Great article. Would love to see more informative technical articles like this. As far as feedback all I could ask for would be more detail on how the chips are actually made. Thank you for all you do.
AnonD-560664, 08 Feb 2017I didn't see anything that shows Apple doing better with 1GB than Android with 6GB becuase
i... moreActually Apple can do that (it's closer to 3:1 rather than 6:1 memory wise) because they cheat. They eliminate one of the primary uses of computers (processing many things at the same time) freeing way too much memory. Basically when you open a new app, your last one has been frozen in the background, that is to say only a screenshot of its last state is kept in memory, a shortcut of sorts ... none of its internal components work though, you can't call its subroutines from another app, you can't have it continue its work in the background ... etc. They kinda fixed some of the overt background issues after ios7 (apps are less universes of their own and exists some backgrounding in some apps) but with an obious hit in memory (which is why the new iPhone plus needs 3GB of RAM instead of 1GB and why 512MB iOS devices are ultra slow in ios7+ ).
So yeah, you get some, you lose some. Personally I prefer android's approach, because unlike software, hardware advances linearly so it's only a matter of time that android phones would catch up even surpass iOS phones in both performance and functionality (we are almost there with 6-8GB android phones).
Kristi, 08 Feb 2017Ok so i don't get two things here
1. What happened to apple and nvidia processors
2. This ... moreIf they put that in, plus a graph on performance per watt.. all those cpu listed here will be shamed.
So much for a "full" understanding.
A few comments:
- could you possibly include a final chart that includes power usage? So, perf/W by freq? That would provide, for the first time, i think, an absolute hierarchy since we could then simply provide a single number, slope (the origin will need to start at 0 in order for this to work), to see which cpus are the best (perf/W tells us efficiency, while freq provides insight into scalability)
- you have the mongoose listed as 2.3GHz, but the score is clearly for multicore, so the soc should be using 2.6GHz
Ok so i don't get two things here
1. What happened to apple and nvidia processors
2. This isn't even the full range of qualcom processors
Where is the snapdragon 626????
Anonymous, 08 Feb 2017But these programs and functions need processing power, not ram. Did you even see the ram mana... moreI didn't see anything that shows Apple doing better with 1GB than Android with 6GB becuase
it exists only in your mind. Feel free to link to it though, I need a good laugh.
But for people who actually write software, the notion that Apple can beat Android performance with an 6:1 memory disadvantage is delusional. There is no such thing as magic no matter how many times Apple tells you your product is magical. Devices with less memory have less performance. Software needs memory to run, not just processing power. If you don't have enough memory then you'll just thrash.
Octa-core A53 SoCs from different vendors seem to rank very high on these charts, even beating multiple older flagship SoCs. Only in reality they usually struggle with even basic tasks, and despite more cores they are even worse for multitasking. I owned both A53 based devices and Krait/Kryo quad-cores and Apple dual-cores - A53 octa-cores were the worst of them.
AnonD-560664, 08 Feb 2017LOL, even if OS's don't need much RAM (a false statement), you conveniently forget application... moreBut these programs and functions need processing power, not ram. Did you even see the ram management comparison where iPhone with 2GB (1GB was 2014) is better than Samsung with 4 and OnePlus with 6GB. And also, there is no need to be offensive, that just shows that you are clearly a fandroid not able to expand his horizon.
Anonymous, 08 Feb 2017you are talking sh*t. If you have slow CPU, it will be slow in future. If you have fast CPU, i... moreLOL, even if OS's don't need much RAM (a false statement), you conveniently forget applications, which do use lots of RAM, becuase they keep on adding functionality and they're not written by the OS developer and becuase users want to keep adding more of them.
The only people who argue RAM isn't important is Apple users who don't know any better trying to justify their 1GB $700 phones.
What's the point of all this if it doesn't try to benchmark power usage, arguably the most important metric of all?
AnonD-197217, 08 Feb 2017this is really funny, everybody knows when you want future proof, you get more RAM, not CPU. A... moreyou are talking sh*t. If you have slow CPU, it will be slow in future. If you have fast CPU, it will be still ok in future. And OS don't need much RAM, it's more like OS are better optimized so they use less RAM. Marshmallow on my M4 Aqua used half the RAM of Lollipop
if android benefits from more cores (there are many articles that shows apps using more and more cores) how can you say single core performance is better?
Anonymous, 08 Feb 2017Look at the s7 and s7 edje battery life and say that again How many hours do you think S7/S7 Edge will last you on a single charge? 98 hours? Come and say that again :v lol
AnonD-197217, 08 Feb 2017I myself is a fan of mediatek. I believe Mediatek focuses on efficiency, exactly what peopl... moredid you put mediatek and efficiency in one sentence? just check gsmarena battery benchmarks you will see how mediatek bad mediatek is in efficiency