iPhone 7 - Performance Results

[TidaLWaveZ]

4 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

 

Exactly ~10 seconds max in a completely unrealistic scenario.  This is a huge performance gap that can be ignored by no one.

[Doobeedoo]

I've seen this the other day...

[Commodus]

22 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

I'd rather have better battery life and CPU/GPU performance 99% of the time than have a slightly better looking screen when my nose is almost touching the screen (0% of the time). 

I generally agree with you, although I don't think it's necessarily an either/or.  There are mid-size quad HD phones that get good battery life right now.  It's just a question of whether or not Apple can offer that resolution while including everything else it wants, such as slim phone designs and 3D Touch.

[Trixanity]

31 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

Exactly ~10 seconds max in a completely unrealistic scenario.  This is a huge performance gap that can be ignored by no one.

I'm assuming sarcasm but it's an 8 second difference on cold starts and 2 seconds on hot. Fairly insignificant. 

 

However the same test on the Snapdragon would probably be embarrassing. 

[Pomfinator]

12 minutes ago, Commodus said:

I generally agree with you, although I don't think it's necessarily an either/or.  There are mid-size quad HD phones that get good battery life right now.  It's just a question of whether or not Apple can offer that resolution while including everything else it wants, such as slim phone designs and 3D Touch.

Apple won't go OLED until Samsung decides to let go of Pentile.  The fact that they just ditched RGB after the S2 is just so disheartening.

[TidaLWaveZ]

18 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

I'm assuming sarcasm but it's an 8 second difference on cold starts and 2 seconds on hot. Fairly insignificant. 

 

However the same test on the Snapdragon would probably be embarrassing. 

Sarcasm is definitely my language.  If the 820 were twice as slow (~20 seconds slower across all apps) I'd hardly even call that a significant performance gap.  I consider myself somewhat tech savvy, especially when compared to the average user and I don't even notice a speed difference between my mom's iPhone 6s and my LG G3.

[Walkin]

8 hours ago, TheReal1980 said:

Personally I find it amusing that a brand like Apple, which according to most has no innovation (not that it matters regarding this matter but still), is smashing all the other phones is some benchmarks.

Comments?

Well it all depends on what you define as innovation, for many Apple critics, innovation means bringing something new to the table; better benchmarks than other smartphones that were presented earlier in the same year is hardly innovation for me, is just part of the current development of processor technology. Now, if they are using some sort of new technology, a breakthorugh to achieve this speeds that would be innovation, but since they're not saying anything about their A10 chip i don't think that's the case.

[patrick3027]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

Unfounded claim with no source or proof. Can only ignore.

@Trixanity posted a video of a one year old iPhone destroying the latest Note 7 a few posts above. Please explain to me how that isn't a huge gap in performance.

[patrick3027]

59 minutes ago, TidaLWaveZ said:

Exactly ~10 seconds max in a completely unrealistic scenario.  This is a huge performance gap that can be ignored by no one.

That's a one year old phone beating one released two weeks ago. The iPhone 7 is 36% faster than the 6S who's used here.

 

Also, the Exynos version is faster than the SD 820, so the performance gap is even higher for American customers.

[pit5000]

i'll still be waiting for next year's model. I don't care too much about benchmarks, I just want a reliable, good looking phone that gets things done quickly and easily

[Sauron]

Just now, patrick3027 said:

@Trixanity posted a video of a one year old iPhone destroying the latest Note 7 a few posts above. Please explain to me how that isn't a huge gap in performance.

It has nothing to do with the claim YOU made, which is that it has the best SoC by far.

[TidaLWaveZ]

17 minutes ago, patrick3027 said:

That's a one year old phone beating one released two weeks ago. The iPhone 7 is 36% faster than the 6S who's used here.

 

Also, the Exynos version is faster than the SD 820, so the performance gap is even higher for American customers.

 

Well the s7 edge was released six months ago, but that's not really my point.

 

The performance gap is really just seconds.  Like I was saying in an earlier comment, I don't even notice a speed difference between an LG G3 and a 6s.  That should be a much larger gap than what's been discussed here.

 

[Trixanity]

16 minutes ago, patrick3027 said:

@Trixanity posted a video of a one year old iPhone destroying the latest Note 7 a few posts above. Please explain to me how that isn't a huge gap in performance.

Let's be reasonable here. 

1) it's not exactly destroying. 

2) it's an S7 Edge (Exynos). 

3) the hardware of the S7 and Note 7 is largely the same including the SoC. It being newer would give as big a performance boost as a factory new S7 Edge if we assume that the Note 7 doesn't have any secret sauce or other optimizations the S7 doesn't have. 

4) there is good reason to believe some of the difference comes from iOS optimizations and nvme storage. 

[patrick3027]

6 minutes ago, Sauron said:

It has nothing to do with the claim YOU made, which is that it has the best SoC by far.

Given I'm tired of proving that Apple has the best SOC, let's reverse the roles and try to convince me that Apple doesn't have the best SOC. Because it seems like you can't.

[Gibs960]

Doesn't really come as a shock to be honest, iPhone chips are usually very good. 

 

I'm more shocked that people don't use the Apple CPUs as their reason for buying one, because honestly a lot of other reasons don't make a whole lot of sense.

[79wjd]

1 minute ago, Gibs960 said:

Doesn't really come as a shock to be honest, iPhone chips are usually very good. 

 

I'm more shocked that people don't use the Apple CPUs as their reason for buying one, because honestly a lot of other reasons don't make a whole lot of sense.

such as? i can think of much better reasons thean the SoC to buy an iphone.

[dtaflorida]

6 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

such as?

My expansive check list for my next phone:

• Lacks audio port

/joke

[Gibs960]

1 minute ago, djdwosk97 said:

such as? i can think of much better reasons thean the SoC to buy an iphone.

To me, having a good CPU is a bigger draw than a "retina screen", for example, because the screen on an iPhone doesn't make it stand out. My girlfriend has a 6s and while it's a clear screen, there's a noticeable black edge on the screen that's really irritating. 

[Sauron]

10 minutes ago, patrick3027 said:

Given I'm tired of proving that Apple has the best SOC, let's reverse the roles and try to convince me that Apple doesn't have the best SOC. Because it seems like you can't.

I have already posted the numbers that prove the opposite, but even if I hadn't the burden of proof falls on the one that made the claim - which would be you.

[Overkilled]

4 hours ago, The Benjamins said:

iPhones never had "Retina" screens, as far as I know only Macbooks and iPads have been marketed as such. but in all honesty 720p (ish) is fine on most small (ish) phones and I think 1080p should be the limit. I don't even like the idea of high res then 1080p on laptops.

 

EDIT: Retina started on iPhone 4 and is used on all products. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retina_Display

why should 1080p be the limit when 1440p is better?

[VerticalDiscussions]

Guys, guys please calm down. Exynos and A-Chips are both best in multithreaded and singlethreaded performance. Theyr both the best of the mobile world in power effficiency, processor integer performance and probably the most optimized gpu's for power and energy savings.

 

Mediatek cpu's gpu's are pretty bad and so is single-threaded performance and it would seem energy savings, Qualcomm well, great gpu's but even so games tend to not run well on them for some optimization reasons and theyr connectivity options are top notch, with theyr cpu's being great most of the times. Nvidia was the real MVP in graphics performance but now theyr beneath the ocean floor :(.

[The Benjamins]

6 minutes ago, Overkilled said:

why should 1080p be the limit when 1440p is better?

to see the difference i need to me 3" - 6"  from the screen and the content I view on phones (videos) are mostly 1080p or less. it feels like a waste of resources and R&D. and just because its better does not make the best option to use.

[dtaflorida]

18 minutes ago, Overkilled said:

why should 1080p be the limit when 1440p is better?

That's like why is the One Plus 3 better than the Axon 7. On paper the Axon 7 beats the OP3. But there are no reviews that say it's better than an OP3. 

 

See what I did there? I removed Apple from the equation so you can now look your question objectively.

[Trixanity]

1 hour ago, Pomfinator said:

Apple won't go OLED until Samsung decides to let go of Pentile.  The fact that they just ditched RGB after the S2 is just so disheartening.

I hope not. I'll be extremely disappointed if Apple will allow pentile. It needs to go away. It has so far been impossible to get rid of the drawbacks. Even the latest pentile tech at 1440p can't hide it. 

[VerticalDiscussions]

7 minutes ago, Trixanity said:

-snip-

What you mean? Whats the difference between Pentile and RGB pixel layout? I honestly havent even noticed the pixels on my current S6 Diamond Pentile display...?