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

Which chip does your 6s(6s+) have?

Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: doboy, brianjsw, Simacca and 3 others
Che Castro said:
Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
Click to expand...

uh what.. now you've confused me too :p

what is going on :confused:

maybe the samsung is the better one this week, seems to swap every week :p
 
  • Like
Reactions: doboy, brianjsw, iAstonish and 2 others
Che Castro said:
Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
Click to expand...

Now, all the people who returned their Samsung chip phones to get a TSMC chip phone are going to return their TSMC chip phones to try to get the Samsung one back!

Wakka wakka wakka!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: doboy, brianjsw, iAstonish and 2 others
eric3312 said:
Now, all the people who returned their Samsung chip phones to get a TSMC chip phone are going to return their TSMC chip phones and try to get the Samsung one back!

Wakka wakka wakka!
Click to expand...

you can count on it :p, oh and btw, didn't you ask about the lirum app the other day?, hopefully I have the right person, hope things are better with that whole situation and it didn't stop you enjoying your phone too much :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kris28 and eric3312
CraigGB said:
you can count on it :p, oh and btw, didn't you ask about the lirum app the other day?, hopefully I have the right person, hope things are better with that whole situation and it didn't stop you enjoying your phone too much :)
Click to expand...

Yes I am enjoying my phone. Thanks for your feedback and kind words.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CraigGB
Che Castro said:
Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
Click to expand...

Perfection! LMAO!
 
  • Like
Reactions: iAstonish, eric3312 and CraigGB
Dented said:
Perfection! LMAO!
Click to expand...

Sounds like a thorough analysis too. I'm not an expert on the matter but the explanations of everything seemed pretty good to me.

Looks like they did their homework and really put time and attention into making the tests thorough, and as close to real life as they could.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianjsw
eric3312 said:
Sounds like a thorough analysis too. I'm not an expert on the matter but the explanations of everything seemed pretty good to me.

Looks like they did their homework and really put time and attention into making the tests thorough, and as close to real life as they could.
Click to expand...
It's very credible, and it's once again flagging this Geekbench test (however many times its run) as pretty spurious.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eric3312
Your lives will be better if you just don't bother checking which chip you have. It's a new iPhone release and you've got that brand new lovely device in your hands so, just enjoy it!
But if you notice your battery draining faster than usual, try restoring to factory settings via iTunes and set up as new. Use it how you would! Enjoy life! Capture moments with your 12mp camera! Browse the web! After couple of days usage and if the battery problem isn't fixed, then, take it back to Apple!
 
  • Like
Reactions: evorc and CraigGB
Che Castro said:
Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
Click to expand...

Now it's samsung's turn to revel in the iPhone chip glory!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kris28 and iAstonish
Che Castro said:
Now I'm confused


http://www.tomshardware.com/news/iphone-6s-a9-samsung-vs-tsmc,30306.html


Based on the results of our testing, it's clear that both versions of Apple's A9 SoC deliver the same level of performance, but Samsung's 14nm FinFET process appears to offer slightly better power efficiency, extending battery life between 3.5-10.8 percent. This is a little more than the 2-3 percent quoted by Apple, but not much, and it equates to only about 5-15 minutes of runtime under the most extreme conditions.
Click to expand...

Interestingly, they didn't test battery life with Geekbench, which seems like a huge oversight, since that is what caused the debate in the first place.

Arstechnica did, and while their results with other benchmarks were similar to Toms, the Geekbench tests matched what others have found.

http://arstechnica.com/apple/2015/10/samsung-vs-tsmc-comparing-the-battery-life-of-two-apple-a9s/


So, the question is (IMO) - WHY does the geekbench battery test fare so badly on the Samsung chip?
And are there any real world uses (however uncommon) where users will see the difference?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kris28
Sywofp said:
Interestingly, they didn't test battery life with Geekbench, which seems like a huge oversight, since that is what caused the debate in the first place.
Click to expand...

I read that as quite deliberate - they have a consistent approach to this kind of testing which they always apply, they think is a good measure of "real world", and which doesn't happen to include Geekbench.

Geekbench is just one of various artificial tests, and the only one returning the sort of results that it's returning. The longer this goes on the more the performance of that test is starting to look suspect rather than the chip.
 
  • Like
Reactions: brianjsw and eric3312
Dented said:
I read that as quite deliberate - they have a consistent approach to this kind of testing which they always apply, they think is a good measure of "real world", and which doesn't happen to include Geekbench.

Geekbench is just one of various artificial tests, and the only one returning the sort of results that it's returning. The longer this goes on the more the performance of that test is starting to look suspect rather than the chip.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. Which IMO is why it is a shame they didn't test those results for themselves, and try and figure out what is causing the difference and if the test is suspect.

I have a chemistry background, and to me, the weird outlier result is usually the most interesting.

Ignoring it is always an option, but figuring out what caused the outlier is the only way to ensure your overall testing conclusions are accurate.
 
Dented said:
I read that as quite deliberate - they have a consistent approach to this kind of testing which they always apply, they think is a good measure of "real world", and which doesn't happen to include Geekbench.

Geekbench is just one of various artificial tests, and the only one returning the sort of results that it's returning. The longer this goes on the more the performance of that test is starting to look suspect rather than the chip.
Click to expand...

I been saying it all along it pretty clear that when the Galaxy s6 battery benchmark is better than the 6 plus that the test doesn't mean ****.
 
The solution is to get both then whatever the internet says is the best chip that day you can carry that phone around :). Too me, at the end of the day, I don't think there is a true winner. Probably more variation of other factors.
 
At this point don't bother to find out and enjoy. If you get a TCMP it will be worse today and better tomorrow and this flip flop for awhile.
 
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