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

Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

comparedial.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 509 posts

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#111

Post by GeekyBear »

izacus wrote: post #64
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #10

I guess my question is - why do I care about geekbench? When was the last time someone who doesn't play games on their phone thought "man, I wish this was faster"? Because it's been years for me. The good news I hear is that Samsung is finally improving their battery life. That is a score that I actually care about.

[flagged]

> Because it validates your decision to pay 1000$ for a phone

The $399 iPhone SE from 2016 got six years of OS updates and just got another security update last month.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#112

Post by cokeandpepsi »

metalliqaz wrote: post #92
jacooper wrote: post #30

At this point I really don't care about what is the latest and greatest in phones They are all the same at this point, we are way past when Specs actually mattered(outside of JS performance on mobile, thank you Snapdragon!), they are just too small for anything useful, at least for me personally. I just buy a pixel and install GrapheneOS/CalyxOS on it, and call it a day. Its a phone that works, and I can relatively t…

Why buy a Pixel only to replace the OS? Pixels are basically minimum viable hardware to deliver Google software. Without the Google software, its just a mid-range phone at high-end prices.

the a series are well priced/supported and do more than enough for me, you can pick one up for $300 and be good for years.. all while there are people making monthly payments for 1,200 iphones

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#113

Post by therouwboat »

barbazoo wrote: post #46

Why anyone would get a Samsung is beyond me. The amount of bloatware they install is insane and a lot of that you can't even uninstall. Plus it takes so long to get OS updates. And then there is Bixby or what that piece of shit is called.

A52s was cheap and it had good specs, but software side is awful. You can uninstall more apps with adb, but they come back when you upgrade.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#114

Post by satvikpendem »

minusf wrote: post #48
gbil wrote: post #15

I like my slower android in which I can run my browser engine of choice, install any program I want in an easy way without time limitations and customize it in general as I want. Did I mention that it has a USB-C connector too? Disclaimer: I have an old iphone, used iphone 11 for weeks then went back to Android and I daily drive a M1 Pro Macbook

what choice is that? firefox or chrome based skins? a duopoly is not a choice. however silly it is, apple's silly browser rule is the only thing standing in full on chrome monoculture. chrome is the new ie.

Both Chrome and Safari are the new IE, but for different reasons; the former, pushing their own browser standards, and the latter, falling behind in standards and being a pain to develop for and use.

Truly, Firefox is the only one that stops either.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#115

Post by olliej »

I will never not think of Apple's Bionacles :D

This does look to just be geek bench CPU, and we need to be honest, people play games on phones now so GPU performance matters, so if you're going to make an extreme claim like the headline, you need more than a single category of a single benchmark.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#116

Post by pertymcpert »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #91
itake wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use an iPhone X (released 2017) and I wish it kept up with modern app performance requirements. The iPhone X doesn't support built-in OCR in images and apps take 1-2s longer to launch than my iPhone 13. Faster performance today means longer lasting tomorrow.

Apps taking longer to launch is generally a RAM issue (unless you swipe up and force-close your apps each time). They drastically increased RAM recently: https://9to5mac.com/2022/12/31/iphone-ram-list/

Why?

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#117

Post by twobitshifter »

itake wrote: post #29
SketchySeaBeast wrote: post #10

I guess my question is - why do I care about geekbench? When was the last time someone who doesn't play games on their phone thought "man, I wish this was faster"? Because it's been years for me. The good news I hear is that Samsung is finally improving their battery life. That is a score that I actually care about.

I use an iPhone X (released 2017) and I wish it kept up with modern app performance requirements. The iPhone X doesn't support built-in OCR in images and apps take 1-2s longer to launch than my iPhone 13. Faster performance today means longer lasting tomorrow.

I only use an iPhone X so I don’t have a point of comparison but I’ve never felt it was slow to launch any apps, that’s why I haven’t felt the need to upgrade.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#118

Post by satvikpendem »

epolanski wrote: post #103

I can't understand who are the people that care about smartphone performance. I do every computation and gaming outside my phone. My Xiaomi Redmi Note 8 from 3 years ago feels as good as when I bought it when reading the net, watching youtube, chatting, emailing or editing pictures. And my Redmi scores 300 in the same Benchmark, where the S22 scores 900, the S23 1500 and the iPhone 14 Pro 1900. Maybe JS performance c…

Lots of people (especially in the third world) use their phone as their primary computer and gaming device.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#119

Post by cm2187 »

koolba wrote: post #78
cm2187 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple wouldn't replace my ipad battery and is bullshitting me saying it is at 100% health. The device is 4 years old and I can tell it's only lasting half to 2/3 of the original battery life (even with only safari open). I'd be happy to pay $100.

They won’t do the replacement even if you insist on doing it?

No what the guy told me is that they can't replace batteries because of lack of repairability. So their "battery replacement" is really a full device replacement (even though my device is otherwise in mint condition), and therefore they won't do it until their own diagnostics tell them the battery is dead. And of course I found lots of people sharing the same experience on forums, their diagnostic tool is set to never tell them the battery is dead.

Re: Apple’s 2½ year old iPhone 12 is 6% faster than the new Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra

#120

Post by cma »

diebeforei485 wrote: post #91
itake wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I use an iPhone X (released 2017) and I wish it kept up with modern app performance requirements. The iPhone X doesn't support built-in OCR in images and apps take 1-2s longer to launch than my iPhone 13. Faster performance today means longer lasting tomorrow.

Apps taking longer to launch is generally a RAM issue (unless you swipe up and force-close your apps each time). They drastically increased RAM recently: https://9to5mac.com/2022/12/31/iphone-ram-list/

Drastically still looks way lower than Samsung flagships (12GB).
Post reply on HN