A new Snapdragon 855+ benchmark cements it as the fastest Android processor

How the existing ones do compared to Snapdragon? They bite the dust. Snapdragon is simply the most efficient, fastest in CPU and GPU(real world application) as of now. Infact Apple SOC despite having great numbers in benchmarks, throttles really BAD when pushed. So sustained performance is really bad.

Got a source for that? I’m pretty sure the snapdragon throttles more under sustained load (which is a very rare circumstance in mobile devices)

You are completely wrong. The Snapdragon has proven time and time again that it can sustain graphics with ease. The iPhones have a problem with sustainable graphics. Just look at VR apps that can run for hours with a SD 835 and above. Not one iPhone could ever perform those feats. Plus Apples iOS on iPhones can only run one task at a time. There is still no split screen multitasking. IPhones are the Palm pilots today. Apple always trys to fool is blind followers with smoke and mirrors. Apple even today tries to say it's displays are equal to the best Android displays. Yet the XS has 1.6 million fewer pixels per frame. Even the older Android smartphones from years ago. Push 1 to 1.2 million more pixels than the XS. XS resolution (2436x1125) = 2740500 pix XS Max resolution (2688x1242) = 3338496 pix S10 resolution (3040x1440) = 4377600 pix LG G8, Pixel 3 XL, and many others drive the highest resolution displays at sustainable rates. Apple's iPhones do overheat and throttle down. That is a fact. Even the latest benchmarks showing Apple's latest iPhones show a max rate, and a sustainable frame rate. Yet the Snapdragon benchmarks show only one rate. Yet it's still higher than the iPhones sustainable rate. Plus the SD versions are pushing 1.6 million more pixels. I would love to see any iPhone push the same graphics resolutions. But alas Apple wants people to think their iPhones are roughly the same as Android flagships. But they are NOT. Wake me up when an iPhone can do the same things as an Android smartphone from 2010.

I’m not sure what benchmarks you are looking at, but the Snapdragon does have a max and a sustained rate when benchmarked. You can look at any GFXBench test score and see SD chipsets with both scores. You are correct that there is throttling involved with Apple chipsets, but you also forget that the CPU and GPU of Apple phones and Android phones are used differently. Apple uses their GPU for non-graphic related computations to assist the CPU in things like hardware acceleration, camera imaging processing, and other transactional processes. Android phones don’t really use GPU compute a whole bunch unless it’s up to the individual manufacturer. Also, Apple hasn’t really done a whole lot of thermal things like liquid cooling you see in some other phones. All of this to say: yes Apple does throttle but Apple also uses the GPU in different ways than Android and you can’t necessarily compare them side by side unless you use the same operating system.

Of course the OS plays a big part in all benchmarks. Benchmarks on Android can be skewed if there is multiple apps running in the background, or side by side. Apple halts all tasks on the iPhones as soon as you switch to another task. Android doesn't. So yeah, everything I said earlier where the SD sustainable rate is faster than Apples. Plus high priced iPhone XS is pushing 1.6 million fewer pixels (per frame) compared to a S10. So each graphics frame on the S10, pixels, or any other QHD+ display is pushing almost 100 million more pixels per second at a frame rate of 60 frames per second compared to the lower resolution, and slower iPhone XS. Even though the S10 can sustain frame rates of 75 per second within VR. Since the SD 855 in can sustain VR frame rates of 90 frames per second. Look, DolmioMan said the Snapdragon throttles more, when that is NOT true at all. Proof is in real world results. Show me an iPhone that run sustainable VR at 90 fps, or even 75 fps. Hell show me an iPhone that can do real multitasking and split screen multitasking. So I rest my case. The SD 855 is faster, period.

Your galaxies running fortnite drop frames and lag. iPhone doesn’t.

Benchmarks aren't really affected by display resolution. There are certain graphic tests like offscreen 1080p that can be affected, but most on-screen benchmarks that I have seen are not affected by display resolution. And it's because the benchmark itself runs at a set resolution and then it's rendered by whatever screen you have. Biggest example: take the Snapdragon 855 equipped Xiaomi Mi 9 with its FHD resolution display and compare it to the Xperia 1 with it's 4K screen. They both have the same amount of RAM at 6GB. In 3D Mark the Xperia 1 scores 5792 while the Xiaomi scores 5816. In GFX 3.1 car scene the Xperia 1 has 33 fps while the Mi 9 has 35 fps. Again, very negligible differences. And again when you go on these benchmark websites they do have a disclaimer that reads: software differences are the real game changer because if certain phones run certain APIs they can perform differently. As far as your claim about real world results, I don't know. You would have to show me that test. I tried to look up iPhones running graphics test for hours and have yet to find anything.

Wrong again broski. Are we supposed to believe you or a site like anandtech?https://www.anandtech.com/show/13786/snapdragon-855-performance-preview/5 You can see the peak and sustained scores of the XS Max. The sustained/throttled score is higher on the A12 vs the 855. If you have any knowledge of benchmarking (which doesn't look like you have any), you'll know that pixel count doesn't matter in most of these "offscreen" benchmarks. They are forced to run at 1080p. Power efficiency is also better on the A12 vs 855.

Read what was said in the Anandtech report you posted the link too. "As a reminder, we were only able to test the peak performance of the phone as we didn’t have time for a more thorough sustained performance investigation." You know that the founder of Anandtech was and as far as I know still works for Apple! With his track record I would not trust a word they say.

How about this link: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/2435?vs=24870 3DMark's on-screen tests show that the SD855 has the definite advantage. Off-screen testing is again mostly theoretical and doesn't represent real world scenarios.

How is your galaxies not making unli 4k video then techie? Apple tried to differentiate ipad from iphone. Ipad has split screen multitasking and its better 90% than your android split screen with very small screen to work on.

Really iloveapps you bring up iPads and multitasking? So let's forget that there is NO real multitasking or split screen multitasking on the iPhones. Why not go all the way, especially when the higher end iPads come with an A12X, A10X, ... Come on, I thought you were smarter than that? I guess I shouldn't be shocked by your comparisons. Also you do know that the A12 has two higher end cores, and 4 lower end cores, and a a 4 core GPU. The A12X has 8 cores, 4 being higher, and a 7 core GPU. But you don't want to tell the full truth, do you iloveapps? So where did you pull that multitasking is better than 90% than your Android split screen. Did you pull that out of where the sun don't shine? Iloveapps you continue to prove to me that you don't know your head from your @$$.

Don't really have a dog in the fight, but I suppose you could use the iPad Air for such a comparison, since it has the same A12 as the latest iPhones.

Once again you prove you have no idea of what you are on about. My 5 year old iPad Air 2 with an old A8X SoC does split screen with 2GB RAM. Split screen is fully supported in iOS, Apple just don’t enable the function in iPhones. iPads and iPhones both run iOS, it’s all down to what Apple allows on the varying devices.

Lol, iOS supports multitasking buddy, it has for a long time, spilt screen has long been supported on iPads, Apple have just not enabled it for iPhone. You clearly have not got a clue of what you are talking about at all.

I have no idea where you got that info from, but it is proven that: -CPU performance is vastly superior on A12 with generally lower power consumption, -A12's GPU is more efficient AND more powerful at the same time, -Snapdragon 855's GPU peak performance is comparable to throttled A12's GPU, -Thanks to the better app optimisation and API integration on iOS, heavier apps tend to process things faster on iPhone. Lightroom is one of the prime examples. So no, literally everything you just said about A12 and Snapdragon 855 is wrong, very unfortunately. https://www.anandtech.com/show/14072/the-samsung-galaxy-s10plus-review/7 https://www.anandtech.com/show/14072/the-samsung-galaxy-s10plus-review/10

If more of the chip design team keeps quitting apple...you might be eating your words before you know it bud lol.

The A12 is still weaker than the A10X in some ways. The X processors are just on another level in terms of raw compute.

Of course the A12 is weaker. The A12 has 2 higher end CPU cores, and 4 lower end cores. It's also has a 4 core GPU. The 10X has a 6 core GPU. The 12X has a 7 core GPU.

In benchmarks only is it faster. The true power of the A12X for processing data compared to laptops with a processor that scores similarly in Geekbench, doesn't even come close to what those laptops are capable of doing, that's why Geekbench is so damn misleading. The scores are in no way an indication of what it can actually do in real life. And with most people who do buy an iPad Pro using it about the same way they'd use a regular one makes the whole argument rather useless anyway.

ipad OS will change that completely

No it won't because it's still just iOS with the mostly the same limitations and primarily a cosmetic change of the homescreen. Yes it gains a bit more advanced multitasking, but it's still a very limited ability and apps that aren't used still get paused and cached and need to be reloaded when switching apps.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/13392/the-iphone-xs-xs-max-review-unveiling-the-silicon-secrets/4 "What is quite astonishing, is just how close Apple’s A11 and A12 are to current desktop CPUs. I haven’t had the opportunity to run things in a more comparable manner, but taking our server editor, Johan De Gelas’ recent figures from earlier this summer, we see that the A12 outperforms a moderately-clocked Skylake CPU in single-threaded performance. Of course there’s compiler considerations and various frequency concerns to take into account, but still we’re now talking about very small margins until Apple’s mobile SoCs outperform the fastest desktop CPUs in terms of ST performance. It will be interesting to get more accurate figures on this topic later on in the coming months." And now you're talking about A12X, a tablet processor that has more core counts and runs at higher TDP(but still a lot lower than 15W/28W TDP of quad core mobile i5/i7 U-series Intel processor) than the regular A12. Now with iPadOS many developers will start updating and optimising their apps so that it becomes far closer to the desktop version functionality wise. It might not completely beat current Intel's offerings in terms of raw performance but can get damn close while being twice as efficient.

I'd love to see an iPad run the same multi gig CAD renders that my laptop does without breaking a sweat, that's a totally fake statement that it's faster than 90% of all laptops. Add a gpu to a laptop and it's not even a competition

https://www.laptopmag.com/reviews/laptops/new-ipad-pro-2018-129-inch I'd love to see some photo & video editing results from your laptop.

Maybe those comparisons should be done with hardware that's at least somewhat comparable performance wise, but they don't. They're all Ultrabook processors with iGPUs and significantly less performance. Obviously the transcoding would take forever on those devices.

That's fine. You can compare it to another x86 CPU if you want as long as it has passive cooling and can come close to the iPad's battery life.