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

[singhjeet29]

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.

Negligible. But considering Apple's merger of hardware and software, the end user experience MAY be better.

The really amazing feat is just the engineering. A dual core 1GHz processor, is comparable to a quad core 1.4GHz processor.

Although there is this Geekbench of a Galaxy S III - 2164, but it's using a quad core 1.8GHz processor (Don't recall it being 1.8GHz, could be wrong though)

 

[jhende7]

Obliterated? With one benchmark score higher by 2%? While at the same time offering 2x RAM, NFC, simultaneous voice and data, wireless charging, higher screen resolution, higher memory capacity. It's pretty clear that SGS3 is a superior phone.

Simultaneous voice and data? I've had that since my iphone 3G. Don't try to extrapolate Verizons poor network and the bandaid solution that samsung used as a positive for Samsung.

And higher resolution is meaningless. My iPad has a higher resolution then the SIII, does that mean it makes a great phone? Don't even get me started on NFC (which is a gimmick and security threat), or the fact that to have higher memory it needs archaic sd cards.

Apple could have packed all the crap you mentioned in without a sweat if they had made a big bloated plastic POS. Luckily, they have taste.

 

[goobot]

Does it have Quad-core graphics tho like the A5X?

 

[ethana]

HOLY CRAP!

WOW!

Other phones will NOT be able to compete speed-wise with the iPhone 5.

 

[pandamonia]

You also realised the S3 can run at 1.6ghz easy and probably match or beat that score.

 

[ethana]

You also realised the S3 can run at 1.6ghz easy and probably match or beat that score.

I GUARANTEE that the S3 can't beat that score.

 

[KPOM]

HAHA

The yet-to-be-released iPhone has a mere 41 points more in the benchmark than the S3, a difference that nobody will be able to notice, but Samsung is DEAD.

Your logic is flawless.

Running half the cores at 2/3 the clock speed. The A6 appears to be a superior design. Just as you don't need a 300hp v8 in a roadster, you don't need the fastest CPU if your OS is very efficient. iOS is more efficient than Android. Apple concentrated its efforts on reducing power consumption (hence they didn't clock this thing even faster), and yet it still equals the S3's processor. That's pretty impressive.

 

[holmesf]

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

The benchmark takes advantage of the S3's quad core CPU, yet the iPhone still beats it in the benchmark with a dual core CPU. Most software is not written to take advantage of a quad core CPU. The advantage goes to the iPhone here. If you had any programming experience at all you'd know why that is.

 

[mackinmike]

get real people.. celebrating a win btw a score of 1601 vs 1560? that's so negligible.

all this tells me is people are so insecure of their phone specs.

 

[Ochyandkaren]

Denial, denial… Fools are fools because they choose so.

Samsung faulty ad will get more traction among ignorants ( Apple hater, how can you hate a company that competes against the world depending only on its creativity_? ) than the truth.


huffingtonpost / The Guardian / The BBC among others are all pushing against Apple.

More reason for me to love my favorite bunch of creative people - Apple.

 

[KPOM]

Does it have Quad-core graphics tho like the A5X?

My guess is no, since it probably doesn't need them to run the iPhone's lower resolution screen.

 

[Navdakilla]

I came in here (ex 4s owner, current S3 owner) JUST to compare specs.

AND WOW.. speechless.
I will be switching back to my apple

 

[vishalduggal]

LOL! Can't see Android fanboys here anymore. I guess they have gone hiding in some cave now.
All the while they were crying and moaning like it didn't have Quad Core CPU, 2 GB Ram and stuff, but hey, you just got nailed Android fans, iPhone 5 kicked every Android smartphone' ass

 

[faroZ06]

Obliterated? With one benchmark score higher by 2%? While at the same time offering 2x RAM, NFC, simultaneous voice and data, wireless charging, higher screen resolution, higher memory capacity. It's pretty clear that SGS3 is a superior phone.

Marginally higher screen res for a much larger screen is not good. In terms of raw specifications, the SGS3 is a superior phone. In terms of user experience, real-life usage, and design, I would say that it's far behind.

I just don't get the Apple fans here cheering about the iPhone having a slightly better benchmark test than the S3. The S3 is simply an older phone.

 

[radcliff]

Obliterated? With one benchmark score higher by 2%? While at the same time offering 2x RAM, NFC, simultaneous voice and data, wireless charging, higher screen resolution, higher memory capacity. It's pretty clear that SGS3 is a superior phone.

What are you talking about? "Simultaneous voice and data". I use that all the time on my 2 year old iPhone4... ???

 

[daveathall]

Not much faster. I think the point being made (or alluded to is that the iPhone 4S was already perceptually competitive in speed to other phones and it was only 1/2 the performance we'll see with the iPhone 5.

Negligible. But considering Apple's merger of hardware and software, the end user experience MAY be better.

The really amazing feat is just the engineering. A dual core 1GHz processor, is comparable to a quad core 1.4GHz processor.

Although there is this Geekbench of a Galaxy S III - 2164, but it's using a quad core 1.8GHz processor (Don't recall it being 1.8GHz, could be wrong though)

Thank you very much.

 

[mtcowdog]

If true this says a lot about Apple's chip design capabilities. That can help them differentiate and adapt for specific features. King of the benchmark hill is not all that interesting and short-lived.

 

[KPOM]

get real people.. celebrating a win btw a score of 1601 vs 1560? that's so negligible.

all this tells me is people are so insecure of their phone specs.

At the end of the day, the specs don't really matter. The user experience does. However, the fact that Apple equaled the CPU power of the S3 with half the cores running at 2/3 the speed, and likely consuming less power is pretty impressive.

 

[Bezetos]

HOLY CRAP!

WOW!

Other phones will NOT be able to compete speed-wise with the iPhone 5.

I can guarantee you that it will be highly probable that any smartphone released after the iPhone 5 will be faster. Already phones released 3-4 months ago are only marginally slower than the iPhone 5.

 

[gnasher729]

But Apple is catching up. Isn't this a catchup? An unreleased iPhone model is faster than previously-released Android-based phones. The iPhone 4S was slower than those Android models. Apple is catching up here. They won't be ahead for long on this.

Catching up = still behind.
In this benchmark, iPhone 5 is ahead, so it's _not_ catching up.

 

[ChazUK]

Just bought Geekbench on Android to see how my hardware fares.

Surprised by how well the Galaxy Nexus still does despite its age.

 

[votdfak]

It's all about the software, as SJ used to say that Apple is software company, and Google is closing in fast. My user experience on iOS and Android JB is similar. Still there is a midget of a screen on iPhone5...

 

[KPOM]

What are you talking about? "Simultaneous voice and data". I use that all the time on my 2 year old iPhone4... ???

The CDMA versions of the iPhone 5 (Verizon and Sprint) don't support simultaneous voice and data. It's partly a limitation of the CDMA network, but other phones, including most Verizon LTE phones, use two radios in order to get around this limitation. The iPhone has only one radio and so it can't. The GSM versions of the iPhone can run simultaneous voice and data.

 

[blackcrayon]

Does it have Quad-core graphics tho like the A5X?

Unknown, most likely it has about the same graphics power of the A5X just using a newer dual core graphics chip. Since it has far fewer pixels to push, graphics (games, etc) should have amazing potential.

 

[Moshu]

Once and for all guys: 4 cores are mostly useless for most applications, maybe for 99% of what's on your phone.

Basically, the performance of each core is more likely to be an indication of the real-life phone performance.

That's where the iPhone 5 shines, as with only 2 cores, it beats on a multi-core benchmark a 4-core processor. It's obvious that the performance per core is HUGE compared to the competition.

Adding the 1 GHz-only frequency and the software that squeezes the last drop of power, i can only say:

GG Apple!