WiFi Performance

While cellular data is often the center of smartphone connectivity, it’s often the case that people rely on WiFi instead of cellular data for the bulk of their data transfers. As a result WiFi is a pretty important part of the overall smartphone experience. In the case of the iPhone 6s, the major change from the iPhone 6 is that rather than single stream 802.11ac, the iPhone 6s now has dual spatial stream 802.11ac. This increases the maximum physical link rate to 867 Mbps. There’s been some confusion over what’s used for the WiFi chipset, and as far as I can tell this is definitely a Broadcom solution, which is identified as BCM4350 in the system judging by the device ID. This chipset is shared with the Macbook, which is probably helpful for driver development. In order to test how well this performs, we use iperf2 in UDP mode to attempt to determine maximum practical bandwidth. It’s worth noting here that the iperf2 ports on iOS are still amazingly buggy though, so these results are no guarantee as far as I can tell.

WiFi Performance - UDP

Interestingly enough, for whatever reason the iPhone 6s holds a minor lead over most of the other devices in this test. I’m not sure what’s causing this, but in practice I found that WiFi on the iPhone 6s worked without any noticeable issues. Reception is noticeably improved when compared to the iPhone 6 due to the addition of a second spatial stream which means that throughput at the same distance is higher.

GNSS

Accurate location is often critical to a number of popular applications for smartphones like any kind of navigation or mapping application, which is going to be an incredibly painful experience if the GNSS system in the phone has poor sensitivity to the signals used in the various GNSS systems available today. Although I have no hard evidence to go on, given the use of a Qualcomm modem in this phone I strongly suspect that this phone is using Qualcomm's IZat location services. I would normally run some cursory testing here with a GPS test application, but because iOS offers no way to clear assistance data and location services are disabled if there is no prior connection to download assistance data, there's no way to do the usual cold lock testing.

A warm lock in which connection was immediately established to begin downloading assistance data achieved lock within 15 seconds, and in general I've never had issues with location services in the iPhone 6s in my time using it.

Misc

Over the course of the review, there are a lot of various bits and pieces that I learn about a phone that might be of interest, but aren’t necessarily examined in intense depth because of either limitations in our testing or the issue of interest isn’t significant enough to examine closely. For example, the fuel gauge appears to be a TI design win as there are references to a BQ27540 chip. The A9 SoC also contains a dedicated AES accelerator for things like full disk encryption and FairPlay DRM. The display backlight appears to use the TI LM3539 driver, but other evidence within the system suggests that this isn’t the only backlight driver for the display.

On the audio side of things, although I haven’t been able to do deep investigations into audio quality it appears in the system that the audio codec used is Cirrus Logic’s CS42L71 which also appears to be responsible for microphone input. However, instead of using an amplified on the audio codec a dedicated amp is used for the speaker, which appears to be a Cirrus Logic CS35L21. Subjectively, the speaker sounds pretty similar to the iPhone 6, but at the high end of the volume range it feels like volume was increased while also increasing distortion. Turning down the volume to a comparable level makes both sound pretty much the same.

More reading of the system files reveals some noticeable codenames like Stockholm which appears to be related to NFC and payments in some way. The fingerprint sensor is referred to as Mesa, and the authentication/secure element appears to be Sand Dollar. The charger chip is referred to either as SN2400 or Tigris. Some sort of accessory detection chip is referred to as TriStar2 or CBTL1610. The ambient light sensor is referred to as CT821 but I can’t find anything on what this is at all.

Display Final Words
Comments Locked

531 Comments

View All Comments

  • blackcrayon - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    I bet it goes further than you think. I bet Anandtech is paying Huawei and Samsung or maybe has undercover agents at Qualcomm to make sure their SOCs perform more slowly than Apple's. It's the only way to explain it!

    You're so enraged and deluded that you can't see how something that is pretty much universally agreed as "one of the best" could possible be "the best" in someone's opinion (an opinion backed up by a uniquely large amount of test data I should add).
  • osxandwindows - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    You and your conspiracy theories.
    lol
    So what other conspiracy theories do you have about anandtech
  • blackcrayon - Wednesday, November 4, 2015 - link

    Maybe Apple injected code into Webkit (that's also in Chrome and that Microsoft and Mozilla also copied unbeknownst to them) that makes any bar graph showing iPhone performance to have longer lines! Except when smaller lines are better, then it makes them shorter. :)
  • melgross - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    Maybe because it actually is the best, despite what Android users want to think.
  • zeeBomb - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    the fight between android and apple will never end.
  • itpromike - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    Paid? That is a very dangerous and very serious accusation for a publication such as Anandtech which does scientific and objective chip architectural analysis as well as benchmarks and performance measurements. You are suggesting that Apple is literally giving them money to lie to all of their readers and to willingly change benchmark results AND architectural analysis, including forging SOC cross section pictures (also implicating chip works of being equally fraudulent and deceitful)? You are truly saying that Apple is paying Anandtech to publish falsified results, with Anandtech having no integrity at all? WOW. That is a BOLD BOLD claim. I'd love to see your journalistic proof of this. Do you have links to bank statements, written contracts, emails, phone conversation recordings, etc... that we all can look at so we can make sure the public is aware that Anandtech writers, and analysts are liars? Or can you share with us your deep examination and analysis of the page by page writings and findings in the review in contrast to your on findings that you've spent hours on end testing and analyzing? This way none of their readers will mistake them for being an honest, data driven publication. Just go ahead and link to your findings in the reply to this message. Thanks
  • Alexey291 - Tuesday, November 3, 2015 - link

    Er are you sure you're not confusing anandtech from half a dozen years ago with a marketing publication with the same name in the now?
  • shadowii - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    Wow, what a worthless reply. Read the article.
  • KoolAidMan1 - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    Anandtech backed up their conclusion with pages and pages of objective tests and analysis. This bothers you so you accuse them of being paid shills.

    Standard Fandroid in the wild, ladies and gentlemen.
  • Ethos Evoss - Monday, November 2, 2015 - link

    Yeah and final words section like wtitting a bokk !!! Fkin never seen end so long like this..
    The whole review - aplle bible.. anandtech had to follow apples bible......

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now