Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 31 to 42 of 42

Thread: iPhone XS consistently slower than Pixel 3

  1. #31
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Posts
    582
    Feedback Score
    0

    iPhone XS consistently slower than Pixel 3

    Quote Originally Posted by DebiLee View Post
    Tests show how the Intel-powered iPhone XS compares to Qualcomm devices & more https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/01/iphon...ormance-tests/
    iPhone XS Crushes X in LTE Speeds, But Still Falls Short of Qualcomm https://www.pcmag.com/news/364116/ip...falls-short-of
    To me, those charts show that a real world difference isn’t likely to be seen in most cases if you’re comparing the newest Intel vs Qualcomm. Maybe you’d see it right at the fringes of a signal but the difference between a signal of -128 and -130 isn’t substantive. I feel like Intel has just about caught up and the new iPhones perform very well. 4x4 MIMO was needed and it’s a huge difference versus the X (or the XR).

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Broomfield
    Posts
    241
    Device(s)
    iPhone 8+, Note 8
    Carrier(s)
    AT&T, T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    I have an XS Max and speed tests are basically the same now when I use my Note 9/S9+ or my XS Max.

    When I was using my 8+ or 7+, the speeds on the Note 9/S9+ were always faster, as much as 40-50Mbps faster.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    2,063
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 9, iPhone 7 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by DebiLee View Post
    Tests show how the Intel-powered iPhone XS compares to Qualcomm devices & more https://9to5mac.com/2018/10/01/iphon...ormance-tests/
    iPhone XS Crushes X in LTE Speeds, But Still Falls Short of Qualcomm https://www.pcmag.com/news/364116/ip...falls-short-of
    The bottom line is that if you need the fastest LTE speeds, for whatever reason, buy a phone with a Qualcomm 845 or 855 chip set.

    Whenever you see rationalizations like "well in the real world there's not much of a difference" be very wary of such rationalizations, but in this case for most people the difference in LTE speed is not a huge deal except when downloading very large files or doing multiple streams of high definition video with tethered devices.

    Eventually Intel will address the issues with their modems, or Apple will develop their own modems in-house https://www.theverge.com/circuitbrea...ngineer-hiring . It's a tremendously difficult task, much more difficult that developing processors, but having to rely on Intel or Qualcomm forever is clearly not acceptable.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,489
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s+ 64GB
    Carrier(s)
    ·T···Mobile· USA
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by p6B5Nm5b View Post
    I think that’s pretty well known and largely irrelevant. People don’t buy Apple products for specs like they do PC or Android. iPhones never have the memory or screens or modems of Android flagships because at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Well that's simply because when the OS is designed properly, the CPU/RAM do not matter as much.

    Even on a laptop, MacOS will get much better/efficient usage out of a slower CPU/RAM than Windows 10 will, it's just a difference in Unix vs Windows - Windows does not do a great job handing junk in the background just like android.. which causes "lag" and power drain.

    Honestly, Intel just makes garbage modems is the problem. Apple blackballed themselves trying to bully Qualcomm, and both being similar in the patent troll department.. Qualcomm is a bit more petty than Apple though and will blackball them until they apologize then pay up.
    Left: Verizon Unlimited LTE, Right: WideOpenWest 500/50

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,398
    Device(s)
    iPhone XS Max
    Carrier(s)
    T-Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0

    iPhone XS consistently slower than Pixel 3

    Quote Originally Posted by smsgator View Post
    Whenever you see rationalizations like "well in the real world there's not much of a difference" be very wary of such rationalizations, but in this case for most people the difference in LTE speed is not a huge deal except when downloading very large files or doing multiple streams of high definition video with tethered devices.
    But almost no one would ever encounter that scenario. First in a streaming world who downloads large files on a phone, and even if they did then they’re probably on wi-if, and even THEN you’re assuming they’re in a network scenario where there would be measurable difference. It’s highly unlikely to the point that it doesn’t matter.

    There’s no dispute that (for now) Qualcomm has faster modems, we are just at a point where it doesn’t matter. It’s like me saying my Camary is faster than your Accord... unless you’re 14 who cares?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    2,063
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 9, iPhone 7 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by p6B5Nm5b View Post
    But almost no one would ever encounter that scenario. First in a streaming world who downloads large files on a phone
    Uploading and downloading large video files is very common. When you have unlimited data there's no real reason to use Wi-Fi, even if it's available.

    I used to hear the "in the real world" excuse constantly and some semiconductor companies I worked at, and inevitably it was used as an excuse to remove features or not look at performance issues--issues that customers cared a lot about. In some cases, designers would remove a feature without even telling sales and marketing, or the customer, resulting in big financial hits as customers rejected new designs.

    You could also say that "in the real world" no one cares that the A12 ARM chip used by Apple is much faster than the SOCs used by other phone manufacturers because it would be rare that anyone would need that much compute power.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    2,063
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 9, iPhone 7 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    Well that's simply because when the OS is designed properly, the CPU/RAM do not matter as much.

    Even on a laptop, MacOS will get much better/efficient usage out of a slower CPU/RAM than Windows 10 will, it's just a difference in Unix vs Windows - Windows does not do a great job handing junk in the background just like android.. which causes "lag" and power drain.

    Honestly, Intel just makes garbage modems is the problem. Apple blackballed themselves trying to bully Qualcomm, and both being similar in the patent troll department.. Qualcomm is a bit more petty than Apple though and will blackball them until they apologize then pay up.
    When the royalties based on the price of the phone were agreed to probably no one thought that phones would be costing $1500. But it might have been better to wait until there was a viable Qualcomm alternative before burning bridges.

  8. #38
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,489
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s+ 64GB
    Carrier(s)
    ·T···Mobile· USA
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by smsgator View Post
    When the royalties based on the price of the phone were agreed to probably no one thought that phones would be costing $1500. But it might have been better to wait until there was a viable Qualcomm alternative before burning bridges.
    My thing is, i'm paying $1,500 for a piece of hardware.. at a minimum they can put the best available radio in there. Apple is getting plenty of profit from the device, even if they were to use a good radio.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    2,063
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 9, iPhone 7 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    My thing is, i'm paying $1,500 for a piece of hardware.. at a minimum they can put the best available radio in there. Apple is getting plenty of profit from the device, even if they were to use a good radio.
    Agreed, but the vast majority of customers have no idea of the differences between modems. Also, the Samsung Note 9 was more than 200% faster than the iPhone X but only only 39% faster than the iPhone Xs Max, so there has been a vast improvement in the Intel modems.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Columbus, OH
    Posts
    6,489
    Device(s)
    iPhone 6s+ 64GB
    Carrier(s)
    ·T···Mobile· USA
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by smsgator View Post
    Agreed, but the vast majority of customers have no idea of the differences between modems. Also, the Samsung Note 9 was more than 200% faster than the iPhone X but only only 39% faster than the iPhone Xs Max, so there has been a vast improvement in the Intel modems.
    I'm more speaking of signal in fringe areas. The Intel modem does not do nearly as well.

    AT&T is trash in my house, but the iPhone 8+ does fine on AT&T and can usually hold a call, this XS Max will usually just fail the call unless on on WiFi calling in the same weak spot.

  11. #41
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    2,063
    Device(s)
    Samsung Galaxy Note 9, iPhone 7 Plus
    Carrier(s)
    Verizon, T-Mobile, AT&T
    Feedback Score
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by brad15 View Post
    I'm more speaking of signal in fringe areas. The Intel modem does not do nearly as well.

    AT&T is trash in my house, but the iPhone 8+ does fine on AT&T and can usually hold a call, this XS Max will usually just fail the call unless on on WiFi calling in the same weak spot.
    I didn't know that. I thought that the Xs Max, with the 4x4 MIMO antenna, would do better in fringe signal areas. even with the Intel modem, than the Qualcomm modem 8 Plus with 2x2 MIMO--obviously that's not the case.

  12. #42
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    40
    Device(s)
    iPhone
    Carrier(s)
    Cricket, Xfinity Mobile
    Feedback Score
    0
    The 4x4 MIMO will give you faster download speeds. According to
    https://www.wiwavelength.com/2018/09...y-fail-to.html
    The phones have lower antenna gain and less radiated power. That would explain the phone to fail in fringe areas. Just can not talk back to the tower.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 50
    Last Post: 07-23-2013, 07:24 PM
  2. iPhone data slower than other phones?
    By sonicbuzzed in forum Sprint
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-09-2012, 06:35 PM
  3. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-03-2010, 12:02 PM
  4. Slower than usual iPhone Edge ?
    By MaskU2See in forum Apple
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-02-2009, 08:11 AM
  5. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 08-14-2002, 01:33 AM

Bookmarks