>iPhone 7 outperforms all compared Android phones with its

>>56625713
Didn't they say that about the last iPad and it was proven to be far behind sandy bridge laptop processors in reality?

File: 1457071946533.png (6KB, 501x84px)

6KB, 501x84px

>>56625713
Why is geekbench such a fucking joke?

>>56625733
I really have no idea.

File: 1458727801745.png (133KB, 610x1054px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 610x1054px

>>56625713
>>56625733
>>56625766
>>56625781
Same shit every fucking year for the last two decades. When will retards learn?

File: killme inside.jpg (123KB, 1242x2208px)

123KB, 1242x2208px

>>56625766

>phone outperforming mac pro

k

>>56625833
>posting articles over a decade old involving some dead dude

>>56625851
>>56625766
It's not that surprising, Apple's SoCs have been catching up on laptop and other low-end CPUs for a while now, and they're heavily optimized for single-threaded performance because, you know, mobile. Mac Pro hasn't been updated since 2013, and if they're comparing single-threaded performance then having 12-cores doesn't matter. You guys are letting your Applel butthurt get ahead of yourselves here.

File: 1393332794121.jpg (26KB, 372x396px)

26KB, 372x396px

>>56625907
And the Macbook Airs have been deprecated and aren't released anymore. I mean, it's still actually a REALLY impressive feat for a mobile SoC to outperform any laptop at all to begin with, but you guys are trumping it up as some kind of impossible marketing hype induced fantasy when the truth is that it's been a long time coming.

File: 1444540472908.webm (2MB, 955x539px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 955x539px

>>56625907
>>56625930
iTardism, not even once.

>>56625999
>anyone who doesn't mindless hate applel must be a fanboy!
Nope.

File: 1460720787561.jpg (213KB, 489x500px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 489x500px

>>56626047
>b-b-b-but ifone really beat $6000 workstaions i swar!111

iTardism, not even once.

>>56626075
The "Mac Pro" is overpriced and old as fuck dude, you sound more like an iTard than anyone else ITT if you think it's still some miracle of engineering.

File: 1447504722445.gif (897KB, 800x430px)

897KB, 800x430px

>>56626095
>iTard thinks fruity toy phone manufactured at $200 total cost beats out $6500 mac pro as if it's some miracle of engineering.

Thanks for the (You) at least, bro.

>>56625713
>that multicore score
Throttling?

>>56626237
No, you can download the same benchmarking program they use and test the same workload on your own hardware.

File: 1464678571326.jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>56626322
>different architecture
>same workload

>>56626359
>No, you can download the same benchmarking program they use and test the same benchmarks they use
There (You) go.

Thank you Apple, I can finally edit 4k 3D Videos in my iPhone without having to spend the price of a car in a computer.

>>56626373
>iTard
>probably still believes the megahertz meme in 2016

Why are you even on /g/ moron?

>>56626322
What does that have to do with throttling?

I'm an Android guy and it would be tough to get me to switch at this point due to being pretty invested in the Google ecosystem and such, but goddamn Qualcomm needs to get its shit together. I will most likely end up with a Pixel XL this year (pending reviews), but I absolutely hate knowing that the 821 gets absolutely shit on by the A10.

I basically just want an iPhone with a headphone jack and hi-res screen that runs Android and somehow keeps the battery optimization from iOS.

>>56626997
>I basically just want an iPhone with a headphone jack and hi-res screen that runs Android and somehow keeps the battery optimization from iOS.

Don't we all?

>>56625852

Samshit got in trouble for this shit in Android not too long ago. Baking in optimizations SPECIFICALLY for artificial benchmarks that never translated to real-world performance.
Somehow you believe Apple isn't above this? They can't even really get "caught" doing it due to their ultra-closed and proprietary nature