4 ms·

> That test is relevant for the end user, but it doesn't make sense as a hardware test. Err? It seems to me that the only tests that make any sense are those t

> That test is relevant for the end user, but it doesn't make sense as a hardware test. Err? It seems to me that the only tests that make any sense are those that count for end users. Everything else is pointless. It doesn't matter if it's the same system or code base or whatever other engineering fetish. Users who compare their phones to see which goes faster look at how the same app opens and runs on two separate phones. Which incidentally is what this test is about. It's the only sensible test you can do.

ajdlinux 10y ago
If you're an engineer who's working on branch predictors, or a developer working on compiler optimisations, then such a test isn't exactly pointless...
golergka 10y ago
This os a test for an entire phone, including the OS. The article focuses on the chip alone.
dspillett 10y ago
> Err? It seems to me that the only tests that make any sense are those that count for end users. Everything else is pointless. If you are specifically comparing two specific phones against each other then yes this is the only sort of test that matters, and if you are comparing manufacture's flagship models then that is what you are doing. From every other point of view, either comparing performance of individual components or comparing like-for-like performance of devices with very similar spec it is less valid though: the screen resolution is a huge variable for a game so it isn't a "fair" test to compare performance of two devices like that. You could equally state that the higher resolution produces a better result because of the resolution difference and you would similarly be called to task by for not comparing like for like. Maybe the a device with the same hardware other than the better screen would outperform the iDevice on the test, or at least not appear to underperform by as much, this test can't tell us that. This is difficult of course because few phone models are practically identical and few vary by just one factor, and can make a developers life more difficult when trying to support a varied market like Android based devices.
MaulingMonkey 10y ago
> Everything else is pointless. Better understanding individual components lets engineers build better overall systems. Millions of choices and decisions go into something like a phone, most of which can't have their result easily measured by just looking at the end result. But if enough of them are good, you end up with the iPhone. If enough of them are bad, you end up with mass recalls, and a class action lawsuit because your phones catch fire when charged overnight because your engineers didn't think to test that specific use case, didn't test their capacitors, didn't test their QA process, didn't unit test their battery management code, or otherwise failed to indulge their "fetish" (read: job.) Proper hardware tests might be pointless to end users, but that doesn't make them pointless.

ajdlinux 10y ago

If you're an engineer who's working on branch predictors, or a developer working on compiler optimisations, then such a test isn't exactly pointless...

golergka 10y ago

This os a test for an entire phone, including the OS. The article focuses on the chip alone.

dspillett 10y ago

> Err? It seems to me that the only tests that make any sense are those that count for end users. Everything else is pointless. If you are specifically comparing two specific phones against each other then yes this is the only sort of test that matters, and if you are comparing manufacture's flagship models then that is what you are doing. From every other point of view, either comparing performance of individual components or comparing like-for-like performance of devices with very similar spec it is less valid though: the screen resolution is a huge variable for a game so it isn't a "fair" test to compare performance of two devices like that. You could equally state that the higher resolution produces a better result because of the resolution difference and you would similarly be called to task by for not comparing like for like. Maybe the a device with the same hardware other than the better screen would outperform the iDevice on the test, or at least not appear to underperform by as much, this test can't tell us that. This is difficult of course because few phone models are practically identical and few vary by just one factor, and can make a developers life more difficult when trying to support a varied market like Android based devices.

MaulingMonkey 10y ago

> Everything else is pointless. Better understanding individual components lets engineers build better overall systems. Millions of choices and decisions go into something like a phone, most of which can't have their result easily measured by just looking at the end result. But if enough of them are good, you end up with the iPhone. If enough of them are bad, you end up with mass recalls, and a class action lawsuit because your phones catch fire when charged overnight because your engineers didn't think to test that specific use case, didn't test their capacitors, didn't test their QA process, didn't unit test their battery management code, or otherwise failed to indulge their "fetish" (read: job.) Proper hardware tests might be pointless to end users, but that doesn't make them pointless.