Overclock.net banner

[Guardian] 32GB iPhone 7 significantly slower than more expensive versions, tests show

4K views 43 replies 32 participants last post by  sLowEnd 
#1 ·
#2 ·
Wow.... If Apple customers actually cared about Apple policies they'd be pissed. But I'm expecting something more along the lines of "That's why the bigger one is more expensive!".... Sigh....
 
#3 ·
WHo knew that the cheaper device is slower.
 
#4 ·
here's the relevant info..
Quote:
the iPhone 7 Plus smartphones with model numbers A1778 and A1784, including those available in the UK and Europe, performed noticeably poorer than those with model numbers A1660 and A1661, including those available in the US.

A1778 and A1784 iPhone 7 Plus smartphones have an Intel modem chip that connects them to the 4G network, while the A1660 and A1661 models use a modem supplied by Qualcomm
and the fact that the 32GB versions have slower memory has been known for a while.
 
#6 ·
I can understand the slower SSD speeds, but the radio speed difference is unacceptable.
 
#7 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a nickname View Post

A larger will perform better but writing 8 times slower? 50 mbps is VERY SLOW and unacceptable for such a high end device. Even my 50$ 64 GB micro sd card (2 years old) is faster than that!
50MB/s not 50Mbps lol.
 
#9 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

50MB/s not 50Mbps lol.
This is what I meant. 50MB/s is very slow by today's standard (for a 1k$ phone). I may be wrong but it seems like the iphone 7 only has usb 2 support (60mbps)? When I wrote my post, I thought it had at least USB 3 and thus was quite bottlenecked by the write speed.
 
#10 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cindex View Post

Wow.... If Apple customers actually cared about Apple policies they'd be pissed. But I'm expecting something more along the lines of "That's why the bigger one is more expensive!".... Sigh....
Don't worry. Someone will throw a class action lawsuit about it. Apple customers are not as sheep as you think.
 
#13 ·
I keep not understanding how one purchases what is a 900 euros phone in my country. 770$ in the US and acept, be okay, completely FINE that their phone, which is already one of the most expensive phones on the market be slower than the remaining same model phones because, you didn't pay for more space or because you happened to buy the wrong model.

But it doesn't matter, because people seem to be okay with it.

I understand, it's apple. It looks good, has tons of accessories does what you ask it to do till the next one comes along, at which time you're probably gonna upgrade through your operator anyway. So yea.
Just keep on trucking and things like these will become norm.
 
#14 ·
I think the decision to use a cheaper storage medium in the 32GB model is lawsuit-worthy.

You know review samples and reviewers are going to be reviewing a product, and the average joe will go buy a product that is drastically slower than said product. Kind of like Nvidia products
biggrin.gif
 
#15 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buris View Post

I think the decision to use a cheaper storage medium in the 32GB model is lawsuit-worthy.

You know review samples and reviewers are going to be reviewing a product, and the average joe will go buy a product that is drastically slower than said product. Kind of like Nvidia products
biggrin.gif
Not even close, Apple did not advertise the speed of their storage, only the amount. They did not even advertise the speed of their 128GB models. There is no false advertising here, you get what you paid for.

In Nvidia's case they advertised the amount (4GB) and the speed at which the 4GB ran. This did not add up and thus is false advertising and misleading. in addition to this, memory speed of the last 0.5GB actually mattered in real-world scenario's. With apple, not so much.
 
#16 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yttrium View Post

Not even close, Apple did not advertise the speed of their storage, only the amount. They did not even advertise the speed of their 128GB models. There is no false advertising here, you get what you paid for.

In Nvidia's case they advertised the amount (4GB) and the speed at which the 4GB ran. This did not add up and thus is false advertising and misleading. in addition to this, memory speed of the last 0.5GB actually mattered in real-world scenario's. With apple, not so much.
There's also the 4G networking issue that can be proven to be different hardware, with different speeds.
 
#18 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laserlight View Post

Who cares? It's cool and has a fruit on its back and it is also as much expensive as it needs so that others won't confuse me for a dirty peasant.
rolleyes.gif
Until apple starts putting emblems that denote memory size on the back
wink.gif


It'll be like the Subaru WRX STi RA-R Spec C - you dirty peasants can keep your STi's.
 
#19 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokkan View Post

I keep not understanding how one purchases what is a 900 euros phone in my country. 770$ in the US and acept, be okay, completely FINE that their phone, which is already one of the most expensive phones on the market be slower than the remaining same model phones because, you didn't pay for more space or because you happened to buy the wrong model.

But it doesn't matter, because people seem to be okay with it.

I understand, it's apple. It looks good, has tons of accessories does what you ask it to do till the next one comes along, at which time you're probably gonna upgrade through your operator anyway. So yea.
Just keep on trucking and things like these will become norm.
I think a lot of people (like me) are much more willing to pay high prices for smart phones like the iPhone these days because of 0% 24 month financing, which seems to have replaced the old model of getting phones for a cheaper price with a 2-year contract. My Note 7 is costing me $35/mo for 2 years which is a lot easier to swallow than paying $850 up front. I'm definitely a big fan of the new way of purchasing phones (at least VZN's current system)...
 
#20 ·
Dang that's crazy I bought my iPhone 7 for $200 upfront with a two year commitment (sprint)
 
#21 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just a nickname View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by ZealotKi11er View Post

50MB/s not 50Mbps lol.
This is what I meant. 50MB/s is very slow by today's standard (for a 1k$ phone). I may be wrong but it seems like the iphone 7 only has usb 2 support (60mbps)? When I wrote my post, I thought it had at least USB 3 and thus was quite bottlenecked by the write speed.
Again, 50MB/s is not the same as 50 mbps. 50MB/s is 400 mbps, almost half of your gigabit ethernet connection.

USB2 has a theoretical limit of 60 megabytes/s or 480 mbps.
 
#25 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anateus View Post

Meanwhile, every Xiaomi user just laughs at those news.
($150 phones that have performance as good as $800 iPhone)
That is until they join the ranks of every other Xiaomi user I know when their phone starts showing why they are so cheap. In China Xiaomi are a brand to be avoided unless you really can't afford anything else.
 
#26 ·
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tokkan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yttrium View Post

Not even close, Apple did not advertise the speed of their storage, only the amount. They did not even advertise the speed of their 128GB models. There is no false advertising here, you get what you paid for.

In Nvidia's case they advertised the amount (4GB) and the speed at which the 4GB ran. This did not add up and thus is false advertising and misleading. in addition to this, memory speed of the last 0.5GB actually mattered in real-world scenario's. With apple, not so much.
There's also the 4G networking issue that can be proven to be different hardware, with different speeds.
Same thing, Apple did NOT promise certain hardware in their devices or the same hardware across all new devices. They could have placed an hard limit of 1Kbit and you still wouldn't have a case. Would be a dick move costing them alot of money, wouldn't be a lawsuit.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top