The Samsung Galaxy Note7 (S820) Review
by Joshua Ho on August 16, 2016 9:00 AM ESTStill Image Performance
Now that we’ve gone over what the Galaxy Note7’s camera looks like from an architectural standpoint and a user experience standpoint we can talk about how it performs. In the interest of timeliness and due to the sheer level of commonality with the Galaxy S7 in camera we have dispensed with a broad-base comparison across multiple generations and OEMs and price points in favor of a more test scenes with the Note 7’s direct competitors to have more relevant data points that do something other than reiterate parts of the Galaxy S7 review.
| Daytime Photography |
Looking at a simple daytime scene the Galaxy Note7 looks almost exactly like the Galaxy S7 but with some very minor contrast changes and some slight reduction in sharpening. In blind A/B testing I suspect It would be impossible to actually consistently tell which photo came from which device in a consistent manner. The LG G5 has had a major OTA recently which seems to have affected camera processing as while it was noticeably sharper than the Galaxy S7 and Note7 before it now looks fairly comparable with less visible luminance noise but also less detail.
The Note7 outputs higher detail here compared to the iPhone 6s Plus which is likely due to the larger sensor used in the Note7, but pretty much every high-end Android flagship is shipping larger sensors at this point so it’s not too surprising that the iPhone 6s Plus is starting to show its age as far as camera quality goes.
When compared to the HTC 10 it’s fairly obvious that HTC has missed exposure for this scene as rather than exposing for the center with some radius and weighting they seem to expose for the whole scene with a higher weighting applied to the center of the lens. As a result things like the sky look somewhat washed out compared to reality. The iPhone 6s Plus’ color rendition is pretty much exactly how I saw the scene, so the sky isn’t reproduced quite right there. On the other hand, shadow detail is clearly superior to the Galaxy Note7 on the concrete, and texture detail is also comparable. There are some clear issues with the HTC 10’s edge detail as high-contrast edges are rather soft and more comparable to the iPhone 6s Plus, so I would say the two are fairly comparable but the Galaxy Note7 edges past due to its better edge contrast.
| Low Light Photography 1 |
Moving on to the low light scenes the first scene was just a photo of some houses at night which has both brightly lit and dark areas which are mostly identical save for the appearance of a random cat at the fence for the iPhone 6s Plus. Starting with the comparison for the Galaxy Note7 and S7, it’s obvious that the Galaxy S7 elects to use a much warmer white balance than the Galaxy Note7. I’m reluctant to pass judgment on the white balance here because pretty much every OEM is using some kind of fuzzy logic and white balance is almost always just an educated guess, so misses like this aren’t that unusual. Again, pretty much everything looks identical as far as detail goes with maybe some minor differences in edge sharpening but not much here.
Compared to the iPhone 6s Plus other than the extra cat in the photo it reproduces the fairly cold fluorescent lighting used by the first house more accurately, but other than this difference detail looks almost identical between the two.
Compared to the LG G5, we can actually see some noticeable differences in detail on the plaster walls and clearly better detail reproduction on the shrubs in the center of the frame. I would argue that the LG G5 does the best out of any of the devices tested here as LG seems to have the cleanest noise reduction algorithms.
Relative to the HTC 10 it’s obvious that the Galaxy Note7 isn’t capturing as much detail as the HTC 10 when you look at areas like the plaster under the light as various patterns that can be seen in the HTC 10 just aren’t there on the Galaxy Note7’s version of the same image. These details are also captured by the LG G5 so it’s unlikely that we’re just looking at some image artifacts either. The HTC 10 does suffer from some noticeable purple noise at the bottom right edge of the photo though and color noise is more noticeable as you get to the very edges of the image.
| Low Light Photography 2 |
In the next scene I deliberately chose a fairly low light scene where dynamic contrast is not really needed but white balance would be difficult to get right. Here we’re starting to see some difference in post-processing when comparing the S7 and Note7 as it’s obvious that Samsung has significantly toned down the sharpening effects here compared to the Galaxy S7. However, if you use the reference photo I took with the HTC 10 with manual white balance in an attempt to get the correct color rendition it’s obvious that the Note7 is a bit too yellow while the Galaxy S7 properly captures the basically orange lights given off by these sodium lights. Again, white balance can vary dramatically just based on the slightest angle change so I suspect that the differences in white balance aren’t going to be consistent from scene to scene.
Relative to the HTC 10 in Auto mode, both are equally wrong in white balance here, but it’s obvious that the HTC 10 still has more detail especially if you look at the RAW + Manual version of the photo which has even more detail preserved by Lightroom compared to the JPEG processing. The HTC 10 just has a better camera here.
If you look at the iPhone 6s Plus it actually ends up missing white balance even more as I think it’s assuming that these are conventional sodium lamps while the street lamps here are just extremely orange for whatever reason, and much more so than what I’ve seen in most cases. Detail between the two is actually comparable as well, and the Note7’s sharpening is much less aggressive than the Galaxy S7 so I would give the Note7 a narrow edge here.
Finally, the LG G5 I would say probably comes the closest to actually getting color rendition right in this scene. Detail is also one of the best here and I would argue it’s clearly superior to pretty much every other camera I tested here short of a dSLR.
| Low Light Photography 3 |
As a sanity check I went ahead and went to the same scene that I used for the Galaxy S7 review to see how cameras performed here. Once again, comparing the Galaxy Note7 and S7 it’s evident that there are slight changes in white balance but nothing huge and probably more a function of slightly different positions rather than actual changes. The main change here is the reduced amount of sharpening halos which reduces edge contrast slightly but looks a lot more natural. Detail for the most part is really unchanged here. For whatever reason the Galaxy S7 I received has issues with light streaking on the lens no matter how I clean it, but the Note7 doesn’t have these issues which might also be an advantage.
Relative to the iPhone 6s Plus it’s difficult to distinguish any difference in detail relative to the Note7 and color balance is basically identical as well. It’s also worth mentioning that the noise reduction is slightly cleaner on the iPhone 6s Plus but the difference is small. I would call it a wash here as both devices have fairly similar output and minor differences in both directions.
Against the HTC 10 the Note7 is clearly inferior. Just looking at the asphalt there’s better detail on the HTC 10, and if you look at the street sign you can clearly make out the words Glenmont Dr while the Note7 really only has Glenmont legible. The tree also has finer detail. The one thing that the Note7 does handle better is distortion, as the lights are just clearly blown out and a lot of optical aberrations are visible compared to the optics on the Note7. I suspect HTC is just going too aggressive with focal length here as the problem is especially worse on the edges despite wiping down the lens of each phone with a cotton cloth before taking the shot.
The same sort of story plays out with the LG G5 but detail is somehow slightly worse than what we saw on the HTC 10 which leads me to believe that the recent OTA has really affected image processing. The G5 just has a much cleaner photo than what the Note7 is putting out, as is the HTC 10.
| Low Light Photography 4 |
In this scene which attempts to introduce an object fairly close to the camera such that focusing at infinity is no longer sufficient, we can test to see how well a device hits focus. Here, again the only perceivable difference between the Galaxy S7 and Note7 is color balance. Detail is basically identical.
Relative to the HTC 10 the Note7 has clearly superior dynamic range. This is often a sticking point for HTC even with auto-HDR. The photo is just very dark. Doing the same photo in manual mode with a 2 second exposure solves the problem so I suspect that HTC is clamping gamma at high ISO in an attempt to reduce color noise. The sharpening halos on the Note7 are also fairly visible in the background when compared to the manual mode reference photo while the HTC 10 on auto doesn’t do this sort of thing. Detail on the wood is also much finer on the HTC 10, which seems to be a product of the larger sensor and generally less heavy-handed noise reduction.
Relative to the iPhone 6s Plus the Note7 has a noticeably brighter exposure and better dynamic range. Detail is also comparable, but again it’s obvious that Samsung is doing some artificial sharpening that really makes for some strange effects as out of focus background objects now have random sharp halos on them. Samsung ultimately wins out here, but the sharpening artifacts really do count against them and if not for the superior dynamic range I would hand the win to the iPhone 6s on this alone.
Looking at the LG G5 detail is better than the Note7 but color balance is strangely warm and the dark background is lacking detail compared to the Note7. However, the G5 also gets points for having more natural noise reduction and sharpening, so I would probably call this one a wash as depending upon what matters to you in a camera one type of output is going to be preferable to the other.
| Low Light Photography 5 |
As a final scene I decided to do a fairly simple test of absolute detail in low light by just pointing the camera at a patch of evenly lit grass, but in fairly low light conditions. This is not designed to be difficult test, but makes things like poor noise reduction fairly obvious. The Galaxy Note7 once again shows visibly less artificial sharpening. The Note7 clearly still has some noise reduction but not a ton. Color balance is once again different as the Note7 renders the grass somewhat excessively green while the Galaxy S7 is a bit more accurate. Both are pretty much the same, but these are minor differences worth noting.
However, relative to the HTC 10 it’s obvious that fine detail is not being rendered very well by the Galaxy Note7. A lot of fine textures and colors are just being replaced by almost no fine texture and a single green hue which has a lot of implications for things like portraits, although depending upon what you want from a camera you may not want to capture all of the pores of someone’s face. Sharpening on the HTC 10 is just very subtle if it’s there at all.
If you look at the iPhone 6s Plus it’s obvious that detail is again comparable, but the iPhone 6s Plus is more conservative with its post-processing and lacks the extra sharpening that the Note7 uses. In this particular case it’s acceptable to do this because it’s hard to notice the difference, but I would say the 6s Plus has better post-processing.
Looking at the LG G5 it looks like we’ve actually hit an edge case or something similar with its post-processing because unlike other scenes where it clearly leads the Note7 here it’s fairly comparable with aggressive noise reduction but fairly light sharpening. I would say this is pretty much a tie.
Just as a final sanity check here I decided to take a RAW photo with the Note7 and processed it with Lightroom and it’s fairly obvious that there’s more detail to be had here but the gains are small. I suspect what we’re really seeing here is just decreased sensitivity that comes with the dual pixel system. It’s obvious that there are huge user experience benefits but I get the feeling that if Samsung decided not to pursue minimizing module thickness as a design goal that the camera would’ve been much better than what we got. I also suspect that the lack of RWB is a major contributor to what seems to be a stagnation in detail and sensitivity.
Overall, the camera of the Note7 is kind of a mixed bag for me. On one hand like the Galaxy S7 it is just ridiculously absurdly fast at everything it does, but on the other hand the output is really kind of disappointing at times. It’s not amazing but it’s not awful either. The HTC 10 is almost always producing better results here and with a major iPhone launch on the horizon I think the camera will be acceptable, but not necessarily the best. I would say that the HTC 10’s camera is fast enough to not really annoy people and produces better output which makes it the better camera for still images, but if you really care about speed above all else then the Note7 is the fastest camera you can get today.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
202 Comments
View All Comments
name99 - Friday, August 19, 2016 - link
For crying out loud. Read the damn comments to that article.Bottom line is it doesn't prove what you and Andrei seem to think it proves.
CloudWiz - Sunday, August 21, 2016 - link
Simply because the scheduler is able to schedule a workload across multiple threads does not mean it is taking "full advantage of 4 or more cores". Browser performance is still heavily single-threaded whether you like it or not. Read the comments on Andrei's article.I'm going by Anandtech results here, and the E7420 suffers incredibly on battery life when on LTE compared to Wifi. Without results for the E8890 I can't say for sure, but with not even Qualcomm having found a way to get LTE battery life to even EQUAL Wifi (sure they're getting close, but there's still a small delta) I severely doubt that Samsung can do it, given their E7420 difficulties. Also, personal experience is highly unreliable and unless you have some time-lapse video to prove it, I won't believe you when all the data available says otherwise.
Sure Safari is more efficient. (It's also far more performant, but that's another story.) And yes I will concede that the 6s renders at a fairly low resolution. However you must keep in mind that the 6s Plus actually renders at 2208 x 1242 which is 75% the pixels of 1440p, much closer than you would think. And render resolution on GS6/7 might not even be the display resolution - most Android apps don't bother to render at such a high resolution because most phone's don't have 1440p displays. And given screen technologies in 2016, if Apple switched to 1440p LCD I doubt there would be a 2 hour+ impact to battery life. Phones like the HTC 10 with 1440p LCD displays with the same chip as the GS7 can achieve better battery life than it with the same size battery. This is not only a testament to S820's inefficiencies but also Samsung's implementation inefficiencies. And no, the GS6/7 are not able to "keep up". I've already stated how the GS6 absolutely cannot compare with the 6s or 6s Plus, and even with the GS7 the S820 version barely edges out the 6s with a battery nearly twice the size, with even the more optimized E8890 version being unable to top the 6s Plus with a larger battery. These differences can't be attributed solely to browser inefficiencies or screen densities. Samsung's implementations are simply not efficient compared to Apple or even HTC with their S820 implementation and Huawei with their Kirin 950.
jlabelle2 - Monday, August 22, 2016 - link
- if Apple switched to 1440p LCD I doubt there would be a 2 hour+ impact to battery lifeHow do you explain then the huge drop of battery life between the MacBook from the MacBook Air?
- And no, the GS6/7 are not able to "keep up". I've already stated how the GS6 absolutely cannot compare with the 6s or 6s Plu
The iPhone 6S did not exist when the GS6 was released. The S6 had (slightly) better battery life than the iPhone 6, despite a screen bigger, with 3 times more pixels to push.
The facts do not back up your claims.
CloudWiz - Thursday, August 25, 2016 - link
You have to consider what you're comparing here. On one side you have smartphones which have screens not even 6 inches diagonally. On the other side you have full-blown computers which have screens more than twice the size diagonally. There's a reason most computers haven't moved far past the 1440p-1600p mark. The screens are so big that the power consumption gets unreasonable. The subpixels on computers have to be much larger than on a phone. A 1440p LCD on the HTC 10, for example, will not consume the same power as a 1440p Macbook screen. In fact, it consumes far less, allowing the phone to have basically the same web browsing battery life with a much smaller battery. In addition, the Macbook has a 25% smaller battery compared to the Air, further giving it the disadvantage.I stated that the 6s and 6s Plus destroy the GS6, correct? I never mentioned the 6 at all. Don't try to twist my words. The facts do indeed back up my claims and if you can't see that maybe you should take a look at those charts again. I do concede that the 6 series were terrible phones all around (terrible SoC, terrible display, terrible modem, terrible design, terrible Touch ID) but with the 6s Apple fixed almost all of these issues.
Finally, the S6 actually had worse battery life than the 6 in web browsing and in gaming (taking into account frame rates). What are you basing your (non-existent) claims off of?
sonicmerlin - Sunday, August 28, 2016 - link
You're hugely exaggerating the iPhone 6's deficiencies. Touch ID was it slow but it was far more accurate than any other fingerprint scanner implemented on a mobile device up to that point.The design was the exact same as the 6S. The modem had more LTE bands than had ever been integrated into a single device. The screen wasn't vastly different than the 6S screen either. And the SoC had great single core performance. The battery even lasted longer than the 6S.
lilmoe - Saturday, August 27, 2016 - link
Please don't be offended, but I cannot take you, or any other biased user, seriously when you're claiming that someone's argument is unreliable, then go on and prove the opposite using the same (and/or worse) approach they did. Yes, I've read the comments on that article (all of them actually), and contributed/replied to lots.-- Simply because the scheduler is able to schedule a workload across multiple threads does not mean it is taking "full advantage of 4 or more cores"
A good example of what I mean above. Your statement may (and I say: may) be correct if there WASN'T any DIRECTLY related data to prove it wrong. When 4 or more cores are ramping up (and actually computing data) during app loading and scrolling (including browsers, particularly Samsung's browser), then it sure as hell means that these apps (all the ones tested actually) ARE taking advantage of the extra cores. Unless the scheduler is "mysteriously" loading the cores with bogus compute loads, that is (enter appropriate meme here). Multi-core workloads ARE the future, Apple is sure to follow. It's taking a LONG while, but it's coming. We've also pointed out that there is LOTS of overhead in Android that needs work, and that most certain won't be remedied with larger, faster big cores. On the contrary it would be worse for efficiency.
"I'm going by Anandtech results here"
AHHHHHHH, right there is the caveat, my dear commentator. If YOU had actually read the comment section, you'd know just how much we're complaining about the inconsistency of Anandtech's charts. You never get the same phones/models, consistently, on a series of comparisons; you get the GS7 (Exynos) VS iPhone 6S+ on one, then the GS7e (S820) VS iPhone 6/6S (not the plus) on the other, considering both iPhone models are NOT the same phone, with different resolutions and different screen size/resolution (AND different process nodes among even the same models). It's relatively safe to claim, at this point, that those inconsistencies are intentional, while Anandtech's "excuse" is that not all phones are at the same "lab" at the same time. Selective results at its best. There's absolutely no effort in extracting external factors and testing HARDWARE for what it is. One could argue that the end user is getting a package as a whole, but that's also inconsistent with Anandtech's past and present testing methodology, where at times they claim that they're testing hardware, and times you get a review largely clouded by "personal opinion" like ^this one and the one before. If you really are reading the comment section, you'd see us mention that this review is personal opinion, and adds nothing to what's being said and shown online already. We can deduct the outcome, but we want to know the REASON. Anandtech fails to deliver.
Back to the argument about radios. You haven't tested the devices yourself. You haven't used any as your daily driver. I have. Anandtech's results, charts and whatnot don't only contradict my findings (and many others) in one department, but MOST. It's safe to assume that their testing methodology is flawed, seriously flawed. They absolutely do NOT take into consideration any real world usage, NOR do they completely isolate external factors to test hardware, NOR is there any sort of deep dive or tweaking to justify their claims. For WiFi, they cherry picked the least common scenario to fault the device and they didn't show any performance/reliability data for more common workloads.
I own a Galaxy S7 Edge (Exynos), since day 1. I actually go out and know lots of people, for business and leisure. My family, friends and clients own iPhones (various generations, mostly latest), Galaxies, HTCs, LGs and Huaweis. Guess who has the best reception. Guess who has better and more reliable WiFi. Guess who has the better rear camera (front camera is almost a wash now after updates, and sometimes better. It was worse at launch), BATTERY LIFE, SCREEN, features, etc, etc, etc... This isn't limited to this generation of Galaxy S/Notes, it's been this way since the S4/Note 2 (aesthetics aside). The only drawback on current generation Galaxies is reception COMPARED to previous plastic built Galaxies; they're still BETTER than the competition.
Again, what are we comparing here? Actual hardware? Or real world usage? Performance consistency? I don't know at this point. Anandtech reviews are anything but consistent, and nowhere as easy for an objective user to extract the truer result between the lines. They weren't perfect, but it was easy to deduct the facts from the claims. Now, you get a deep dive of why X is better than Y, but then you get a "statement" of why Z is better than X without anything sort of rational reasoning (sugar coated with "personal taste").
Did you read the camera review? What was Josh comparing there? If it's about post processing, then Samsung isn't worried about his "taste", what they're worried about is what MOST OF THEIR USERS like and want. Their USERS want colorful, vivid and more USABLE images, not a blurry mess. Nothing beats Samsung's camera there, especially with the new focusing system. Again, what's being compared here? Sensor quality or his own taste in post processing? If it's sensor quality, I haven't seen a side by side comparison of RAW photos using the same settings, have you??
-- Sure Safari is more efficient.
Let's stop there then, because we agree. At this point, software optimization can (and does) completely shadow any "potential" inefficiencies in radios. Everyone agrees that Chrome isn't the best optimized browser for ANY platform. Safari has built-in ad blocking, Chrome doesn't. Samsung's browser supports ad-blocking, but Anandtech didn't bother making the comparisons' more apples to apples. They claimed that it performed worse or the same as Chrome. ***BS***. Samsung's Game-Tuner enables the user to run Samsung's browser (or any other app, not just games) in 1080p and even 720p modes, but again, Anandtech didn't bother. I sure as hell noticed a SIGNIFICANT increase in render performance, battery consumption, and lower clock speeds when lowering the resolution (I run my apps and browsers in 1080p mode exclusively, and my games at 720p with no apparent visual difference, but with HUGE performance benefits).
Other than the FACT that these phones are NOT running the same software (OS, apps/games, even if they were the same "titles"), Javascript benchmarks, in particular, are an absolute mind-F***. You get VASTLY different results with different browsers on the same platform, and different results using the same browser on different platforms. Any sort of software optimization can drastically change the results more so than any difference in IPC or clock speed. Any reviewer (or computer scientists for the matter) worth their weight would never, NEVER, claim that a freagin' CPU is faster based on browser benchmarks UNLESS those CPUs were running the SAME VERSION browser, on the SAME platform, using the SAME settings, AND the SAME OS. Anandtech, among others, are "mysteriously" refusing to bring this point to light, and instead chose to fool the minds of their audiences with deliberate false assumptions. Most commentators know this, so how do you expect me, and others, to take you seriously. With that said, javascript (at this piont) is the least deciding factor of browser performance (especially on mobile).
-- This is not only a testament to S820's inefficiencies but also Samsung's implementation inefficiencies
How so? Where's the log data to back this up? Where's the deep dive? Where, in Samsung's software, is the reason for that? How can it be fixed?
This community is infested with false claims, inconsistent results, and bad methods of testing. Youtube is littered with "speedtests" and "RAM management" tests that have no evident value in everyday user experience, and FAIL to exclude external factors like router-scheduling and Google Play Services. No one runs and shuffles 10s of apps and 5 games at the same time.
I'm a regular commentator here, and I've bashed Samsung more than praising them on various subjects. I'm the first to point out the shortcomings of their tradeoffs. But I also know that these shortcomings are far, FAR less user-intrusive for the majority of consumers.
lilmoe - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link
"The GT7600 was only beaten in GFXBench this year by the Adreno 530 and surpasses both Adreno 530 and the T880MP12 in Basemark (it also has equal performance to the T880 in Manhattan). You make it sound like the GT7600 is multiple generations behind while it is not. It absolutely crushes the Adreno 430 and the T760MP8 in the Exynos 7420. The GX6450 in the A8 was underpowered but the GT7600 is not."You mean better drivers, right? You mean better a optimized benchmark for a particular GPU on a particular platform, VS a the "same" benchmark not optimized for any particular GPU on another platform...
Even with that handicap, the GS6/7 still manage longer battery life playing games. Amazing right?
CloudWiz - Sunday, August 21, 2016 - link
Whether or not a phone has "better drivers" or an "optimized benchmark" doesn't matter. Sure I can let Basemark go if you so wish, but GFXBench is cross-platform and not optimized (so far as I know) for either iOS or Android. The fact is that offscreen performance is very similar between all devices, and that your statement about the GT7600 'long being surpassed' is false. It's been half a generation since it's been surpassed, and I have no doubts that whatever goes in the A10 will again reclaim the GPU performance crown for Apple. And then Qualcomm/Samsung will pass it again next year - that's how technology works. But the fact that GT7600 is so close to Adreno 530 and T880MP12 despite being half a year older and on an inferior process is a testament to Apple and PowerVR. You couldn't say the same for GX6450 or even G6430.Also, have fun playing a game for 4 hours at 10 fps when it'd be far more enjoyable to play it for 2 hours at 30+ fps.
lilmoe - Saturday, August 27, 2016 - link
What are we comparing here? Unused performance or efficiency as whole? What matters in gaming desktops isn't the same for mobile devices (Smartphones). Some benchmarks are comparing Metal to OpenGL ES 3.1 when they should be comparing a lower level API to its competitor, ie: Vulcan.Mali GPUs have far surpassed PowerVR in efficiency, for a while. You can actually measure that in both benchmarks (battery portions) and real life gaming.
-- Also, have fun playing a game for 4 hours at 10 fps when it'd be far more enjoyable to play it for 2 hours at 30+ fps.
Part of the reason why I can't take you seriously (again, no offense). What game exactly runs at 10fps even at full resolution? I haven't seen any. But it's also good that you do acknowledge that Apple's implementation isn't exactly the most power efficient.
That being said, I run all my games at 720p (just like the iPhone) using Samsung's game tuner app, and not only do they run faster now, but the battery life (which was class leading at full res) is even better. Complaining that Samsung has larger batteries is like complaining that Apple has larger/wider cores. Because, again, what are we comparing here? Hardware? Or user experience??? It's not clear at this point, but the GS7 wins on both accounts at this particular workload.
Game-tuner (and the latest resolution controls in the Note7) has completely diminished my concerns with the resolution race. It doesn't matter to me anymore. They can go 4K (or complete waco 8K) for all I care, as long as I can lower the resolution. I'm baffled how there isn't a complete section about this app/feature (and Samsung's underlying software to enable it). I also bring this up because you get a benchmark tuned-down to 1080p (on my GS7 at least) results more FPS than the 1080p "offscreen" test for "some" reason. After seeing this, I'm even more conservative about these benchmarks.....
jlabelle2 - Monday, August 22, 2016 - link
- the modem on the S6 makes it last a ridiculously short amount of time on LTE and even on Wifi the 6s lasts half an hour longerDo you realize when you wrote that, that the iPhone has a ... Qualcomm modem ?
There is nothing magic about iPhone hardware that people try to make you believe.
It is crazy when you realize that the Note 7, with a bigger screen, with 50% more pixels, can still browse on LTE longer than the iPhone 6S Plus, while being significantly smaller.