Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a common objection but if you actually do the calculation you find it's bunk.

44 fps / 1.30 = 33.8 fps, still ahead by anywhere from 45% to 200%.



You appear to be claiming that this is a demonstration of how much better Apple's custom ARM chips are, when it's just a better GPU in the core, just like Samsung's Hummingbirds in the Galaxy and Nexus S used the next GPU up compared with the iPhone 4. They're all PowerVRs. It's about as technically impressive as us both buying a laptop from Dell and me buying a laptop with a better GPU than yours.

I suppose you could give Apple 10% credit seeing how they bought that much of the company that makes them (again, after starting to use their products) but then Intel should get even more credit, because they've owned more, for longer.


There's two sides to this argument and you appear to have missed the important half. Anyone can slap a better GPU on and get better framerates. Not just anyone can slap on "the next GPU up" and still beat you in battery life.

Everything I've ever read about Apple's supposed optimizations is that they have to do with power efficiency.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: