Looks like Apple wants to prevent the Samsung/TSMC made chips on the new iPhone 6S from turning into a chip-gate of sorts, and broke its usual silence to address the issue of the differences being reported between iPhones 6S with TSMC and Samsung-made A9 chips.
Apple says there are no difference between iPhones using these chips, but does it in a way that sidesteps the issue, stating that these benchmarks don't reflect actual use. So, they don't directly deny that there may be huge differences between the different iPhones in these tests, just that, under regular use, they won't be noticeable by the users.
Well, maybe I'm just being picky, but there are indeed lots of cases where users will have their iPhones running intensive apps (it's not hard to find games to push the iPhone hardware to the max), and it will be kind of annoying if some iPhone last 5h while others, by having a "better" chip, can last 7h. Besides, the test in question doesn't even put the CPU to the max as Apple stated, but does a mixed usage simulation.
It won't be easy to gather sufficient data to find out if these efficiency differences really are due to the TSMC/Samsung chips, or if they may happen even between different batches of A9 SoCs made by the same manufacturer (just like sometimes we get Intel chips that are much more suitable to undervoltage or overclocking). But now that the cat is out of the bag, I'm sure lots of people will be looking into it until there's a suitable answer.
No comments:
Post a Comment