if better performance is the innovation you want then every single iphone was highly innovative ....
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.
Samsung Galaxy S 4 Benchmarks Nearly Twice as Fast as iPhone 5
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
if better performance is the innovation you want then every single iphone was highly innovative ....
That's what happened to me. Way back when I had the 3GS I switched to a Charge because of the screen size and LTE. Used it for a bit than to the Galaxy Nexus and iPhone 5 I have now.
paper work , love it - looks like photoshop 
please can they like run Real Race 3 and lets see who the winner is
please can they like run Real Race 3 and lets see who the winner is
My MacBook has a single core at 1.6 GHz... How do you think I feel?
My iMac only has two cores at 2.4 GHz each!
If you're looking at raw performance, does it really impress?
The benchmark shows that 4 Cores at 1.9 GHz on the S4 is twice as fast as Apple's 2 Cores at 1.3 GHz on the iPhone 5, correct?
What if the S4 had just 2 cores? That means Core vs Core, the "new" chip at 1.9 GHz is the same speed as the "old" chip at 1.3 GHz.
The benchmark shows that 4 Cores at 1.9 GHz on the S4 is twice as fast as Apple's 2 Cores at 1.3 GHz on the iPhone 5, correct?
What if the S4 had just 2 cores? That means Core vs Core, the "new" chip at 1.9 GHz is the same speed as the "old" chip at 1.3 GHz.
I think you might be missing the point. Apple could have made their A6 faster but chose not too because it was not necessary in order to run iOS 6 and most likely because it would lead to higher battery consumption. So, actually, it should be as fast as necessary, not as fast as possible.
I know Apple comes off as lame with some of their reasons to do or not do things but when they say that specs aren't THAT important, they are very right.
The Galaxy S 4 has a quad core CPU in the Snapsdragon 600 and each of it's cores are clocked at 1,9Ghz while the dual core Apple Swift CPU in the A6 are clocked at 1,3Ghz. The A6 is already a really fast chip since it smokes the Tegra 3 and is neck to neck with the quad core 1,4Ghz Exynos 4412.
But is anyone here really surprised? It's like comparing a 1,7Ghz dual core i5 to a 3,4Ghz quad core i7.
I say: let's wait for a quad core Apple Swift2 and then we'll talk.
But is anyone here really surprised? It's like comparing a 1,7Ghz dual core i5 to a 3,4Ghz quad core i7.
I say: let's wait for a quad core Apple Swift2 and then we'll talk.
Last edited:
Maybe, but we have used Android 4.2.2 devices and I have to say, nothing makes four cores feel like a single core more than Android. Maybe this new Samsung chip will finally be fast enough not to notice.
That's about what I'd expect; the S III's CPU is a 4-core 1.4GHz and benchmarks in synthetic Geekbench roughly the same as the iPhone 5's 2-core 1.3GHz, but I'm much more interested in seeing real-world benchmark results.
See, despite having roughly equivalent Geekbench performance (which gives you raw CPU capability, although might overly weight things like memory speed), you get tests like these from Barefeats or AnandTech. Barefeats has an S III (running Android 4.0) performing at roughly half the speed of an iPhone 5 in Javascript Sunspider, and 2-3 times better GPU performance. (It was also nearly 4 times faster in Linpack, which seems weird; I assume that's due to some problem with Linpack on Android.)
If you don't trust BareFeats because they're a Mac-centric site (though never one that shies away from showing a Windows box as faster in a head-to-head test), Anandtech certainly isn't, and their benchmark has the iPhone 5 1.6 times faster in Sunspider.
Point being, synthetic performance does not, by any means, equal real-world performance. I do expect the S4 to be faster than the iPhone 5, but I'm not convinced it will be by as much of a margin as Geekbench implies until I see some practical tests.
See, despite having roughly equivalent Geekbench performance (which gives you raw CPU capability, although might overly weight things like memory speed), you get tests like these from Barefeats or AnandTech. Barefeats has an S III (running Android 4.0) performing at roughly half the speed of an iPhone 5 in Javascript Sunspider, and 2-3 times better GPU performance. (It was also nearly 4 times faster in Linpack, which seems weird; I assume that's due to some problem with Linpack on Android.)
If you don't trust BareFeats because they're a Mac-centric site (though never one that shies away from showing a Windows box as faster in a head-to-head test), Anandtech certainly isn't, and their benchmark has the iPhone 5 1.6 times faster in Sunspider.
Point being, synthetic performance does not, by any means, equal real-world performance. I do expect the S4 to be faster than the iPhone 5, but I'm not convinced it will be by as much of a margin as Geekbench implies until I see some practical tests.
No surprise to see a big processor shoehorned into the S4 to make up for the pig of an operating system (Android) that it runs.
And the keyboard still sucks. The keyboard on my work SIII is one of the main reasons I don't give up my iPhone for personal use. What good is a benchmark if the words I type never show up correctly? I can erase the letters and retype faster??
All fps and no resolution makes chaos86 a dull boy.
Seriously, are you writing for native iPhone resolutions? And the GS4 and other 1080p phones have to do a lot of heavy lifting.
At the end of the day - it's about real world usage.
Why people are seemingly trying to either discredit or find some rationalization is beyond me.
To date - this phone benchmarks twice as fast as the iPhone 5. Period. If it benchmarked the same or worse people would be bragging on how the iPhone kicks ass.
Stop rationalizing. Wait until their are real reviews/you use one yourself/etc.
Why people are seemingly trying to either discredit or find some rationalization is beyond me.
To date - this phone benchmarks twice as fast as the iPhone 5. Period. If it benchmarked the same or worse people would be bragging on how the iPhone kicks ass.
Stop rationalizing. Wait until their are real reviews/you use one yourself/etc.
The keyboard in the S4 is Swiftkey.
And, if you don't like the stock keyboard you can change it
And the keyboard still sucks. The keyboard on my work SIII is one of the main reasons I don't give up my iPhone for personal use. What good is a benchmark if the words I type never show up correctly? I can erase the letters and retype faster??
Funny - because SwiftKey Flow is exactly why I use my Skyrocket FAR more than my iPhone.
And the keyboard still sucks. The keyboard on my work SIII is one of the main reasons I don't give up my iPhone for personal use. What good is a benchmark if the words I type never show up correctly? I can erase the letters and retype faster??
And keyboards? Sounds like a BB user. First, swype and swiftkey are great. But now I just hit the microphone button.
So... Uh... What about battery life. While running apps requiring that performance?
Unless Samsung is building batteries out of magic dust, that has to be a devastating performance hit and something you really wish to avoid.
Unless Samsung is building batteries out of magic dust, that has to be a devastating performance hit and something you really wish to avoid.
8 core should be fast. The problem is the software is poorly written so they need it just for semi-smooth performance
Do you realize the software isn't done yet? They still have 1-2 months before the phone is released? Do I realize that they SHOULD have had better software running right now - sure. But as someone wrote on one of the sites - when you pay the kind of money you do to have your keynote at RCMH and everything that goes with it .... you don't delay your product unveiling. You just make sure it does everything it's supposed to when it hits the public. Or yes - you're doomed