Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Hardware - Troubleshooting and Discussion > iPhone, iPad & iPod > Waiting for the iPhone 5, aka The New iPhone

Waiting for the iPhone 5, aka The New iPhone
Thread Tools
The Godfather
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 18, 2012, 09:25 PM
 
It will be a disappointment unless:
1. Thunderbolt
2. 64GB base model (c'mon it's been years of 16GB base models)
3. All LTE bands supported, unlocked available
4. No heavier, nor bigger than current iPhone
5. Optical zoom
6. Waterproof

Make it happen Apple, no matter the price. Otherwise it is of no value to anyone with an iP4.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2012, 03:39 AM
 
Enough with these bullshit wish lists disguised as "iPhone X will be a failure/disappointment unless" "analysis".

1. AnandTech - Why Thunderbolt Won't Come to the iPhone Anytime Soon
2. You pay for the difference. I think Apple, and ordinary mortals, would prefer a "cheap" (with contract) entry price.
3. Maybe. Probably not before 2013 (LTE is kinda irrelevant most places until then, anyway).
4. But...but...we all know iPhone 6 will be a failure if it doesn't come at least with a 4" display...!...right?
5. Figure that with your point 4., and get back to us.
6. Figure that with your point 4,, and get back to us. Though that nano-coating looks very sweet (but it has for five or so years, since the first company demonstrated it, and somehow, it hasn't made it into production. I wonder why?
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2012, 05:24 AM
 
My guess is lte will be in this new iPhone. I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a 4 inch phone with the same resolution screen as well as a current size one. Doubt we'll see optical zoom. Water proof would me awesome but I doubt they'd even advertise it haha. Mostly because I don't think it would be that reliable.

My big hope for the next iPhone is really just a spec bump. I have no idea what they could add that isn't obvious.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2012, 05:58 AM
 
Thunderbolt is a terrible idea, and anyway they're moving to wireless syncing. Will not happen.

Flash: No, actually. We are the minority among Apple's customers, and the majority do not need more than 16GB. They might increase to 32GB if they e.g. started pushing HD movies or something, but the fact that the AppleTV is still stuck at 8GB should be a hint.

LTE: MAYBE. The operators would like it so they could move some traffic away from the crowded 3G bands, but the dismal failure of all the Android phones with 4G has to be a cautionary tale. I'm not up to date on what baseband chips are coming, and if there is one that will significantly improve battery life and frequency coverage, then maybe.

Weight & size: Sure. Personally I think that the screen will grow slightly without increasing the outer dimensions, and that the iPhone will eventually look like what the iPod Touch does now.

Optical zoom: It would be interesting if they could align the light path along the length of the phone, like an old compact digital camera I had, but since they're just buying ready cameras as a package, I don't see that happening.

Waterproof: This one actually has some likelihood of happening. It's a definite "regular customer" concern with the current model.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
The Godfather  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2012, 08:32 PM
 
What was that old digicam you had?

It's going to be best if we express our wishes here, or else Apple will release a really dumb upgrade like:

1. 3D
2. Larger
3. Haptic
4. Ultra-retina
5. Fingerprint/iris reader
6. FM, AM and ATSC
7. Contact less cursor positioning
8. Bionics
9. Prints your AAPL dividend or credits into your iTunes account
10. Full function remote-controlled car wheels

And then we would feel really bad for not having a good iPhone 5 at least in our imagination
     
The Godfather  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 19, 2012, 09:49 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
Enough with these bullshit wish lists disguised as "iPhone X will be a failure/disappointment unless" "analysis".

1. AnandTech - Why Thunderbolt Won't Come to the iPhone Anytime Soon
If not Thunderbolt, FireWire Extreme.

ARM would not need a controller because in the sync operation, it does not need to be the bus master, just a storage peripheral like a thunderbolt harddrive.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2012, 01:26 AM
 
Originally Posted by P View Post
LTE: MAYBE. The operators would like it so they could move some traffic away from the crowded 3G bands, but the dismal failure of all the Android phones with 4G has to be a cautionary tale. I'm not up to date on what baseband chips are coming, and if there is one that will significantly improve battery life and frequency coverage, then maybe.


The ATT 4S is "4G" already ! I say bah humbug to 4G! I'll sit at my local Culver's and enjoy my Northwoods Walleye™ and surf the net.
     
besson3c
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: yes
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2012, 01:35 AM
 
Will we ever see wireless headphones?
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2012, 06:27 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
What was that old digicam you had?
An old Minolta I think, don't remember the model number for its day. It took decent pictures if you ever got it focus, but the autofocus was

Originally Posted by besson3c View Post
Will we ever see wireless headphones?
You can buy them today. Look for headphones supporting Bluetooth A2DP. Be warned that it eats battery.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 20, 2012, 07:54 AM
 
Originally Posted by The Godfather View Post
If not Thunderbolt, FireWire Extreme.

ARM would not need a controller because in the sync operation, it does not need to be the bus master, just a storage peripheral like a thunderbolt harddrive.
What the hell is "Firewire Extreme"?

And Firewire requires two controllers at opposite ends of the connection. That's how the protocol works.
     
The Godfather  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 23, 2012, 09:47 PM
 
These controllers can be embedded in teh CPU, just like USB controllers are embedded in virtually all ARM chips. FireWire is trivial 1999 technology and Apple specifies/designs their own ARM chips.

I meant FireWire 800, not FireWire Extreme. In any case, USB2 is plainly insufficient for iPadders who will buy HD content from iTunes, and is not helping the marketing of Macs at all.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2012, 05:14 AM
 
Plainly.

Sales are tanking.

     
The Godfather  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2012, 08:12 AM
 
The magic is gone. All that's left are the brand, consumism and fanpersons.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Mar 24, 2012, 09:12 AM
 
As opposed to the 90s when it was JUST the brand and fanpersons.

Also, how do you go from "the magic" to needing FireWire on iDevices?

The connection escapes me.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 30, 2012, 06:55 AM
 
I was expecting an A5X or A5 in the new iPhone. However a new blurrycam argues for an A6.



I wonder if this blurrycam pic was of a computer screen, given those lines.

The A5X is Dual-core ARM Cortex A9, with Quad-core PowerVR SGX543MP4. However, existing A5X chips in the new iPad are 45 nm, which would be too much power for an iPhone 5 I'm guessing. So, I would think the new iPhone would get a 28-32 nm A5X, or a 28-32 nm A5 which has a slower GPU portion than the A5X. 28-32 nm A5 chips already are shipping in Apple TV.

Or perhaps it's a different chip altogether, which they've named A6. If that happened, I'd guess it was based off Cortex A15. I just thought September 2012 was a bit early for A15, but then again products with A15 chips from Apple's competitors are just a few months away, with A15 chips already being manufactured.

http://9to5mac.com/2012/08/30/more-iphone-parts-a6-processor-more-new-9-pin-cables/
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Aug 31, 2012, 12:22 AM
 
Apple has been shipping 32nm A5 chips for several months now - namely inside the new Apple TV (with one core disabled) and in the iPad2 (a lottery thing, most are 45nm). That was my bet for the new iPhone, but maybe not.

If it truly is an A15 core, that is very early and completely unexpected. I know Apple likes to do that sort of thing, but it would be highly unexpected, as new chips have so far debuted in the iPad, and the A15 is a much better fit for the iPad anyway. A quadcore also makes little sense. It could be a regular dualcore A9 with a new GPU, however - PowerVR launched the 600 series not too long ago.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2012, 06:39 AM
 
Nano SIMs are now in the wild... with no shipping product that requires them:

     
MacinTommy
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 4, 2012, 08:59 AM
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/04/iphone-5-event-september-12_n_1854597.html
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 10:56 AM
 
Bump, cuz, well, it's actually been announced now.

I'm surprised at the lack of interest. Well maybe not. The release is pretty much exactly what we were expecting, except that it comes with an A6.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/12/iphone-5-processor/

     
kenna
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 11:00 AM
 
I'm surprised too.

However, does anyone know whether it'll be available for pre-order at 9am? Or will Apple start pre-orders at midnight?
MacBook Pro 17" 2.2 GHz quad-core, 2x4GB 1333MHz RAM, 750GB Hard Drive, Intel HD Graphics 3000,
AMD Radeon HD 6750M with 1GB GDDR5, Mid 2011

MacBook Air 13" 1.7 GHz dual-core Intel i5, 4GB RAM, 128GB Flash Storage, Intel HD Graphics 3000, Mid 2011
iPhone 4 32 GB, Mid 2010
     
genevish
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: Marietta, GA, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 12, 2012, 12:41 PM
 
kenna, exactly what I was going to ask.

And no one has mentioned my favorite new feature: The camera lens cover is now glass. Yay! I seem to be really good at scratching the plastic cover on my iPhone 4.
Scott Genevish
scott AT genevish DOT org
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 01:45 AM
 
Anandtech says that they "have heard" that it is two A15 cores and the same SGX543MP4 as in the new iPad on a 32nm process. That is impressive, even if we don't have the clockspeeds yet. A big.LITTLE design would have been even more impressive, but hey... this is pretty good.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
lpkmckenna
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Toronto
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 02:38 AM
 
I was pretty impressed by the Panoramic photo-taking. Has that been seen in a phone before?
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 07:00 AM
 
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 07:23 AM
 
Originally Posted by lpkmckenna View Post
I was pretty impressed by the Panoramic photo-taking. Has that been seen in a phone before?
Yup, several Android models have it.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
kenna
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 09:33 AM
 
In comparison with the Galaxy SIII and the Nokia Lumia, are we really to believe that these phones are THAT much better?

It's a strange sensation on the comments of articles with Android fans running rampant.

I really like the iPhone 5 and because I've bought into Apple's eco-system, it's a no brainer. If that wasn't the case… I'd be interested to know if those phones are THAT much more superior?
MacBook Pro 17" 2.2 GHz quad-core, 2x4GB 1333MHz RAM, 750GB Hard Drive, Intel HD Graphics 3000,
AMD Radeon HD 6750M with 1GB GDDR5, Mid 2011

MacBook Air 13" 1.7 GHz dual-core Intel i5, 4GB RAM, 128GB Flash Storage, Intel HD Graphics 3000, Mid 2011
iPhone 4 32 GB, Mid 2010
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 10:59 AM
 
Thinner, lighter, 4" display, 4G LTE and A6 seem appropriate to me. IMO "better" is indeed about the ecosystem.

In fact IMO once basic hardware is modern and reliability is good it is _all_ about the ecosystem.

The great design is a bonus.

-Allen
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by kenna View Post
It's a strange sensation on the comments of articles with Android fans running rampant.
I really like the iPhone 5 and because I've bought into Apple's eco-system, it's a no brainer. If that wasn't the case… I'd be interested to know if those phones are THAT much more superior?
I don't have much invested in either the Android or iOS ecosystem. I'm more a free-app type of guy, with only occasional paid apps.

Originally Posted by kenna View Post
In comparison with the Galaxy SIII and the Nokia Lumia, are we really to believe that these phones are THAT much better?
The Lumia has no ecosystem at all.

I kind of like the idea of the Galaxy SIII, except for the part that it's a 4.8" phone. Too big IMO.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 01:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
The Lumia has no ecosystem at all.
Actually the vaporware Lumia 920 will be entering the nascent Microsoft ecosystem. Although MS has totally failed in mobile to date the Win Phones are not as bad as their market share suggests. And since (IMO) desktops are part of an ecosystem, the 90% share MS has in the stagnant desktop OS space does give them a starting point. I do believe that MS gets the ecosystem concept, even if they are simply mimicking Apple at this point.

-Allen
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 02:03 PM
 
The Windows Phone hardware isn't terrible, but so far there is no compelling reason for anyone on any platform to get a Windows Phone. In fact, the only person I know who has a Windows Phone 7 Lumia is an MS employee, and even he doesn't like it that much.

Meanwhile, When secrecy is not a good thing: Microsoft and Windows Phone 8

When I read colleague David Meyer's piece detailing how Microsoft is restricting access to the WP8 SDK to only the "developers of [the Marketplace's] most-downloaded apps" I was sure I didn't read things accurately. So I read the entire article again, only to verify that what I read was indeed what Microsoft is doing.

It seems that even though Microsoft needs developers writing apps for Windows Phone 8 more than anything else, it is only giving the SDK to those already with popular apps in the store. You read that right, only developers with top apps in the store can get access to the SDK. Others have to wait until Windows Phone 8 is officially launched.

As if that isn't silly enough, the reason for the restricted access to the SDK is downright bizarre. Microsoft wants to keep some features of Windows Phone 8 secret to build excitement for the platform. You may want to read that sentence again, I'll wait.
     
SierraDragon
Mac Elite
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Truckee, CA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 13, 2012, 02:32 PM
 
That's the thing, MS keeps doing the dumbest things. A firm without cash to burn would have failed years ago.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2012, 03:35 AM
 
They try to emulate Apple and utterly fail at doing so.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2012, 04:22 AM
 
Hmm... The contract pricing of the iPhone 5 in Canada begins at $179, despite the fact the unlocked price is $699. Then again, it's still a 3-year contract in Canada.
     
Salty
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2012, 08:18 AM
 
Yeah it used to be that Rogers would let you upgrade after 2 years, but they seem to have pushed that to two and a half years. Needless to say I'm more than a little pissed off about that. I'll be phoning them as soon as the phone lines die down. I'd love to get an iPhone 5 on launch day, but I want to make Rogers work for it more than I want it
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 14, 2012, 09:00 AM
 
The iPhone contract for Rogers is 3 years as well. Maybe you're thinking of other phones, some of which have 2 year contracts.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 15, 2012, 08:24 PM
 
Interesting. Apple's A6 is not an ARM A9 or A15, but a custom ARM core design.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6292/iphone-5-a6-not-a15-custom-core

Also, the iPhone 5 has 1 GB RAM, which is a huge spec improvement over the iPhone 4S.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2012, 11:18 AM
 
1GB A6 is a welcome improvement, but it's pretty much keeping up with the Jonses/not falling too far behind.

Before the iPhone 5 release you were looking at at 512MB A5 vs 2GB Snapdragon or Exynos.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2012, 12:43 PM
 
Twice as fast as the new iPad, at least in Geekbench.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1030202
http://browser.primatelabs.com/ios-benchmarks

iPhone 5,2: 1601
iPad 3: 791
iPad 2: 760
iPhone 4S: 629
iPad: 454
iPhone 4: 380
     
The Godfather  (op)
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Tampa, Florida
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2012, 02:04 PM
 
Jumps the shark 2.5 times faster than the 4S. Probably it will be worth waiting remaining iphoneless until the third recession dip and snap one for $300 in Craigslist.
     
Cold Warrior
Moderator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Polwaristan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2012, 04:25 PM
 
Don't forget Apple introduced the iPhone in 2007 and it sold incredibly well through the crash and recession and "recovery."
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 16, 2012, 06:37 PM
 
AnandTech weighs in on the A6 Geekbench results

Also pay close attention to peak bandwidth utilization. The 4S had 6.4GB/s of theoretical bandwidth out to main memory, the 5 raises that to 8.5GB/s. In the Stdlib write test the 4S couldn't even hit 50% of that peak bandwidth. The iPhone 5 on the other hand manages to hit over 70% of its peak memory bandwidth. I will say that if these numbers are indeed faked, whoever faked them was smart enough not to violate reality when coming up with these memory bandwidth numbers (e.g. no 95% efficiency numbers show up). It's also clear that these results aren't a simply doubling across the board over the 4S, lending some credibility to them.

Some of the largest performance improvements promised by the Geekbench data appear here in the memory results. It's whatever work Apple did here that helped enable the gains in the integer and floating point results below:

On average we see around 2.2x scaling from the 4S to the 5 in Geekbench's integer tests. There's no major improvement in multicore scaling, confirming what Geekbench tells us that we're looking at a two core/two thread machine.

The gains here are huge and are likely directly embodied in the performance claims that Apple made at the iPhone 5 launch event. Many smartphone workloads (under Android, iOS and Windows Phone despite what Microsoft may tell you) are still very CPU bound. Big increases in integer performance will be apparent in application level improvements.

Don't be surprised to see greater than 2x scaling here even though Apple only promised 2x at the event. Remember that what you're looking at is raw compute tests without many of the constraints that apply to application level benchmarks. While Apple has used benchmarks in the past to showcase performance, all of its performance claims at launch were application level tests. Those types of tests are more constrained and will show less scaling. That being said, I am surprised to see application level tests that were so close to the 2.2x average scaling we see here. Apple could have moved to faster NAND/storage controller here as well, which could help most if not all of these situations.
     
P
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 07:06 AM
 
This is very interesting. A few vague ideas:

* Since Nehalem, ARM has had bad memory bandwidth utilization compared to Intel. This looks like Apple has managed to do something about that. Options include a lower latency memory controller setup and more outstanding cache misses.

* 1 GHz clockspeed means that we are looking at a pipeline similar to A9 rather than A15. I think they probably took an A9 and started tweaking. Said tweaking likely means wider, but not deeper - more issue ports, more execution units. They could also have tried to cut L1 cache latencies, increase the OOO window, added more renaming registers, etc.

* No threading improvement means no SMT, and it seems unlikely that there is any sort of chip multithreading at all.

Will be very interesting to see what we will find out.
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 09:35 AM
 
Yeah, I was almost wishing for lacklustre performance benches so I'd be justified in saving a few bux now and waiting until the 5S.

However, the more info that comes out about it, the more it looks like I'll get it.

P.S. I skipped the 2G, but went for the 3G, and then the retina screen in the 4, and probably now the A6/1GB-endowed 4" iPhone 5.
     
Spheric Harlot
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 09:36 AM
 
What blows me away is that the Geekbench results are roughly on par with a dual-processor G5 tower from 2004.

That's just…

*wanders off, shaking head and muttering into his beard*
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 09:58 AM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
What blows me away is that the Geekbench results are roughly on par with a dual-processor G5 tower from 2004.
That's just…
*wanders off, shaking head and muttering into his beard*
Funny you should mention that. I've been thinking I should just get rid of my iBook 1 GHz because it's so damn slow, actually slower than my iPhone 4 for surfing, and both the iPad 2 and Nexus 7 I have blow it away. However, my wife likes it as a kitchen computer. Not a big deal if crumbs get in it.

However I also had the (dis)pleasure of using a G5 iMac fairly recently. It's amazing just how slow that thing feels too now. In contrast, a dual-core Atom with ION GPU and SSD is pretty decent even in Win 7. But the quad-core Tegra 3 just flies... at least until you get to a GIF-heavy page. It would be great to have that performance on my phone. It might just be 4-6X as fast as my Apple A4 endowed iPhone 4.
     
mduell
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 05:36 PM
 
Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot View Post
What blows me away is that the Geekbench results are roughly on par with a dual-processor G5 tower from 2004.
That's just…
*wanders off, shaking head and muttering into his beard*
Anand Lal Shimpi notes:
Although Geekbench is cross platform, I wouldn't recommend using this data to do anything other than compare iOS devices. I've looked at using Geekbench to compare iOS to Android in the past and I've sometimes seen odd results.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 08:02 PM
 
Still, just for fun, my computer Geekbench scores are below. I didn't test the Android and iOS devices myself because they're paid apps, and they've been heavily tested anyway.

2.93 GHz Core i7-870 iMac Lion: 9241
Int: 7533
FP: 15104
Memory: 4095
Bandwidth: 4993

2.9 GHz Athlon II X3 Win 7: 4291
Int: 4815
FP: 5495
Memory: 2245
Bandwidth: 2341

2.26 GHz Core 2 Duo P8400 MacBook Pro Lion: 3269
Int: 2636
FP: 4664
Memory: 2534
Bandwidth: 2076

1.3 GHz Pentium SU4100 Win 7: 1722
Int: 1866
FP: 1530
Memory: 1654
Bandwidth: 2028

[ Nexus 7 - 1604 ]

[ iPhone 5 - 1601 ]

1.6 GHz Atom 330 Win 7 (3 GB RAM): 1164
Int: 1286
FP: 1135
Memory: 1029
Bandwidth: 1110

[ iPad 2 - 765 ]

1.07 GHz G4 iBook Leopard: 556
Int: 713
FP: 607
Memory: 344
Bandwidth: 258

800 MHz G4 iMac Leopard: 388
Int: 496
FP: 423
Memory: 230
Bandwidth: 208

[ iPhone 4 - 375 ]

[ iPhone 3G - 141 ]

The machines that feel decently fast to me are the Core i7 iMac, triple-core Athlon, and Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, as well as the Nexus 7 (for most stuff).
The machines that feel slow to me are the Pentium SU4100, Atom 330, and iPhone 4.
The ones that are painfully slow are the iBook, G4 iMac, and iPhone 3G.

Then there's the iPad 2 at 765, but it's usually an OK surfer speed-wise. It just feels way, way faster than the iPhone 4, but it also feels way slower than my Nexus 7.

P.S. All of these devices (except for the iPhone 5 of course) are in current use in my house.
I want my, I want my, I want my iPhone 5.
     
Brien
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Southern California
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 17, 2012, 08:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
I don't have much invested in either the Android or iOS ecosystem. I'm more a free-app type of guy, with only occasional paid apps.
The Lumia has no ecosystem at all.
I kind of like the idea of the Galaxy SIII, except for the part that it's a 4.8" phone. Too big IMO.
And rumors peg the SIV at 5.0". I'd considered getting a Note II instead of the new iPhone, since I like the real estate, but even I think it's odd that Android phones are still getting larger. HTC's new phone is 5", and there are rumors that the next Nexus device will be in the 5" range. Makes me wonder if it's time for Apple to consider splitting the iPhone into multiple SKUs (a 4" and a larger model).
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2012, 05:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by Brien View Post
And rumors peg the SIV at 5.0". I'd considered getting a Note II instead of the new iPhone, since I like the real estate, but even I think it's odd that Android phones are still getting larger. HTC's new phone is 5", and there are rumors that the next Nexus device will be in the 5" range. Makes me wonder if it's time for Apple to consider splitting the iPhone into multiple SKUs (a 4" and a larger model).
The one thing that bugs me about the new iPhone 5's specs is its 640 pixel width with that form factor. I would have actually preferred a slightly wider phone, even if it meant a slightly lower pixel density, although even better would be say a 720 pixel width with an increased physical width. To accomplish that increased screen width would be hard, but if say it increased by 6 mm from its current 50 mm, to 56 mm. it could be done by reducing the bezel size by 1.5 mm on each side, and then increasing the overall phone width by 3 mm, bringing it to 61.6 mm, which is actually still narrower than the iPhone 3G.

I think that's where the justification comes from for the new huge Android phones. However, they're going too far IMO. The 4.8" Samsung Galaxy S III is 70.6 mm wide, a full 9 mm wider than my hypothetical 720p iPhone. It feels awkward. The fact that they have 4.8" phone isn't a problem. The problem is they don't have a flagship 4.3" phone.
     
Eug
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Caught in a web of deceit.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Sep 18, 2012, 06:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Eug View Post
[ Nexus 7 - 1604 ]

[ iPhone 5 - 1601 ]

1.6 GHz Atom 330 Win 7 (3 GB RAM): 1164
Int: 1286
FP: 1135
Memory: 1029
Bandwidth: 1110

[ iPad 2 - 765 ]

[ iPhone 4 - 375 ]

[ iPhone 3G - 141 ]

The machines that feel decently fast to me are the Core i7 iMac, triple-core Athlon, and Core 2 Duo MacBook Pro, as well as the Nexus 7 (for most stuff).
The machines that feel slow to me are the Pentium SU4100, Atom 330, and iPhone 4.
Speaking of which... Here is a new Android phone running a 2 GHz single-core but hyperthreaded Atom:

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/18/motorolas-razr-i-benchmarks-intel-2ghz-medfield/

Performance is variable, but it blows away the dual-core 1.5 GHz Snapdragon S4 in SunSpider, and Motorola is claiming it has excellent power characteristics. It scores below 1100 in SunSpider, which is outrageous. In comparison, the new iPad 3 scores at about 1700. (Lower is better.)
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:29 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,