Michal Marek On a popular YouTube channel PhoneBuff appeared a video comparing the real speed of the almost year-old iPhone 6S and Samsung's brand new top model called the Galaxy Note 7. The test, in which the iPhone has already successfully competed with many of this year's flagships, turned out to be a clear victory for the iPhone, despite the hardware assumptions on paper.
[su_pullquote align=”right”]This does not necessarily mean that the iPhone is a better phone.[/su_pullquote]The PhoneBuff channel tests the speed of phones by running a series of 14 demanding apps and games and rendering video, with the "race" having two rounds. Although the iPhone 6S has a year-old, weaker processor on paper and only 2 GB of RAM, and the Note 7 has a newer processor with double the RAM, the iPhone won in this test "by a steamer", so to speak.
The iPhone completed its two laps in one minute and fifty-one seconds. The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 needed two minutes and forty-nine seconds.
[su_youtube url=”https://youtu.be/3-61FFoJFy0″ width=”640″]
The test proves the still-valid fact that Android phone manufacturers fail to harmonize software and hardware to match iPhone devices in speed. In short, thanks to the famous fragmentation, Android is much more demanding on hardware, and phone manufacturers have to come up with more powerful hardware so that their phones can match the speed of iPhones, which are weaker on paper.
However, this does not necessarily mean that the iPhone is a better phone. Few people will launch applications in the same way as it is done in the test, and it should be noted that the biggest advantage of the iPhone was when loading games.
The Note 7 also has its big advantages. Compared to the iPhone 6S Plus, the Note makes much better use of the potential of the large display, not only through optimization for the S Pen, but also through many software gadgets, led by the ability to split the display and thus work with two applications at once. Let's also add features such as fast wireless charging, water resistance or unlocking by sensing the human iris, and the iPhone can turn pale with envy. In addition, Samsung manages to fit a beautiful large display into a relatively much smaller body and shows that in the field of hardware Apple is unfortunately not the king at the moment.
One of the last advantages of Apple.. Fine-tuned system.. It's just a shame that it can't run on hardware with the performance and functions of Samsung's...
that probably wouldn't make sense...or do you see one? The only point of all this debugging is Apple's earnings. Debug and save on HW, which is therefore not needed. Both Apple and the customer are satisfied.
For Samsung, this only confirms the pointlessness of high resolution, and from the lasing video it can be seen that the resolution alone does not slow down the mobile phone. It's just great for the money.
Well, I thought perhaps waterproofing, smaller dimensions of the phone and so on. I am satisfied with the processor and graphics performance, but I would take the 4gb ram.. Personally, I still hope that Apple will learn from the competition and use the display size a bit.. Personally, I hope for 2 apps and picture kn picture at least on the plus side, but we will see..
What do you want to save??? parts in such series cost practically the same...
It's still true no matter Android knocks down any add-ons and updates are the exception rather than the norm. That's his main problem - but Google doesn't mind, he collects just as at one time MS also had its system expanded at any cost...
I don't want to save anything, but Apple will save a lot if it optimizes the system to 2GB and a weaker processor on paper, unlike the sporadically functional Android with 4 or more GB. As you write, it's a matter of the system and Apple works with it. And I don't think that parts in such a quantity are practically the same. If that were the case, the memory is already there anyway.
Apple does not optimize anything to 2GB, with today's application requirements, 2GB of RAM is plenty at FullHD resolution for all activities, but the phone may not keep as many browser tabs in memory as if it had 4GB of RAM.
The 1GB of RAM in the older iPhone 6 is still usable at the "roughly HD" resolution that the smaller iPhone 5S/6 have.
If Apple installs a QHD panel in the future, it will have to put at least 3GB of RAM, otherwise it will end up similar to the iPhone 6 Plus, which had FullHD and 1GB and constantly killed apps, and didn't even keep 3rd party keyboards in memory.
On the other hand, Apple regularly installs a powerful SoC, and as such, coughs on optimization.
Today, a SoC with performance at the Apple A8 level is sufficient for most normal activities (including gaming).
Those who want a well-optimized Android will choose Nexus 5X/6P, Moto X Play/Style/Force, Sony Z and X series or something from Xiaomi or OnePlus.
http://goo.gl/Si7ywT
The XA Ultra with Helio P10 performance at the level of the Apple A8 is actually not that much slower than the 6S Plus with the Apple A9, which has up to a third higher performance, both devices have FullHD and 2GB of RAM, which makes them better for comparison.
Xperia XA Ultra MTK Helio P10 Geekbench Multi-Core 2992
iPhone 6 Apple A8 Geekbench Multi-Core 2935
iPhone 6S Apple A9 Geekbench Multi-Core 4370
Yes, thank you for the correction, Apple optimizes the system even only to 1GB and where, of course, nothing is just about tabs in the browser, but about memory management so that nothing is lost, nothing is dropped, the display was fast, i.e. normal usability so that the user does not have to deal with HW.
iMac, Mac Pro... the entire line with OS X is designed by Apple itself, previously PowerMac was designed outside of the Intel platform. So it's purely a business point of view of Apple that it doesn't focus on gamers. The GPU at the time of MacPro 2013 launch was powerful enough. Apple does not optimize the system for either 1GB RAM or 2GB RAM, Apple just installs panels with a low resolution, so rendering is not demanding on RAM memory. There is nothing more to it. In tablets, Apple cares about it even more, the iPad Pro has a straight twelve-core GPU.
So I don't know, but Apple was at least one of the first to push the resolution of computers, phones and tablets higher. The fact that it's already running into nonsense today is a different matter. When it makes sense for Apple, they will push it further, but personally I don't see a reason. And today's version of VR is definitely not the reason.
If we compare the resolution of the first iPad with Retina and the RAM expansion to only 1GB, when the competition with a similar or even lower resolution went to 2GB and still not so well, I am afraid that it will definitely not be what you describe. It certainly won't be the only reason.
That test is pointless and very stupidly done, understandable USER EXPERIENCE tests are done by Tech Trinkets channel, not PERFORMANCE tests. Of course, the raw performance of the SoC has an effect on the system response, another parameter is the system optimization and the value of the screen resolution. In contrast, benchmarks are performed offscreen, so for a benchmark that measures device performance, the display resolution has no effect on the result.
1) Samsung with the TouchWiz superstructure has one of the worst optimizations of all Androids. Anyone who wants to use Samsung and get the most out of the otherwise bloated hardware should download CyanogenMOD, which is better optimized, to Gaysung.
2) The optimization of pure Android, add-ons from Sony, OxygenOS for OnePlus3, CyanogenMOD, FlymeOS or MIUI is at an excellent level, I dare say better than iOS9.x.
3) Although Apple has only a few models in its range, it has failed to optimize the software of the iOS8.x and iOS9.x systems, instead of the traditionally excellent system optimization that we were used to from the time of Steve Jobs, the last time with iOS6, it became an absolute tragedy under Cook's leadership. Apple only increases the raw performance of the SoC in the latest models, so the phones are fast, but this is not due to software optimization.
4) Effect of resolution on environment performance and user experience.
Most topend androids have QHD resolution. iPhones all have "roughly HD" resolution (5S, SE, 6,6, 6S) and only a minimum of iPhones on the market have at least FullHD (6 Plus and 169S Plus), which is otherwise common with most Androids starting at $6. The higher the resolution, the higher the hardware requirements for system smoothness and RAM memory. RAM memory is a very important value for a higher resolution, which is why the iPhone 1 Plus with 3GB of RAM was such a flop that it couldn't even keep a 2rd party keyboard in RAM. Currently, the reasonable minimum for smooth system operation is 3GB of RAM for a FullHD panel, XNUMXGB of RAM for a QHD panel.
If we want to compare directly, the optimal situation can be considered when we put another device with a display of the same resolution value and roughly comparable SoC performance against the 6S Plus with a FullHD panel. Only in this case can a certain degree of software optimization be evaluated. On the other hand, when, for example, a mobile phone with the same powerful SoC as the Apple A9 and a higher display resolution than the 6S Plus is faster than the 95S Plus with iOS6.x in 9% of all activities, it can be safely said that the software optimization of the device with QHD resolution is at a higher level than iOS9.x.
5) Benchmark comparison.
Benchmarks are performed offscreen, for a benchmark that measures device performance, the display resolution has no effect on the result.
AnTuTu can be excluded from the comparison, which changes its methodology with every second release and individual comparisons are not very relevant. Screenshot from AnTuTu help guide http://i.imgur.com/i7J4LFO.png
For multi-platform comparison, the GeekBench3 benchmark is suitable, if we are interested in the raw performance of the SoC, then the Multi-Core Score is the most telling value. In all activities, the vast majority of devices use MultiCore power. Single-Core performance is usually used by a mobile phone running iOS or Android only when it is asleep, with the display off or in specific activities. Realistically, if the performance requirement is an important parameter, only the MultiCore Score is. For game players, in addition to the MultiCore performance, the score in the GFXbench or 3Dmark benchmarks is interesting. If you don't play games, you may not be interested in these values. It is good to point out that you cannot read from any benchmark how long it will take for the SoC to start throttling and underclocking at full performance. Such a situation never occurs during normal activity, it is an essential parameter for game players. http://goo.gl/IkNHo9
6) Tech Trinkets conducts user experience tests, both app launch speed and multitasking.
Comparison of Nexus 6P with Snapdragon810v2 and iPhone 6S Plus with Apple A9.
Both SoCs have roughly the same MultiCore performance. The Nexus 6P has a QHD resolution of 3 pixels, the iPhone 686S Plus 400 pixels. http://goo.gl/qiGT8P
The Nexus 6P is faster than the 95S Plus in 6% of activities, even though it has a multiple times higher display resolution. The SoCs of both phones are similarly powerful, which means that the optimization of pure Android is at a much better level than the optimization of iOS9.x.
I'm not the only one who has noticed what Apple has done with iPhones:
Profits are great. Apple should make profits, but some people aren't blind to what apple is doing to its customers, which is giving them what would be a mid-range $299 device, for android flagship prices. And, is one of the reasons Apple is losing customers. No doubt that iOS is great, but that doesn't change the fact that Samsung (and many others) are giving their customers 2560×1440 resolutions ( yes, you CAN see a difference ) vs. 750p/1080p as well as 3-6GB ram vs 1-2GB. (yes, I get that iOS doesn't "need" those specs to run smoothly) but you are paying for it even though you aren't "getting" those specs.
All { Flagship } android devices ship with Double the internal storage (yes android + oem skin takes up a little more room than iOS, but still end up with WAY more user available in the end on android) Not to mention SD card for more storage for music and pictures.
Apple 90% profits is because they are ripping you off on cheap hardware parts. 750p is a joke just like a 16Gb phone in 2016.
750p 2GB phones on android sell for $199 and they still make a small profit. Apple users pay $650 for that same hardware because of iOS/ecosystem I guess. If apple charged $499 for the 6S, they would still be making a massive profit. The 6S has about $140 in parts. Apple users pay that 400% markup. I am all for apple making profit, but for the money, I should be getting better parts. I want 1080p on the 6S. I want 1440p on the 6S Plus. I want 3GB ram so that when iOS 12 comes out, if I still have my phone, it doesn't slow down to being nearly useless. I want certified water resistance like galaxy phones have. I want wireless charging. I want to be able to add an SD card or have 64GB internal storage (not 16GB) for a $650+ phone.
They can still make profits and give us something WORTH $700.
http://goo.gl/lDMPfP
with lapsing video, the resolution is the same, there you can compare it. And I'm not really interested in what and how I should compare when the result in use is a drag. So what are they basing this pointless distinction on?
kua, I'll just sign this below :D my words
I don't see why the Tech Trinkets test should be better than the one in the article. Tech Trinkets compares apps on ios and android that are not exactly the same on both platforms. Everyone has a different animation and that's why it seems that the nexus could be faster than the iphone even if they are the same speed (maybe the iphone is a hair faster, but those milliseconds don't matter anymore in my opinion). PhoneBuff at least compares applications that have the same animation and thus can be compared on both platforms. The test it performs also corresponds to the frequent use of a mobile phone in life. A person takes a picture, then edits it, plays a game, and here I can easily jump in the parts.
Even if the test from Phone Buff might not be quite as objective, it is at least as objective as the test from your Tech Trinkets. ;-)
Of course, you don't buy the best hardware from Apple, but I don't think that's the point here either, it's similar to the megapixel factories in cameras. A person does not always need the best when the whole works well. ;-)
The bias of PhoneBuff is precisely that it launches apps one after the other and tracks the total time...grr it's not good. Tech Trinkets always compares apps at the same time, the browser too... so it's nice to see which of the phones is faster in which situations and when, for example, only an app has a different animation. This is what a user experience test should look like. What PhoneBuff presents is a comparison by idiots and for idiots. Anyone who is interested in how individual devices are really doing with user experience requires a face to face comparison.
First of all, Tech Trinkets always conducts a multitasking test, thanks to this type of test, aggressive RAM management was found in the first version of the OxygenOS build of the OnePlus3.
When I run the PhoneBuff test, even though it is confusing, not all apps on both platforms have the same animations, even if they do, it would be stupid to compare only apps that have "identical" animations. Because both systems are different, even if the app has the same name, it is written differently on both competing systems, may have different hw requirements, etc.
It's evident in the test that the Nexus 6P doesn't seem like it could be faster. Nexus 6P is faster in 95% of all apps and web browsing.
Iris unlocking? Let the author try it, nobody has invented anything so annoying and tedious for a long time - by the way, MS came up with it in 950XL and it still doesn't work properly today.
With MS, it was "traditionally" a scam, phones were unlocked only by eye color, it was discovered by accident when someone accidentally unlocked a foreign Lumia.
Exactly.. Samsung technology is much more tuned atm in terms of accuracy or speed. I find the area of eye scanning and interaction with them (scrolling in text, etc.) to be interesting, but it runs into a whole range of problems, such as non-functionality for people with glasses or poor functioning in poor lighting conditions. You also have to hold the phone quite close to your face.
“The iPhone completed its two laps in one minute and twenty-one seconds. The Samsung Galaxy Note 7 needed two minutes and four seconds.”
The iPhone did 2 laps in 1:51, the Samsung Galaxy Note 7 in 2:49.
Yes, fixed. The original data were split times after the first round.
A clearer comparison of S7 Edge vs iPhone 6S Plus.
The S7 Edge with a QHD panel has about 5400 points in GeekBench. iPhone 6S Plus with FullHD, 4400 point GeekBench. It comes out half and half, sometimes the iPhone is faster, other times the S7 Edge. Anyway, compared to Nexus 6P, which has pure Android, it is clear that Samsung's TouchWiz optimization is at a worse level, especially when it has more than 20% more powerful SoC than 6S Plus or Nexus6P. http://goo.gl/xKMqOg
But the US version of the Note 7 with the much worse Snap Dragon 820 was tested, the Exynos version that is current for our market is much faster in the tested things. (Snap has a faster GPU on the other hand)
What's so special about this???
This was a test note 7 with snapdragon and
not with exynos which doesn't matter but everyone knows ios is faster
than android and therefore this article and video have no telling
value, rather than pointing to the incompetence of those who present this here.
6s will be faster than any android and not just note 7
It is clear that Apple is behind in terms of HW. But on the SW side, it is still further. Updates are a problem with Android. The latest system has a couple of flagships and most of the time it doesn't even have security updates. I have a Note 3 myself. I bought it a year and a half ago. It had android 4.4.2. After half a year I got 5.0 with great glory. This version cut my battery life by a day. Two before that. This was a known issue with version 5.0. Most mobile phones of other brands with version 5.0 received an update to 5.0.1 or 5.0.2 quite quickly. Note 3 nothing. Still 5.0. Although I have the option to put some alternative rom, but that's just with the Note series, where you lose the most important thing and that is the pen, it's not possible. I understand the note 3 is a 3 year old phone but I bought it a year and a half ago. For 12200. And I am without support. The phone is practically unsellable. I charge daily. If I bought an iPhone back then, I'm guaranteed an update for a few more years. So from Android, for the next time, maybe only Nexuses. But even there the update ends after 3 years. The price for the Nexus 6P is also quite high, but it still doesn't have enough for Apple updates.
The error is not in Android, the error is that you chose Samsung. If you chose Nexus, you don't have to deal with updates at all. Updates are constantly flowing to the 5X and 6P. Currently Android7 Nougat. Sony's Z and X series also have excellent support for updates.
It is true. But I wanted Note advice because of the stylus. I use it quite a bit. Otherwise I would go to Samsung. Unfortunately, no one else made a similar phone. It has a stylus, it can work with multiple windows, so you can easily have 5 windows on top of each other. I use two applications like this quite often. If it can do pure android, I'll just buy a Nexus. I must have made the mistake of trying to save money. At the time when I bought the Note 3 for 12200, the Note 4 was on sale for less than 20. If I had bought it, today I would have a better display, android 6.0.1, Nougat on the way and a better camera. Lessons for priste. Don't be shy about buying the latest phones.
nj
Otherwise, another consideration for those who claim that there is no need for such a resolution of the display as the Note 7 has. This resolution is there only and only because of virtual reality, and for this reason it will increase. iPhones are unusable for VR. The future iPhone will also get these resolutions and it won't be long. Otherwise, FullHD on such a small display is enough, but VR demands more.
Virtual reality on mobile. I haven't seen a more demented idea. The same stupidity and allure as 3D on TV. There are already a lot of glasses rolling around the bazaars because they are unsolved eye-damaging crap. Apple is researching AR, which has given it a bigger future than VR, which has not moved anywhere in development for 20 years. It's still about the dementedly robust glasses on your head now with a phone.
Unfortunately, I am one of the owners of an IPHONE 6+, I charge it twice a day and I can tell you that I have NEVER had a bigger problem. I'm already looking for a buyer. And further? The choice is clear HP ELITE X2. Super system, BANG OLUFSEN STEREO SPEAKER!! Only the speaker is worth more than 3 iPhones!!
EPL-NEVER AGAIN
That's why most people have HP, no one wants Apple stores. It's hard to find a buyer
But this is a theoretical level. I need the phone for work and video rendering, do not run games on it. And I don't appreciate the speed of playing pool while waiting in the doctor's waiting room. And the actual use of the phone starts with e-mail and ends with the web browser. Their performance is sufficient not all without need. And if I appreciate something, it's a high-quality and fast camera, and unfortunately Apple hasn't excelled there for a long time