Potential Benchmark for iPhone XR Successor Shows 4GB RAM, Moderate Performance Gains

[EugW]

4GB DRAM is just catching up to 4GB Moto G7 that has been as low as $200. For $750 starting price the iPhone Xr should really come with at least 6GB if not 8GB since it competes price wise with more feature rich Galaxy Note 10 256GB storage version.

While they're at it also put 4GB in the base iPad since it's gimped with only 2GB.

I think a 4 GB iPhone 11 (replacement for the XR) is fine. 6 GB is mandatory for the 2019 iPad Pros though, and would be nice for the OLED iPhones too. In fact, 6 GB may be necessary for the OLED iPhones because of the new tri-lens camera, but I'm not sure.

BTW, in a supposed Apple internal document leak, the new 2019 iPhones are supposed to ship with iOS 13.1, the same OS as what is running in the Geekbench entry.

https://twitter.com/AppleBeta2019

 

[cmaier]

I think a 4 GB 11R is fine. 6 GB is mandatory for the 2019 iPad Pros though, and would be nice for the OLED iPhones too. In fact, 6 GB may be necessary for the OLED iPhones because of the new tri-lens camera, but I'm not sure.

BTW, in a supposed Apple internal document leak, the new 2019 iPhones are supposed to ship with iOS 13.1, the same OS as what is running in the Geekbench entry.

https://twitter.com/AppleBeta2019

An extra camera doesn’t require 2GB of RAM

 

[EugW]

An extra camera doesn’t require 2GB of RAM

Well, the extra camera for the iPhone 7 Plus and iPhone 8 Plus required an extra 1 GB RAM for a total of 3 GB, which represented a 50% increase in RAM. Meanwhile the 7 and 8 only got 2 GB RAM.

To put it another way, a 2016 iPhone 7 Plus got 3 GB RAM, but the otherwise more advanced 2017 iPhone 8 got only 2 GB RAM.

Also, the XR with 1 camera lens got 3 GB RAM, while the XS & Max with two lenses got 4 GB RAM.

In 2019, the 11 with 2 camera lenses will get 4 GB RAM, so it shouldn't come a big shock if the 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max with 3 camera lenses will get even more RAM.

 

[cmaier]

Well, the extra camera for the iPhone 7 Plus and iPhone 8 Plus required an extra 1 GB RAM for a total of 3 GB, which represented a 50% increase in RAM. Meanwhile the 7 and 8 only got 2 GB RAM.

To put it another way, a 2016 iPhone 7 Plus got 3 GB RAM, but the otherwise more advanced 2017 iPhone 8 got only 2 GB RAM.

Also, the XR with 1 camera lens got 3 GB RAM, while the XS & Max with two lenses got 4 GB RAM.

In 2019, the 11 with 2 camera lenses will get 4 GB RAM, so it shouldn't come a big shock if the 11 Pro and 11 Pro Max with 3 camera lenses will get even more RAM.

No, the extra camera for the iPhone 7 Plus and 8 plus did not require an extra 1GB RAM, either. It got more memory to differentiate the plus from the base model, and because there was more room for it in the bigger device. You can tell this because: (1) the extra RAM in the plus models was available for apps, and not reserved for the camera; (2) taking a photo in the camera.app does not suck up that extra RAM and flush other apps out of memory; (3) file size is identical despite multiple cameras

 

[EugW]

No, the extra camera for the iPhone 7 Plus and 8 plus did not require an extra 1GB RAM, either. It got more memory to differentiate the plus from the base model, and because there was more room for it in the bigger device. You can tell this because: (1) the extra RAM in the plus models was available for apps, and not reserved for the camera; (2) taking a photo in the camera.app does not suck up that extra RAM and flush other apps out of memory; (3) file size is identical despite multiple cameras

RAM on the 7 and 7 Plus have the same physical footprint. It's included in the SoC package.

 

[Cosmosent]

Anybody else notice that with this leak'd iPhone12,1 Geekbench, that the Memory Bandwidth number is down for the very first time ???

NOT by much, ONLY ~3%, but it's EXTREMELY telling !

In fact, it helps shed light on the A12's Hardware Bug.

Apple "may" have fixed the A11/A12 (Performance Controller) Hardware Bug, by adjusting the L1 & L2 cache sizes & the DDR PHY Controller !

By generation, number in () represents Memory Bandwidth in GB/sec.

6s+ (9.26) -> 7+ (12.9) -> X (17.3) -> Xs Max (19) -> 12,1 (18.4)


The BIG question is:

Once word of this becomes common knowledge, what attractive upgrade option will Cook & Co. offer to those of us with a XR, XS, or XS Max ???


The next most important questions are:

What is the "Aperture" of the Telephoto Lens in the 2019 iPhones ?

What is the "Pixel Size" of the Telephoto Lens' Image Sensor in the 2019 iPhones ?

Will the 2019 iPhones (FINALLY) support 10-bit color capture ???

kCVPixelFormatType_30RGBLEPackedWideGamut

kCVPixelFormatType_ARGB2101010LEPacked


The Pixel 4 is about to eat Apple's lunch if Cook & Co. doesn't "appropriately" answer ALL those questions !
[doublepost=1567568022][/doublepost]

RAM on the 7 and 7 Plus have the same physical footprint. It's included in the SoC package.

Wrong !

7 has 2.002 GB of DRAM

7+ has 3.000 GB of DRAM !

 

[EugW]

Wrong !

7 has 2.002 GB of DRAM

7+ has 3.000 GB of DRAM !

You completely missed the point of the post, and it also seems you completely ignored the content of the prior posts where we already talked about 3 GB vs 2 GB in the 7 Plus and 7 respectively.

The point was that the 3 GB on the 7 Plus takes up the same amount of physical space as the 2 GB on the 7, so going with 2 GB doesn’t actually save room on the logic board.

 

[cmaier]

Anybody else notice that with this leak'd iPhone12,1 Geekbench, that the Memory Bandwidth number is down for the very first time ???

NOT by much, ONLY ~3%, but it's EXTREMELY telling !

In fact, it helps shed light on the A12's Hardware Bug.

Apple "may" have fixed the A11/A12 (Performance Controller) Hardware Bug, by adjusting the L1 & L2 cache sizes & the DDR PHY Controller !

By generation, number in () represents Memory Bandwidth in GB/sec.

6s+ (9.26) -> 7+ (12.9) -> X (17.3) -> Xs Max (19) -> 12,1 (18.4)


The BIG question is:

Once word of this becomes common knowledge, what attractive upgrade option will Cook & Co. offer to those of us with a XR, XS, or XS Max ???


The next most important questions are:

What is the "Aperture" of the Telephoto Lens in the 2019 iPhones ?

What is the "Pixel Size" of the Telephoto Lens' Image Sensor in the 2019 iPhones ?

Will the 2019 iPhones (FINALLY) support 10-bit color capture ???

kCVPixelFormatType_30RGBLEPackedWideGamut

kCVPixelFormatType_ARGB2101010LEPacked


The Pixel 4 is about to eat Apple's lunch if Cook & Co. doesn't "appropriately" answer ALL those questions !
[doublepost=1567568022][/doublepost]

Wrong !

7 has 2.002 GB of DRAM

7+ has 3.000 GB of DRAM !

Once again, there is no performance controller hardware bug. Why do you keep trying to sell this? I mean, if you google it, the only place it comes up is literally your posts.

Also, nobody cares about the “aperture” of the telephoto lens (why do you put that in quotes as if it’s a made up term?) They care about dynamic range, and there are lots of ways to get it other than aperture.

 

[Cosmosent]

An extra camera doesn’t require 2GB of RAM

That may NOT be true in this case.

Apple currently offers a Dual Camera mode, that captures content off both the Wide & Telephoto.

That mode struggles on some devices, because of a lack of Available DRAM !

Add-in another Lens at the same time, & 2 GB might just be necessary to put the new iPhones in the "comfort" zone.
[doublepost=1567569116][/doublepost]

You completely missed the point of the post, and it also seems you completely ignored the content of the prior posts where we already talked about 3 GB vs 2 GB in the 7 Plus and 7 respectively.

The point was that the 3 GB on the 7 Plus takes up the same amount of physical space as the 2 GB on the 7, so going with 2 GB doesn’t actually save room on the logic board.

I wasn't 100% sure what you were referring to ... now I know.

 

[cmaier]

That may NOT be true in this case.

Apple currently offers a Dual Camera mode, that captures content off both the Wide & Telephoto.

That mode struggles on some devices, because of a lack of Available DRAM !

Add-in another Lens at the same time, & 2 GB might just be necessary to put the new iPhones in the "comfort" zone.
[doublepost=1567569116][/doublepost]

I wasn't 100% sure what you were referring to ... now I know.

No, it doesn’t struggle because of lack of RAM on any devices. It’s easy to check simply by monitoring RAM usage from Xcode while taking photos. Taking photos does not use appreciable RAM.

 

[Cosmosent]

Once again, there is no performance controller hardware bug. Why do you keep trying to sell this? I mean, if you google it, the only place it comes up is literally your posts.

Also, nobody cares about the “aperture” of the telephoto lens (why do you put that in quotes as if it’s a made up term?) They care about dynamic range, and there are lots of ways to get it other than aperture.

ONLY High-Perf CPU-based apps have the capability to Discover the Bug.

The fact that NO OTHER App Dev has discovered it simply means there is ONLY ONE High-Perf CPU-based app in the entire App Store !

Apple knows that !

And they have done their best to try to suppress knowledge of it.

It's just a matter of time BEFORE it ALL becomes Common Knowledge.

ALSO, if you had studied the Pixel 4, for even a day, you would know the competition hasn't been sitting still, wrt the Telephoto lens !

 

[dampfnudel]

I don’t think it’s a limit of speed, but rather of what we are requiring of these devices.

Between 2011-14 we were really pushing our iPhones with the many new features and apps pushing these limits (1080p then 4K video, 400+ ppi screens, and previous-gen console ports - think GTA 3/VC/SA/LCS, Bully, various NFS releases and even Bioshock).

Since 2015 I think Apple has added Portrait Mode to the iPhone and that’s it. The console port scene is dead. What other new app has really required additional horsepower from our iPhones? Pretty much all users are using some combination of push mail/social networking/music streaming/video streaming - which even an iPhone SE can do well.

Yeah, and from what I can tell, most people don’t seem to bother much if at all with AR. I think most people would appreciate a breakthrough with battery life a lot more than another big (and useless) jump in performance.

 

[DeepIn2U]

It’s something that Apple could, if they wanted, use a year-old SoC and still outperform everyone else.

However, I doubt it. When has Apple ever used an older SoC in a brand new iPhone? Or taken an older SoC and given it a clock speed bump?

Plus there’s a rumor of a new co-processor called “Matrix” for image processing. I’m quite sure all iPhones get an A13.

In iPhone ... potentially the OG, 3G and maybe the 3GS maybe even the 4!

iPad .... Air/Air2, And all the pro models have larger die size of the same main or basic architecture or lithography process and more cores speed bumps and ram. Including more performance and cores out of the GPU

 

[chucker23n1]

Do we have to argue in every thread?

Yes. What do I win?
[doublepost=1567589711][/doublepost]

The point here is that market share did the trick in that Android app store reached and then surpassed App Store very quickly.

OK, but whose goal was that?

Is the Play Store actually a better experience for users? Is it having more apps more valuable for Samsung?

 

[chucker23n1]

Anybody else notice that with this leak'd iPhone12,1 Geekbench, that the Memory Bandwidth number is down for the very first time ???

NOT by much, ONLY ~3%, but it's EXTREMELY telling !

No it isn't. As Poole keeps saying, Geekbench statistics on unreleased iOS hardware are unreliable guesswork because the OS doesn't actually tell the app much.
[doublepost=1567590797][/doublepost]

The fact that NO OTHER App Dev has discovered it simply means there is ONLY ONE High-Perf CPU-based app in the entire App Store !

Apple knows that !

And they have done their best to try to suppress knowledge of it.

Orrrrrrrr that app of yours has a bug and you keep shifting the blame to Apple.

It's just a matter of time BEFORE it ALL becomes Common Knowledge.

Chemtrails?

ALSO, if you had studied the Pixel 4, for even a day, you would know the competition hasn't been sitting still, wrt the Telephoto lens !

Who said the competition "has been sitting still"? Nobody in this thread is making that argument.

 

[Ludatyk]

Being able to briefly untether your watch is a FAR cry from it being “standalone”!
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204641
The instructions for updating it begin with “make sure your iPhone is on the latest version.
Standalone would imply that you could own and use an Apple Watch, WITHOUT owning/using an iPhone... which you simply cannot.
It is my understanding that the Apple Watch doesn’t have its own # registered on a network or anything, rather it does a fancy “cloning” of your iPhone SIM & passes the calls/messages/notifications sent to that device... so, if you canceled service on your iPhone, your Apple Watch would not do that anymore.
That is, by definition, a companion device (with limited autonomy), again... NOT a standalone device.

Fair enough.

You are aiming at the definition of "standalone" device, but not my reasoning behind it. Yet, all l I'm trying to explain that this dream of having an Apple Watch untethered to the iPhone appears to be unrealistic. It doesn't benefit Apple as much as having it the way the setup currently is.

And having a cellular capability Apple Watch is anyone "best chance" at a standalone device.

 

[Abazigal]

OK, but whose goal was that?

Is the Play Store actually a better experience for users? Is it having more apps more valuable for Samsung?

As always, the answer is going to vary from user to user, depending on whether the apps they want is available in the respective app stores.

We know that iOS is home to many quality ipad apps, such as lumafusion, ferrite, procreate and affinity photo. We also have pretty high quality apps such as bear, fantastical, notability, Apollo, overcast, Tweetbot and spark.

I still think iOS has the advantage here, because having aggregated the best users means that iOS developers can better create a more sustainable business model by charging fair prices for quality apps. The end result is a virtuous cycle where users are willing to pay $20 for an app like lumafusion, which in turn makes it worth their while to continue supporting said app.

So it’s not about having more apps in an absolute sense, but having more of the apps you want. Just like how the iphone and iOS App Store having more profits despite smaller market share teaches us an important lesson - it’s not market share in a vacuum that matters, but usage share, especially when you realise that not all consumers are created equal.

 

[Wowereit]

The S865 is also rumored to score almost 13000 in multicore which would be higher than the A13 leaked score.

The 8cx was tested in a Windows environment so scores are lower in comparison to Geekbench scores in Android.

Window's overhead is minimal, maybe 2% load on a decent mobile CPU.

If your benchmark claims to be platform independent, but scores way lower on Windows, it's not platform independent.

Geekbench has been BS for a while now and people use it to compare Apple's ARM CPUs on iOS to Intel's x86 CPUs on Windows, which is completely ridiculous.
[doublepost=1567602833][/doublepost]

when i put my 6s+ next to the XR or XS, I'm appalled at how awful the decrease in PPI looks

Too bad the XS has higher PPI than the 6s Plus...

 

[chucker23n1]

The end result is a virtuous cycle where users are willing to pay $20 for an app like lumafusion, which in turn makes it worth their while to continue supporting said app.

So it’s not about having more apps in an absolute sense, but having more of the apps you want.

Exactly.

This discrepancy is sort of true on phones, but seems to be even more starkly the case on tablets.
[doublepost=1567605030][/doublepost]

Too bad the XS has higher PPI than the 6s Plus...

Debatable. The 6s Plus has 401ppi with three subpixels. The XS has 458ppi, but with four subpixels. They're not apples to apples.

 

[realtuner]

Nobody needs 5x number of apps because there that amount of ideas/use cases simply does not exist. Both Play Store and App Store are filled with tons and tons of identical mediocre apps. The point here is that market share did the trick in that Android app store reached and then surpassed App Store very quickly.

As far as revenues are concerned, it's very difficult to get the full picture. Here are a few factors:

* When they talk about the app store revenues, do they count advertising? Android apps prefer add-supported model.
* iOS has one App Store. Android has many (the main ones being Play Store and Amazon store but the Chinese app market is huge and it's not counted towards Play Store).
* Do Amazon's Prime subscriptions (which come with Prime Video) count as Android app revenues?

So, while App Store may have higher revenues than Play Store, Android may still be on top in total app revenues.

So many excuses. And so many goalposts I could kick a ball in any direction and still score.

Apparently the market share trick DID NOT do the trick due to the fact Android is useless on tablets and developers have all but ignored them. Since @Khedron failed in his attempt to list some "comparable" tablet Apps to rival what's on the iPad perhaps you want to try?

So it’s not about having more apps in an absolute sense, but having more of the apps you want. Just like how the iphone and iOS App Store having more profits despite smaller market share teaches us an important lesson - it’s not market share in a vacuum that matters, but usage share, especially when you realise that not all consumers are created equal.

No, no, no, no, NO.

You're doing it wrong. It's ALL about market share. That's the only thing that matters. /s

 

[falainber]

So many excuses. And so many goalposts I could kick a ball in any direction and still score.

Apparently the market share trick DID NOT do the trick due to the fact Android is useless on tablets and developers have all but ignored them. Since @Khedron failed in his attempt to list some "comparable" tablet Apps to rival what's on the iPad perhaps you want to try?



No, no, no, no, NO.

You're doing it wrong. It's ALL about market share. That's the only thing that matters. /s

Here are all the apps the tablets need:

* [G]Mail
* Office 365
* Skype
* Facebook
* Instagram
* Netflix
* ESPN
* HULU
* NBA
...

You get the picture. The apps you are talking about are probably used by less than 1% of the tablet users (and in most cases for the wrong reasons). It's really irrelevant.

 

[Falhófnir]

If it can eke out a little more performance using significantly less power that's still a real winner. Particularly given the 5nm A14 is meant to be the next really big step up.

 

[Justanotherfanboy]

Fair enough.

You are aiming at the definition of "standalone" device, but not my reasoning behind it. Yet, all l I'm trying to explain that this dream of having an Apple Watch untethered to the iPhone appears to be unrealistic. It doesn't benefit Apple as much as having it the way the setup currently is.

And having a cellular capability Apple Watch is anyone "best chance" at a standalone device.

Eventually, I’m sure there will be an option other than a smartphone... as far as your ONLY personal computing/communication device.
However, the reason that option does not exist today comes down to expectations and experience... not Apple trying to make more money.
You can’t enjoy consumable content on an Apple Watch (Netflix, YouTube, family photos, etc.), you can’t take photos on an Apple Watch, you can’t easily write posts like this one or respond to emails w/ more than just a word or two, comfortably. You can’t play full fledged games... and so on & so on.
In short. Giving an option of “hey, you can use this INSTEAD of a smartphone... go ahead and get rid of your phone!” w/ a device that does well nearly nothing that the majority of time spent on smartphones is spent doing wouldn’t so much cut into profits of people buying iPhones; more like make the company a laughingstock for pretending like the Apple Watch is anything but miles & miles & miles from being an adequate iPhone replacement.

 

[Aston441]

Window's overhead is minimal, maybe 2% load on a decent mobile CPU.

If your benchmark claims to be platform independent, but scores way lower on Windows, it's not platform independent.

Geekbench has been BS for a while now and people use it to compare Apple's ARM CPUs on iOS to Intel's x86 CPUs on Windows, which is completely ridiculous.
[doublepost=1567602833][/doublepost]
Too bad the XS has higher PPI than the 6s Plus...

incorrect

the pentile screen is objectively lower resolution per square inch on the XS

if your eyes are not good enough to see this, go get some new glasses, or even a magnifying glass and see for yourself

 

[realtuner]

Here are all the apps the tablets need:

* [G]Mail
* Office 365
* Skype
* Facebook
* Instagram
* Netflix
* ESPN
* HULU
* NBA
...

You get the picture. The apps you are talking about are probably used by less than 1% of the tablet users (and in most cases for the wrong reasons). It's really irrelevant.

Moving the goalposts yet again. It's no wonder you think tablets are toys - you don't actually use them for anything that you could already do on your phone. But it's OK, because it's not like you have a choice.

With iOS I can use a tablet for basic things (like you) or I can use a tablet for more complex things. I can choose to use it how I like because I have a wide range of options for Apps. With Android you only do simple things because there are no high-end Apps available. Which is what I've said all along.