Memorygate!! iPhone 7 32GB vs 128GB

[AlTech]

Just now, manikyath said:

the iPhone would be the most sensible platform out of all smartphones to have USB3 (or similar) available, wouldnt it?

IDK, the iPad Pro has the USB3 capable Lightning...... So yeah.

[manikyath]

Just now, AluminiumTech said:

IDK, the iPad Pro has the USB3 capable Lightning...... So yeah.

think of this: syncing speed off the iPhone hasnt changed since i had a 120GB hard drive as a single storage device, and considered it plenty.

[Dabombinable]

2 minutes ago, potoooooooo said:

Because 90% of users don't need over 32gb, and it costs more

It may cost more, but not any where near as much as the mark-up given by Apple.

[AlTech]

1 minute ago, manikyath said:

think of this: syncing speed off the iPhone hasnt changed since i had a 120GB hard drive as a single storage device, and considered it plenty.

I wouldn't care that much if Apple's iTunes for Windows didn't suck balls.

 

Why would I (in theory since I don't own an iPhone) have to use iTunes to access the contents of my phone?

[manikyath]

8 minutes ago, AluminiumTech said:

I wouldn't care that much if Apple's iTunes for Windows didn't suck balls.

 

Why would I (in theory since I don't own an iPhone) have to use iTunes to access the contents of my phone?

no, think of it like this:

 

why does taking a local backup of your device fail if your firewall blocks iTunes?

[Castdeath97]

2 hours ago, DisconnectedYT said:

Apple sucks balls

 

IMO dont buy an iPhone (Google Pixel is a better option)

If only it had a form of optical zoom.

[dlink377]

I don't really think it is a big problem. Apple also never say it is faster, it just guarantee the capacity of the flash memory.

 

Smaller flash memory is always slower than the much bigger capacity, although I do love for Apple to use more high quality chips on the 32GB.

 

Most users doesn't need those faster write speed though, since it is still USB 2.0. Most people download speed also doesn't reach 30MB/s.

[Castdeath97]

3 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I just bought a 128GB flash drive for like nothing and a few 480GB ssds for 100$ each. wtf is with phones capacity anyway? Just now we got higher ones, for iPhone at least. 

Nvm 6 had it too 

 

anyway with a phone that fuckin expensive, and the crazy margins apple has, why is the 32GB one even a thing? 

649 fucking dollars for the 32 Gb one. 749 and 849 for 128 and 256. 

200 dollars more for ~224GB more space. What the fuck am I missing something? Is that the only difference? That's like a little less than a dollar a GB for the upgrade 

Well even google is following them now...RIP nexus value. I really hope this phone actually performs, otherwise what's the point of charging it that much.

[mathijs727]

Why are people even supprised about this?

If you really didnt see this coming you have no idea how computers work.

The low capacity iPhone 7 has less NAND chips.

Less chips = less parallelism = less speed

[AlexGoesHigh]

3 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I just bought a 128GB flash drive for like nothing and a few 480GB ssds for 100$ each. wtf is with phones capacity anyway? Just now we got higher ones, for iPhone at least. 

Nvm 6 had it too 

 

anyway with a phone that fuckin expensive, and the crazy margins apple has, why is the 32GB one even a thing? 

649 fucking dollars for the 32 Gb one. 749 and 849 for 128 and 256. 

200 dollars more for ~224GB more space. What the fuck am I missing something? Is that the only difference? That's like a little less than a dollar a GB for the upgrade 

You probably know this but they don't give a fuck, the low storage option is just there for the sake of having something at that price point (even though its already on territory almost no other company is competing at...) and to incentivize people to spend more on the higher storage option that have higher margins.

 

Also the big gap in pricing between each storage tire feels again like a because they can thing.

 

Apple has reached the point that no other company has reached of being able to release what it looks like a interesting product but in reality is not that special, that is what the iphone has turned. 

[Godlygamer23]

Please update your post to be in line with our requirements as stated here:

 

[LAwLz]

6 minutes ago, mathijs727 said:

Why are people even supprised about this?

If you really didnt see this coming you have no idea how computers work.

The low capacity iPhone 7 has less NAND chips.

Less chips = less parallelism = less speed

I am surprised. Want to know why I am surprised despite knowing that larger size SSDs generally have higher speeds?
Because the 32GB iPhone 7 has slower memory than the 16GB iPhone 6S.

 

Here are the iPhone 6S, 16GB results:

Read - 854MBps

Write - 45MBps.

 

Here are the 32GB iPhone 7 results:

Read - 691MBps

Write - 40MBps

 

 

These results should be surprising. The people who aren't surprised are those who doesn't know enough about the hardware of previous generation iPhones to know what to expect.

[DocSwag]

This shouldn't be a huge surprise, though the drop does seem a little large. When capacity goes up though write speed does too just because of parrallelism. I'm not sure how it is on real world test but it kinda makes sense in synthetics.

[Castdeath97]

41 minutes ago, LAwLz said:

I am surprised. Want to know why I am surprised despite knowing that larger size SSDs generally have higher speeds?
Because the 32GB iPhone 7 has slower memory than the 16GB iPhone 6S.

 

Here are the iPhone 6S, 16GB results:

Read - 854MBps

Write - 45MBps.

 

Here are the 32GB iPhone 7 results:

Read - 691MBps

Write - 40MBps

 

 

These results should be surprising. The people who aren't surprised are those who doesn't know enough about the hardware of previous generation iPhones to know what to expect.

They switched to a new manufacturer perhaps? Best explanation I can come up with.

[Daveeede]

Here's the benchmark run for my iPhone 7 128GB.

[Coaxialgamer]

Well of course smaller ssd's perform worse than larger ones,  and this is also true for pc's.  But this is still unacceptable  considering the price of the device. 

[Sauron]

4 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I just bought a 128GB flash drive for like nothing and a few 480GB ssds for 100$ each. wtf is with phones capacity anyway? Just now we got higher ones, for iPhone at least. 

Nvm 6 had it too 

 

anyway with a phone that fuckin expensive, and the crazy margins apple has, why is the 32GB one even a thing? 

649 fucking dollars for the 32 Gb one. 749 and 849 for 128 and 256. 

200 dollars more for ~224GB more space. What the fuck am I missing something? Is that the only difference? That's like a little less than a dollar a GB for the upgrade 

Have you seen what passing from 8gb to 16gb of ram on an imac costs? It's just plain old ram but it costs 200$ for 8gb

[Vode]

4 hours ago, Syntaxvgm said:

I just bought a 128GB flash drive for like nothing and a few 480GB ssds for 100$ each. wtf is with phones capacity anyway? Just now we got higher ones, for iPhone at least. 

Nvm 6 had it too 

 

anyway with a phone that fuckin expensive, and the crazy margins apple has, why is the 32GB one even a thing? 

649 fucking dollars for the 32 Gb one. 749 and 849 for 128 and 256. 

200 dollars more for ~224GB more space. What the fuck am I missing something? Is that the only difference? That's like a little less than a dollar a GB for the upgrade 

Apple charged 600 bucks for 32GB of RAM before and also 600 bucks for 1 TB SSD instead of a 1 TB HDD is still a thing. I'm not surprised.

 

People in general are uninformed and still buy into it so they get away with it.

[Bsmith]

4 hours ago, richardmajor86 said:

-snip-

 

I don't remember them telling us that during the keynote

neither did they say anything about the NVME drive inside the phone, never heard someone complain about that.

[GoodBytes]

Does not meet posting guidelines.

Moved out of Tech News section.

[Thiback]

3 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Get it reimaged. EVERY computer with ANY OS has this happen over time due to cruft and file system bloat. It's not even the features slowing you down.

Yep, but in every computer you get to choose whether or not to upgrade to the next version. Except in some rare cases ATCHHOOOwindows10AHEM. 

[patrickjp93]

12 hours ago, Thiback said:

Yep, but in every computer you get to choose whether or not to upgrade to the next version. Except in some rare cases ATCHHOOOwindows10AHEM. 

Eh... OEM computers are pretty bad about allowing that actually.

[Dabombinable]

5 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Eh... OEM computers are pretty bad about allowing that actually.

*Looks at HP and Dell, "What do you mean that PCIe and PCI slots only work with a very limited range of brands and models?"*

[Sakkura]

On 9/10/2016 at 3:00 PM, LAwLz said:

I am surprised. Want to know why I am surprised despite knowing that larger size SSDs generally have higher speeds?
Because the 32GB iPhone 7 has slower memory than the 16GB iPhone 6S.

 

Here are the iPhone 6S, 16GB results:

Read - 854MBps

Write - 45MBps.

 

Here are the 32GB iPhone 7 results:

Read - 691MBps

Write - 40MBps

 

 

These results should be surprising. The people who aren't surprised are those who doesn't know enough about the hardware of previous generation iPhones to know what to expect.

Newer products often use newer flash memory, and newer flash memory often has higher density. Meaning you get fewer channels for the controller to address at a given capacity.

 

However, I don't think the density would have more than doubled going from 6S to 7, and doubling the density should just put the 6S 16GB and the 7 32GB on equal footing (all else being equal).

[LAwLz]

34 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

Newer products often use newer flash memory, and newer flash memory often has higher density. Meaning you get fewer channels for the controller to address at a given capacity.

 

However, I don't think the density would have more than doubled going from 6S to 7, and doubling the density should just put the 6S 16GB and the 7 32GB on equal footing (all else being equal).

Yeah newer chips are usually denser, but this is not a case where you can just go "oh the higher capacity is just faster because of more NAND chips". There is something else going on which makes the 32GB model slower than expected.

 

It would be interesting to know what is going on. Hopefully someone will do a deep analysis of the 32GB model.

It's not really a serious issue to begin with, but it's sad to see Apple take a step backwards like this (on the 32GB model, the other models are even faster than the previous versions).