprising, aren’t Apple about 1.5-2 years ahead of everyone else right now?
Samsung's new Galaxy S22 models are some of the fastest Android smartphones ever, but Apple still has the world's fastest mobile processor by a considerable margin.
In a Geekbench 5 benchmark test conducted by PCMag, the Galaxy S22 Ultra with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 processor achieved a multi-core score of 3,433, compared to 4,647 for the iPhone 13 Pro Max with Apple's A15 Bionic chip. Based on these results, the iPhone 13 Pro Max is around 35% faster than the Galaxy S22 Ultra for CPU performance.
In the United States, all Galaxy S22 models are equipped with the Snapdragon 8 Gen 1, but models sold in Europe use Samsung's Exynos 2200 chip. Geekbench 5 results for the Exynos 2200 models still have multi-core scores in the mid-3,000s, however, so iPhone 13 models maintain a considerable lead in performance.
PCMag also ran Geekbench ML for machine learning performance and the iPhone 13 Pro Max achieved a score of 948, over double that of the Galaxy S22 Ultra, which came in at 448. Apple's A15 chip features a new 16-core Neural Engine capable of 15.8 trillion operations per second for machine learning tasks such as on-device Siri processing.
Apple will look to extend its lead in performance later this year with an even faster A16 chip for the iPhone 14 series.
Article Link: iPhone 13 is Significantly Faster Than Samsung's New Galaxy S22 in Benchmarks
Would be interested to see how the Snapdragon 8Gen1 along with new Exynos compare to the older A13 and A14 chips, think the new Android chips are more comparable to that right now.
You can also pull (more comparable?) numbers from PCMag's iPhone 13 review. iPhone 12 beats S22 in all 3 categories, and even iPhone 11 beats it in machine learning and is _really_ close in the other two.
The competition is so far behind in performance it's almost laughable... now we just need to make sure that Apple doesn't sit on their hands like Intel did with Pentium 4 and again with Core/14nm.
It really wouldn't matter if it was as fast or faster than iPhone. It would still be running janky Android.
Can you tell during day to day use? I'd prefer being able to customize how i use my phone and be less powerful on paper. Now, if you're frugal and plan to keep your phone 5+ yrs then yea Apple is the way to go. Aslo, the new S22 line is so pretty compared to the iphone 13s.
Just a same shame all that power doesn’t do much on the iPhone. So much wasted power…software could be so much more
Agreed that it’s great that Samsung continues to improve their quality and designs, but it will have almost zero impact on Apple’s design or engineering team working on future iPhones. Not that they don’t care what other manufacturers are doing, but they’re working on devices 2-3 years out, and improved features like brighter screens or cameras are things Apple engineers saw long ago as parts/pieces, since Samsung (and other manufacturers) sells to /makes components for Apple. What Samsung is good at doing is launching products with technologies that may not quite be ready for prime time (think about folding screen devices), whereas Apple just won’t risk damaging their cash cow brand in taking a chance on something, whether it’s a new tech or new supplier who may not be able to hit big volumes.
OK, now try to pull out 100 GB out of the obsolete Lightning USB 2.0 port to an external USB stick, let's see who's faster, Lightning or USB-C...
my ex actually prefer her samsung cause she gets to put a cat in her messaging background
iPad OS on M1 Mac and 16GB is still faster than most mobile/tablet devices.
That's amazing but what on earth do you want us to use it with? Ditto for Android.
20GB phones coming out so kids can play 2016 technology games like PUBG and Fortnite.
Mobile Processor performance has stopped being a factor for mobile buyers for a few years now.
Developers are unable to use these for some reason and nobody knows what to do about it.
Apple should release FCP for iPad Pro and lead the smartphone industry into the future of mobile computing.
That's amazing but what on earth do you want us to use it with? Ditto for Android.
20GB phones coming out so kids can play 2016 technology games like PUBG and Fortnite.
Mobile Processor performance has stopped being a factor for mobile buyers for a few years now.
Developers are unable to use these for some reason and nobody knows what to do about it.
Apple should release FCP for iPad Pro and lead the smartphone industry into the future of mobile computing.
iPhone performance envelop does afford iPhone to maintain lower total cost of ownership, as the phone continues to perform well many years beyond Android phones would. It is also helped by Apple providing much more generous software update cycle.
I accredit the great work of Apples CPU/GPU team, and I know they have to keep the development going on, my problem is more with these benchmarks click-bait articles.
There aren't any Apps/Games that does not run well on 3-5 years "far slower" older phones, the devs have to support various older phones anyway.
Honestly, i see no differences between Games running on iPhone 8,X,11,12,13 or some older el'cheapo Huawei.
Sure i could do screenshots and start counting beans, compare the graphics, and "maybe" I would find something, but specially at this small display scale it makes no sense.
We reached a mobile CPU/GPU level where these marginally speed differences does not matter at all.
Maybe if you skip a few generations, or when new noticeable graphic features comes up, e.g. ray tracing, then you will need more speed of course.
For now these tests just tells that the iPhone is faster, sure thing, but currently in real life it's worthless.
There aren't any Apps/Games that does not run well on 3-5 years "far slower" older phones, the devs have to support various older phones anyway.
Honestly, i see no differences between Games running on iPhone 8,X,11,12,13 or some older el'cheapo Huawei.
Sure i could do screenshots and start counting beans, compare the graphics, and "maybe" I would find something, but specially at this small display scale it makes no sense.
We reached a mobile CPU/GPU level where these marginally speed differences does not matter at all.
Maybe if you skip a few generations, or when new noticeable graphic features comes up, e.g. ray tracing, then you will need more speed of course.
For now these tests just tells that the iPhone is faster, sure thing, but currently in real life it's worthless.
I’ve thought similarly, but also wonder if we just don’t currently have any tasks or apps that can even use the current power of the iPhone to its fullest. I’m out of the iPhone gaming demographic, which I would think is probably the only thing that can fully tax the system. Perhaps it’s photo / video related on-device processing, but I can’t imagine most professionals or general consumers are going to shoot videos, edit then on the iPhone and then publish them online, but I could be wrong. I’m more interested in how long I can use my iPhone without needing to charge it, and in this case it’s all about the chip’s efficiency, not performance.
Not all surprised Apple is way out ahead and I'm personally happy about that - but ultimately raw power stats only resonate to very specific audiences and not the masses. It's 2022, phones in general are more than fast enough for day to day tasks and the sensible experience if we're being honest. Choice is good, even if there's a clear winner.
This is good to know. Now I don't have to worry about the processor getting taxed once Apple activates CSAM and all of our pictures are constantly scanned and monitored in the background. ?
Don’t worry Apple is like Santa. They know when you’re awake (using your phone) and when you’re sleeping (phone inactive) so they’ll run it quietly while you sleep. The only difference is the naughty ones get presents delivered by the FBI ?
So sayeth the dude who can afford an iPhone.
You're speaking of the value proposition and not hard currency on a far lower cash flow.
I think people gaslight this way to look humble.
I love my Apple devices but I do not tell myself something to sooth my guilt at being able to afford one using cheap/free money.
Last edited:
Agreed. I’d go a step further and say that the other data point besides chip performance that really needs to be factored into the equation is battery life. If the S22 Ultra has a great chipset, great screen with higher brightness levels, better cameras, the pen, etc., but only provides 3 hours of use before requiring a recharge, then are these improvements worth it? Obviously people will say yes and buy these things, even when they see that they’re less powerful or less efficient than the iPhone 13’s, because they’re just not going to buy an iPhone.
How fast is fast enough?
I wish there was a way to dock an iPhone and have my Mac use it as a co-processor of some kind.
I wish there was a way to dock an iPhone and have my Mac use it as a co-processor of some kind.