Games any more are getting so large, I have to ask what is the realistic future of gaming. Cartridges can only hold so much data without getting unrealistically expensive. But if you want something that will play on both a larger at home console and a smaller portable console, it seems like the way to go.
Of course, mini discs can do the job as well. According to wikipedia, mini blu-ray discs can hold 15 GB. That seems sufficient for the current generation of gaming.
I just bought 2 32GB microSD cards for about $20. Memory prices are lower than they've ever been. There's a reason that I use memory cards to run my PSP's games, rather than using the UMDs directly.
You suppose that Apple tested their chips inadequately.
No that's not what I said. I said you don't know how Apple tested their chips.
Either Apple found the issue, or they tested their chips inadequately. By definition, tests that don't find significant problems are inadequate.
From what I can tell by the Chipworks assessment, they appear the same with one being smaller. But then again I didn't look at the billions of transistors to determine if there are minor differences.
You don't have to look at the billions of transistors. You just have to run a widely-available benchmark on the two models of phone. Not even "you" personally; I'm sure that we'll quickly have documentation of the difference, independently supported by large numbers of tech enthusiasts.
They perform differently according to a Reddit user using a test Apple may not have used. How do you know that Apple should have known?
Because battery life in a mobile device is a highly-advertised, important aspect of selling the device, and it would be foolish to advertise performance metrics without thoroughly testing them beforehand.
The AC contended that Apple knew that there was a performance problem.
I'd contend the same thing, but I would classify it as a "difference", not a "problem".
That requires that they did the test the Reddit user did
It does not. It requires that they at least did an equivalent test that would expose the same difference. I don't think there's anything unreasonable about that assumption.
But what are the parameters of this "bare minimum"?
Presumably Apple has an internal test suite that they are convinced would give them performance numbers for various use-cases of the phone, and they required that suppliers' test results met or exceeded certain standards.
That is supposition. First, I haven't performed the test as I don't have iPhone 6s with two different processors to confirm it. Second, I don't know (and you don't know) how Apple tested their A9s.
I'm just following your lead
The sooner all the animals are extinct, the sooner we'll find their money. - Ed Bluestone
