Performance tests; do no real benefit to it?

Of months of technical news stories recently is the discovery of joining company Oppo for companies that fake performance tests of its organs, and before the month was the news of a fake company Huawei to the results of the performance of their Kirin 970 famous commented Huawei it deliberately this is because performance tests are deceptive and do not choose the phone with the real thing. which might give the incorrect impression right from their device. So what are the performance tests of these and give a real result effective for? If the results are not real so why give manufacturers all this focus regardless of a declaration of interpretation or the price at deception?


After the detection of any new processor find of interest the first be as Will the processor in the Geekbench results and look of the phone to see evaluated in Antutu and when the announcement of disaster graphics think about the results on the 3DMark cameras in DXOMark, and so on. These companies are only a sample of the many companies specializing in testing the performance of the hardware gear that is not only on iOS and Android but extends it to include the eyebrows and also perhaps one of the most famous companies in PassMark. And before to think together how important these companies apps, let’s learn the reason for the existence of the foundation.


Why I found the performance tests

When we tell you that there’s a car engine with 200 hp and its engine 220 hp so does this mean that the second fastest? Of course not might be the first extremely light or designed it more dynamic you can think on a second in speed, so it is judged on the speed of the registry any how much seconds to get from zero to 100 km. The same thing happens in the tech world owing to the presence of different techniques for the manufacture of processors, the faster it becomes tough, but it is getting harder and harder when compared to the speed of the device as a whole. The pace of the device depends on the processor speed memory, storage capacity as well as the gear that says that the processor is running, so I may put a more powerful processor and the memory faster but the gear remaining, such as the screen violent consumption causing a decrease in performance.

>

So appeared the application of performance measurement to provide a standard similar to acceleration from zero to 100 km in the car


How it works performance tests

Companies designated to conduct performance tests, the status of certain criteria to test them, for example, a company DxoMark standards vary Zoom Zoom and auto focus, noise and Noise and colors and flash and installation and other factors to judge the cameras they put the 9 worlds in the pictures and 7 videos. Then begin to choose the hardware and installed according to their conformity to the standards established by the. It is the same with apps that disappear Kart graphics they are running the game as well as adjustments to images and other things, measuring the efficiency of disaster graphics in the delivery of these functions. In short the company set certain standards for testing, then arrange on the basis of which.


Why application performance is not fair?

In a comment Huawei to secretly trick them to develop the performance they said it is not fair and does not show the truth, so they tricked me into it; and the fact that what was said by the officer of Huawei’s partly true applications is not fair but neutral. – winter interval. Imagine with me that the phone is able to do 10 posts and then the company decides to conduct tests and standards its 7 functions of the 10 welcomes companies building on this performance of these functions 7 are neutral, but imagine that there is a company superior extremely in the job 8, 9 and 10 have not been included in the performance test while the performance of the average in the 7 others the result is that their phone would be the average. Test did not include the points that outperform the phone. Another example imagine that the performance test for the DxoMark does not include photography in poor lighting then launches Google phone pixels 3 share Mi mix 3 advantages, especially in night photography. What do you expect to be evaluated? Bad, of course, because their competitive advantage and their own strength is not included in the test.


And standards a secret?

Now the question-duper Famous, which are the standards of the test confidential? Of course no secret, but declaring it as it appears in the photo to the highest in DxoMark, but the important point is that the floats don’t read -but probably not up most of the opening article to this point to read – for example, when you ask someone about the camera iPhone or Note 9 and he tells you that its assessment of such in DxoMark, but on what basis he came to this evaluation. Did anyone think to read the details of the evaluation? Such as the assessment of the iPhone XS Max came in 3560 word, i.e., 2-3 times the length of a news article on margin and more than 3-fold compared to this. Detailed report too will be making it clear that the disadvantages of the camera such advantages that, but in reality will not care about the 99% reading reports it would leave the final. And here the disaster! The numbers and details of tests and criteria advertised, but buoy care about despite the final judge. Accordingly, error may occur and the gas right.


How to serve our applications performance

Get away from Apple and look to offer DxoMark for my phone Note 9 of Samsung and Mi Mix 3 from Shawty we all the two phones got 103 points, does that mean that they identical? Of course not the score these are the average figures, but there are differences in detail is huge, for example, in the doctor get Shawty on 53 points while Samsung 66 points and overtake Shawty in the colors of 87 points compared to 81 for Samsung and so but the final outcome of the both phones got 103 points. So may happens to be stuck with two phones and pick up a photo and change your standards “aims such as roughly,” you say to Samsung and the report and how it helps between the Shawnee and Samsung and the opposite happens at other points.

For example a last resort, the same tests says that the evaluation of the Note 9 is 103 points and evaluate Google’s Pixel 2 is 98 point… but internally in the filming of the video gets a Samsung phone on the 94 point of having a 96 any phone Google, at least in the ratings outperform on another phone top in a specific area. Here are two pictures to offer Samsung Galaxy Note 9 share Mix 3 and shows you that they are the same final assessment but they are different in both the detailed results almost

Photo to Samsung Galaxy Note 9

Photo to Shawty Mix 3

In short, the application of the performance assessment you average performance, so I might buy a phone and great results to test the performance of the “gross” conduct that is not at the level required; either because the more that interest you that is not covered by the test or because you look for the total and not the details.

Another point is that currently companies are beginning to offer processors a custom part to artificial. Performance tests do not measure this, but the speed accordingly might tell you to choose that processor X is better than Y while at the same time. the processor Y at least speed in the right way supports the functions of the artificial intelligence is better than X build have to be in actual use better and more efficient.


Why should we follow the performance tests

Maybe you feel weird because from the beginning of the article say that the application of non-neutrality. and the figures for average performance and no one cares to detail has adopted a wrong decision on the basis of which then find we say that we have to continue to follow up performance tests. The truth is that the application performance as we mentioned at the top may not reflect the full but neutral. Any standards set by the day of the order, whatever the device. In this way we can see the development for the same company. For example, the Samsung S9 boasts hardware strong and one running Samsung’s “heavy gear” screen ultra-high quality. Phone S10 or X the next will come from the same company and the same fact or a newer version of it and build on it if we found that test performance shows improvement, it means a real improvement because it’s the same company. If we look for growing businesses, if we found that the phone gets 260 thousand points and another 250 and the second 270 these devices three of the different companies most often will be their performance comparable, and the differences of the actual few and are caused by the quality of the screen and one system. But if I find another phone shows $ 340 thousand head is the fastest of them is the differences big these be stems from a real change and not the interface screen.

Also you can learn the app development itself, for example, a processor Kirin 980 compared with kirin 970 processor Snapdragon 845 compared with 855 “didn’t believe” processor A11 with A12, and so on.


The bottom line

Apps performance test are important because they tell us about the extent of development in performance, but should not serve us and are living the only provision in particular the final figure; we must wait for details and how you got this phone or the situation on the assessment of strengths and weaknesses; and remember that the results are near often imperceptible, but if there are differences, huge often be these relationships real and perceptible in use.

Do you think the results of the performance tests for the hardware before buying it? Either you have particular criteria you can share with us in the rankings up?

Source:

DxOMark


All rights reserved ©iPhone Islam, 2018. | Link to the topic | Comments |
Cards: Shawty, Apple, Samsung, Huawei

The post performance tests; do no real benefit to it? appeared first on iPhone Islam.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *