Benchmarks prove Apple’s iPhone 7 easily outperforms new Google’s anemic Pixel

“The Google Pixel phone officially revealed on Tuesday wasn’t a well-kept a secret prior to release, and as a result there are a large number of benchmarks available,” Mike Wuerthele reports for AppleInsider. “They show the phone’s raw performance lags far behind that of the iPhone 7, and is even defeated in single-core performance by the iPhone 6s and iPhone SE.”

“Early benchmarks for the Pixel and Pixel XL phones in Geekbench 4 have come in at around 4100 for multiple core performance, and 1580 for single core,” Wuerthele reports. “In contrast, the Apple iPhone 7 multiple core score is around 5600 regardless of model, with a single core score of around 3430.”

“For comparison, the iPhone 6s Plus has a multiple core benchmark of 4106, and a single core rating of 2508,” Wuerthele reports. “Both models of the Google Pixel revealed on Tuesday use a Snapdragon 821 CPU with two cores running at 2.15GHz, and two running at 1.6 GHz. The phone has 4 gigabytes of application RAM. The Apple iPhone 7 series utilizes the A10 Fusion processor, with two high-performance cores, and two high-efficiency cores. The two high-performance cores run at 2.34GHz.”

Google's slow iPhone wannabes Pixel and Pixel XL
Google’s slow iPhone wannabes Pixel and Pixel XL

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Snaptortoise is more like it.

Fly on the wall listening to Google’s braintrust:

“What’s another word for ‘Plus?'”

“Un, ‘XL?'”

“Yeah, ‘XL,’ let’s go with that.”

Beleaguered HTC assembles Google-branded Pixel phones – October 4, 2016
Google announces Google-branded iPhone knockoffs, again – October 4, 2016


  1. Not defending google… but go back a few iPhone models (4 maybe?) and google/android had a super fast phone (hardware) that was faster than the iPhone.
    Apple said speed wasn’t everything, the os and user experience was more important.

    Be prepared for the android clowns to turn that right back at the iPhone 7 now.

    (Course they are wrong… but they will try)

    1. And Apple was right then… OS X was highly optimized for offloading processing to the GPU at that point in time… Apple’s interface ran as smooth as butter on CPU speeds that were anemic compared to other devices. It took Google YEARS and CPU power an order of magnitude faster to get their interface to run just as smoothly, and some would argue it still isn’t as nice.

      1. Well that went over your head.

        All I said was they will TRY to use that argument.
        Apple and the fanboys downplayed the fact the android phone had a faster clock speed etc, and now apple fanboys are bragging about the speed of the iPhone hardware. Roles reversed. (Although it’s been that way for a while)
        Same thing happens with cars, 1 manufacturer comes out with a car that has 1hp more than anyone in the class… and starts bragging. The car may be a pos.. but it has higher hp!!!!!

        The os argument is irrelevant cause iOS is just better period.

        1. Yes, it was downplayed by Apple users, because real-world results showed it wasn’t as important as Fandroids made it out to be. (And at that time Apple wasn’t designing their own CPUs, they were using off the shelf parts.) iOS had a heavily animated UI running on a 400MHz CPU and it still was extremely smooth. I remember the head of RIM saying that there was no way that device could run that software.

          We aren’t bragging specifically about the performance and how it may or may not matter, I think most are bragging about Apple’s CPU design prowess. Their ability to design and develop CPUs that are literally generations ahead of the competition and fast approaching Intel’s benchmarks. In fact, if Apple clocked their Hurricane CPU at 4.0GHz, it would surpass any and every Intel CPU in raw performance. (Don’t get me wrong, Intel CPU’s are still much more advanced and have many, many more features.)

  2. I actually like the Pixel XL name. Taking the X and L out of PiXeL is clever. It kind of rolls of the tongue.

    And it’s not as if “Plus” is some unique nonmonclanture anyhow. As in Google… Google Plus. Stop nitpicking at silly things, people. If Google called it the Pixel L, or the Pixel EX or the Pixel X, would it change anything? They all denote something larger/better in some way.

    Pixel may have a winner on its hands if it can fill the gap being left by the Galaxy Note fires.

    1. Google does not have the distribution to replace Samsung. Nor would HTC have to assembly capacity to produce devices in those numbers.

      Furthermore, Google does not have the cachet of being a premium product. Their analogous with “cheap” and/or free.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.