iPhone 5s slaughters quad-core rivals in performance tests

[The Evil Overlord]

surprise surprise, not

My Android phone has 1GB ram, i barely use it and i still had to remove a bunch of apps because it was getting so sluggish I couldn't swype or punch in phone numbers without it stuttering.

ok, curiosity has got the better of me, might I ask what phone you have?

[adrynalyne]

FIrst of all, you should learn to read what i'm saying. I was saying over 1 million new Android users everyday cares about the stuffs that Armando did write about in his article. They don't cares only about one single thing there, they cares about that they can get all of the things in that list.

 

They cares about that they can get the whole package with freedom to choose whatever that is best for them.

 

With Android, you don't have to adapt to Android. Android simply adapts to you while you have to adapt to whatever Apple with iOS is telling you to do or not do.

 

Do you see the difference on why so many choose Android today over iOS and why so many doesn't really care that a smartphone from the stone age have some better benchmark scores that nobody cares about as the average joe under iOS doesn't cares about?

I am curious how you know what over 1 million people want or care about.

[Draconian Guppy]

I am curious how you know what over 1 million people want or care about.

I give up, seriously :/

[The Norwegian Drone Pilot]

I am curious how you know what over 1 million people want or care about.

Because if they wouldn't care about those things, they wouldn't buy an Android phone when there are many other good and cheap WP8 smartphones around, just to take an example.

[adrynalyne]

surprise surprise, not

 

My Android phone has 1GB ram, i barely use it and i still had to remove a bunch of apps because it was getting so sluggish I couldn't swype or punch in phone numbers without it stuttering.

That is because Android prior to 4.3 had issues with flash storage slowing to a crawl once it started getting full.

 

Nothing to do with ram or CPU.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

I know that processors get better every year, and benchmarks don't mean anything really, as it's the actual usage that's important, but I LOVE that a dual core beats an octa-core CPU (and yes, I know the SGS4 only uses four at once).

 

Really does show how pointless these MOAR CORES attitudes are. 

[NeoPogo]

All that matters is iPhone 5S is the tops of the modern smartphones in software and hardware! All else pales in comparison.

[Draconian Guppy]

I know that processors get better every year, and benchmarks don't mean anything really, as it's the actual usage that's important, but I LOVE that a dual core beats an octa-core CPU (and yes, I know the SGS4 only uses four at once).

 

Really does show how pointless these MOAR CORES attitudes are. 

Do consider the comments above? such as:

 

 

Interesting comment under that article on Anand. I recall reading there earlier in the week regarding the 64Bit A7 and the users complaining about the dubious nature of the article

 

Quote

 

 

ddriver - Wednesday, September 18, 2013 - link Actually, there are quite a lot of discrepancies in this review.

For starters, the "CPU performance" page only contains JS benchmarks and not a single native application. And iOS and Android use entirely different JS engines, so this is literally a case of comparing apples to oranges.

Native benchmarks don't compare the new apple chip to "old 32 bit v7 chips" - it only compares the new apple chip to the old ones, and also compares the new chip in 32bit and 64 bit mode. Oddly enough, the geekbench at engadget shows tegra 4 actually being faster.

Then, there is the inclusion of hardware implementation in charts that are supposed to show the benefits of 64bit execution mode, but in reality the encryption workloads are handled in a fundamentally different way in the two modes, in software in 32bit mode and implemented in hardware in 64bit mode. This turns the integer performance chart from a mixed bad into one falsely advertising performance gains attributed to 64bit execution and not to the hardware implementations as it should. The FP chart also shows no miracles, wider SIMD units result in almost 2x the score in few tests, nothing much in the rest.

All in all, I'd say this is a very cleverly compiled review, cunningly deceitful to show the new apple chip in a much better light than it is in reality. No surprises, considering this is AT, it would be more unexpected to see an unbiased review.

I guess we will have to wait a bit more until mass availability for unbiased reviews, considering all those "featured" reviews usually come with careful guidelines by the manufacturer that need to be followed to create an unrealistically good presentation of the product. That is the price you have to pay to get the new goodies first - play by the rules of a greedy and exploitative industry. Corporate "honesty"  :)

I don't say the new chip is bad, I just say it is deliberately presented unrealistically good. Krait has expanded the SIMD units to 128 bit as well, so we should see similar performance even without the move to a 64bit ecosystem. Last but not least, 64bit code bloats the memory footprint of applications because of pointers being twice as big, and while those limited memory footprint synthetic benches play well with the single gigabyte of ram on this device, I expect an actual performance demanding real world application will be bottlenecked by the ram capacity. All in all, the decision to go for 64 bit architecture is mostly a PR stunt, surely, 64bit is the future, but in the case of this product, and considering its limited ram capacity, it doesn't really make all that sense, but is something that will no doubt keep up the spirit of apple fanboys, and make up for their declining sales while they bring out the iphone 6, which will close all those deliberately left gaping holes in the 5s.

[adrynalyne]

Because if they wouldn't care about those things, they wouldn't buy an Android phone where there are many other good and cheap WP8 smartphones around, just to take an example.

That is not a logical deduction.

 

I'm sure you believe it though.

 

It is more likely that it is because Android is widely available, moreso than WP8, and priced lower than iPhones.

[The Norwegian Drone Pilot]

I know that processors get better every year, and benchmarks don't mean anything really, as it's the actual usage that's important, but I LOVE that a dual core beats an octa-core CPU (and yes, I know the SGS4 only uses four at once).

 

Really does show how pointless these MOAR CORES attitudes are. 

Clearly, you don't know much about CPU's when you don't see the advantages with 4+ CPU cores over 2 CPU cores.

 

I bet that you would still be blind on those benchmarks numbers even if Apple had a single core CPU that had better performance per CPU over per CPU's on the dual / quad-core CPU's. You would believe the single core CPU would be best because it gives better numbers per core.

 

And by that, i'm sure you could tell me where the single core CPU is better than a dual / quad-core CPU in real usage, right?

 

And why do you think the CPU technology for normal computers have developed from single / dual-core CPU's to Quad-Core and 8-core CPU's today?

 

There is a reason for it.

[Marshall Veteran]

Let's try to keep this one civil, to prevent it from being closed, please.

[mcloum]

I am kind of curious why the 5S seems to get worse Wifi battery life than the 5C and previous phones

 

 

And you know this for sure how? Been using for a while have you?

[Draconian Guppy]

Clearly, you don't know much about CPU's when you don't see the advantages with 4+ CPU cores over 2 CPU cores.

 

I bet that you would still be blind on those benchmarks numbers even if Apple had a single core CPU that had better performance per CPU over per CPU on the dual / quad.core CPU's. You would believe the single core CPU would be best because it gives better numbers.

Man...  cheers to you, I give.

[Hardcore Til I Die]

Clearly, you don't know much about CPU's when you don't see the advantages with 4+ CPU cores over 2 CPU cores.

 

I bet that you would still be blind on those benchmarks numbers even if Apple had a single core CPU that had better performance per CPU over per CPU's on the dual / quad-core CPU's. You would believe the single core CPU would be best because it gives better numbers per core.

 

And by that, i'm sure you could tell me where the single core CPU is better than a dual / quad-core CPU in real usage, right?

 

Less load per core = less power usage, plus improved performance when apps can take advantage of all cores. 

 

I don't claim to be an expert.. I know "a bit." 

 

Do these benchmarks not use all cores? I was under the impression most of them did. 

[Nogib]

ARMv8 architecture faster/more powerful than the ARMv7 everything else uses?  Wow, would never have guessed that...

/sarcasm

 

Article linked by OP hopefully written by "Captain Obvious"

[Astra.Xtreme]

And you know this for sure how? Been using for a while have you?

What are you rambling about?... I was commenting on the benchmark results in the article...

Perhaps you should RTFA before opening your mouth...

[Belazor]

Although I'm quoting one user, this post is aimed at everyone who's upset about benchmaks.

 

I understand that the crux of the benchmark argument is that they're not directly comparable, but I believe they're still very important and I'm aiming to explain why with this post.

 

Hardware was fast enough with the 5.

Wat.

 

Since when is there such a thing as "fast enough"? We need the "pointless chasing of stats" because it breeds competition and innovation. 

 

It would be incredibly stupid to cease innovation on the hardware front because software is inherently limited by hardware. Why don't we have Jarvis and the rest of Iron Man's tech yet? Because both the hardware and software isn't there yet. We don't have hardware capable of running a software with that kind of AI interface, and we don't have hardware that can accurately translate arm flailing to system commands (though MS is working on that with their Kinect).

 

Even if we disregard all of that, you're still forgetting that the guys who work on hardware are not the same as the guys who work on software. I'm a programmer, I could (conceivably) help code iOS but if you told me to design a CPU I'd give you a blank stare.

 

Software and hardware innovation are not mutually exclusive, they're mutually dependent. 

 

The second you think "okay that's enough innovation on the hardware", that's when you've lost and you might as well close down shop.

[Draconian Guppy]

 

 

Software and hardware innovation are not mutually exclusive, they're mutually dependent. 

 

Which is why I keep saying apple has the upper hand here, they design the OS, software that runs on it AND the hardware that will run everything.

[adrynalyne]

Although I'm quoting one user, this post is aimed at everyone who's upset about benchmaks.

 

I understand that the crux of the benchmark argument is that they're not directly comparable, but I believe they're still very important and I'm aiming to explain why with this post.

 

Wat.

 

Since when is there such a thing as "fast enough"? We need the "pointless chasing of stats" because it breeds competition and innovation. 

 

It would be incredibly stupid to cease innovation on the hardware front because software is inherently limited by hardware. Why don't we have Jarvis and the rest of Iron Man's tech yet? Because both the hardware and software isn't there yet. We don't have hardware capable of running a software with that kind of AI interface, and we don't have hardware that can accurately translate arm flailing to system commands (though MS is working on that with their Kinect).

 

Even if we disregard all of that, you're still forgetting that the guys who work on hardware are not the same as the guys who work on software. I'm a programmer, I could (conceivably) help code iOS but if you told me to design a CPU I'd give you a blank stare.

 

Software and hardware innovation are not mutually exclusive, they're mutually dependent. 

 

The second you think "okay that's enough innovation on the hardware", that's when you've lost and you might as well close down shop.

The thing is, higher clock speeds and more cores just for the sake of it is wasted, and I certainly wouldn't call it innovation.

 

If you can't see or feel the difference, it really does not matter to anyone other than the benchmark obsessed.

 

 

Better to spend that energy and money on real innovation, something you can quantify.

[Astra.Xtreme]

The thing is, higher clock speeds and more cores just for the sake of it is wasted, and I certainly wouldn't call it innovation.

 

If you can't see or feel the difference, it really does not matter to anyone other than the benchmark obsessed.

 

 

Better to spend that energy and money on real innovation, something you can quantify.

Agreed.  Since battery life is still pretty bad on modern smart phones, companies should be focusing on how to prolong it.  Instead, companies seem to be fighting for the crown for the fastest CPU and highest resolution.  That's great and all, but I'm sure everybody would love to have a phone that you wouldn't need to charge for a week.  Huge $$$ for the first company to release a premium smartphone that meets that mark.

[adrynalyne]

Agreed.  Since battery life is still pretty bad on modern smart phones, companies should be focusing on how to prolong it.  Instead, companies seem to be fighting for the crown for the fastest CPU and highest resolution.  That's great and all, but I'm sure everybody would love to have a phone that you wouldn't need to charge for a week.  Huge $$$ for the first company to release a premium smartphone that meets that mark.

Exactly. We need some serious advances in battery tech.

[AJerman]

Agreed.  Since battery life is still pretty bad on modern smart phones, companies should be focusing on how to prolong it.  Instead, companies seem to be fighting for the crown for the fastest CPU and highest resolution.  That's great and all, but I'm sure everybody would love to have a phone that you wouldn't need to charge for a week.  Huge $$$ for the first company to release a premium smartphone that meets that mark.

They are, that's why they are going quad and octa core. :laugh: My One EASILY lasts a day even for me. My One X definitely didn't with the dual core S4. Not the ONLY factor, but still a part of it. The Exynos octa-cores are not for performance, they are for battery saving. But iOS and WP users, as seen here, take that as trying to make the fastest CPU in the world and show off when it's not (entirely) the case.

[Astra.Xtreme]

Exactly. We need some serious advances in battery tech.

Tesla-phone anybody?  :laugh:

[Noir Angel]

You haven't even used it, have you...

 

Don't need to have, the screenshots and videos tell the story

[mmjm]

That is because Android prior to 4.3 had issues with flash storage slowing to a crawl once it started getting full.

 

Nothing to do with ram or CPU.

 

right, that's why god knows why 700MB of RAM is being used, a lot if by apps I rarely use I guess the OS can't figure out how to kill an app that's not running

 

ok, curiosity has got the better of me, might I ask what phone you have?

GSII with 4.1.2