Jump to content

Google Pixel - How it compares?


Teken

Recommended Posts

It was interesting to read many of the early tests performed on the newly released Google Pixel phone. As many journalists have stated it mirrors what the Apple iPhone looks like in many ways. Of special interest was the bench tests for this new hardware.

 

I don't think it did too bad but it certainly didn't try to cheat like Samsung has proven to do many times. One thing of note these days is the fallacy in the belief hardware is the final victor in terms of performance.

 

Anyone who has been in the hardware business knows its a tight relation ship of software and hardware that will offer the best over all performance.

 

Very curious to see how long this piece of hardware will be supported. Given past history of Google it may only make it one year and then be abandonware.

 

 

 

Apple's iPhone 7 handily outperforms new Google Pixel in early benchmarks

By Mike Wuerthele
Wednesday, October 05, 2016, 06:18 am PT (09:18 am ET)

The Google Pixel phone officially revealed on Tuesday wasn't a well-kept a secret prior to release, and as a result there are a large number of benchmarks available. They show the phone's raw performance lags far behind that of the iPhone 7, and is even defeated in single-core performance by the iPhone 6s and iPhone SE. 

18532-17549-pixel-top-l.jpg


Early benchmarks for the Pixel and Pixel XL phones in Geekbench 4 have come in at around 4100 for multiple core performance, and 1580 for single core, consistent with the earliest numbers claimed to be for the phone from mid-September.

In contrast, the Apple iPhone 7 link text multiple core score is around 5600 regardless of model, with a single core score of around 3430.

For comparison, the iPhone 6s Plus has a multiple core benchmark of 4106, and a single core rating of 2508.

The processor in the Pixel XL is said to be running at the lower of the two speeds indicated by Google's technical specifications. However, the clock speed for the iPhone 7 was misidentified early on as well as a lower frequency than it actually peaks, so the benchmarks are thought to be accurate. 

If the benchmarks are in fact measuring the slower of the two processors, a mathematical correction of the benchmarks in accordance with the faster processor still has the iPhone 7 beating the Pixel handily in both single and multiple core measurements.

While benchmarks aren't a perfect representation of day-to-day speed, nor do they measure user interface elements well, they are useful for comparison of the raw processing power between two pieces of computing hardware.

Both models of the Google Pixel revealed on Tuesday use a Snapdragon 821 CPU with two cores running at 2.15GHz, and two running at 1.6 GHz. The phone has 4 gigabytes of application RAM.

The Apple iPhone 7 series utilizes the A10 Fusion processor, with two high-performance cores, and two high-efficiency cores. The two high-performance cores run at 2.34GHz.

 

Link to comment

I've never been an iphone user but the software fragmentation and variable quality in the android world plus the lack of ongoing software support for a given android phone is frustrating (whatever phone you may choose).  I'm not an apple fan (don't like walled garden), but they are much more consistent in providing software support for a longer period of time.  I swear Google changes things simply for the sake of changing things -- I don't see much of a movement along the awesome-curve anymore.

 

The price of these phones now days is nuts.  My microphone isn't working well on my 2 year old Sony and to think about dropping another $500+ on a phone is frustrating.  Otherwise the Sony is working just fine.  

Link to comment

I believe once people get past *Oh I can side load this* or all of the other pro's Android users use to bolster their position. You're indeed correct Apple has a tight eco system even if its limited in many ways. But each phone will have a guaranteed update path for at least four iOS updates.

 

Android not so much and many times the lower priced hardware is left in the dust because it doesn't have enough HP to move toward the next OS release. No other smartphone platform in the history of phones in general has ever had so many virus's and holes in the system like the Android OS.

 

Sadly, many users are left holding the bag because many of the telco's either have dropped support or refuse to release a update to address the security threats.

 

Many in the industry have mused about Google just pulling the plug on the whole Android OS and keeping it for themselves. But that will never happen because they make too much money on Ads and cross sales from various portal services.

 

If anyone had the chance to watch their so called Key Note for the Pixel it was a very close fail to the Microsoft Surface presentation.

 

If you're going to copy someone in their methods of presentation or what ever. For God sakes do a good job of it already because you just look like a freaking clown! 

Link to comment

Google seem to be fans of Jonathan Ive...

 

What do they say *The best compliment is one that tries to copy*. I believe this phone is made by HTC so the direction of how it looks is up for debate.

 

Lord knows Samsung has copied almost every element known to man for the iPhone. Then again Apple has single handily stolen other IP of others and called it their own. Lots of finger pointing and blame is easily dished around for any company. One of the funniest IP thefts I've ever read and laughed about was the clock face.

 

Who knew some mindless fool in the Apple company thought it was a good idea to steal a very well known clock face from a company still in business and makes gobs of money!  

 

http://gizmodo.com/5959542/apples-swiped-swiss-clock-design-cost-21-million

Link to comment

Hardware design is really really hard to do well.  I worked for a company making a tablet for airlines to rent to passengers to watch movies.  The first version was out years before the ipad so this was new territory back then.  There are so many things that can go wrong in design and so many things you don't know will go wrong until after the device has been in use for awhile.  I can see the appeal of just copying someone that has a known working design (already tried and proven).

Link to comment

Hardware design is really really hard to do well.  I worked for a company making a tablet for airlines to rent to passengers to watch movies.  The first version was out years before the ipad so this was new territory back then.  There are so many things that can go wrong in design and so many things you don't know will go wrong until after the device has been in use for awhile.  I can see the appeal of just copying someone that has a known working design (already tried and proven).

 

While I agree copying some elements does save time it shouldn't be the driving factor in making a end product. Plus you certainly should not be allowed to patent or trade mark something that is common. Like Apple did and that is a rectangle with rounded corners?!?

 

The fact the patent office said this is unique and one of a kind shows the people in these jobs are complete morons. Then again the patent office is filled with patents which are so vague and general in nature it makes you wonder the IQ to work in that office must be 1.

Link to comment
  • 1 month later...

While I agree copying some elements does save time it shouldn't be the driving factor in making a end product. Plus you certainly should not be allowed to patent or trade mark something that is common. Like Apple did and that is a rectangle with rounded corners?!?

 

The fact the patent office said this is unique and one of a kind shows the people in these jobs are complete morons. Then again the patent office is filled with patents which are so vague and general in nature it makes you wonder the IQ to work in that office must be 1.

The patent office averages about 4- hours per patent.

The holder of the patent swears in writing there is no prior art.

 

This is QA at its finest.

 

The patent office has no responsibility and is not responsible for damages incurred.

 

Ronald Reagan has to go.

Link to comment

While I agree copying some elements does save time it shouldn't be the driving factor in making a end product. Plus you certainly should not be allowed to patent or trade mark something that is common. Like Apple did and that is a rectangle with rounded corners?!?

 

The fact the patent office said this is unique and one of a kind shows the people in these jobs are complete morons. Then again the patent office is filled with patents which are so vague and general in nature it makes you wonder the IQ to work in that office must be 1.

 

I was briefly involved in looking at a response from the US patent office.  They came back with a couple of wording issues they were concerned about.  They had us reword it so that it was less like another patent and then it went through.

 

I've also been on the end of being sued by a patent troll.  They set their settlement amount just below what it will cost you to fight them -- about $200,000.  So, it comes out cheaper to just pay them and possibly setup a payment schedule to drag it out so you don't have to come up with the money up front.  Many trolls sue those that can't fight back.

Link to comment

I've also been on the end of being sued by a patent troll. They set their settlement amount just below what it will cost you to fight them -- about $200,000. So, it comes out cheaper to just pay them and possibly setup a payment schedule to drag it out so you don't have to come up with the money up front. Many trolls sue those that can't fight back.

Thats where teaming up with others in a similar situation over the same bad Patent is a benefit. It lowers each participants cost, and sends a message to trolls that they can sometimes not prevail.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...