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

iPhone 5 Benchmarks Appear in Geekbench Showing a Dual Core, 1GHz A6 CPU

madslvig said:
Sorry to disappoint you. The iPhone 5 is not the world's thinnest smartphone, the Huawei Ascend P1s is (6,7 mm vs. the iPhone 5's 7,6 mm - www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=4409&idPhone2=4910). It is also not the fastest smartphone. The Galaxy S III has scored well above 1800 points in the same test as shown in the article (GeekBench) link: http://db.tt/aj2IGJqq
The screenshot is from my own Galaxy S III, so I can personally guarantee that it is not a fake.
Click to expand...

Numbers cannot determine which device is faster if they are not on the same platform. iOS may use its processor more efficiently, therefore, making it a faster device. Just like how my iPhone 4 got faster with iOS 6. The software was upgraded. An iPhone 5 and Galaxy S3 each run different software, so you cannot compare the two phones with numbers, only results. This is true with Windows vs. Mac / Windows vs. Linux etc....

What does this mean? The iPhone 5 has potential to be the "fastest" smartphone on the planet, regardless of what Geekbench shows.
 
The Geek Bench scores are only good for comparing scores on the same platform. The iPhone 5's improvement over the 4S is very impressive. It will be interesting to see real benchmarks -- SunSpider, Peacekeeper, Google's benchmark, BrowserMark, etc.
 
johncarync said:
Image
Click to expand...
Umm not sure where u got you numbers from but it show the Galaxy S3 get 1728
http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks

----------
penajmz said:
Galaxy S III = 1560. :rolleyes:

Check mate, spec freaks.
Click to expand...

http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks

GalaxyS3 1728

----------
daveathall said:
Apple iPhone 5 1601
SGS3 1560

In the scheme of things, how much faster is a factor 41 please? I ask this because I don't know the answer.
Click to expand...

WHere the f3ck are you all getting SGS# 1560?
The link clearly says 1728!
http://browser.primatelabs.com/android-benchmarks
 
If you're on Android 4.0.4 you'll get upwards of 1800, if you're on 4.1.1 you'll get about 1600. I've seen scores as high as 2000.
 
jaysen said:
Coming from an Andorid and iOS - iFanAppledroid fan,this seems like the most reasonable post in this thread.

I browse Macrumors/XDA/and Android Central as my top 3 frequently visited sites and its the same with all three. XDA/AndroidCentral bashing "iSheep" and Macrumors bashing fandroids. This is the beauty of the US market - competition; and without it we'd all be stuck at an iPhone 3G or Nexus
Click to expand...

I'm only level headed when I'm not due for an upgrade :D.
Neither of them accomplish what I want from them...
But I give Android credit for doing in phones what Windows has failed at with computers. Push the limit of the available hardware...Looking for a 2.6/2.7Ghz Windows non-BTO laptop was a giant waste of time.
 
madslvig said:
Sorry to disappoint you. The iPhone 5 is not the world's thinnest smartphone, the Huawei Ascend P1s is (6,7 mm vs. the iPhone 5's 7,6 mm - www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPhone1=4409&idPhone2=4910). It is also not the fastest smartphone. The Galaxy S III has scored well above 1800 points in the same test as shown in the article (GeekBench) link: http://db.tt/aj2IGJqq
The screenshot is from my own Galaxy S III, so I can personally guarantee that it is not a fake.
Click to expand...

Nice of you to be mature and change my name, by the way.

The iPhone 5 is the worlds thinnest smartphone.

To quote a review of the Huawei Ascend P1:

we discovered that the camera's hump is an extremity that gives the P1 the same maximum thickness as the RAZR (roughly 10.5mm).
Click to expand...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/01/huawei-ascend-p1-review/

Now to address my 'fastest smartphone' claim:

Lets start by making it clear that the performance of a smartphone consists of both a CPU and a GPU (amongst other things).

First - the CPU. We have no benchmarks yet which can reliably compare the two. Geekbench doesn't reliably do that, as many technical sites have documented. We don't know if the iPhone benchmark is real, and 1 test clearly isn't enough to go on given that the numbers on Galaxy 3 vary from 1400 to 2400. These Geekbench scores can easily be faked, but even if they weren't - as I mentioned we can't compare. Even taking the numbers at face value we're talking about the iPhone CPU being 10% slower than the SG3.

Second - the GPU. The iPhone 4S - a year old phone, currently has the fastest GPU in any smartphone in America. Faster than the American version of the SG3. Compared to the International SG3 - the iPhone 4S GPU is about 10-15% slower. The new iPhone DOUBLES that performance, so assuming Apple's is approximately correct - the new iPhone will have roughly 85% faster GPU performance than the SG3. Even if Apple has massively lied and the new iPhone is only 50% faster - we're still talking an approx 40% speed bump over the SG3. The reality is that Apple probably isn't lying and we're talking 85% faster GPU.

Combine the two above and the iPhone will be the fastest performing phone in the world.

It's also the thinnest - it's less fat, less tall, less wide - and lighter than the Samsung Galaxy S3 - and it also doesn't use a PenTile display like the SG3 (PenTile displays are not full pixels).

So all of the above facts now made clear to you - I think you should probably see that the 'oppressed' name you gave to me is more appropriate for yourself.

----------
JForestZ34 said:
Yup until you see how bad of battery life you get


James
Click to expand...

I've already posted the benchmarks of battery life of 4S vs SG3 (page 30 on this thread).

The 4S wins in 2 of the 3 tests and overall.

The new iPhone claims to improve on this battery life - so it will most likely maintain it's lead over the Samsung Galaxy S3.
 
Last edited:
saturn88 said:
Right. On Android you can turn off cores, in fact, certain power management apps do it transparently to the user. You can run a test not even knowing that you running on one core only.

----------



What's not to love? Besides the S3 is future proof, unlike some other phones which become absolete before even being released :D
Click to expand...

Forgive me, cause I might be wrong.. but does the iPhone 4S.. a now year old phone, have a better GPU than your shinny new SGS3?

----------
Oriental said:
Nice of you to be mature and change my name, by the way.

The iPhone 5 is the worlds thinnest smartphone.

To quote a review of the Huawei Ascend P1:



http://www.engadget.com/2012/06/01/huawei-ascend-p1-review/

Now to address my 'fastest smartphone' claim:

Lets start by making it clear that the performance of a smartphone consists of both a CPU and a GPU.

First - the CPU. We have no benchmarks yet which can reliably compare the two. Geekbench doesn't reliably do that, as many technical sites have documented. We don't know if the iPhone benchmark is real, and 1 test clearly isn't enough to go on given that the numbers on Galaxy 3 vary from 1400 to 2400. These Geekbench scores can easily be faked, but even if they weren't - as I mentioned we can't compare. Even taking the numbers at face value we're talking about the iPhone CPU being 10% slower than the SG3.

Second - the GPU. The iPhone 4S - a year old phone, currently has the fastest GPU in any smartphone in America. Faster than the American version of the SG3. Compared to the International SG3 - the iPhone 4S GPU is about 10-15% slower. The new iPhone DOUBLES that performance, so assuming Apple's is approximately correct - the new iPhone will have roughly 85% faster GPU performance than the SG3. Even if Apple has massively lied and the new iPhone is only 50% faster - we're still talking an approx 40% speed bump over the SG3. The reality is that Apple probably isn't lying and we're talking 85% faster GPU.

Combine the two above and the iPhone will be the fastest performing phone in the world.

It's also the thinnest - it's less fat, less tall, less wide - and lighter than the Samsung Galaxy S3 - and it also doesn't use a PenTile display like the SG3 (PenTile displays are not full pixels).

So all of the above facts now made clear to you - I think you should probably see that the 'oppressed' name you gave to me is more appropriate for yourself.

----------



I've already posted the benchmarks of battery life of 4S vs SG3.

The 4S wins in 2 of the 3 tests and overall.

The new iPhone claims to improve on this battery life - so it will most likely maintain it's lead over the Samsung Galaxy S3.
Click to expand...

You beat me to it!! HAHAHAHAH Exactly.
 
MythicFrost said:
If you're on Android 4.0.4 you'll get upwards of 1800, if you're on 4.1.1 you'll get about 1600. I've seen scores as high as 2000.
Click to expand...

wrong

benchmark of the s3 on 4.0.4 and 4.1.1 are on par

but no where near 1600 !!!

ICS

jabedubu.jpg


http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1045623


jb


ve3aba3u.jpg


http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1040548

----------
Denzo said:
Forgive me, cause I might be wrong.. but does the iPhone 4S.. a now year old phone, have a better GPU than your shinny new SGS3?
Click to expand...


http://androidandme.com/2012/05/sma...xy-s-iii-defeats-iphone-4s-in-gpu-benchmarks/
 
GorgonPhone said:
dont worry there will be 18 new android POS phones out in 3 weeks with 3 gigs or ram and 6.5 mhz hexacore processors..lol:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

And just as those android phones start making traction, Apple will release the iPhone 6, and smoke a whole new wave of android phones,

----------
Tylwith said:
wrong

benchmark of the s3 on 4.0.4 and 4.1.1 are on par

but no where near 1600 !!!

ICS

Image

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1045623


jb


Image

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1040548

----------



http://androidandme.com/2012/05/sma...xy-s-iii-defeats-iphone-4s-in-gpu-benchmarks/
Click to expand...

Did you wipe your palm on your phone to get this screen shot?

Nice feature, lol
 
hchung said:
(...)
What holmesf and tbrinkma was trying to say:
: for the average application, which is primarily single-threaded
: a dual core CPU that scores 1600 in an arbitrary multi-core benchmark versus
: a quad core CPU that scores 1600 in an arbitrary multi-core benchmark,
the actual difference in runtime of the average application will be significantly better on the dual core CPU than the quad.

To which you said:

"Wha-? "Larger performance advantage than indicated by the benchmark"? Keep dreaming..."

(...)
Click to expand...

Yes, because he also claimed that most applications will be single threaded (and that general phone use will be single threaded) and not use the power of multi-core processors, and I argued against it. Only after he introduced an analogy that doubling the number of cores should double the performance I have started arguing that it is not true. I never argued that a single core of iPhone's 5 processor will be less efficient that a single core of the SG3's processor. This is probably were the confusion arose.

However thanks for trying to resolve this dispute.
 
Judas1 said:
This benchmark makes me really question the validity of benchmarks. I mean come on. How can a dual core 1 Ghz processor score comparably to a quadcore 1.4 Ghz processor? I'd understand if the quadcores were made by nobodies whom had no idea how to make processors. But we're talking about people like Samsung, and Nvidia, who've been in the game a long time. What criteria is Geekbench using? Are all four of the cores of the quadcores being used compared to all two cores of the A6? No wonder so many say not to look at benchmarks for accurate performance evaluations.
Click to expand...

Instructions per cycle is what you are seeing. The A6 has better IPC than Krait or Exynos 4.
 
ConCat said:
This says one thing to me: Apple has designed the CPU for the OS. You can do crazy things with that kind of design philosophy.
Click to expand...

Not really. For one, Apple didn't design the CPU. They designed the SOC (system on chip), and sure, it only had the components that Apple's using on the iPhone (or perhaps the iPhone and the next iPad, if they plan to use the same SOC for both, as they sometimes have in the past). That can be a bit of power savings, versus a general purpose SOC that has features you don't intend to use.

The CPU is by now very clearly the ARM designed Cortex A15. Everyone knew this was coming out this year, and it's been sampling from Texas Instruments and Samsung. But it is certain that Apple's first to ship, which does tell you they're serious about catching up to where the Android market is. Particularly given that every flagship device will have the A15 or the Qualcomm Krait fairly soon.

A graphics test would be interesting as well. While everyone likes to point out that the iPhone 4S had the lowest performance of any 2011-2012 flagship mobile device, that wasn't entirely true -- it had the fastest GPU of any smartphone until recently. Apple's getting very focused on gaming, and their claims of the A6 doubling the GPU performance say that's not just a one-time thing.

----------
hchung said:
LG Optimus G is using Krait cores just like the JP Galaxy S3. Just because Krait has A15-like elements does NOT mean it was a custom designed A15. Just like how the Apple A6 has A15 similarities does not mean it's a custom designed A15 either.
Click to expand...

Far as we know, the Apple A6 is a bog standard A15 core. Apple hasn't said, and the chip is presenting pretty much as ARM described the A15. Given that ARM has apparently been working on the A15 longer than Apple's owned a chip design group, it doesn't make a great deal of sense to suggest the A6's core is a custom version of the ARM. Could be, but no reason to believe it.

The Krait, of course, is a full custom Qualcomm design, just as the Scorpion was before it. Qualcomm uses their ARM Architecture license to develop cores that compliant (which they have to certify with ARM) with the ARM ISA, but they're not using ARM-developed CPU architectures at all. They of course do their own GPUs as well, the Adreno series, based on IP they bought from ATi some years back. These haven't been competitive, yet.
 
Anand has said it's a custom designed CPU by Apple, not the A15. It would be foolish to write his opinion off so quickly.
 
GorgonPhone said:
ANDROID IS SO LAME ... they have too many different phones and none can beat iPhone:cool:
Click to expand...

Well the thing is that IF the iPhone is indeed faster companies like Samsung will just make a newer faster one. Then all the current Galaxy 3 owners will be mad because they will no longer be the fastest and they just signed a 2 year contract.

What I'm gonna like is that the software is designed for specific devices with specific hardware that is controlled by Apple. I know one company who learned their lesson about this a few years back. That company was Microsoft. You must control the hardware specs. Example IF a devices is going to run Jelly Bean then Google should set min. and max. specs for that device (CPU, GPU and RAM). They should also set port locations (micro USB) screen sizes all that stuff. Don't just let manufactures do what they want. This is why android doesn't have docks for example because the USB ports are all over the place, some are on the bottom some are on the side, some are on the other side.. Its stupid..
 
hazydave said:
Not really. For one, Apple didn't design the CPU. They designed the SOC (system on chip), and sure, it only had the components that Apple's using on the iPhone (or perhaps the iPhone and the next iPad, if they plan to use the same SOC for both, as they sometimes have in the past). That can be a bit of power savings, versus a general purpose SOC that has features you don't intend to use.

The CPU is by now very clearly the ARM designed Cortex A15.
Click to expand...

No, by the looks of it they have indeed designed their own CPU core based on the ARMv7 instruction set, and of course the SoC which by the way includes other bits like image processing DSP.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6292/iphone-5-a6-not-a15-custom-core

Fun tidbit, Apple co founded ARM holdings in the 80's.
 
Misleading information?

It is to my knowledge having read and published many articles, that most people read and asimilate the informqtion by faith. Many of the users that have commented to this article have not gone to geekbenchmarks resukts page, even though the link was provided by some. According to Geekbenchmarks page the Galaxy S3 is by far way over the iPhone 5 stats, oner 1688 vs 1601, and in todays numbers the S3's average is ober 1700. Follow the link and verify for yourselfs that the S3 is faster than the iPnone 5 484220c34c25d_Playing_in_bed
 
nmelcam said:
It is to my knowledge having read and published many articles, that most people read and asimilate the informqtion by faith. Many of the users that have commented to this article have not gone to geekbenchmarks resukts page, even though the link was provided by some. According to Geekbenchmarks page the Galaxy S3 is by far way over the iPhone 5 stats, oner 1688 vs 1601, and in todays numbers the S3's average is ober 1700. Follow the link and verify for yourselfs that the S3 is faster than the iPnone 5 484220c34c25d_Playing_in_bed
Click to expand...

I don't get your point. It's a fact that 2 days ago, the average published score by geekbench was 1566 for the s3. How come it grows now all of a sudden? Also, don't you think it's a bit funny that you question other peoples reading comprehension and at the same time misses that iPhone have 1 sample point?
 
The thing I don't get...

Most of the people posting the S3 Benchmarks are posting the quad-core version. The US version is dual-core, so the comparison should be done on that I think. Also, the one thing that people don't seem to look at is the memory benchmark. The processor speed does matter somewhat, but the memory speed can really be the bottleneck. If you look at the iPhone 5 memory benchmark, then it blows the S3, even the quad-core, away. It is a nice number. I can't wait until the phone is released and all of the different benchmark sites can test it.
 
kefob said:
Most of the people posting the S3 Benchmarks are posting the quad-core version. The US version is dual-core, so the comparison should be done on that I think. Also, the one thing that people don't seem to look at is the memory benchmark. The processor speed does matter somewhat, but the memory speed can really be the bottleneck. If you look at the iPhone 5 memory benchmark, then it blows the S3, even the quad-core, away. It is a nice number. I can't wait until the phone is released and all of the different benchmark sites can test it.
Click to expand...


"Poole acknowledges that any pre-release results on Geekbench have a chance of being faked, but he seems to believe that these results are legitimate."

Even if these scores are legit, no big deal. It's a phone, it's not like I will be developing on it. Besides, I would rather have the iPhone 5 than walk around with a Samsung Galaxy S3 which is a piece of manure, cheap, plastic phone that's too large to use one handed.

Can't wait for my iPhone 5 this week. :D
 
hazydave said:
Not really. For one, Apple didn't design the CPU.
...
The CPU is by now very clearly the ARM designed Cortex A15.
...
Far as we know, the Apple A6 is a bog standard A15 core. Apple hasn't said, and the chip is presenting pretty much as ARM described the A15. Given that ARM has apparently been working on the A15 longer than Apple's owned a chip design group, it doesn't make a great deal of sense to suggest the A6's core is a custom version of the ARM. Could be, but no reason to believe it.
Click to expand...

There was a good reason to believe that it wasn't a stock Cortex A15 because A6 was so much smaller than the known Cortex A15 chips.

More importantly from the reports, it looks like Apple created their own architecture like Qualcomm. Apple's A6 chip development detailed

That's a pretty brave job by Apple but they have the economy of scale to make a new architecture worthwhile, and it means iPhone 5 is fast, very small in volume, and also has good battery life. That wouldn't have been possible if they were stuck with A9 or had to use a big A15 chip.

If a faster version of A6 chip and the famed IGZO tech are ready, the next iPad will be awesome.


skunnykart said:
As if apple are the only ones to tweak and cutomise. Maybe it's a first for Apple but not a first for the industry.
Click to expand...

It is a first for the mobile industry in the recent history since Apple will be the only phone maker who created their own microarchitecture without intention of selling it. Qualcomm has its own microarchitecture but they make chips for others and everyone else just uses the standard ARM.
 
Last edited:
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