iPhone 7 - Performance Results

[thecreativename]

5 hours ago, ShadowCaptain said:

I still think its sharp enough 95% of the time at normal distances

Everyone's eyes are different, if its fine for you that's fine. It's not fine for me though. I think 400 PPI is a good area where I stop complaining.

[Dionyz]

On 9/14/2016 at 10:47 PM, MrDynamicMan said:

Does performance benching even matter to mobile anymore? It's unlikely it's gonna get very stressed in everyday use. What I'd want to see is battery results.

 

Anyway, it doesn't really matter. No-ones gonna buy this anyway outside of a few select coffee shops. 

Watching anime at 1080p FLAC network streamed... Yea that would push its specs, but will it thermal throttle? Possibly... So these benchmarks on the phones do a small test, and give results. The problem is you are not always getting fast performance.

[suicidalfranco]

6 hours ago, Hunter259 said:

The Apple SoC will be better in 95% of apps. The only place would be in a heavy gaming load that, somehow, will actually use those 4 cores. Do you guys not understand just how hard it is to multithread an application in the first place? Let alone do it correctly. Instagram doesn't need 4 cores. It needs one good one. Mobile web browsing MIGHT use 2. Snapchat - 1. Camera - 1. Reddit- Maybe 2. GTA - Possibly 3-4. Angry Birds - 1. @Sauron is FAR out weighing multi-core in the mobile work space. Shit. Even just NOW are we getting games that use more than maybe 2 or 3 on the desktop side. But if you notice, if you care to see facts, that the difference between the 6600k and the 6700k is still EXTREMELY close. Phone's don't need high core counts. They need fast dual cores. The Apple SoC, in a day to day usage case, is the better chip period.

 

want facts? here's facts. And the fact is: Android applications are heavily multi-threaded whether it's for a browser, a game or a simple social app 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9518/the-mobile-cpu-corecount-debate 

[Sauron]

7 hours ago, Hunter259 said:

The Apple SoC will be better in 95% of apps. The only place would be in a heavy gaming load that, somehow, will actually use those 4 cores. Do you guys not understand just how hard it is to multithread an application in the first place? Let alone do it correctly. Instagram doesn't need 4 cores. It needs one good one. Mobile web browsing MIGHT use 2. Snapchat - 1. Camera - 1. Reddit- Maybe 2. GTA - Possibly 3-4. Angry Birds - 1. @Sauron is FAR out weighing multi-core in the mobile work space. Shit. Even just NOW are we getting games that use more than maybe 2 or 3 on the desktop side. But if you notice, if you care to see facts, that the difference between the 6600k and the 6700k is still EXTREMELY close. Phone's don't need high core counts. They need fast dual cores. The Apple SoC, in a day to day usage case, is the better chip period.

The desktop space has nothing to do with this. You can't take desktop cpus as an example. It's like saying the ps4 doesn't need an 8 core cpu because pc games don't use more than 4 - developers know what they are working with and android phones are almost exclusively quad core and up. But hey, you're welcome to provide any test that shows a high performance android app isn't using more than 2 cores.

[spellmanuk]

i really dont think specs matter when it comes to phones anymore i mean there more powerful than the pc we had in my house growing up 

[VerticalDiscussions]

So many people trying to find arguments and evidences to undermine the A10 fusion, for some reason lawl. Or is it something entirely different that isnt consensual with the hardware the IP7 packs? Well, i guess you can say a good phone nowadays is much smoother to use than a 9 year old laptop or maybe even 6-7. Some laptops nowadays are pretty bad regardless, selling for nearly 200€.

[Hunter259]

1 hour ago, suicidalfranco said:

want facts? here's facts. And the fact is: Android applications are heavily multi-threaded whether it's for a browser, a game or a simple social app 

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9518/the-mobile-cpu-corecount-debate 

And i see in the majority of those tests a higher load on just 2 cores, besides the chrome test where it somehow needed all 4 nearly 100 compared to s-browser. 

[Hunter259]

1 hour ago, Sauron said:

The desktop space has nothing to do with this. You can't take desktop cpus as an example. It's like saying the ps4 doesn't need an 8 core cpu because pc games don't use more than 4 - developers know what they are working with and android phones are almost exclusively quad core and up. But hey, you're welcome to provide any test that shows a high performance android app isn't using more than 2 cores.

How does it not? The same basic programming principles are shared even if they don't have the same architecture. Remember in the beginning we were happy seeing a large core count because it might mean that's games will be getting higher performance with more threads? Yeah guess what? The difference between a 6600k and a 6700k are still within 5 fps for most new games. I'd argue that it really doesn't if they aren't going to be utilized. Although that could be a bad port but with the Xbox having the same architecture and basic OS as a PC I don't quite understand how you could fuck that up. 

[Sauron]

22 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

How does it not? The same basic programming principles are shared even if they don't have the same architecture. Remember in the beginning we were happy seeing a large core count because it might mean that's games will be getting higher performance with more threads? Yeah guess what? The difference between a 6600k and a 6700k are still within 5 fps for most new games. I'd argue that it really doesn't if they aren't going to be utilized. Although that could be a bad port but with the Xbox having the same architecture and basic OS as a PC I don't quite understand how you could fuck that up. 

There are no inherent multithreading limitations in pc games, the devs just don't bother splitting the load evenly. May I also remind you that i5s are quad cores?

[Hunter259]

Just now, Sauron said:

There are no inherent multithreading limitations in pc games, the devs just don't bother splitting the load evenly. May I also remind you that i5s are quad cores?

Yeah. That's why I chose it and the 6700k. But that more or less proves my point. If the desktop doesn't need it for much more advanced titles then a phone doesn't need it. Even that Anandtech link has the first two cores getting used more than the other 2 in the majority of their tests by a good margin. The phone, in gaming, is more limited by raw GPU horsepower than the CPU.

[Sauron]

40 minutes ago, Hunter259 said:

Yeah. That's why I chose it and the 6700k. But that more or less proves my point. If the desktop doesn't need it for much more advanced titles then a phone doesn't need it.

That's a completely groundless assumption; if more performance is required more cores should and will be used, if it's not required then it won't benefit from faster cores either. Furthermore the single core performance of a desktop i5 is way higher than even an iphone. The comparison simply doesn't hold and on top of that you're focusing the whole debate around games, which are only one kind of intensive application and don't reflect what the vast majority of users do with their phones (candy crush doesn't exactly stress the cpu).

[Hunter259]

Just now, Sauron said:

That's a completely groundless assumption; if more performance is required more cores should and will be used, if it's not required then it won't benefit from faster cores either. Furthermore the single core performance of a desktop i5 is way higher than even an iphone. The comparison simply doesn't hold and on top of that you're focusing the whole debate around games, which are only one kind of intensive application and don't reflect what the vast majority of users do with their phones (candy crush doesn't exactly stress the cpu).

I picked the worse case scenario. If it doesn't need it there then it won't need it anywhere else. 

[Sauron]

Just now, Hunter259 said:

I picked the worse case scenario. If it doesn't need it there then it won't need it anywhere else. 

Except it's a completely different scenario with completely different requirements and baselines. If I'm rendering a video then I'll take full advantage of 10 cores, does that have anything to do with what happens on phones? Obviously not. But it's arguably "the worst case scenario"... so according to your logic if that doesn't need faster cores, nothing else will...

[Hunter259]

Just now, Sauron said:

Except it's a completely different scenario with completely different requirements and baselines. If I'm rendering a video then I'll take full advantage of 10 cores, does that have anything to do with what happens on phones? Obviously not. But it's arguably "the worst case scenario"... so according to your logic if that doesn't need faster cores, nothing else will...

Now you are throwing something else into the mix. Game programming is really really similar between phones and PC/Console nowadays. This isn't as apples and oranges as you think. And no you still need faster cores, just not 4 or more of them. 

[patrickjp93]

On September 14, 2559 BE at 9:21 PM, patrick3027 said:

It's not "very good", it completely shatters the competition and will continue to do so well into 2017. It's the fastest phone in day to day usage. You can trow multi core scores at me how much you want, I refuse to believe there is a single app on the appstore that is as well optimized as Geekbench. 

 

On September 14, 2559 BE at 9:30 PM, Trixanity said:

If that is the case, then there is something rotten in the state of benchmarks. Geekbench is awful.

Geekbench is farm from awful comparing ARM SOCs. In fact, I'd stake my reputation on being the most comprehensive benchmark suite there is for ARM outside of LinPack. That said, it's useless for comparison between ISAs because of its shit optimization for anything other than ARM.

 

Benchmarking is not easy. See Chandler Carruth's talks about Google's Benchmarking suite and how tough it is to capture modern architecture and modern demands in one program even with a narrowed scope. CPPCon 2014 and 2015 are proof enough the world has changed significantly between the era of Diablo 2 and now.