Most benchmark tests support Apple's claim that differences in battery life among A9 chips is 2%-3%

Earlier this month, we told you that some benchmark tests were indicating that there was a major difference in battery life between an Apple iPhone 6s powered by the TSMC version of the A9 chip, and the same handset using the Samsung built A9. One benchmark test showed that the TSMC A9 was getting nearly 2 hours more of battery life...
This is a discussion for a news article. To read the whole news, click here


4. zeeBomb

Posts: 2318; Member since: Aug 14, 2014

Unless youre lightly using your iPhone, the Samsung chip outweighs the TSMC in lesser battery life and performance.

7. stanislav

Posts: 136; Member since: Sep 22, 2014

first time ever head about noticable difference in performance, only in battery life.


Posts: 1168; Member since: Oct 05, 2015

Now I hope that qcom keeps most chips made with tsmc. Honestly, other than the Z7C, I made stick with mid- and upper mid-range phones as the Zeroth platform scares me

14. TheYellowFlash

Posts: 41; Member since: Oct 08, 2015

Ripped off!! We have a ripped off

20. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

The whole point of the original tests was to try to discredit Samsung. I read one report clsim the difference in battery was as much as 20-30%. I stated then, there is no way Apple would have alllwed such a gab. Considering that one chip is 16NM and the other is 14NM, there is no way a gab would have been that big. Apple surely would not have approved using Samsungs chip if thr gap was that big. Now all the fools saying Samsung lrobbaly did this on purpose to ruin the iPhone and blah blah, now should be apologizing for being a compete and uttered idiot.

42. 8ozchickenbreast unregistered

People do anything to discredit Samsung. Quite ridiculous.

28. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

Apple designed one chip i am sure and both companies simply have a different fabrication method. 2-3% is well within the 5% margin of error. Whixh means all.of this means nothing. Neither xhip is betyer than the other and tests dont prove anytbing becaise people dont use their devices like a tests does. The whole point of all of this beforenis all the Apple fanboi zealots and idioys, just wanted to discredit Samsung. Its amazimg what you fools will do to try to make Samsung look bad. Samsung makes the best conponets on the pla et considering their yield capabilith. On intel has better fabrication as far as yields. Samsung didnt mess up. It just seems TSMC has a slightly more efficiant chip to some degree. If the gap was as big as first reported, i am surw Apple qould nevwr have approved it.

61. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

TL; DR; Ehhhh..... did you expect "amen"

31. medicci37

Posts: 1361; Member since: Nov 19, 2011

I don't understand. Shouldn't the 14nm Samsung chip have better battery life?

37. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

I would think, but a 3% differece is simply not enough of a gab to decide.

44. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

Yes, if it was designed to. If its just a stop gap filler product than not. My guess is the A9 was designed to be a 16nm chip and if you add 14nm components to a 16nm it just doesn't fit and is too small. So if you put voltage designed for 16nm on a 14nm chip that's probably too many volts.

50. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

Sheepdroids really know nothing. There is nothing like varying designs depending on the node size. Sammy failed. Their numbers make as much sense the gimmicks they are selling as features.

54. Taters

Posts: 6474; Member since: Jan 28, 2013

I am happy that Apple has a chip gate. The only thing I know is qualcomm is going Samsung over tmsc for the 820 after the Exynos beat down the SD810 so that's all I need to know in terms of the quality to expect from Samsung products. They make the best ram, displays, and everything. You isheep can't change that. This one case doesn't mean a thing sheep boy. Lol

56. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

Yet Sammy *Display* and *Semiconductor* failed to qualify in supplying Apple. In case you didn't know Apple is by far the biggest customer for any parts suppliers including Sammy *Display* and *Semiconductor*. Most probably they aren't as great as you might think.

59. alex3run

Posts: 715; Member since: May 18, 2014

Ahaha "Apple" and "quality" can't be used in a one sentence :D

60. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

I wouldn't mind your inability in reading in comprehension, but it's quite disturbing to see someone failing in simple reading even if it's a everyday SheepDroid.

32. Evan_C

Posts: 153; Member since: Dec 15, 2014

TSMC chip here! I can now carry on in life. haha

34. ibend

Posts: 6747; Member since: Sep 30, 2014

then apple should order all A10 from TSMC.. if they still order from samsung, then this report is fake.. (note: production capacity isnt problem for TSMC if they start makin A10 6month before launch date)

43. nahusiv

Posts: 100; Member since: Apr 20, 2015

too bad real life tests disagree

66. ILikeBubbles

Posts: 525; Member since: Jan 17, 2011

Idk.. Apple does have the OS game on lock.. They've had a really rocky start with ios9 but I do have to hand it to them about battery life. Kudos to Apple.. Won't make me switch from android but I can swallow enough pride to give a little credit. :)

67. johanbiff

Posts: 415; Member since: Mar 31, 2015

so, the Samsung made A9 is faster but drains more battery when being pressed?.. you loose some and win some..who cares

71. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

It isn't any faster. That's the joke.

74. johanbiff

Posts: 415; Member since: Mar 31, 2015

from what I can see in diffrent clips, the samsung A9 is faster..maybe apple needs to throttle it back a bit and change the voltage..if they have the same values for both A9 chips I can see why this is happening.

68. Shocky unregistered

Could it be the issue is nothing to do with the Samsung SoC and everything to do with geekbench being a useless battery benchmark and users over-reacting? Looks like I was right, it really doesn't matter which one you have, all this has done is cause iPhone users unnecessary concern.

72. Shocky unregistered

Forgot the mention since the Samsung SoC performance is a little better it may just be the case Apple need to adjust the voltage and throttling. Even on the same process performance and voltage requirements can vary quite a bit, so it might be just be the case Apple need to fine tune a little.

76. obedchuni

Posts: 308; Member since: Jun 16, 2014

its so sad to see samsung chip showed so poorly each and every performance compared to TSMC's chip, in battery test, in benchmarks test...this shows that they suck and tried to take down apple....well samsung even if your phones don't sell then pls make your chips better in iphones, if you are getting the full amount to make the chips atleast work honestly....

79. hanabi

Posts: 177; Member since: Oct 08, 2015

Seems like no one blames apple for not making identical spec phones.. isn't this core of the problem?? they can't just use alll the different components and make people worry about each components .. it should be apple's responsibility

80. Shocky unregistered

Yep, that's the underlying issue but Samsung haters will find any excuse. Apple would have been well aware of the differences long before launch, clearly the SoC from Samsung meets the specifications required or Apple would never have used them. Wondering if Samsung will comment on this, as this isn't exactly good publicity for them.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.