iPhone X Geekbench BLOWS any Android phone away

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, Aytex said:

but we all know apples A chipset is far superior than Android's.

Historically, Apple's chipset has boasted worse RAW performance. But iOS has vastly superior resource handling than Android, most other mobile operating systems do/did.

And what few times Apple has superior hardware, it's becuase Qualcomm and Samsung haven't pushed their new chips yer.

2 minutes ago, Sauron said:

as you would expect given the core counts of their chips compared to their competitors

A10X is a 3+3. It might act as a Hexacore on the iPad Pro, IDK. But the A11 is a 2+4 high/low perf, and supposedly works the same as Qualcomm's hexacore and octocore. Only 4 cores active. Only difference is Qualcomm has a 4+2 high/low.

 

2 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Ummm or you could compare said benchmarks between them and said iphone that was released at the same time and do a performance test and even though the iphone smokes it in benchmarks, in real world use the iphone loses in response time.

I don't care about synthetics on mobile. Real world usage, neither the Pixel or Nexus are smoking anything with the same level of hardware.

[Sauron]

1 minute ago, AluminiumTech said:

Yes but Apple unveiled their new 2nd gen Performance Controller which is able to utilize all the CPU cores at once in some situations. So......

Interesting, although I wonder what the situations are and if all cores just blast out at full power in that situation (drawing what, 50% more power than normal peak?) or the 2 high performance cores will scale down.

[Devin92]

tbh, i dont see why people still focus on mobile phone benchmarks. my s7 is still very smooth and lag free. so is the iphone6 plus as my previous daily driver. there's little to no reason to go higher and higher performance since mobile phone can not replace PC for heavy computing anyway, so why bother?

 

instead, i really would prefer iphoneX made on screen finger printer scanner work, also provide a longer battery life (well, also the headphone jack, but we all know thats not gonna happen). these are more practical to make everyday use much easier.

[Drak3]

3 minutes ago, Devin92 said:

tbh, i dont see why people still focus on mobile phone benchmarks. my s7 is still very smooth and lag free. so is the iphone6 plus as my previous daily driver. there's little to no reason to go higher and higher performance since mobile phone can not replace PC for heavy computing anyway, so why bother?

 

instead, i really would prefer iphoneX made on screen finger printer scanner work, also provide a longer battery life (well, also the headphone jack, but we all know thats not gonna happen). these are more practical to make everyday use much easier.

I tackle this one piece at a time, pyo.

People care because it gives psuedofacts to validate their purchases, pyo. Instead of focusing on the experience and what the entire package is capable of, they focus on a single aspect, pyo.

 

As for the fingerprint scanner, the iP8 has it, pyo. The main differences between the 8 and the 10 come down to the higher PPI edge to edge screen and lack of home button, pyo. Other hardware is the same, pyo. I agree on the headphone jack, pyo.

[DildorTheDecent]

13 minutes ago, mynameisjuan said:

Like I dont think many people can grasp the challenge android has. Like with windows having to support a plethora of hardware indirectly.

Yup. Android is massively fragmented. Google is getting better though. Some of the companies, not so much. I think I only got 2 releases on my old HTC One X 4.1 and 4.2 Kinda disappointed. S7 Edge will enjoy 8.0 don't think 9.0 will be there though. 

 

Where as the iPhone 8 and iPhone X can enjoy the next 4 or so major releases. but then again. It doesn't have to deal with some of the hardware variations like Android does. 

[The Benjamins]

Is someone also going to tell me this is as fast as an Ryzen 3 1200

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=1200

[PlayStation 2]

The best benchmarks is how much use you get out of a phone and not meaningless numbers from a synthetic benchmark.

In this case, I'd imagine the iPhone X could very easily keep up with the fastest of the Android pack, but it means nothing to the end user when whatever they prefer offer good experiences.

[Qwerty2323]

For years apple great chips have barely been able to work with 720p screens and have poor battery....

While android has been going for over 3 years with 1440p displays and decent battery...

It is not all about raw power....

[Arika]

I'm curious. what do people do on their phone that needs this much processing power?

[TidaLWaveZ]

I don't get why people are surprised that this will be better than a CPU that came out 6 months before it, it should be better.

 

What's the GPU look like on this thing?

 

Lastly if anyone argues all blame should go to the OP for the amazing thread title.

[Dylanc1500]

3 minutes ago, Sierra Fox said:

I'm curious. what do people do on their phone that needs this much processing power?

Retina VR Porn lunch break fap session.

 

That's honestly all I can come up with. I use mine to call text and browse the Internet.

[Drak3]

9 minutes ago, Sierra Fox said:

I'm curious. what do people do on their phone that needs this much processing power?

Some people, ultimate porn experience. Others, games.

[Sauron]

47 minutes ago, Qwerty2323 said:

For years apple great chips have barely been able to work with 720p screens and have poor battery....

While android has been going for over 3 years with 1440p displays and decent battery...

It is not all about raw power....

To be fair that has nothing to do with the chip itself. The screen's resolution and the battery's capacity have been limited for other reasons.

[TidaLWaveZ]

I'm calling BS, that 2.4 looks extremely suspect to me especially in the crisp picture compared to actual Geekbench pages.

 

I still wouldn't be surprised, there's iphone 7 plus results close to this.

 

 

DEBUNKED

[The Benjamins]

6 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

I'm calling BS, that 2.4 looks extremely suspect to me especially in the crisp picture compared to actual Geekbench pages.

 

I still wouldn't be surprised, there's iphone 7 plus results close to this.

 

 

 

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=iphone10

[TidaLWaveZ]

3 minutes ago, The Benjamins said:

https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=✓&q=iphone10

How did you find that?

 

Even when I search it doesn't show up for me.

 

I guess you have to specifically type in iPhone10. Doesn't show up with iphone and sorting.

[ScratchCat]

24 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

I don't get why people are surprised that this will be better than a CPU that came out 6 months before it, it should be better.

 

What's the GPU look like on this thing?

 

Lastly if anyone argues all blame should go to the OP for the amazing thread title.

It's generally the fact that this chip beats most android octa cores with two cores. And the fact geekbench makes the chip look faster than some Intel quad cores release in the last 4 years (and Intel hasn't gone anywhere in IPC).

 

The main problem with the development of android chipsets is that most manufacturers advertise core counts so average Joe just goes buys the one with the highest core count as "it has more cores so must be faster". This means manufacturers just make chips with more impressive specs on paper as they sell better. In comparison Apple simply doesn't advertise these specs and invests heavily in single thread performance.

[Drak3]

16 minutes ago, ScratchCat said:

It's generally the fact that this chip beats most android octa cores with two cores.

Qualcomm and Samung Hexacore and octocore chips are effectively quad cores.

Also, iOS is significantly easier to run because it isn't a bloated mess.

[TidaLWaveZ]

4 minutes ago, ScratchCat said:

It's generally the fact that this chip beats most android octa cores with two cores. And the fact geekbench makes the chip look faster than some Intel quad cores release in the last 4 years (and Intel hasn't gone anywhere in IPC).

 

The main problem with the development of android chipsets is that most manufacturers advertise core counts so average Joe just goes buys the one with the highest core count as "it has more cores so must be faster". This means manufacturers just make chips with more impressive specs on paper as they sell better. In comparison Apple simply doesn't advertise these specs and invests heavily in single thread performance.

Really? I haven't seen a Galaxy S8 advertisement with core count listed and it's the top seller for android. Honestly I'm sure there are but I can't think of a single Android device in recent history that advertised the core count.

[19_blackie_73]

why could we not agree that all of the flagships offer more than enough performance for a phone? It's still only a smartphone...

[TidaLWaveZ]

1 minute ago, 19_blackie_73 said:

why could we not agree that all of the flagships offer more than enough performance for a phone? It's still only a smartphone...

We can, that was the Apple users go to move until recently.

[Drak3]

4 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

Really? I haven't seen a Galaxy S8 advertisement with core count listed and it's the top seller for android. Honestly I'm sure there are but I can't think of a single Android device in recent history that advertised the core count.

OEMs don't advertise with that. Stores with stupid people running the label makers do though. If you go to Office Depot, Office Max, Fred Meyers/Krogers, etc. You'll see things like "octocore to speed up all your tasks" and shit.

[TidaLWaveZ]

Just now, Drak3 said:

OEMs don't advertise with that. Stores with stupid people running the label makers do though. If you go to Office Depot, Office Max, Fred Meyers/Krogers, etc. You'll see things like "octocore to speed up all your tasks" and shit.

 

30 minutes ago, ScratchCat said:

The main problem with the development of android chipsets is that most manufacturers advertise core counts so average Joe just goes buys the one with the highest core count as "it has more cores so must be faster". This means manufacturers just make chips with more impressive specs on paper as they sell better. In comparison Apple simply doesn't advertise these specs and invests heavily in single thread performance.

 

Exactly, which negates the entire notion that Apple is able to make better hardware because Android manufactures are spending too much money advertising things like core count, lol.

[ScratchCat]

16 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

Really? I haven't seen a Galaxy S8 advertisement with core count listed and it's the top seller for android. Honestly I'm sure there are but I can't think of a single Android device in recent history that advertised the core count.

As you say, it seems not to be the case anymore with higher end phones. However many eastern manufacturers such as UMi , Vernee and others advertise the core count and many retailers do as well

Spoiler

These two show the core count/clock speed

These simply shOw either nothing or relative improvement.

 

[Zodiark1593]

As many core is common in the Android realm, Android tends to be good at scaling for multiple cores. However, as there is very few truly wide CPU designs in this realm (with the only potential exception being OG Kyro, according to die shots), Android probably isn't well optimized to take advantage of wide cores, hence why the Cortex a73 is a 2 wide design. Wider cores are power hungry, and if not taken full advantage of, will actually be detrimental.

 

Of course, Apple doesn't have deal with any "Chicken or the egg" problem as both the CPU and software can be developed in house simultaneously.