iPhone 6/Plus Geekbench Benchmarks hit the web

Discussion in 'iPhone' started by CupertinoSlave, Sep 18, 2014.

  1. FSUSem1noles macrumors 68000

    FSUSem1noles

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2006
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale
    #2
  2. satchow macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    #3
    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.
     
  3. CupertinoSlave thread starter macrumors regular

    CupertinoSlave

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #4
    Logic isn't welcome either!

    ----------

    The user who did these benchmarks is a really trustworthy reviewer who also wrote a blog about it so I doubt its wrong.
     
  4. rhaezorblue macrumors regular

    rhaezorblue

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    #6
    Those are backwards - it's already been established previous benchmark posts the 6+ is clocked higher and got higher scores.
     
  5. HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #7
    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.
     
  6. Korican100 macrumors 6502a

    Korican100

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2012
    #8
    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.
     
  7. dumastudetto macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2013
    #9
    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.
     
  8. CupertinoSlave thread starter macrumors regular

    CupertinoSlave

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #10
    It seems accurate compared to other benchmark photos

    [​IMG]
     
  9. HiRez macrumors 603

    HiRez

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2004
    Location:
    Western US
    #11
    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).
     
  10. rhaezorblue macrumors regular

    rhaezorblue

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    #12
    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?
     
  11. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #13
    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...
     
  12. HolyGrail macrumors 6502

    HolyGrail

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2010
    Location:
    Planet Earth
    #14
    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.
     
  13. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #15
    Geekbench doesn't measure any gfx related stuff. It's a pure benchmark of the cpu/memory side.
     
  14. burp43 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2008
    #16
    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
     
  15. Starfyre macrumors 68020

    Starfyre

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    #17
    So 6 is the phone flagship. 6+ is the phablet flagship.

    But 6 has higher geekbench, so that does it! 6 it is!
     
  16. CupertinoSlave thread starter macrumors regular

    CupertinoSlave

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #18
    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.
     
  17. bchreng macrumors 6502a

    bchreng

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2005
    #19
    That's somewhat dissappointing. After reading the MacWorld review, I was beginning to think that the 6 Plus was clocked higher than the 6.
     
  18. Dranix macrumors 6502a

    Dranix

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Location:
    Gelnhausen, Germany
    #20
    It very probably is - Anything else doesn't fit into logic.
     
  19. CupertinoSlave thread starter macrumors regular

    CupertinoSlave

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Location:
    Tampa, FL
    #21
    That is the only site that claims the differ.
     
  20. BC-2 macrumors member

    BC-2

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2012
    #22
    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?
     
  21. ronm99 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2012
    #23
    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.

    ----------

    I agree ... I won't trust any Geekbench results until we see multiple benchmarks with consistent results.
     
  22. powerstrokin macrumors 6502a

    powerstrokin

    Joined:
    May 18, 2013
    #24
    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.
     
  23. Richardgm macrumors 6502a

    Richardgm

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2008
    #25
    I think this is the first iPhone since the 4 that didn't blow the competition away at benchmarks.
     

Share This Page