Not long after the iPhone 6S made its debut, it was revealed that there are two versions of the handset in the wild: one with a 16nm TMSC chip, and another with a Samsung chip built on the 14nm standard.
Advertisement
In response Apple has released a statement (via Ars Technica), saying that the battery life performance between the two chip types in “real-world usage” varies little.
The company said that their testing and consumer data show that the real battery life of the iPhone 6s Plus and iPhone 6s differ within 2%-3% of each other. However, Apple says that “manufactured lab tests” that continuously run a heavy workload don’t represent the iPhone 6s’ true capabilities. The A9 chip powering the devices is actually sourced from two different suppliers – Samsung and TSMC.
The other version available globally and the model you will get with Sprint, T-Mobile and Verizon is the A1688 for the iPhone 6S and A1687 for the iPhone 6S Plus. Despite claims that the Samsung panel is superior to the LG one, and even a class-action lawsuit against the comapny, Apple never officially addressed the issue.
About the advantage of SIM-free iPhones, Apple said: “If you don’t want a multiyear service contract, or if you prefer to use a local carrier when traveling overseas, the SIM-free iPhone is the best choice”.
Key to Apple’s rejection of the online test results is that the “benchmark” tests are conducted by running processor-intensive tasks for hours at a time until the battery is drained to a certain degree.
Apple designed the A9 chip in-house, but manufacturing is handled by third party fabs.
In terms of real-world battery life, the Guardians own review of the new iPhones found that they underperformed compared to similar devices.
Advertisement
Earlier this week, we reported on performance differences when it comes to Apple’s new iPhone6s. This difference seems to have had a pretty major side-effect with owners of Samsung devices apparently experiencing much greater battery drain than those with TSMC chips. The Samsung chip tends to run several degrees hotter than the TSMC A9.
