BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Did Apple Sell You A 'Good Or Bad' iPhone 6S Plus?

Following
This article is more than 8 years old.

Both the iPhone 6S and the iPhone 6S Plus are powered by Apple's latest chip, the A9. Apple suggests the A9 offers significantly more processing and graphical power that its predecessor. But there is a sting in the tale for some iPhone users' battery, thanks to Apple sourcing its A9 chips from two different manufacturers.

The A9 chips used by Apple appear to offer two different levels of performance depending on the manufacturer of the component. Those manufactured by Samsung appear to be drawing more power and offering a shorter battery life than those manufactured by TSMC.

Last year's A8 chip was manufactured by TSMC, while the previous 64-bit A7 chip was manufactured by Samsung. Rather than select either company for the iPhone 6S family, Apple has decided to take on the technical challenge of working with two different sizes and designs of A9 chip. X-rays of the new hardware from Cupertino show two different sizes of chips - Samsung's die is 96 mm2 while TSMC's die is 104.5 mm2. The companies also use different manufacturing processes, with the South Korean company's 14 nm challenging the 16 nm process favoured by the Taiwanese.

And the two chips have different levels of ultimate performance.

Details are being collated on various forums and websites across the internet, and the theory coming through is that the Samsung-manufactured A9 chips are generating more heat and drawing more power than the TSMC variants. Benchmarking tests in some cases are reportedly showing a difference of up to two hours of battery life using Geekbench's battery test. Chinese site MyDrivers uses a mix of JavaScript and video playback, which exhibited a hungrier Samsung chip, as did AnTuTu's benchmarking software.

These tests all focus on the ultimate performance of the chipset, pushing Apple's hardware to the edge of the performance envelope. There's no solid data on real-world performance of the two chipsets, and there's every chance that Apple's performance specifications demand a similar utilisation of resources during 'mixed' usage from its suppliers.

This is not a unique problem, even individual chips from the same production line can offer a range of performances. Apple may have complicated the process by going with two different manufacturers, but what it does do is offer users a small insight into some of the manufacturing issues around modern computing devices.

That's not going to stop those iPhone users who are wanting the most powerful device possible in their pocket doing their best to outfit themselves with the TSMC variant of the iPhone 6S. They'll be loading up unsigned applications to check the chipset, hoping to get the 'more efficient at maximum power' option. If they have a Samsung chip they'll then try to work out how to get an exchange with Apple before running the whole process once more to see if they have picked up one of the lucky silicon lottery tickets from Cupertino.

I would assume that the lower demands placed on the A9 in regular use will see both the TSMC and Samsung chips fit comfortably inside the same performance envelope. That would mean that there is little difference in day-to day use between the two options, but the difference is there.

To paraphrase George Orwell, its likely that all iPhones are equal, but some iPhones are more equal than others.

(Now read my review of the iPhone 6S).

Follow me on Twitter or LinkedInCheck out my website