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

401–410 of 509 posts

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

#401

Post by hiisukun »

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.

This is one of the main reasons I use two particular things on Android:

1) Firefox on mobile, with addons. Battery consumption is reduced a lot with less javascript, less ads downloaded, less domains contacted etc. From my quick tests, Firefox was perhaps efficient as a default installation compared to Chrome, or on a wifi with a pihole/nextdns type setup. But out and about in the world

2) Downloaded videos, podcasts, music or books. If I store my stuff on the device by downloading at home on wifi, it uses way less power than streaming over mobile data. My battery lasts for really long time playing videos from storage compared to for example Youtube.

I often wonder how much the battery life of a phone is a function of battery size and phone cpu & screen technology, vs web technologies and website design/performance. I can sort-of control for the latter.

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

#402

Post by lern_too_spel »

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.

People mostly care about app launch performance for productivity tasks. It was the norm for many years for budget Android devices that were a year old to wipe the floor on those tests with the latest, most powerful iPhone due to how poorly optimized iOS was. iPhone might have caught up since then.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25205588

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

#403

Post by r00fus »

ericpauley wrote: post #394
r00fus wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s $49 for my iPhone 8 Plus. $69 for a newer phone. Considering it as the health is listed close to 85% now. https://support.apple.com/iphone/repair/battery-replacement

The 14s are $99, used the worst case in GP.

Battery replacement only really makes sense for 1-2y old phones TBH unless you you’re abusing your phone.

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

#404

Post by acdha »

faeriechangling wrote: post #400
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…

Yeah and the s23 has double the memory so it’s going to absolutely kick the crap out of the iPhone12 after it starts to swap your tabs into memory even accounting for the JVM. It’s cool and all for Apple to have an edge in single core performance but it doesn’t matter all that much in the real world and the s23 is objectively the faster phone.

> the s23 has dramatically more memory so it’s going to absolutely kick the crap out of the iPhone12 after it starts to swap your tabs into memory.

Do you have any reproducible test results showing that or are you just asserting tribal loyalty? I jest, we all know the answer.

You might want to read up on how iOS and Android differ in key ways: native code versus JIT, garbage collection versus ARC, and all of the system level differences for how many things can run in the background as well as quickly apps can save and restore state - faster CPUs and SSDs allows iOS to be more aggressive there, too, and developers can tune more aggressively because they have fewer, more consistent configurations to support.

Also consider it from the perspective of the engineering trade offs that the manufacturers make. More RAM means lower battery life and a higher price, and consumers are also sensitive to both of those. Apple controls their stack so tightly that they designed a custom SoC and market-leading CPU, and they measure the user experience very closely since that’s a lot of what they’re selling — if there really was a gap, adding more RAM would be one of the easiest ways to close it. Similarly, Samsung wouldn’t make every phone they make have lower battery life and cost more if that only benefited a small percentage of users. They’re making different choices because they have different systems but both of them watch this stuff closely.

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

#405

Post by mynameisash »

stevemk14ebr wrote: post #252
mynameisash wrote: post #233

I'm particularly frustrated with the market for phones. I'w not going to buy an iPhone, and I'd really like to avoid the Google ecosystem (eg, by using GrapheneOS). I just received new Pixel 6a phones for me and my family yesterday only to discover that there's no 3.5mm jack. I really feel like old man yelling at cloud, but the more advanced phones and the software get, the more I miss the days of my cheapy Motorola…

you've got to be very disconnected to not know that 3.5mm jacks have been removed from most modern phones by now (a terrible choice, I agree)

I don't follow advances in phones - new models coming out are never on my radar. So if a manufacturer drops functionality like that, I don't notice. And literally every phone I've owned for my nearly 25 years of cell usage has had a 3.5mm jack, so it's never had to be a conscious choice.

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

#406

Post by iKlsR »

dileepkr wrote: post #232

To all the iphone diehards, I recently switched from Samsung to iphone 14PM and I whole heartedly hate following things: 1. The keyboard in ios: its unintuitive and ancient compared to the android counterparts. And No, Gboard, swiftkey keyboard in ios suck equally bad too. 2. Battery drain issues: Battery drains randomly, main culprit being "find my" process. This alone drains ~8% of battery overnight on my iphone an…

On a random note I used to be an "I'll never go apple guy" but having to do some app dev had to get one so got a 13PM and recently upgraded to the 14PM and also copped a Pixel 7 Pro and man... going back to Android feels like regressing, sure swiftkey etc is nice but every app feels lesser than it's ios counterpart in terms of polish and feel, ios gestures are also way better. I haven't used my Pixel in weeks outside of work and a few calls despite having spent the last decade or so on Android. I once heard someone say even a baby can use an iphone and it shows, I don't think when I'm on it, it feels very natural and you quickly get used to the inconsistencies. I now have a M1 and a watch, heh.

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

#407

Post by acdha »

cokeandpepsi wrote: post #112
metalliqaz wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I find it interesting that you’re comparing an old, low-end Pixel phone to the most expensive current generation iPhone. If your phone budget is $300 you’d be comparing it to the similarly priced iPhone 11 or SE; if you wanted a prestige flagship phone you’d be comparing it to a high-end Android device costing about the same.

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

#408

Post by acdha »

gamblor956 wrote: post #183

My 22Ultra overnight: loses 6-8% battery life. My GF's iPhone 14 overnight: loses 20% battery life. My GF uses my phone more than I do because her iPhone is usually dead by the end of the day if she doesn't remember to charge it every few hours. I'm willing to accept a slightly slower phone if it means my phone can make it through the day without me being a hostage to charging.

Do you have the same apps installed? Years back I found uninstalling Facebook was like a 20% battery life improvement - I didn’t even open it much but it was so busy in the background.

Going through the battery usage report and pruning apps is like flossing: most people should do it more often than they do.

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

#409

Post by acdha »

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.

I think it’s “tried but it takes a while” — and I’m sure the supply mess of the last couple years broke a lot of schedules. The most recent story I’ve seen has it a year or so out, so it’ll be interesting to see if that pans out or, especially, if Qualcomm comes up with some new legal angle to prevent competition.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-09/apple-pla...

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

#410

Post by sidlls »

goosedragons wrote: post #392
pb7 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Android phones can do everything iPhones can plus more. You can debate whether or not it's more rough around the edges but they just simply do more. More but worse. I don't want it to be a really bad space heater or a really bad flood light, I want it doing a few things really well. >No emulators, no NFC pairing, no auto-sorting your app pages alphabetically, worse notifications, no grabbing that file off a USB C dr…

Nobody cares about better app and notification management? Some of these are niche but those two things make Android better at being a smartphone than the iPhone. You might not care about these things but some people do. Rounding errors start to add up when there's lots of them.

Apple's notification management is better than what I remember from my last Android phone (years ago, a Pixel, latest version at the time, I think in 2017 or 2018). Apple's app management is definitely mixed, but I find it quite easy to use as-is, certainly not deficient enough to be a deal-breaker. And most people--by far--don't care much about either item.
Post reply on HN