http://www.gsmarena.com/iphone_6s_plus_vs_s6_edge_plus-review-1324p7.php
6S Plus is better in offscreen as well.
[doublepost=1471969151][/doublepost]
Such as?
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 6s Bests Samsung's New Galaxy Note 7 in App Speed Test
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
http://www.gsmarena.com/iphone_6s_plus_vs_s6_edge_plus-review-1324p7.php
6S Plus is better in offscreen as well.
[doublepost=1471969151][/doublepost]
Wow. Apple's internal hardware really is a powerhouse.
But given my use case I still can't use iOS and the devices that run it.
It's like having a family of 5 and the fastest, most fuel-efficient, greenest, and safest 1-seat car made.
I need to do more than Apple offers with the iPhone.
It goes to show though, that if they quit screwing around they could build the most powerful and flexible device "on the planet" (like Steve used to say).
The processing and optimization muscle is there. All we (Android users) need is for Apple to give us control and to stop intentionally crippling the hardware with fewer or proprietary ports and (too much) simplicity.
But given my use case I still can't use iOS and the devices that run it.
It's like having a family of 5 and the fastest, most fuel-efficient, greenest, and safest 1-seat car made.
I need to do more than Apple offers with the iPhone.
It goes to show though, that if they quit screwing around they could build the most powerful and flexible device "on the planet" (like Steve used to say).
The processing and optimization muscle is there. All we (Android users) need is for Apple to give us control and to stop intentionally crippling the hardware with fewer or proprietary ports and (too much) simplicity.
Subsequent test with the Note 7 resolution lowered usinv it's own built in scaler to 720p was still behind the iPhone in this regard to app opening and keeping apps in background. This is more to do with Samsung poor optimisation of SD820 than resolution. Or it could also be an issue / bug with the new LPDR4 storage controller.
Last edited:
Not necessarily. You can scale resolution with the app without affecting processing (you can turn off processor powersaving independently from resolution) ....
Wireless charging, waterproof, a camera that can take RAW photos (though that's probably more software).
I don't think anyone doubts the A9 and it's power in mobile phones. It's a very fast, dual core processor that should handle everything we throw at it. Combine with good NVME storage and yes, App load times, especially for large apps like games shuold load faster.
But this test is asanine. The way it was done is not only extremely unscientific, it's also completely impractical, and doesn't truly reflect load times at all.
There are also "tricks" that each phone does that affects timings somewhat artificially.
Some initial things to poke this test with:
because it's done sequentially, any one particular App that loads slower on the Note 7 by a large enough margin will automatically make the iPhone win by a large margin at the end of the day. Even if it's only 1 or 2 apps with noticable difference
For example, some of those games (which benefit less, but more powerful cores usually), load much faster on the iPhone (to be expected) but much slower on the Note 7. if the Note 7 takes 7 more seconds to load that game, and you're just firing one app after another, the iPhone will always win by that margin.
what this doesn't show is that there are some apps that are nearly identical. in fact, Most apps will launch very closely.
Samsung doesn't do themselves a favour either with their animations that add 1-2 seconds of "animation" time to each load. if you disable the little animations, you do shave a few seconds off each load.
Apple also does this nifty little trick when re-opening previous run apps that are no longer in memory. They fire up and display the same screen that they closed on. the App hasn't actually finished loading yet, but it looks like it.
if you want a purely scientific test, you need to do app loading in controlled envrionments. independantly. not in some rapid fire sequential way.
However, I don't doubt that Apple's phone is faster. But its not some giant commanding lead that this video fails to demonstrate through bad testing methodology.
in day to day experience, you're not likely to notice the difference, unless you're an avid gamer loading these ginormous titles.
And it clearly isn't some "CRUSHES!" hyperbole many fanboys on this site are repeating, but at the end of the day, you have to weigh down, is the 1-2% faster performance worth buying an iphone? or are some of the more advanced technologies and features in the Note 7 worth it?
That question is going to be different for everyone. I know for myself, I would rather have the slightly slower device if it means the 1440p display, unlocked NFC chips, USB based connectivity, wireless charging, headphone port, extremely fast camera software with physical buttons for loading and shutter, with RAW mode capture. larger base storage, etc
But this test is asanine. The way it was done is not only extremely unscientific, it's also completely impractical, and doesn't truly reflect load times at all.
There are also "tricks" that each phone does that affects timings somewhat artificially.
Some initial things to poke this test with:
because it's done sequentially, any one particular App that loads slower on the Note 7 by a large enough margin will automatically make the iPhone win by a large margin at the end of the day. Even if it's only 1 or 2 apps with noticable difference
For example, some of those games (which benefit less, but more powerful cores usually), load much faster on the iPhone (to be expected) but much slower on the Note 7. if the Note 7 takes 7 more seconds to load that game, and you're just firing one app after another, the iPhone will always win by that margin.
what this doesn't show is that there are some apps that are nearly identical. in fact, Most apps will launch very closely.
Samsung doesn't do themselves a favour either with their animations that add 1-2 seconds of "animation" time to each load. if you disable the little animations, you do shave a few seconds off each load.
Apple also does this nifty little trick when re-opening previous run apps that are no longer in memory. They fire up and display the same screen that they closed on. the App hasn't actually finished loading yet, but it looks like it.
if you want a purely scientific test, you need to do app loading in controlled envrionments. independantly. not in some rapid fire sequential way.
However, I don't doubt that Apple's phone is faster. But its not some giant commanding lead that this video fails to demonstrate through bad testing methodology.
in day to day experience, you're not likely to notice the difference, unless you're an avid gamer loading these ginormous titles.
And it clearly isn't some "CRUSHES!" hyperbole many fanboys on this site are repeating, but at the end of the day, you have to weigh down, is the 1-2% faster performance worth buying an iphone? or are some of the more advanced technologies and features in the Note 7 worth it?
That question is going to be different for everyone. I know for myself, I would rather have the slightly slower device if it means the 1440p display, unlocked NFC chips, USB based connectivity, wireless charging, headphone port, extremely fast camera software with physical buttons for loading and shutter, with RAW mode capture. larger base storage, etc
Last edited:
Do you think most people use SSH, VNC, RDP, FTPS, bittorrent, etc, on their iOS devies? I'm a big nerd and the closest I come to using any of those is using LogMeIn Ignition to access my home PC once or twice a day. I sign in, do what I need to do and leave. I rarely leave Ignition in the background.
I would actually guess that it's hardware mainly.
When you're talkign about performance of any computer device you have to understand that there will always be a bottleneck somewhere in the hardware. there is always going to be that one "slowest" part.
Launching programs (regardless of what platform), is a very CPU and IO intensive processes. it requires reading the program binary off storage and then storing it in system MEMORY. disk IO is usually the biggest hurdle for performance, and that's likely the case here too.
NVME is currently the fastest Sequential read storage medium. UFS is also extremely fast, but in most App loading situations, the reads will be sequential, giving the edge here to the iPhone.
Loading Apps can also be very sequential in initial load. This puts the performance benefit on the A9, due to it's lower core count, but higher clock speeds. There are still some places that clock speed reigns over more parallel processors.
its not something thats cut and dry, but i wouldn't rule out the hardware. The onyl way we can rule out the hardware is if we could run both iOS and Android on identical hardware
Disagree. While Apple's A Series are clearly superior IMO from an architectural standpoint, iOS also runs Native. This will always be a Software Advantage for the iPhone's Hardware.
Only if Android it's fully optimized with Nexus devices like the iPhone, because if that's the case, Android will run out of business..because other OEMs including Samsung will not support platform anymore
I agree and dont forget the slow updates
Last edited:
Some people only need their phone as a basic iPod Plus but in large parts of the world the phone is the primary computer and Android is much closer to a computer replacement. My phone is not my primary computer but it's saved my rear end countless times when I get an urgent load balancer, firewall, ACL, etc. change request and don't have the laptop with me. These change requests usually have me switching between one or more SSH sessions, RDP, email, document, diagram, etc. so background multitasking and split view multitasking are much more valuable than some unrealistic niche speed test.
i continually ask but never get an answer from Android fans - what exactly can you do that I can't on my iPhone? I'd love a serious answer, and please don't say multi-tasking - I can in a meaningful way.
Wireless charging is not a feature. It's neither enhances or detracts from the phone's usability. In fact, actually, I could argue it detracts as the phone can't really be used on a charging pad as it could plugged in (I guess, maybe if you have a charging stand). It's a neat feature for sure but hardly anything that gives one phone an advantage over another.
I'm a member on lots of tech forums. This is one of them. Hardware ownership isn't a prerequisite... and even if it were it would be completely irrelevant to the points I made in my earlier post.
You may have a different opinion, but time will vindicate mine. Simply put, the Note 7 is a more compelling device to look at and hold than *any* other consumer smart phone I have come across. A coworker just got his in today, so i got to spend some time holding one without the anti-theft tethers on it.
Its VERY nice. Go to a store and go see one instead of ignorantly bellyaching about an opposing opinion
Most the people who use their phones as their primary computer are still only talking, texting, emailing, taking photos, sharing photos and videos, editing photos and videos, etc. Even the majority of people with computers don't do much more than that. So yes- the phone replaces a computer. But they don't suddenly become SysAdmins.
Multi-tasking
and I don't mean that in the way that Apple does it. I do regularly have to have applications that stay running, even when in the background. I do need SSH sessions that cna remain open even if I'm not directly looking at it.
I regularly use multi-window display, without one fo the apps "stopping" for the other one.
I do use iOS on my iPad, and Android on my phone and regularly do try and do similar things, and iOS routinely falls flat. I'm not saying I'm the average user, I understand that i'm not. But the ability to have multiple applications running properly at the same time does assist me, especially if i'm stuck trying to actually have to work from my phone.
Other gripes with iOS that currently prevents it from being capable of being my daily driver:
- No Ability to replace default apps with my own.
- Pausing video / streaming while attempting to multi-task (if i'm in youtube for example, and I use the slideover 2nd program, video pauses. iOS seems incapable of running the two applications in full side by side.
- Inability to access the filesystem
- No Background running tasks (If i'm running monitoring programs in an SSH session in the background for example)
- Notifications (but they look great in iOS10)
- no Tasker
- inability to customise my home screen. I'm still not a fan of the simplistic iOS grid of icons. I have dozen or so widgets on my home screens that provide me easy information. so far the iOS implementation of widgets seems 1/2way (though I like you can see them while locked)
- Customisation Notification light colour
I've always liked the look/feel of the iPhone. But iOS, while fast, is still a very limited OS in many regards. This isn't necessary terrible. But for myself, it doesn't have the necessary capability to allow me to use it as my daily driver phone.
The biggest thing I noticed - DANG the resolution on that thing is huge. On the web it says 515ppi for the Note vs iPhone 6S: 326!. I am impressed with the display but I don't like the look of AMOLED, but wow that is impressive. So Apple wins easy in speed but the Samsung has a superior display.
Hardware-wise it IS an iPhone killer. 10% physically smaller with a LARGER (higher res) screen, bigger battery and somehow they fit a stylus in there. But like Windows, it's too difficult to be a hardware manufacturer running a 3rd party software with 100% efficiency.Heh. This is supposedly Samsung's latest "iPhone-killer" according to many rabid tech blogs.
If the the next iPhone was the Note 7 running iOS it'd be a killer device.
[doublepost=1471974805][/doublepost]
The AMOLED on the Apple Watch looks good. So I'm wondering if the "Samsung look" is a choice on their part...