XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

badgolferman wrote:

According to Geekbench scores for single-core performance discovered by CompareDial, the Galaxy S23 Ultra scored 1480, while its closest rival,
the iPhone 14 Pro, achieved 1874. That suggests the iPhone 14 Pro is
21.02% faster than the Galaxy S23 Ultra in single-core tests.

Hi badgolferman,

It's nice to know Apple can make a fast CPU using licensed ARM technology.
But whether or not it has the typical Apple CPU issues remains to be seen.

I wonder if you're aware that almost every CPU ever built by Apple has unpatchable holes in it (which is why iOS has the most zero-day holes)?

HINT: Half of which are exploited, which means _because_ Apple can't
design a secure CPU (nor a secure enclave), those holes are forever.

Must I give the cites, again and again and again or have you read them?
(People on this newsgroup are incredibly immune to well-known facts.)

When it came to multi-core performance, the difference was smaller, but
still considerable. The S23 Ultra recorded a score of 4584, compared to
a score of 5384 for the iPhone 14 Pro indicating that Apple's flagship
device is 14.86% faster in multi-core tests than Samsung's latest
premium offering.

An issue, clearly, is what good is a processor that is fast, but where the entire phone has to be then throttled (often secretly) to keep it stable?

Samsung has traditionally struggled to keep up with Apple's mobile
processor technology and the gap has widened in recent years.

I would disagree in that the Apple CPUs, I believe, have far more
unpatchable holes and stability problems than have the Qualcomm CPUs.

The improvement in performance this year is largely down to the fact
that Samsung has stopped using its inferior Exynos chips in the
European market, with Qualcomm's faster, more power-efficient tech now
being used for the Galaxy S23 in all markets.

What matters, badgolferman, in the long run, is _everything_ about the CPU.
Not just the processor speed.

All Apple iPhones are fast out the gate but if it has to be throttled only
a year later, or if it's found to be unpatchable - what good is it?

Still, it's nice to know that Apple can make a fast CPU.
But whether or not it has the typical Apple CPU issues remains to be seen.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: misc.phone.mobile.iphone

On 2023-02-08 08:33, Andy Burnelli wrote:

badgolferman wrote:

According to Geekbench scores for single-core performance discovered by
CompareDial, the Galaxy S23 Ultra scored 1480, while its closest rival,
the iPhone 14 Pro, achieved 1874. That suggests the iPhone 14 Pro is
21.02% faster than the Galaxy S23 Ultra in single-core tests.

Hi badgolferman,

It's nice to know Apple can make a fast CPU using licensed ARM
technology. But whether or not it has the typical Apple CPU issues
remains to be seen.

So you still want to have it both ways...

I wonder if you're aware that almost every CPU ever built by Apple has unpatchable holes in it (which is why iOS has the most zero-day holes)?

But you claim that Apple doesn't design or build CPUs.

Please explain.

HINT: Half of which are exploited, which means _because_ Apple can't
     design a secure CPU (nor a secure enclave), those holes are forever.

Must I give the cites, again and again and again or have you read them? (People on this newsgroup are incredibly immune to well-known facts.)

When it came to multi-core performance, the difference was smaller, but
still considerable. The S23 Ultra recorded a score of 4584, compared to
a score of 5384 for the iPhone 14 Pro indicating that Apple's flagship
device is 14.86% faster in multi-core tests than Samsung's latest
premium offering.

An issue, clearly, is what good is a processor that is fast, but where the entire phone has to be then throttled (often secretly) to keep it stable?

Now you're just making things up.

Samsung has traditionally struggled to keep up with Apple's mobile
processor technology and the gap has widened in recent years.

I would disagree in that the Apple CPUs, I believe, have far more
unpatchable holes and stability problems than have the Qualcomm CPUs.

You "believe"?

I thought you only presented facts.

Please explain.

The improvement in performance this year is largely down to the fact
that Samsung has stopped using its inferior Exynos chips in the
European market, with Qualcomm's faster, more power-efficient tech now
being used for the Galaxy S23 in all markets.

What matters, badgolferman, in the long run, is _everything_ about the CPU. Not just the processor speed.

All Apple iPhones are fast out the gate but if it has to be throttled only
a year later, or if it's found to be unpatchable - what good is it?

"If"?

I thought you only presented facts.

Please explain.

Still, it's nice to know that Apple can make a fast CPU. But whether or
not it has the typical Apple CPU issues remains to be seen.

So yes or no:

Do you believe Apple designs its own CPUs?

If yes, when do you believe that began?

:-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)