The iPhone 7 just won our fastest phone test of 2016

The iPhone 7 may not have done well in our best phone battery test earlier this month, but it has proved itself as the fastest phone in our new look speed test video.

We took the iPhone 7, Samsung Galaxy S7, Google Pixel, HTC 10, Sony Xperia XZ and the LG G5. and put each through our new, high intensity speed test.

Running eight different apps in quick succession, each phone was tested on how quickly it loads games, video editing and even loading a 3D graphics file.

Check out below to see how each of our phones did in the new speed test.

Sourse: techradar.com

#Amazon #Android #Apple #Asus #camera #Galaxy #Google #Games #iPad #iPhone #Lenovo #Lumia #Laptop #Microsoft #Moto #Motorola #news #Nexus #Note #OnePlus #phone #Plus #Releases #review #Samsung #smartphone #Sony #Watch #Windows #Xiaomi #Xperia



Top Brands

20 Comments
  1. Reply Andy December 2, 2016 at 10:16 am

    Hey James Peckham. If you were reviewing a games consul or graphics card that could only push out “half” the resolution of another system, dont you think it would appear to do things that bit faster I.e. more FPS and load a scene faster (exponentially less data to access and process) use less battery ?
    Well that’s your iphone 7.. an inferior ‘spec’ phone that gives less actual computational ‘bang’ at the most expensive price.
    How about you set the iphone screen resolution to an equal 1440 x 2560 (as the Samsung s7) and run your battery and speed tests then see how it goes.. Oh wait what, the iphone 7 screen is just 750 x 1334 … wow MAYBE that’s an important difference. Now maybe that’s not a big deal to some but you really are being highly misleading by making out that the apple device is a superior device when its not.. They couldn’t even get that screen in a comparable sized phone body – the phone is enormous.
    How’s Apple going in the VR field – oh its not, probably because it would highlight just how weak in processing power it really is. Blow through that undersized battery in minutes pushing same res as Samsung) .bwahahah..

  2. Reply Matt December 2, 2016 at 10:16 am

    Seems odd not to include the OnePlus 3T in this test, doesn’t it?

  3. Reply Steven Lowe December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Remember when TechRadar hadn’t sold out to Apple? Nah, me neither.

  4. Reply Nik Maynard December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    I terms of a test I think the methodology was reasonable. The decreased resolution for the iPhone is a factor especially against the Samsung and to a lesser extent the smaller pixel. I also believe Apple just has a slightly more cohesive set up. I also think that test showed the Pixel is pretty nippy and perhaps the 821 does make a difference in spite of the fact that clock speeds are matched. I have a Pixel and having been invested in Android since the beginning it really is a lovely device. It’s wrapped in a case so the looks aren’t an issue. Not to bothered by the lower bezel, too busy looking at the screen. No IP 68 really doesn’t bother me. But for the first time I have a bare bones android device that feels as good as an iPhone, I’ve mostly recently had an iPhone 6 for work so it’s a reasonably unbiased opinion. A good piece of work from Google…

    • Reply manicm December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

      I still think the Pixel is way overpriced.

  5. Reply TrickyDickie December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Read another article somewhere recently that said that the iChip can only keep it up for a minute before it throttles back.
    More of apple’s bullshit figures lol

  6. Reply Nick December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Yawn, yet another skewed pro-Apple clickbait article from Techradar seeking to put the cat amongst the pigeons. Partisan fanboy politics aside, your points of comparison don’t work as noted by others in the comments below due to different screen resolutions i.e. Apple is quicker as the graphics chip doesn’t need to work as hard to push its lower ppi. I note you don’t compare camera spec, battery life, expandable storage options or software and services in your comparison. I think I’ll continue to enjoy my view (and headphone jack) from outside the walled garden. Marked F for technical acumen. Please see me after class.

  7. Reply Mark December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Terrible article, again.

  8. Reply Dave Fox December 3, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Yeah, because this is *exactly* how we all use our phones on a day to day basis,isn’t it? 😉

    All of these phones perform perfectly well, performance wise, in real world usage.

    Camera and battery life are really far better differentiators, along with ecosystem, and frequency of updates.

  9. Reply xx00xx December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Android>setting>developer option>restrict background– android is multitasking more you see.

    also any device maker in android can change the animation speed. its in the developer option

  10. Reply Dr. Stephen Falken December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    As soon as a test shows Apple being better the android-mafia screams.
    It’s actually pathetic, stick with your android if it makes you happy.

  11. Reply 1213 1213 December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Using high intensity apps like that doesn’t reflect usage, but if you didn’t then the scores would be indistinguishable anyway. We just need to accept that they don’t reflect usage and are a different benchmark for performance and in real life all phones are basically the same with minor differences.

    Also the storage speed plays a big role. Over the next year or two android storage should get better with ufs 2.1 and eventually ufs 3, as well as F2FS.

  12. Reply Steven Lowe December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Remember when TechRadar hadn’t sold out to Apple? Nah, me neither.

  13. Reply Nik Maynard December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    I terms of a test I think the methodology was reasonable. The decreased resolution for the iPhone is a factor especially against the Samsung and to a lesser extent the smaller pixel. I also believe Apple just has a slightly more cohesive set up. I also think that test showed the Pixel is pretty nippy and perhaps the 821 does make a difference in spite of the fact that clock speeds are matched. I have a Pixel and having been invested in Android since the beginning it really is a lovely device. It’s wrapped in a case so the looks aren’t an issue. Not to bothered by the lower bezel, too busy looking at the screen. No IP 68 really doesn’t bother me. But for the first time I have a bare bones android device that feels as good as an iPhone, I’ve mostly recently had an iPhone 6 for work so it’s a reasonably unbiased opinion. A good piece of work from Google…

    • Reply manicm December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

      I still think the Pixel is way overpriced.

  14. Reply TrickyDickie December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Read another article somewhere recently that said that the iChip can only keep it up for a minute before it throttles back.
    More of apple’s bullshit figures lol

    • Reply Tullpeis December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

      I read somewhere that someone claimed they read somewhere that the figures are bullshit. Must be true then, because we read it somewhere, me and you.
      Damn, we are stupid…

  15. Reply Nick December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Yawn, yet another skewed pro-Apple clickbait article from Techradar seeking to put the cat amongst the pigeons. Partisan fanboy politics aside, your points of comparison don’t work as noted by others in the comments below due to different screen resolutions i.e. Apple is quicker as the graphics chip doesn’t need to work as hard to push its lower ppi. I note you don’t compare camera spec, battery life, expandable storage options or software and services in your comparison. I think I’ll continue to enjoy my view (and headphone jack) from outside the walled garden. Marked F for technical acumen. Please see me after class.

  16. Reply Mark December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Terrible article, again.

  17. Reply Dave Fox December 4, 2016 at 10:00 am

    Yeah, because this is *exactly* how we all use our phones on a day to day basis,isn’t it? 😉

    All of these phones perform perfectly well, performance wise, in real world usage.

    Camera and battery life are really far better differentiators, along with ecosystem, and frequency of updates.

Leave a Reply to Nick Cancel reply