iPhone vs Android

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

Why don't you post the link with all the benchmarks instead of one picture. Even AMD once in a blue moon beats Intel on an app.

Some benchmarks show iPhone 5 beating the S3 as well, the confusing part is why the S3 varies in benchmarks so much. Different ROMS is the guess.

[silentsim]

iPhone 5 scored 1601.


What's clear is that Samsung chooses to market specs, while Apple doesn't.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

iPhone 5 scored 1601.


What's clear is that Samsung chooses to market specs, while Apple doesn't.

whats clear is why won't any apple supporters post any links.... haha. and if apple fanboys don't care about specs then they shouldn't really care about benchmarks.

what is wrong with specs? Samsung is a hardware maker first , while apple makes no hardware and is all os.

[silentsim]

The pics above were from the Geekbench browser, and taken from an Android site. (right click it).

Apple engineered the A6 which is the driving force behind the iPhone 5. They invested heavily into this, and it shows like it is pretty powerful for a dual core (in some benchmarks beating quad core devices).

Not sure what your looking for here, you claim it wasn't as powerful, you get proven otherwise, and you look for links? lol.

And nothing is wrong with marketing specs, I just believe that most people do not care about tech specs (aside from a small part of the population), and thus Apple chooses not to market that way.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

The pics above were from the Geekbench browser, and taken from an Android site. (right click it).

Apple engineered the A6 which is the driving force behind the iPhone 5. They invested heavily into this, and it shows like it is pretty powerful for a dual core (in some benchmarks beating quad core devices).

Not sure what your looking for here, you claim it wasn't as powerful, you get proven otherwise, and you look for links? lol.

And nothing is wrong with marketing specs, I just believe that most people do not care about tech specs (aside from a small part of the population), and thus Apple chooses not to market that way.

it's just odd that when you are trying to prove something that there isn't a link to click. Whenever we post articles we always submit a link.

A good benchmarking site usually runs at least 8 to 10 apps to show the true speed of the CPU running different programs or software. It would be nice to see how the two compare in other programs. Unless apple swept the board which would be hard to believe.

[Bertuzzied]

and i like how you distort the test by posting different charts. ahhahahaa

hahaha where was your jpg of the actual s3 benchmark? baaa baaaaaaa

a 15 second google search turned up this.
http://www.extremetech.com/computing...an-the-nexus-7

[silentsim]

Well what's confusing me with the S III is there is such a big variety in Geekbench scores- and I am only looking at the quad core model. The dual core model is hovering around 13-400, but the quad core is going from 15-1800. My guess is this is due to different roms, but it looks like a stock S3 is getting around 1600ish, which puts it equivalent to the iPhone.

Perhaps someone with a stock (not custom ROM) S3 wants to run a Geekbench test?

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

and i like how you distort the test by posting different charts. ahhahahaa

I've mentioned this from the beginning...if you know how to read you would actually help figure out these statistical differences.

[silentsim]

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1053286

SAMSUNG S III quad core- 1573.

So I ask again...why the big time difference? My guess is the high end ones are OC'd devices...which really isn't a fair comparision, as it should be done at stock.

Either way, which me and Azure both alluded to, the two devices are pretty darn close either way, and there really won't be a noticable real world difference, other then the OS that is being run.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

I've mentioned this from the beginning...if you know how to read you would actually help figure out these statistical differences.

I know how to read, i also know how to photoshop. whats the point of posting random jpgs without their link?

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

I know how to read, i also know how to photoshop. whats the point of posting random jpgs without their link?

Did you look at the above link? You know, instead of being snarky you can clearly see the image was taken from an Android website by right clicking it.
http://1.androidauthority.com/wp-con...nch-test-1.jpg

Here's another link:
http://www.zimbio.com/New+Mobile+Pho...enchmark+Tests
And i can get 50 more using the same reference and more. And if you go to the Geekbench browser, as I showed one result above, the S3 results vary so much, with around 15-600 being the average.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1053286

SAMSUNG S III quad core- 1573.

So I ask again...why the big time difference? My guess is the high end ones are OC'd devices...which really isn't a fair comparision, as it should be done at stock.

Either way, which me and Azure both alluded to, the two devices are pretty darn close either way, and there really won't be a noticable real world difference, other then the OS that is being run.

real world differences are when you start getting apps which start to use all 4 cores. which Geekbench does. From my article.


To put the iPhone 5/A6 in context: The quad-core Galaxy S3 (Exynos 4 Quad, a Cortex-A9 design) has a Geekbench score of around 1800; the dual-core One X (Snapdragon S4, Krait) scores around 1600; and the quad-core Nexus 7 (Tegra 3, Cortex-A9) scores around 1600. We must also bear in mind that Geekbench makes full use of multiple cores, which gives the quad-core chips an unfair advantage — after all, there are few if any smartphone apps that make good use of four cores. In reality, the A6 will probably perform very similarly to the dual-core Snapdragon S4.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

real world differences are when you start getting apps which start to use all 4 cores. which Geekbench does. From my article.


To put the iPhone 5/A6 in context: The quad-core Galaxy S3 (Exynos 4 Quad, a Cortex-A9 design) has a Geekbench score of around 1800; the dual-core One X (Snapdragon S4, Krait) scores around 1600; and the quad-core Nexus 7 (Tegra 3, Cortex-A9) scores around 1600. We must also bear in mind that Geekbench makes full use of multiple cores, which gives the quad-core chips an unfair advantage — after all, there are few if any smartphone apps that make good use of four cores. In reality, the A6 will probably perform very similarly to the dual-core Snapdragon S4.

So quad core chips have an UNFAIR advantage yet some benchmarks run lower then the dual core...? (all benchmarks done by Geekbench, which you mentioned favors quad core machines)

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

Did you look at the above link? You know, instead of being snarky you can clearly see the image was taken from an Android website by right clicking it.
http://1.androidauthority.com/wp-con...nch-test-1.jpg

Here's another link:
http://www.zimbio.com/New+Mobile+Pho...enchmark+Tests
And i can get 50 more using the same reference and more. And if you go to the Geekbench browser, as I showed one result above, the S3 results vary so much, with around 15-600 being the average.

once again you linked the jpg. link the article so we can see what context and what conditions were used when running the benchmark test.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

once again you linked the jpg. link the article so we can see what context and what conditions were used when running the benchmark test.

The article just took a screenshot from the Geekbench browser, which is available for anyone to view through
http://browser.primatelabs.com

Just type in the device and you will see many different results, the S3 from 14-1500 on quad core all the way up to 1980 or something (over clocked custom rom)

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

So quad core chips have an UNFAIR advantage yet some benchmarks run lower then the dual core...? (all benchmarks done by Geekbench, which you mentioned favors quad core machines)

who knows. maybe they were running Angry Birds Rio in the background when doing this test. You keep linking on the jpg or picture. give us the link to the article so we can see why the testers think the s3 is running slower in some apps compared to others.

Man if you ever did this in an AMD vs Intel fight you would have been lynched.

[silentsim]

I don't really know what your argument is here. You claimed the iPhone 5 didn't really compete, claiming "Even AMD once in a blue moon beats Intel on an app".

Geekbench is a pretty thorough benchmark, and more then 1 result is taken. It's pretty clear that the devices are pretty square power wise.

[Bertuzzied]

Originally Posted by silentsim

The article just took a screenshot from the Geekbench browser, which is available for anyone to view through
http://browser.primatelabs.com

Just type in the device and you will see many different results, the S3 from 14-1500 on quad core all the way up to 1980 or something (over clocked custom rom)

so once again it's just random people on the net running their scores. What if one of them was surfing CP on Chrome while running the testscores. who knows.

My article that I linked has way more credibility.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

who knows. maybe they were running Angry Birds Rio in the background when doing this test. You keep linking on the jpg or picture. give us the link to the article so we can see why the testers think the s3 is running slower in some apps compared to others.

Man if you ever did this in an AMD vs Intel fight you would have been lynched.

Geekbench doesn't test apps...its a hardware benchmark...
Just because it scores 1580, doesn't mean it will run an app slower, just like the iPhone. If a app was better coded on iOS it could potentially run smoother on a 4S over the Galaxy S3, and vice versa. A crappy iOS app will run crappy on an iPhone 5, and a well developed Android app will run smooth on a S2.

[silentsim]

Originally Posted by Bertuzzied

so once again it's just random people on the net running their scores. What if one of them was surfing CP on Chrome while running the testscores. who knows.

My article that I linked has way more credibility.

Your article did not do the benchmarks themselves either. They reference they got them through Geekbench.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57...mance-doubles/
"The A6's score also puts it ahead of Android device benchmarks. For example, the Samsung Galaxy S III with a Samsung Exynos 4412 quad-core chip rated at 1.4GHz posted a score of 1,588 compared to the A6's 1,601.
"