Folks are finding it to be much more than slightly lower
So it’s true Apple intentionally slow down old iPhones. Proof: My iPhone 6 was bought 3years ago and recently got really slow. APP ‘CPU DasherX’ shows iPhone CPU is under clocked running at 600MHz. After a iPhone battery replacement. CPU speed resumed to factory setting 1400MHz. pic.twitter.com/pML3y0Jkp2
— Sam_Si (@sam_siruomu) December 20, 2017
No offense, but honestly a lot of them are.
Sounds like replacing the battery worked to fix it.
Some of their laptops also throttle under load.
It’s all done with a reason, to protect the hardware.
I wonder how much that difference in speed actually makes a difference in regular use.
Just looking at the frequency doesn’t say much.
If opening an app takes 60ms instead of 30ms then it’s not really an important difference and more of a placebo effect after looking at the clock speed.
that’s why there is something called “default setting”, if you think customers are too stupid
The difference between 600MHz and 1400MHz is HUGE.
Anyone that claims differently doesn't know what they're talking about. 
Most of the apple experience is making things streamlined and simple and removing as many options as possible (sort of like console gaming!)
Which is why the majority of power users or smarter people go with non-apple devices.
I have met a lot of people who are smart but admit they are stuck with apple because they are locked into the ecosystem (with things like itunes, icloud, apps, or other software)
For example the latest imac pro which completely removed all upgradeability through that back panel (which was already almost completely unupgradeable)
So yeah, it sucks, but that’s what the entire company is about.
An analogy:
Yes it sucks that those Ultrafire 9800mAh cells are fake, but they’re always gonna exist whether you like it or not, so the best you can do is just not buy them.
On paper it is.
How much you actually notice it when typing a text or making a phone call is a different story.
The place where it makes the biggest difference is in benchmarks.
I still haven’t met anyone who bought a phone to run benchmarks 24/7, all my friends use theirs for instragram or texting or facebook.
Of course it doesn't make a difference when typing a text or making a phone call because you're not pushing the processor.
In gaming, where it matters, it's huge.
If you're using all 1400MHz, and then you're forced to use only 600MHz (because of Apple), the difference in performance is monumental.
What you're saying is that there's no difference between a 10 gallon jug and a 20 gallon jug because you're only using 2 gallons of water.
It makes no sense.
money is evil too
Everyone, cleanse yourselves by sending me all your evil. 
Please post your address in this thread for us all to send you evil stuff .
Send all evil stuff to:
raccoon city
1600 Pennsylvania Ave NW
Washington, DC 20500
People still game on their phones in 2017? 
I mean, like real games, not candy crush.
I would assume someone that likes gaming would not have bought an iphone.
Anyway, my point is not that the performance difference is small.
My point is that it is better to have lower performance than to have phones or laptops randomly shut off due to stuff like battery not providing enough current or the processor overheating.
Unintended shutoffs can corrupt an operating system too, it’s bad stuff. It is also not the same as running out of battery and the phone shutting itself off.
Could you imagine how many millions of computers would shut off or just die if CPU throttling didn’t exist?
I would say at least 1 in 10 computers actually throttles under load due to excessive heat, whether it is bad design or the person doesn’t take care of the machine.
It sounds like, finally, we both agree with my original statement, so there is no point in carrying on in this argument.
The problem is all the people making a huge deal about something that they really don’t understand and isn’t as bad as those “huge” numbers make it seem.
if the performance doesnt change much, why they dont use lower CPU at first :lol:
This is true.
They don’t do it because part of the advertising is saying how much faster it is than the previous one, and everyone looks at benchmarks for that info and would clearly see if it was not faster.
Same for any other phone.
The root of the problem either is the smaller batteries inside iphones (which deliver less current) or too much power draw from the components, or both.
I’m admittedly an Apple fanboy. I’ve been using Macs since ’90, and iPhones since the very first one. Though the guy was a bit of a jerk, I had a lot of respect for Jobs creative ability and leadership. Under Cook, the company is tanking, though most don’t see it. He is an investor shill who really seems to put investors far ahead of customers. This is just further evidence.
While I want to see the company succeed, they need to be held accountable for this.
This is, what I understand, also official Apple statement and “explanation” for such practicies. However, being in flashlight/battery world for some years, one thing bothers me… This “massive” current, we are talking about here, can deplete fully charged battery in, lets say, 3-5 hours. But this is only 0.2C-0.3C load… Come on, what type of new battery suffers from this kind of load ? Even most crappiest Ultrafires can handle such current very well. For flashlight batteries it’s normal to have 1C/2C load …and LiPo packs for RC can handle 10-20x such current.
And Apple is telling people, that for some reason, they use batteries, which after a few hundred cycles have problems providing 0.2-0.3C current? If they indeed use such batteries, I would like to know why? …If their batteries is just common li-ion or li-po, this means that whole explanation is just BS and the real reason is: “buy new”.
Lipo batteries only have a few hundred cycles of lifespan.
The faster you charge and discharge them, the more they wear (one of the reasons I dislike fast charging in devices).
Also, as I said earlier they have lower capacity than most phones (for example the iphone 6 with only 1800mAh).
The current a lipo provides is C rate * capacity = amps
So a lower capacity means it will provide less amps (unless you increase the C rate which will decrease lifespan even faster).
It seems like apple is cutting it close to the line so that the peak performance is only achieved when the battery is very new, and after a few hundred cycles it no longer can provide enough current.
It could also be cheap cells being used instead of higher quality ones (which are often larger and heavier) that make the lifespan only a few hundred cycles.
So yeah basically just bad design, too “cutting edge” and not enough “long term thought”
I sold my iPhone 6 the week before the news broke, because my camera app had suddenly started opening WAY too slow. I used to be able to pop open the app and capture a picture of my daughter. Lately my phone would just hang for like 10 seconds, totally missing the moment. If I had any idea this “feature” existed I could have known how to fix it. This was my first ever Apple product. Now the Apple tastes sour.