Posted on 09/19/2017 1:44:40 PM PDT by Swordmaker
HIGHLIGHTS
The iPhone X was announced last week with many highlights including Face ID, an almost bezel-less OLED display, and a really fast A11 Bionic chipset - something the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus also sport. The SoC has six CPU cores, with the ability to run all of them simultaneously. Now, the iPhone X has been put through GeekBench 4, and the single-core and multi-core tests both prove that the chipset is indeed very powerful. The Apple iPhone X beats the competition in the market - like the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, Samsung Galaxy S8, the OnePlus 5, and the Samsung Galaxy S8+ by a fair margin, as seen in this comparison graph. The Samsung Galaxy Note 8 and Galaxy S8 are being powered by a Exynos 8895 SoC, while the OnePlus 5 and the Galaxy S8+ are powered by Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 SoCs.
The multi-core scores for the iPhone X are much higher than the rest with the second on the list being the Galaxy Note 8 with 6,784 points, while the iPhone X manages a score of 10,069. The single-core score for the iPhone X is at 4,188, while the iPhone 7 Plus stands second with 3,473 points. The iPhone 7 Plus has an A10 Fusion chip with two high-powered cores and four power-efficient ones, but unlike the A11 which is able to run all cores simultaneously, the last generation one was able to run only one cluster at a time - either the high-powered one or the power-efficient ones.
These benchmarking scores do indicate what a powerhouse of a device the iPhone X is. The iPhone X and the iPhone 8 Plus are thought to be powered by 3GB of RAM, while the iPhone 8 is said to have 2GB of RAM.
Apple's A11 Bionic SoC features a 'neural engine' to handle machine learning or artificial intelligence based tasks, powering Face ID, Animoji, and other features. It's a six-core CPU design with two performance cores that are 25 percent faster than the company's A10 Fusion, which it has previously used in older iPhone generations. The other four cores are for efficiency that are 70 percent faster than the A10 Fusion. Coupled with these cores is a new, second generation performance controller that makes use of all the six cores simultaneously (as mentioned earlier), delivering up to 70 percent greater performance for multi-threaded workloads.
Apple claims that the A11 Bionic-powered iPhone models will last two hours longer than the previous generation. The A11 Bionic chipset is also integrated with an Apple-designed GPU with a three-core design that delivers up to 30 percent faster graphics performance than the previous generation.
This is a phone I could use.
http://www.dhresource.com/albu_223648927_00-1.0x0/3-5mm-radiation-free-antique-style-retro.jpg
Or a smart looking one like this.
https://laughingsquid.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/20130918-13132669-2.jpg
Figures. :-)
And yet, for what I use it for, it's plenty speedy and featureful. It's a wonderful pocket computer, communications device, access to the internet, GPS and directions...
And most recently, it's the video screen and controller for my little quadcopter drone.
I hope Apple sees fit to produce phones, not only at the cutting-edge high end, but also some along the lines of what I have now. I recognize that they're more interested in pushing the envelope. But I'm quite comfortable with iOS, and I would like to stay with Apple products when my 5c eventually gets to the end of its useful life.
We'll see what the market offers at that time. I'll be willing to be that used 5c or similar phones may be available on eBay or something...
Pretty much my thought as well. Nothing on my phone needs that much power. I suppose it would help with bloatware. The amount of power available in a modern smartphone is astounding compared to my early desktops.
That said, more speed is better unless it merely means the battery will drain faster. My current phone is an iPhone 6, and I expect to keep it until it no longer is supported via OS updates/patches. I don't really need much more out of my phone than it currently provides.
LOL!
Pretty much in denial about the disadvantages of swapping memory into storage, vs the readily available extra storage that 6 gigabytes give to memory intensive apps and which is also available for running more apps and larger apps without having to swap in and out of “external” storage. I know what the heck I’m talking about because I know what swapping chunks of code and files into and out of storage entails, mostly because I have had to do that kind of swapping in and out in order to get programs and files to “fit” into the limited available main memory. It doesn’t matter how fast the cores are, the swapping WILL make apps and usage of the phone slower than on a device which affords apps more main memory to work. BTw, the reason I know is because I’ve been a programmer and systems analyst and project manager and have worked on all kinds of platforms, including mainframes to “mini-computers” and desktops/laptops and even smartphones/tablets.
I don’t need to own every smartphone ever made, or even use every smartphone ever made, in order to understand how apps/applications and OSes work.
I don’t own Apple because it never made any sense to me to be tied down and depend on any one company for everything from beginning to end. Walled-gardens is not what any developer should ever be involved in, and only the parent company of a PC or phone would be the biggest beneficiary. There might be some advantages to having to depend on only one platform for everything, but there are a lot more advantages to not having to depend on a single platform for the “rest of your life”.
And, the biggest reason that I don’t own Apple (though I’ve owned a couple of Macs along the way, and my daughter and husband own iPhones and iPads), is because I don’t like paying high prices for my stuff, and I could easily pay less and sometimes a lot less, for equivalent tech by other makers; and that is why I won’t own the iPhone 8 or iPhone X or Samsung’s latest phones. The smartphones I’ve owned have come from different makers, and the latest is the LG V20, which is pretty nice and still has most of the features that are “new” to the iPhone 8/X.
When it comes to VR, okay, let’s welcome Apple to the party, though kind of late to it. And, Apple is not talking about VR, but about AR, which there is a difference between the two, in case you didn’t know. And, in the field of AR, it’s Microsoft which has been the leader in that area, and Samsung and Google and now Apple, are following.
And, yeah, if “no one” has had the iPhone 8/X available for testing, then, even those tests that you quote from, are suspect too, aren’t they? The true tests will come when the regular consumer is able to purchase them, so, until then, your are just being fanatical about something that even you have not gotten your hands on.
And, the specs on the Samsung Note 8 are still superior to what the iPhone 8 and X offer. And, Samsung should get the credit for the most visible and most used part of the iPhone X.
And, again, processor speed is mostly irrelevant when the difference between processing and presenting on a screen is so minor that people won’t ever notice. The processor speed is just a marketing gimmick used to score points during presentations.
BTW, a smartphone (or any other device) is just as fast as its slowest component, which means that, the component most used is the screen and it’s the USER that determines how fast information is attained and presented and absorbed. One billionth of a second difference in the internal processing, will NEVER be noticed by any user. GET IT???
“You’ve posted it before as I recall, and were called on it then as well.”
False. You apparently have a defective recaller. I have never posted on your Apple adoration obsession threads, before. Not once.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
