My bad. I should just say that there were the same silicon lottery issues we see when we buy a chip from a single vendor, eg Intel today, compounded by the fact that the process nodes were different too.
The popular narrative at the time was that TSMC chips had the better battery life, but it depended on those silicon lottery results.
>What we know is that there isn't enough information currently out there to accurately determine whether the TSMC or Samsung A9 SoC has better power consumption, and more importantly just how large any difference might be. 1-on-1 comparisons under controlled conditions can provide us with some insight in to how the TSMC and Samsung A9s compare, but due to the natural variation in chip quality, it's possible to end up testing two atypical phones and never know it.
The popular narrative at the time was that TSMC chips had the better battery life, but it depended on those silicon lottery results.
>What we know is that there isn't enough information currently out there to accurately determine whether the TSMC or Samsung A9 SoC has better power consumption, and more importantly just how large any difference might be. 1-on-1 comparisons under controlled conditions can provide us with some insight in to how the TSMC and Samsung A9s compare, but due to the natural variation in chip quality, it's possible to end up testing two atypical phones and never know it.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/9708/analyzing-apple-statemen...
However, when the chips fell as they may, Apple single sourced the A10 at TSMC, and they would have had the largest number of performance data points.