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

341–350 of 509 posts

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

#341

Post by smokelegend »

6nf wrote: post #293
miloignis wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have a shitton of hardware and cables that I'm not going to throw away just for some connector that will be phased out in ten years. Most people already have USB-C cables. Apple people often have them b/c of a MacBook or w/e. > On my desktop, sure. On my phone? Why bother? Dark Mode, Ad Blocking, etc. > Disagree Freedom is important, even if you don't need it now. Someone else, maybe you in the future, may need i…

Apple is moving to wireless instead of cables so who cares when it's only used for charging? I can use my iPhone as a webcam, my iPods Max for audio, and two Macbooks can be placed next to each other to share one keyboard and move browser sessions between them. All wireless. I can even use the phone for internet connectivity while using the phone as a webcam for the macbooks. Zero cables! I mean sure it would be slig…

Silly apple boys, android has been doing wireless charging for years....

It's shyte like this that makes me giggle at the Apple boys and girls they swear up an down when Apple does something android does its "revolutionary" for all... fuck out of here wit that shyte.

Despite what some may think, there are more Android developers [Hardware/Software] then apple developers in this world. That is why Android will always be ahead of the game regardless what Apple does.

Old wise tail: You can polish a turd with bells and whistles, however it's still a turd no matter how you present it. Fin.

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

#342

Post by zerd »

bloodyplonker22 wrote: post #276
pkulak wrote: post #218

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What a gross trivialization of the chip design process. If all a company had to do was get first in line for TSMC's process, Intel would drop all their fabs and just pay that money to TSMC to beat AMD.

"Intel is engaged with TSMC on N3 for its next-generation graphic processors (GPUs) in 2023". https://www.eetimes.com/intel-will-rely-on-tsmc-for-its-rebo...

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

#343

Post by hokkos »

ilyt wrote: post #212
acdha wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I had one but the battery was dead and could't find a replacement. With a Pixel 7 Pro now I feel the speed difference.

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

#344

Post by basch »

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…

Id rather the web have less javascript than my phone be faster.

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

#345

Post by npteljes »

hahamaster wrote: post #62
yumraj wrote: post #19

The one, and only benchmark, I care about is battery longevity. Not how long battery lasts before needing charge, but how many years it lasts before dropping to say 80% of original capacity that it needs to be replaced or the phone needs to be updated. Most, if not all, modern phones are performant enough that I won’t need to update for a long time, if not for the battery issues. At least for my use case.

You take your phone to a shop and come back an hour later and boom you have a new battery. I once had a microphone fail on my phone and it was exact same scenario. It's really not a big deal.

I wish. We bought a Cat B35 because it looked cool. Phone speaker got quieter and quieter, I bought it to several phone places, nobody wanted to touch it. Maybe it wasn't popular enough?

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

#346

Post by [deleted] »

powersnail wrote: post #257
acdha wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> You care about single-core performance when you use the web: Theoretically, I would care. But in practice, I just took out an old budget android phone, gave it a go at browsing the web (news, images, and videos), and it seemed not to be noticeably slower than my much newer and pricier iPhone. Benchmarks would probably show a great difference between the two, but my eyes can't tell.

[deleted]

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

#347

Post by acdha »

basch wrote: post #344
acdha wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Id rather the web have less javascript than my phone be faster.

That is something Alex Russell, the author of that blog post, is trying to raise awareness of in the industry but changing the culture of web development is a lot harder than buying a different phone (in many cases that won't even cost you more money).

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

#348

Post by hot_gril »

brewdad wrote: post #336
hot_gril wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would rather have a gen1 SE than my current iPhone 12 mini. Had an iPhone 5 before, but AT&T stopped serving data to it. I thought maaybe it'd be ok not having a headphone jack, but nah, this sucks.

Buy the $9 dongle from Apple and keep it permanently connected to your headphones. Then it's just a plug in scenario, the same as a headphone jack whenever you want to use them. Sure, you can't charge and use your headphones at the same time but I get 2 full days of battery life from my iPhone 12.

I did, and I got the typical outcome for dongles. Left it plugged into my car aux until my wife wanted to play music off her iPhone 6... turns out it can't use that dongle. She disconnected it, then it got lost beneath the seat eventually. Had another for my headphones, turns out it can't use the wired mic so it's kinda useless. Third one broke. Other car has Bluetooth, but it sucks, often doesn't auto pair or the phones fight over it.

This is a bad compromise that didn't need to happen; I should just be able to plug headphones into my phone. In the end, I took my old iPhone 5 and left it in the car for playing music. It's the better phone.

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

#349

Post by basch »

acdha wrote: post #347
basch wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Id rather the web have less javascript than my phone be faster.

That is something Alex Russell, the author of that blog post, is trying to raise awareness of in the industry but changing the culture of web development is a lot harder than buying a different phone (in many cases that won't even cost you more money).

Fix it at the rendering level. My device should default to not rendering a website the way the developer asks it to, but the way my defaults are set. Load a minimum viable site, ask my permission to execute more.

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

#350

Post by rodgerd »

hinkley wrote: post #314
rodgerd wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Apple’s secret sauce is their long-term focus, colored strongly by their many awful experiences being held hostage by CPU manufacturers. This is the key point. There used to be a lot of chip makers and phone vendors in the Android space (hell, even Sony had their own processors for their early phones), both ARM and the odd non-ARM effort. The way that the Android market has collapsed down to essentially "Qualcomm a…

Apple tried and failed to make a chipset to replace Qualcomm didn't they? I'd love to see them try again. And I feel like that's an area where their particular culture (of looking at vendors that make them resentful and trying to do something about it) might even put them in a place where they're willing to sell those chips or designs to other carriers because fuck Qualcomm.

> Apple tried and failed to make a chipset to replace Qualcomm didn't they?

I can't remember whether it was sourcing Intel modems or rolling their own, but yeah, either way they fell foul of Qualcomm's nest of patents: Qualcomm's real competitive edge is that they are experts at lobbying to have their patented tech built into government and NGO standards.

You don't need to make decent chips or support them for more than a couple of years if it's illegal not to use them.

Post reply on HN