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

iPhone 6/Plus Geekbench Benchmarks hit the web

Are the labels backwards? 7,2 has a higher clockspeed and higher benchmarks than the 7,1 but 7,2 is labeled the iPhone 6 while 7,1 is labeled the iPhone 6 Plus.
 
FSUSem1noles said:
Don't bring "facts" into the debate of which phone is better. Shame on you!
Click to expand...

Logic isn't welcome either!

----------
satchow said:
Are the labels backwards? 7,2 has a higher clockspeed and higher benchmarks than the 7,1 but 7,2 is labeled the iPhone 6 while 7,1 is labeled the iPhone 6 Plus.
Click to expand...

The user who did these benchmarks is a really trustworthy reviewer who also wrote a blog about it so I doubt its wrong.
 
Those are backwards - it's already been established previous benchmark posts the 6+ is clocked higher and got higher scores.
 
satchow said:
Are the labels backwards? 7,2 has a higher clockspeed and higher benchmarks than the 7,1 but 7,2 is labeled the iPhone 6 while 7,1 is labeled the iPhone 6 Plus.
Click to expand...

I think you are right about that. Most benchmarks I've seen so far indicate the Plus is slightly faster. Also they have 7,1 clocked higher (1.38 vs. 1.32) and I would think if there is a clock speed difference, the Plus would almost certainly be the one clocked higher.
 
that's weird. You would think the iphone 6+ needed more processing power.
That just means the iphone 6 is bottlenecked, if they perform at the same speeds.

Also, the 6+ is the exact same benchmark score as the ipad air.
 
I'm just glad I bought both phones. It's looking very clear that the iPhone 6 has the better performance, whereas the 6 Plus has a bigger screen and a better camera.
 
rhaezorblue said:
Those are backwards - it's already been established previous benchmark posts the 6+ is clocked higher and got higher scores.
Click to expand...

It seems accurate compared to other benchmark photos

iphone-6-benchmark-01.png
 
It is however entirely possible the regular 6 would bench higher. Apple may well still have a lot of software optimization to do, and they may have optimized for the higher-volume regular 6 more at this early point. You also need to wait to get a consensus, a single sample of each model is not very reliable (one could have been downloading podcasts in the background or something, lots of things could affect the score on a single run).
 
2900 vs 2600 - both of which they are saying are the 6+ - so something isn't lining up. Does anyone know for sure, for a fact, if the 6+ is model 7,1 or 7,2?
 
Somthing doesn't fit here. It is totally unlogical that the 6 would get a faster A8 then the 6+. The Case is smaller, heat dissipation is lower and the battery is smaller...
 
Make sense to me. Anytime you bench a smaller screen it's going to get higher scores. When I benched a 17 inch MacBook compared to a 15 inch MacBook with the same specs ,the 15 inch came out with better scores. A native lower resolution with the same graphics card and the same CPU is always going to have a better score, then the one with the higher native resolution. You're pushing less with the same specifications.
 
So the 6 is faster than the 6+ according to this.

6+ is 7,1 Because after all, it is the "FLAGSHIP" :rolleyes:

6 is 7,2
 
So 6 is the phone flagship. 6+ is the phablet flagship.

But 6 has higher geekbench, so that does it! 6 it is!
 
HiRez said:
It is however entirely possible the regular 6 would bench higher. Apple may well still have a lot of software optimization to do, and they may have optimized for the higher-volume regular 6 more at this early point. You also need to wait to get a consensus, a single sample of each model is not very reliable (one could have been downloading podcasts in the background or something, lots of things could affect the score on a single run).
Click to expand...

The person who ran the benchmark made it specifically to show off the performance of each device. He wouldn't run things in the background.
 
Seems a little odd that those benchmarks show the 6 processor as 1.39 GHz and the 6+ as only 1.32 GHz. Maybe backwards?
 
HolyGrail said:
Make sense to me. Anytime you bench a smaller screen it's going to get higher scores. When I benched a 17 inch MacBook compared to a 15 inch MacBook with the same specs ,the 15 inch came out with better scores. A native lower resolution with the same graphics card and the same CPU is always going to have a better score, then the one with the higher native resolution. You're pushing less with the same specifications.
Click to expand...

The resolution does not factor into the Geekbench tests. They are not doing anything screen related, and are just measuring how fast the CPU / GPU perform while performing identical tasks.

That being said, as you mention, real life performance may differ. With the 6+ having double the number of pixels to work on, even if it had a faster Geekbench score, it could be slower in real life.

This is one of the many reasons that I detest Geekbench scores. I don't think they do a very good job of measuring what a computer / phone / tablet really performs when doing tasks that people normally do. With computers, for most people, a faster hard drive will make a computer feel faster than a computer with a faster CPU / GPU.

Also, other than games or media processing, multi-core performance does not make that much difference as to how fast a computer feels. Doubling the cores from 2 to 4 or 4 to 8 will double the score in Geekbench, but will not speed up almost anything that a normal user does.

----------
BC-2 said:
Seems a little odd that those benchmarks show the 6 processor as 1.39 GHz and the 6+ as only 1.32 GHz. Maybe backwards?
Click to expand...

I agree ... I won't trust any Geekbench results until we see multiple benchmarks with consistent results.
 
The real question is- will it matter in the real world? Probably not.

Therefore, 99% of users need not worry about any very slight differences in these tests. Also even two 6's may differ slightly or two 6+'s. You get my point.
 
I think this is the first iPhone since the 4 that didn't blow the competition away at benchmarks.
 
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