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

351–360 of 509 posts

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

#351

Post by thewataccount »

wetpaws wrote: post #142
thewataccount wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW my iPhone 7+ went 5 years and holds a charge for ~12 hours. It was just at 78% when I replaced it a few weeks ago but TBH that number is very... random (I used to do phone repair). If you have a charger at your desk/car then honestly you could likely go even longer. I've seen people struggling after 2 years though so it's rather random. Just a random N=1 sample for you

12 hours is laughably small running time

Absolutely 12 hours is not enough for a lot of people

That was with a few hours of screen time - I found that it didn't matter to me because I'd just plug it in at home/work. I'd call it "servicable" but certainly not great - but for 5 years I was personally surprised.

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

#352

Post by acdha »

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.

People's tolerance varies and so do the sites they visit – and things like news sites are a lot better than they used to be before Google started more aggressively including performance in their search ranking factors.

My interest in this topic is mostly the same as the author of the post I linked, namely making sure that developers test and measure on lower-end devices to make sure they're not building sites which exclude key demographics. For example, a government site really needs to work well on the kinds of phones seniors get under the FCC Lifeline program.

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

#353

Post by borissk »

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…

There is no danger of Apple becoming a monopoly in the future AR industry. Their products will be very expensive and out of reach for the majority of worlds population. Most of those who can afford them will still prefer a more open ecosystem from the likes of Google, Microsoft, Samsung, Huawei, etc. even if their offerings are slightly less advanced.

With their A and M series SOCs Apple had an advantage in mobile, tablet, laptop, even desktop PC markets. That advantage didn't result in a monopoly. If you live in US it may look like iPhones have a monopoly in the smartphone market, but they are a lot less popular in the rest of the world.

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

#355

Post by samus »

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.

That would be a very costly mistake for Intel since then they couldn't cater their existing markets anymore. AMD and Nvidia are already struggling since they must share TSMC's capacity with Apple. Also, it remains to be seen whether the x86 architecture can keep ahead of ARM-based designs and maybe also RISC-V in the far future.

Apple has good designs, consistent long-term plans, and doesn't have to directly compete with Intel over domination in the x86 market. They offer a complete package outside the x86 market. This fits well with who a market leader like TSMC would want as a partner.

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

#356

Post by hackmiester »

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 am a bit surprised to hear the iPhone X doesn't do the OCR stuff. The iPhone Xs (2018) does, and I use it all the time. And I kinda thought those phones were identical in all notable respects.

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

#357

Post by SergeAx »

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…

I am using Xiaomi Mi 8, it is four and a half years old now. I don't have visible problems with websites performance. The battery is quite degraded though:(

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

#358

Post by byee »

robert_dipaolo wrote: post #294
byee wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 han…

The Pixel 2 had a launch price of $649 vs the iPhoneX at $999, so ~35% more. That's not really a fair comparison, I imagine if you compare to a similarly priced android phone released at the same time, it'd be a closer result. Where apple does do well is supporting devices for much longer with software and security updates. So running older android phones is prob not a good ideas from a security perspective.

True, but if you can afford it you absolutely can get 35% more lifetime out of an iPhone X.

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

#359

Post by pkulak »

bangonkeyboard wrote: post #302
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.

The S23 is on TSMC's 4nm node. The iPhone 12 was TSMC's first-gen 5nm.

Thank you. No offense to everyone else replying to me, but this one-liner is worth more than all the hot-takes and random conjecture put together.

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

#360

Post by anthomtb »

asow92 wrote: post #202
AstixAndBelix wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that you "still rock" something barely 3 years old sounds.... strange. I still rock my 1983 Toyota, sure. I still rock my 20yo HiFi system. But I don't "still rock" my iPhone 11, it was only recently out of production for God's sake!

As an iOS developer, 3 years is a long time to upgrade.

One wonders how your end users feel about that.
Post reply on HN