Ondrej Holzman Fears that one iPhone 6S could last longer on the battery than the other, because one has a processor from Samsung and the other from TSMC, we can probably definitively dispel. Further more detailed tests confirmed Apple's claim that in real use the two chips differ only minimally.
On the fact that Apple decided to diversify the production of the key component of the new iPhone 6S - the A9 chip - between Samsung and TSMC, she pointed out dissection at the end of September chipworks. Subsequently, curious users began to compare identical iPhones with different processors, which differ in size due to production technology, and in certain tests it was found, that chips from TSMC are much less demanding on the battery.
Finally, to the unfolding case Apple had to react, who stated that "the actual battery life of the iPhone 6S and iPhone 6S Plus, even accounting for differences in components, varies by 2 to 3 percent," which is undetectable to the user under normal load. And just these numbers now confirmed by tests magazine ArsTechnica.
Two identical iPhone 6S models were compared, but each with a processor from a different manufacturer. Both with the SIM card removed and the display set to the same brightness passed a total of four tests. On the one hand, ArsTechnica checked Geekbench, through which others have previously tested different chips, and in the end, only in this test, which uses the processor at 55 to 60 percent all the time, was the difference between the processors more noticeable, more than the mentioned two to three percent.
In the WebGL test, the processor is also constantly under load, but slightly less (45 to 50 percent) and the results from it were practically identical. The same was true for GFXBench. Both measurements put iPhones about as much stress as a 3D game can. TSMC's A9 performed slightly better in one test, and Samsung's in the other.
The last measurement is the closest to reality, which ArsTechnica she did by letting the web page load every 15 seconds before the iPhone died. Difference: 2,3%.
ArsTechnica notes that the phone with a chip from Samsung, with some exceptions, had a consistently worse battery life than the phone with a chip from TSMC, but the only major difference was only the Geekbench test, during which the processor is exploited in a way that the user usually does not burden it at all during normal use.
For most of the time, the batteries in all iPhone 6S should last a similar amount of time. The numbers given by Apple match, and most users shouldn't notice a difference between a TSMC and Samsung processor.
Well, according to the graph, it looks like there really is a difference in processor consumption. The more the processor is used and the less the other parts, the shorter the iPhone with the Samsung processor looks. when talking on the phone, viewing e-mails and the web, the difference is minimal, and if the processor is working properly, the difference in endurance can be higher than 20%.
That's how I see it too. The truth is that most users will never use the iPhone and then it doesn't matter, but it can be used and then it's a problem. The heat will probably be different as well, it seems to me that the 6s+ heats up more with the Samsung than the 6+.
So it's like a 4ky with signal reception. Everything is OK and it was enough to hold the phone correctly. Now, for a change, just use the phone correctly.
Probably Sony this year