Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 126 posts

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#81

Post by dspillett »

> we have decided to delist the affected models and remove them from our performance rankings

I would be inclined to be more aggressive than that. Leave them listed, but add support in the site or other publication system to display "deliberately broke the rules of the test" as a negative, perhaps displaying in a negative looking colour and in any graphs show as a if they scored, say, 20% worse then the worst other score.

If presenting some arithmetically derived overall rating of benchmarks and other properties, balloon this further. Then if the rest of the phone is demonstrably brilliant they still have a hope of not looking terrible, but the cheating hurts the result otherwise.

Unfortunately in these litigious times such an inclination would probably cause me some financial trouble, so it is probably for the best that I don't run a device comparison site! This may be why simply delisting was the chosen way of handling the situation here.

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#82

Post by sjwright »

Joakal wrote: post #61
wenbert wrote: post #5

Can these be grounds for refund?

In Australia, can return for a full refund that it's not working as advertised.

Only if the benchmark results were marketed by Huawei. Otherwise you would be limited to a claim under misleading or deceptive conduct which is still technically possible but you'd have bear the huge expense of taking them to court with the real possibility that you might lose and be bankrupted.

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#83

Post by notamicroshill »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #55
briandear wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They actually do run x times faster. They almost always have faster chips than the previous model. So they’ll pretty much always be faster. Who would release a slower phone as a new model? It doesn’t make any sense.

Maybe if it tripled battery or something

Yes please.

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#84

Post by eertami »

013a wrote: post #49
Jerry2 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we saw every single vendor do this Except Apple.

Probably because they don't need to. Their mobile chips are so ludicrously far ahead of everyone else in the world, it seems possible they discovered a crashed UFO and integrated alien technology into their designs.

Shill more please.

My 3 year old Oneplus X is more responsive than my iPhone 8 (work phone).

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#85

Post by bitL »

drampelt wrote: post #58
EZ-E wrote: post #9

I'm gonna get down voted but that's why I buy Apple phones. Comparing processors, ram, test scores means nothing compared to the actual experience

And that's why I buy Google phones. The processor being slightly slower doesn't matter to me if I prefer the overall experience

If you don't mind being stuck storage-wise with no SD card slot... 4k videos fill up internal storage pretty quickly.

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#86

Post by Geforce8472 »

cehrlich wrote: post #79
taneq wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are those days gone? Benchmark-specific hacks in graphics drivers, I mean, not AGP. :P Also all the outrage when people discovered that a Radeon 9600 was just a Radeon 9800 running in crippled mode, and that you could bridge the tracks and re-enable it in 9800 mode. (Or something similar, anyway, that was a long time ago... :P )

It was the 9500 that could be modded into a 9700. Early versions could be softmodded, this was disabled in later revisions which could only be modded by soldering the additional rendering pipes back on. No idea why I remember this useless piece of information. Also on a completely different note, the 9700 Pro which was the flagship card of that generation, cost about $300. Times have changed.

$399 was the price on launch in 2002, which is around $550 adjusted for inflation, current flagship consumer GPU from Radeon is the Vega 64 priced at $599 RRP. Times haven't changed as much as you might think

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#87

Post by noir_lord »

dingaling wrote: post #77
PinkMilkshake wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Have you seen the rig Apple uses? I cant find this, do you have a link? I'm quite interested in what they do.

They mount DSLR lenses onto stripped-down iPhone chassis via custom adapters. So it demonstrates what the Sony sensor + Apple software can do, but isn't reproducible in the real World.

They'd have to be careful in some EU countries with that trick.

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#88

Post by beerlord »

EZ-E wrote: post #9

I'm gonna get down voted but that's why I buy Apple phones. Comparing processors, ram, test scores means nothing compared to the actual experience

I switched to Apple after my Nexus 5 stopped getting updates about a year after I bought it.

Bought an iPhone 6S second hand for $320. Still getting updates now, and looks like I will for the foreseeable future.

The core feature iPhones are missing is USB Type C- I won't upgrade to a new iPhone if I cant use the same headphones on my laptop and phone (either 3.5mm or TypeC)

Re: Huawei caught cheating performance test for new phones

#90

Post by euyyn »

bitL wrote: post #85
drampelt wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that's why I buy Google phones. The processor being slightly slower doesn't matter to me if I prefer the overall experience

If you don't mind being stuck storage-wise with no SD card slot... 4k videos fill up internal storage pretty quickly.

When you buy a Google phone you get unlimited backup storage in Google Photos. You never think again about things like that.
Post reply on HN