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

211–220 of 509 posts

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

#211

Post by byee »

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 still use an iPhone X (with new battery from last year). The Pixel 2 was released around the same time and is e-waste.

Almost all apps run well with the exception of Google's, which have consistently gotten worse. The camera still starts up quickly, and the fact that most apps are still performant compared to an iPhone 13 is impressive.

Google Docs is unusable - even small documents can't be opened, and the app hangs when opened more than half the time. Google Maps keeps adding misc features which adds significantly to startup time and responsiveness.

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

#212

Post by ilyt »

acdha wrote: post #149
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.

You care about single-core performance when you use the web: things like JavaScript processing, layout, etc. will bottleneck on one core and since developers are shipping more code this is probably the most noticeable difference. It's also a little hard to tell in some cases since there are many “native apps” which use an embedded web view for some of their UI. This is important for developers to know about because i…

My phone is aging One Plus 5T and so far I never felt even slight reason to change it. It is just plainly fast enough.

Only thing that would make extra performance matter are video games and I don't play those on phone.

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

#213

Post by altec3 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #186
MagicMoonlight wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No that’s because your battery is old. Swap the battery and that “slow old phone” suddenly has the exact same speed as the current flagship

Interesting! i would have expected old battery to lead to keeping a charge for less time, but can you explain how it leads to worse perceived performance?

When the batteries get older, iOS throttles performance to ensure the device doesn't shut down unexpectedly. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208387

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

#214

Post by brundolf »

MagicMoonlight wrote: post #174
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.

No that’s because your battery is old. Swap the battery and that “slow old phone” suddenly has the exact same speed as the current flagship

iOS does have a feature that throttles the CPU on deeply worn-down batteries to save battery life, however, after it got some publicity a few years ago they made it user-toggleable from the settings menu (Battery > Battery Health & Charging)

My XS is currently at 74% of initial capacity (it tells you this too, which is really nice), and I don't even have the option to enable throttling yet, so it must not kick in until things get really dire

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

#215

Post by bee_rider »

kccqzy wrote: post #166
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.

Funny, I often think I wish this or that app was faster, but the reality is that for architectural reasons developers are putting heavy computations on the main thread and leave all other cores unused. So I welcome any and all single-thread performance improvements, if only because of lazy developers.

I don’t really want multi-core phone apps for the most part. Smartphones aren’t like full computers, they are small devices with little batteries. I want my phone to run single core programs with smooth scrolling and no jitter.

Multi core performance on a phone is like towing capacity on a sports car.

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

#216

Post by spacephysics »

t8sr wrote: post #162

Everyone in this thread is arguing about operating systems and their mobile OS preference... why? The interesting point here, which is corroborated by different sources than just TFA, is that Apple's silicon is 1-2 generations ahead of everyone else. Whether you like iPhone or Android, I think we should all agree that's a bad situation for the world to be in. Apple's advantage in mobile CPUs is coming at a time when…

Fully agree, they’re very quickly up to the races of intel and Amd for their laptop M series chips. Typically every two gens we see a larger bump, so the next M series (after the one just released) will probably be even worse for intel especially

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

#217

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

oliveshell wrote: post #56
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.

> Faster performance today means longer lasting tomorrow. Exactly. I use a 2nd gen iPhone SE, and a big reason I bought it was that it had the then-beefy A13 chip despite being a “budget model”. It’s now nearly 3 years old and still feels like a brand new phone.

In the same light my S20, which by all benchmarks should be inexcusably slow compared to Apple, still feels like a brand new phone to me as well. I think we've lately hit a level of performance excess that means that phones don't age like they once did.

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

#218

Post by pkulak »

t8sr wrote: post #162

Everyone in this thread is arguing about operating systems and their mobile OS preference... why? The interesting point here, which is corroborated by different sources than just TFA, is that Apple's silicon is 1-2 generations ahead of everyone else. Whether you like iPhone or Android, I think we should all agree that's a bad situation for the world to be in. Apple's advantage in mobile CPUs is coming at a time when…

Does Apple really have some secret sauce, or are they just consistently first in line for TSMC's latest process? Not saying that's better or worse, but it's a very different problem.

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

#220

Post by sliken »

yamtaddle wrote: post #130
cma wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Drastically still looks way lower than Samsung flagships (12GB).

iOS has historically done a lot better with less RAM (as far as how snappy and responsive it feels) than Android. Dunno if that's still the case, but it very much was for years and years.

I believe it's still true. Apple's swift/obj c++ don't use garbage collection. Android default java/kitlin does, so android is inherently more memory intensive.
Post reply on HN