News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previo... by danpalmer on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:22PM (#30920993)
Having had an iPhone 6s, X, and 12, I disagree. I'm a heavy user but of relatively basic functionality – I'm not gaming on my phone.

Switching apps, latency for apps to restore state once you switch to them, latency for the camera to save a photo, latency on pretty much all interactions is noticeably better.

I'm not talking about dropped frames, Apple have always been good at ensuring a fluid user experience, but there are lots of points where apps can take a few seconds to do something on older hardware, or do it nearly instantly on newer hardware.

Does a few seconds make a difference? To my life, no. To my enjoyment of using the device, yeah. Whether it's worth frequent upgrades or not is a value judgement we can only make for ourselves, but there are many perceptible differences devices more than a few years apart.

Re:Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previo... by wiredfool on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:52PM (#30921449)
Having just upgraded from a 6s to a Xs, yeah, there's a speed difference with basic web browsing, even on lightweight sites like HN. It's the difference between fast enough and snappy.
Re:Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previo... by nicoburns on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @12:52PM (#30921446)
How is the battery on your 6S? I don't doubt that the older processor is slower in places, but one with a degraded battery will be much slower.
Re:Samsung's latest Galaxy A53 is 33% slower than the previo... by danpalmer on Tuesday April 05, 2022 @01:25PM (#30921952)
When I upgraded it I think it was at 87% health and my X when it was at about 83%. Apple claim there is no throttling for these amounts.