Related
Interesting results here. Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3 and I must say I am quite shocked with these findings so far
http://thedroidguy.com/2013/09/sams...-sony-xperia-z1-vs-lg-g2-benchmark-comparison
i dont care. n3 is the better phone.
oh i dont disagree i agree 100% that is why i have a note 3 coming and im not stopping at verizon today to see the overrated g2!
hah G2 is like a on screen buttoned Galaxy S4 LG is copying Samsung on many things these days -_-
Blackwolf10 said:
hah G2 is like a on screen buttoned Galaxy S4 LG is copying Samsung on many things these days -_-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know right! everything almost looks the same. Its like there are a dev and just made a rooted s4 with some new ui looks!
Here's a potential difference. There are two versions of S-800; MSM8974 and MSM8974AB. Here's AnandTech's take...
Xiaomi makes the first (to my knowledge) public disclosure of MSM8974AB, which is analogous to the changes we saw between APQ8064 and APQ8064AB. From 8974 to 8974AB, Adreno 330 GPU clocks climb from 450 MHz to 550 MHz, LPDDR3 memory interface maximum data rates go from 800 MHz to 933 MHz, and the ISP clock domain (I think Xiaomi might mean the Hexagon DSP here) goes from 320 MHz to 465 MHz. 8974 comes in both a bin with the 4 Krait 400 CPUs clocked at 2.2 GHz (really 2.15 GHz) and 2.3 GHz (2.26 GHz) with slightly different pricing, while 8974AB comes with a Krait 400 clock available only at 2.3 GHz. Process is still TSMC 28nm HPM, but I suspect that the AB variant might have the high k dielectric and/or transistor mix tuned slightly differently based on a few rumblings I've heard recently.The S-600 in the SGS4 was "AB" so the the S-800 in the N3 might be also. We'll find out when more detailed reviews start to come out.
From AnandTech discussing the SGS4's S-600 chip...
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.
BarryH_GEG said:
Here's a potential difference. There are two versions of S-800; MSM8974 and MSM8974AB. Here's AnandTech's take...
Xiaomi makes the first (to my knowledge) public disclosure of MSM8974AB, which is analogous to the changes we saw between APQ8064 and APQ8064AB. From 8974 to 8974AB, Adreno 330 GPU clocks climb from 450 MHz to 550 MHz, LPDDR3 memory interface maximum data rates go from 800 MHz to 933 MHz, and the ISP clock domain (I think Xiaomi might mean the Hexagon DSP here) goes from 320 MHz to 465 MHz. 8974 comes in both a bin with the 4 Krait 400 CPUs clocked at 2.2 GHz (really 2.15 GHz) and 2.3 GHz (2.26 GHz) with slightly different pricing, while 8974AB comes with a Krait 400 clock available only at 2.3 GHz. Process is still TSMC 28nm HPM, but I suspect that the AB variant might have the high k dielectric and/or transistor mix tuned slightly differently based on a few rumblings I've heard recently.The S-600 in the SGS4 was "AB" so the the S-800 in the N3 might be also. We'll find out when more detailed reviews start to come out.
From AnandTech discussing the SGS4's S-600 chip...
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so could be why we are seeing higher scores in the test note 3?
Why are people knocking the G2? It's the second fastest device on the market. It has an amazing screen area ratio and a very nice battery. It's camera is also one of the best. I would never consider it because I can never go back below 5.5 inches and I can't stand on screen buttons. But that phone should make a lot of people very happy.
Techweed said:
Why are people knocking the G2? It's the second fastest device on the market. It has an amazing screen area ratio and a very nice battery. It's camera is also one of the best. I would never consider it because I can never go back below 5.5 inches and I can't stand on screen buttons. But that phone should make a lot of people very happy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im not saying its not a nice phone but nothing that "wows" me. It looks worse then Touch Wiz not a huge fan of but its ok (sense is my fav), the phone doesnt have sdcard and removable battery also a no no (why i didnt buy htc one), Note 3 has better specs with an spen and loads of new features. G2 looks like a rooted S4 running a launcher and i wasnt impressed by S4. So with that being said this is just a tad faster S4 with same look almost. Now Note 3 you may say is same look as S4 while it is, it at least carries an sdcard and removable battery and the dev support should be behind sammy. Also i do remember LG making an Intuition, revolution, lucid? whatever happened to those? oh thats right they fell through the cracks. LG just cant compete with samsung, htc, or even motorola right now
oneandroidnut said:
Interesting results here. Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3 and I must say I am quite shocked with these findings so far
http://thedroidguy.com/2013/09/sams...-sony-xperia-z1-vs-lg-g2-benchmark-comparison
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Everybody? Who's saying that?
BTW, that article is useless. They are combining results from various places - PhoneArena/GSMArena etc.,
They took GN3 numbers from here: http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-first-benchmarks-scores-of-samsung-galaxy-note-3-are-in/
They also added some from PhoneArena: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBwq0iAoVzQ
One major thing everyone forgets is that running benchmark from display models in launch events is plain wrong.
A] Most phones in such events (IFA, CES, MWC) are always charging. You should never benchmark when the phones is charging.
B] Have you ever seen any 'reviewer' in those shows to reboot the phone before running benchmarks? These display phones are abused by tech-journos. Tons of things would be running in the background. Yes, nobody bothers to clear the memory by rebooting it once. What's the point of such benchmark? Not to talk about thermal envelope after using these phones continuously.
C] G2 running release firmware, rest 2 phones running pre-release version.
(IMO) AnTuTu shouldn't be considered as a good benchmark. A benchmark tool must provide consistent repeatable result. If you run AnTuTu 5 times, I guarantee you that you will get variable result most times. No wonder AT doesn't like using AnTuTu.
Benchmarks never killed a phone :angel::angel:
CLARiiON said:
Everybody? Who's saying that?
BTW, that article is useless. They are combining results from various places - PhoneArena/GSMArena etc.,
They took GN3 numbers from here: http://blog.gsmarena.com/the-first-benchmarks-scores-of-samsung-galaxy-note-3-are-in/
They also added some from PhoneArena: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBwq0iAoVzQ
One major thing everyone forgets is that running benchmark from display models in launch events is plain wrong.
A] Most phones in such events (IFA, CES, MWC) are always charging. You should never benchmark when the phones is charging.
B] Have you ever seen any 'reviewer' in those shows to reboot the phone before running benchmarks? These display phones are abused by tech-journos. Tons of things would be running in the background. Yes, nobody bothers to clear the memory by rebooting it once. What's the point of such benchmark? Not to talk about thermal envelope after using these phones continuously.
C] G2 running release firmware, rest 2 phones running pre-release version.
(IMO) AnTuTu shouldn't be considered as a good benchmark. A benchmark tool must provide consistent repeatable result. If you run AnTuTu 5 times, I guarantee you that you will get variable result most times. No wonder AT doesn't like using AnTuTu.
Benchmarks never killed a phone :angel::angel:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate benchmarks at events and real life situations is where it's at. We just need to wait till some more note 3 make it into the wild
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
oneandroidnut said:
Everybody has been saying the G2 is quicker and better then Note 3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would anyone say that? No one even has the Note 3, so we have to default to expectations. Why would anyone expect the the similar but faster clocked phone to be slower?
dscline said:
Why would anyone say that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Show "anyone" this. All the tests were conducted by the same source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
AnTuTu
Linpack
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
BarryH_GEG said:
Show "anyone" this. All the tests were conducted by the same source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
AnTuTu
Linpack
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no g2 on that list though
oneandroidnut said:
no g2 on that list though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Enjoy -- http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_g2-review-982p5.php
oneandroidnut said:
no g2 on that list though
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oops, I thought "anyone" was saying the N2 was faster than the N3. My bad.
Here's the G2 numbers, again all from a single source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
Linpack
AnTuTu
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
In case anyone's bummed about the lower AnTuTu score here's a score taken from a production unit that was reviewed by a Russian site. GSMArena conducted their tests on demo units at the Berlin launch event. Based on these scores I'd bet anyone here the N3 is using a "AB" chip where the XZ Ultra and LG G2 aren't. So, at least for the time being, the N3's the fastest Android device on the planet.
But not to be a buzz kill, the SGS4 got fantastic benchmarks but had some lag in early s/w releases due to the ton-'O-crap Samsung had loaded on it. It improved over time and the N3 has more RAM so I'm hoping benchmarks translate in to "feel."
http://translate.googleusercontent....v.html&usg=ALkJrhha6VTm0y89eM70OxVC5rPRLSw6nw
BarryH_GEG said:
Oops, I thought "anyone" was saying the N2 was faster than the N3. My bad.
Here's the G2 numbers, again all from a single source; GSMArena.
Benchmark PI
Linpack
AnTuTu
Egypt (Offscreen)
T-Rex (Offscreen)
Sunspider
In case anyone's bummed about the lower AnTuTu score here's a score taken from a production unit that was reviewed by a Russian site. GSMArena conducted their tests on demo units at the Berlin launch event. Based on these scores I'd bet anyone here the N3 is using a "AB" chip where the XZ Ultra and LG G2 aren't. So, at least for the time being, the N3's the fastest Android device on the planet.
But not to be a buzz kill, the SGS4 got fantastic benchmarks but had some lag in early s/w releases due to the ton-'O-crap Samsung had loaded on it. It improved over time and the N3 has more RAM so I'm hoping benchmarks translate in to "feel."
http://translate.googleusercontent....v.html&usg=ALkJrhha6VTm0y89eM70OxVC5rPRLSw6nw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks man! and i cant wait to get my hands on one! and dont know who would keep a n2 over the n3 lol
All I know is that my S4 always benches higher than my HTC One. S4 using the "higher" binned S600.
In real world use, the HTC One felt twice as fast as the S4. Even rooted and running a custom debloated rom and kernel overclocked to 2.1GHz, the S4 still was laggy and much MUCH slower than a stock HTC One. The S4 would lag and stutter all over the place despite showing the superior numbers so I now take benchmarks with a grain of salt.
I'm really hoping Samsung gets it together and instead of just showing higher benchmark numbers, actually perform in real world use like the numbers indicate.
I'm using an LG G2 right now while waiting for my GNote3, so far I am IN LOVE with the G2. It's hands down the fastest device I've ever used, Nothing slows this thing down and I have yet to encounter a hint of lag or micro stuttering. Battery life matches or exceeds my Note 2 which I thought was incredible, I'm not too worried about the non-removable battery anymore. The screen is by far the best display I have seen, and the camera is amazingly good with OIS. In my opinion the S4 is not even in the same league as the G2, hardware or software wise. I really loved my Note 2 and have my fingers crossed the Note 3 doesn't have the incredibly frustrating laggy experience that plagued both my S4's. I would really love to keep the Note 3 as my main device because I actually use the S-pen a lot.
Dan37tz said:
I'm using an LG G2 right now while waiting for my GNote3, so far I am IN LOVE with the G2. It's hands down the fastest device I've ever used, Nothing slows this thing down and I have yet to encounter a hint of lag or micro stuttering. Battery life matches or exceeds my Note 2 which I thought was incredible, I'm not too worried about the non-removable battery anymore. The screen is by far the best display I have seen, and the camera is amazingly good with OIS. In my opinion the S4 is not even in the same league as the G2, hardware or software wise. I really loved my Note 2 and have my fingers crossed the Note 3 doesn't have the incredibly frustrating laggy experience that plagued both my S4's. I would really love to keep the Note 3 as my main device because I actually use the S-pen a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The G2 could be considered a "next gen" phone because of S-800 and the additional features LG's provided. The One and SGS4 with S-600 are previous generation phones. Sadly for SGS_ owners, their device is released before the N_ is and Samsung learns from issues with the SGS_ what not to do in the N_. The SGS3 Exynos with 1GB of RAM vs 2GB in the N2 is a good example.
I share your fears though. The launch s/w on the SGS4 was pretty bad. But I'm hoping that 3GB of RAM, S-800 "AB," and "lessons learned" will make the N3 as big an improvement over the SGS4 as the N2 was over the SGS3. I had no issues with the stock unrooted performance of the N2.
As for "fastest" that's subjective. I don't personally get off on millisecond faster screen transitions as much as I do on 30% faster browser performance which Sunspider indicates the N3 achieves over the G2. Where Samsung phones are "fast" for me is in how, through their features, they allow me to get stuff done faster and in ways I can't with other manufacturer’s devices.
I also don't consider the G2 in anyway a competitor to the N3. One's clearly a "phone" and the other's clearly a "phablet" with S Pen/S Note making the difference even greater. And the G2's lack of expandable storage is a step back not forward. That and the non-removable battery take it off my shopping list even if I were considering a "phone."
BarryH_GEG said:
I share your fears though. The launch s/w on the SGS4 was pretty bad. But I'm hoping that 3GB of RAM, S-800 "AB," and "lessons learned" will make the N3 as big an improvement over the SGS4 as the N2 was over the SGS3. I had no issues with the stock unrooted performance of the N2."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For the "AB" thing, I think, then, Note 3 is supposed to have Adreno 330 clocked at 550 MHz. Have you find any info regarding that?
BarryH_GEG said:
I also don't consider the G2 in anyway a competitor to the N3. One's clearly a "phone" and the other's clearly a "phablet" with S Pen/S Note making the difference even greater. And the G2's lack of expandable storage is a step back not forward. That and the non-removable battery take it off my shopping list even if I were considering a "phone."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apart from your buying preference, if it were for the image stabilization how'd you see Note 3 over G2 in terms of "smart stabilization" vs OIS?
Hey guys, can anyone run some basic benchmarks like geekbench and antutut and post them here? Would like to see what the phone score with the carrier bloatware and stuff. If you do it's much appreciated but could you post your cpu too 820 or 8890? Thanks guys
You can ask for it here
http://forum.xda-developers.com/s7-edge/help/exynos-snapdragon-t3322784
There's already some scores available in there.
selbyftw said:
Hey guys, can anyone run some basic benchmarks like geekbench and antutut and post them here? Would like to see what the phone score with the carrier bloatware and stuff. If you do it's much appreciated but could you post your cpu too 820 or 8890? Thanks guys
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am at work on my work PC so I can't upload a screen shot but Antutu Benchmark score 100% stock - 122,019 I usually have been getting around 92,000 on my Nexus 6p - rooted and tweaked with ac custom kernel.
mocsab said:
I am at work on my work PC so I can't upload a screen shot but Antutu Benchmark score 100% stock - 122,019 I usually have been getting around 92,000 on my Nexus 6p - rooted and tweaked with ac custom kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Most results so far : Snapdragon 820 = Antutu 120 -122000
Exynos = Antutu 127 - 129000
On Geekbench Snapdragon slightly better on single core,Exynos slightly better on multi core. So only marginal differences in benchmark results.
In daily use both are blazing fast ...
Best yet for me... it is no exynos, but I will take it
aaronc_98 said:
Best yet for me... it is no exynos, but I will take it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My note 5 has exynos and I haven't been able to get more than 92,000 or so - honestly the benchmarks don't mean much - maybe they make us feel good a little - but in the end, the real test is how it performs in real life and honestly all of these Flagship phones are pretty amazing. I am really impressed with the S7 - and other than a little bloat, I don't find much to complain about with the new Touchwiz/Marshmallo in the S7 Edge. AND I love the expanded features for the Edge itself...really nice phone.
Only the second day on this phone. I like it!
Sent from my SM-G935T using Xparent Skyblue Tapatalk 2
Just a casual run on the snapdragon version. Didn't cool it or anything
Wow those are some great runs guys, the geekbench is a little lower than expected. On certain s6 roms I've gotten about 5100 on multicore, but for stock those seem pretty good.
Is the general consensus that both cpu's are as good as each other with both slightly out performing one in certain areas?
Can someone run gfxbench battery test on snapdragon and upload performance graphs here. Interesting to see gpu performance degradation.
Can someone please run a workbench from PCmark?
That is the most usefull benchmark at the moment
thanks in advance
selbyftw said:
Wow those are some great runs guys, the geekbench is a little lower than expected. On certain s6 roms I've gotten about 5100 on multicore, but for stock those seem pretty good.
Is the general consensus that both cpu's are as good as each other with both slightly out performing one in certain areas?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just keep in mind the s6 has 8 cores to throw at it. Thats why its multicore score holds up well. Once we consider the single core score and that the 820 only has 4 cores its rather impressive.
I ran pcmark and got about 6k last night. Just keep in mind that pcmark is much more representative of the governor's ability to react to loads etc, than a representation of raw power. If you ran it on performance governor for instance, the score would be much higher.
TANKRED_ENDURES said:
Can someone run gfxbench battery test on snapdragon and upload performance graphs here. Interesting to see gpu performance degradation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hopefully these show you what you want
Xileforce said:
Hopefully these show you what you want
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow, it looks like exynos 8890 have better sustained performance, kinda surprasing
http://4pda.ru/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=707315&view=findpost&p=47363269
TANKRED_ENDURES said:
wow, it looks like exynos 8890 have better sustained performance, kinda surprasing
http://4pda.ru/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=707315&view=findpost&p=47363269
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have no clue what that site says....
TANKRED_ENDURES said:
wow, it looks like exynos 8890 have better sustained performance, kinda surprasing
http://4pda.ru/forum/index.php?s=&showtopic=707315&view=findpost&p=47363269
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Surprising? The ghost of the 810 still haunts the 820 a bit.
Xileforce said:
I have no clue what that site says....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the exynos, notice that it stays above 2.5ghz till around the 21 minute mark, while the sd820 starts throttling after 6 minutes.
peachpuff said:
Surprising? The ghost of the 810 still haunts the 820 a bit.
Here's the exynos, notice that it stays above 2.5ghz till around the 21 minute mark, while the sd820 starts throttling after 6 minutes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just wish I understood the metric. It's not GHz because the GPUs only run around 650mhz. From what i can tell the adreno is much higher peak then suddenly drops for a second and jumps back up. Which seems weird if it's throttling. Normally it would go low and stay low, like the 8890 does in the graph. I'll have to compare to my s6 later. Test takes forever.....
Xileforce said:
I just wish I understood the metric. It's not GHz because the GPUs only run around 650mhz. From what i can tell the adreno is much higher peak then suddenly drops for a second and jumps back up. Which seems weird if it's throttling. Normally it would go low and stay low, like the 8890 does in the graph. I'll have to compare to my s6 later. Test takes forever.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not GHz, it's number of frames in one iteration of test. I suspect thermal driver in snapdragon variant is maybe broken, because It's weird what performance halfed every 2 minutes. In real games it would be noticeable.
Can't say I'm dissapionted with my 820 s7e. Great real world performance and benchmarks very well.
I'm the uk so I'll be getting the 8890, from what I can see from you guys both chips are good but I think the sd820 may have some thermal isssues again. Both score very well in real world performance. If your sd820 gets really hot at least you can dip it in some iced water now
Hello,
Im currently using a Samsung Galaxy S6 32gb and i love this phone and for me its a very good phone, it has everything i need, i have 9 pages of apps in the app drawer all my movie, games, pics, docs and songs and the phone never let me down but im a performance kinda guy and while i love the performance of the s6 after watching the unpacked 2016 i have decided to get the s7 but after doing so looking i found that the 8890 is more of a CPU SoC while the 820 is more of a GPU SoC so i wanna know i want to have the full S7 experience complete with the gear vr and vulkan api so which one should i get i know that the 820 is a 2+2 CPU with the GPU is doing about 550+ gflops while the 8890 is 4+4 and the GPU is doing about 250+ gflops so which one should i get and why and what are the pros and cons of each one
Thanks a lot and sorry for the long post
The only thing that matters is if you care about AOSP ROMs or not. If you do, Snapdragon is your only choice.
As said before I think there will not be a big difference in regards to the performance. The SD820 tends to be a little bit faster in single core applications, while the Exynos will perform better for multi core applications. Will you notice it? I doubt so.
The GPU in the SD820 is indeed faster, but potentially oversized, too (produces more heat => throttles more). So while benchmarks could be better, after some minutes the GPUs are (more or less) on the same high. Some people will agree, some will not
I think the only point that really matters is if you would like to get custom roms, mainly AOSP roms, at a certain time. With the SD820 your chances are a lot higher. Apart from that...
kaspar737 said:
The only thing that matters is if you care about AOSP ROMs or not. If you do, Snapdragon is your only choice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cerbsium said:
As said before I think there will not be a big difference in regards to the performance. The SD820 tends to be a little bit faster in single core applications, while the Exynos will perform better for multi core applications. Will you notice it? I doubt so.
The GPU in the SD820 is indeed faster, but potentially oversized, too (produces more heat => throttles more). So while benchmarks could be better, after some minutes the GPUs are (more or less) on the same high. Some people will agree, some will not
I think the only point that really matters is if you would like to get custom roms, mainly AOSP roms, at a certain time. With the SD820 your chances are a lot higher. Apart from that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im not actually into costume roms at all, i actually like the Samsung rom with the touch wiz ui so i guess it will be the 8890 since there wont be any real world noticeable difference
exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better
matheus_sc said:
exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're confusing benchmark scores with game performance. Despite the difference you list (which I suspect, from Exynos' perspective, is the worst result amongst many), I'll be amazed if you find a single game with a discernible performance increase on the Snapdragon. It's all about the heat and power efficiency, there could well be a difference between the two in that respect.
Noob question
How do I tell which one I have?
thafz said:
How do I tell which one I have?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you in america? Then you have the snapdragon, elsewhere gets the exynos.
peachpuff said:
Are you in america? Then you have the snapdragon, elsewhere gets the exynos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay thanks I also ran the benchmark last night and it shows there exynos. Actually thought I had the 820 since mine gets pretty warm
matheus_sc said:
exynos gives 38k em 3d antutu and snap 820 50k, for games snap 820 will be better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wouldn't be accurate to say the exynos has a faster CPU and generally performs better in day to day tasks, while the adreno has a faster GPU which would do better with high end 3D gaming?
Hi all,
I used to have SofaScore on all my phones, it's a great app (for me the best app) to track every sport.
Since I got my new galaxy S7 I noticed the app has a strange behavior....
On my old Sony Z3 the app is perfect.. Super smooth but in the new Samsung flagship it's so laggy.
So I reported to SofaScore's DEV and the answer was:
" Hello ,
Thank you once again for your feedback.
We have just tested SofaScore app on new Samsung flagship, and yes performance is rather atrocious. But I must disappoint you, every other well established apps suffer from the same problem. We don't know what Samsung has done with their phone, but we ran some benchmarks. These are the graphs.
1. Samsung Galaxy S6 - Android 5.1.1
2. Samsung Galaxy S7 - Android 6.0.1
3. Google Nexus 5X - Android 6.0.1
Horizontal green line represents the normal usage. As you can see on the graphs - on our S6 with 5.1.1, everything is normal, app is fluid and no laggs or hiccups. On S7 on OTOH, we notice some heavy frame dropping and choppiness. We then ran test against the Nexus 5X on the same Android (6.0.1), and the results are similar to the S6.
Please note that this kind of behavior is happening on every other non-Samsung app we tried. We don't know what kind of magic tricks did Samsung do in their new phone. Our assumption is that they underclocked the GPU, and that the GPU struggles with most basic tasks such as app animations. Hopefully, they'll address that soon enough, to save it's customers from further struggle.
Hope you'll understand,
Best regards
Thomas "
Attach:
Nexus 5:
Samsung Galaxy S6:
Samsung Galaxy S7:
What you think ?! How can we adress this to samsung ?
Some Galaxy s7 possibly encryed
I'm having the same problem too! But I don't know how to address the problem to Samsung. However it's my CPU that's a bit underclocked because my CPU tells me it's a Quad core 1.59Ghz Qualcomm Technologies, Inc MSM8996. However in Qualcomm website it claims that the Snapdragon 820 (which is a MSM8996 model) can produce a 2.2Ghz proformance. But I not done yet! My ram specs tells me I have 3.4Gb of ram total! Which is strange because Samsung claims its 4Gb. That's 600Mb of missing ram. And I tell my self I can't be the only one. I realize when I watch speed comparison, the ram management are no different to the previous model (Galaxy s6) and this could be why. My theory is some Galaxy s7 came encrypt when they were shipped to the markets.
Eric24720 said:
I'm having the same problem too! But I don't know how to address the problem to Samsung. However it's my CPU that's a bit underclocked because my CPU tells me it's a Quad core 1.59Ghz Qualcomm Technologies, Inc MSM8996. However in Qualcomm website it claims that the Snapdragon 820 (which is a MSM8996 model) can produce a 2.2Ghz proformance. But I not done yet! My ram specs tells me I have 3.4Gb of ram total! Which is strange because Samsung claims its 4Gb. That's 600Mb of missing ram. And I tell my self I can't be the only one. I realize when I watch speed comparison, the ram management are no different to the previous model (Galaxy s6) and this could be why. My theory is some Galaxy s7 came encrypt when they were shipped to the markets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The CPU is not underclocked. It has 2 clusters - 2 cores performing at 1.59 and 2 at 2.2 Ghz - and usually it is the smaller cluster get's reported. Get a proper app like CPU-Z to see the real frequencies.
RAM is 4 GB and 3585 MB is reported available - why? Well, because ~512MB is reserved for the GPU as it does not have any dedicated VRAM - this is how it is done on all Android devices so far.
RAM management is just a little improved versus Galaxy S6 - Android 6.0.1, but it is miles better what was on the S6 -5.1.1
Encryption is not impacting the performance of the S7 - it was tested already in the forums, in some cases maybe by 2-3%.
---------- Post added at 08:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 AM ----------
borgez said:
Our assumption is that they underclocked the GPU, and that the GPU struggles with most basic tasks such as app animations. Hopefully, they'll address that soon enough, to save it's customers from further struggle.
What you think ?! How can we adress this to samsung ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This imakes no sense. The S7 uses the Adreno 530 (snapdragon) or the Mali-T880MP12 (exynos) GPUs which are pretty damn powerful GPUs - even compared to last year's GPU used in the S6.
Moreover, it is not underclocked and it is running at is intended 650 Mhz (Mali) most of the time. I mean there are intensive 3D apps and other similar apps to SofaScore which do not lag at all - so this has to be something with their app.
On the other hand, even if the GPU would be underclocked - it still should be able to render the graphics in such an app.
EDIT: Just tested SofaScore - and no issues at all.
davebugyi said:
The CPU is not underclocked. It has 2 clusters - 2 cores performing at 1.59 and 2 at 2.2 Ghz - and usually it is the smaller cluster get's reported. Get a proper app like CPU-Z to see the real frequencies.
RAM is 4 GB and 3585 MB is reported available - why? Well, because ~512MB is reserved for the GPU as it does not have any dedicated VRAM - this is how it is done on all Android devices so far.
RAM management is just a little improved versus Galaxy S6 - Android 6.0.1, but it is miles better what was on the S6 -5.1.1
Encryption is not impacting the performance of the S7 - it was tested already in the forums, in some cases maybe by 2-3%.
---------- Post added at 08:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:15 AM ----------
This imakes no sense. The S7 uses the Adreno 530 (snapdragon) or the Mali-T880MP12 (exynos) GPUs which are pretty damn powerful GPUs - even compared to last year's GPU used in the S6.
Moreover, it is not underclocked and it is running at is intended 650 Mhz (Mali) most of the time. I mean there are intensive 3D apps and other similar apps to SofaScore which do not lag at all - so this has to be something with their app.
On the other hand, even if the GPU would be underclocked - it still should be able to render the graphics in such an app.
EDIT: Just tested SofaScore - and no issues at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi, yes the app come with a couple updates and there is no more issues . the problem no longer existed for some time
What is speed like in the Galaxy s7
The Galaxy s7 is powerful in GPU and CPU but android is very heavy and thus the Galaxy s7 has to push more power. The specs looks very promising but their always a ratio in terms of the OS (Andriod Marshmallow). Let me give you a real life example, I have a tank and it has a pretty powerful engine with a strong horse power, but the tanks weight is vast. The horse power to weight ratio would effect the tank and can really make it struggle. However since it does have a strong horse power it will make the tank move with a punch, but driving through tougher landscape like a hill would make the tank struggle since its vast. The crew from inside the tank would perceive the struggle of the tank and feel the weight of it. My point is implied this example to the Galaxy s7. Now don't get me wrong it's a powerful phone but when doing lots of multitasking it becomes a leisurely "like" phone.
Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Look at the hands on videos. You won't be worried about performance after that. Looks like Google has done a lot of optimization. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story.
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The 821 shows a peak cpu frequency spec a bit higher than 820, but this doesn't mean that everyone who uses it is obligated to use the highest frequency.
So here is a little bit of information about CPU manufacturing;
Every CPU core is a little bit different. Some of them are stable at lower voltages and higher frequencies than others. The CPU specification indicates a MINIMUM frequency that it MUST be stable at while operating within the designed power envelope. In other words, another CPU may be able to operate at the higher frequency, but it won't do so within the designed power envelope -- it will require OVER VOLTING.
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Don't worry about benchmarks! What it matters is the SoC you have, how well disipated is the SoC, and most important, how the software is done (kernel, drivers, android, binaries, etc).
There could be many devices with same SoC and better scores, but at the end, they lag more etc.
For instance, my previous Z5 Compact (with Sony Android, which is similar to AOSP) and a much better SoC than my current N5X, imo lags more than my current Nexus 5X with a worse SoC.
There's no way you can choose a device based on the benchmark, you must try both devices by yourself (ideally with your apps) and see the difference.
Giving another example...A Nexus 5 2013, is extremely fast in KK (with ART) and even in MM (but not in Lollipop).
However, it still throttles much more than a 5X because of the frequency, nm, and many other things.
doitright said:
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Good info, thanks guys!
We know nothing yet, time will tell obviously. The videos in the early previews look great, but we'll see under heavy load how these perform.
jbrooks58 said:
Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like it if you could actually find something that claims that the 6p is anywhere near pixel in performance benchmarks. Reality is that it is more than 2x faster across the board.
As far as comparing it with 820, there are two things you can accomplish with the "1" -- more speed, or less power. They seem to be opting for the latter.
All the benchmarks I could find show it against either apple, or samsuck. Samsuck is well known for building TO the benchmarks (sometimes even *cheating*), which causes their scores to be unnaturally high, and comparing against apple is just stupid, since there is no baseline between them due to architectural differences and a complete lack of a common software stack. In other words, in a comparison between pixel and anything made by apple, you could have a smaller number, despite *actually* being considerably higher. The number doesn't equate across platforms.
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 PM ----------
jbrooks58 said:
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That 10% is an interesting figure.
The SD820 has clock rates of 2.15 GHz on 2 cores, and 1.59 GHz on the other 2 cores.
Multiply by 1.1 (add 10%) and you get 2.365 and 1.749 GHz.
The SD821 has clock rates of 2.34 GHz on 2 cores and 2.19 GHz on the other 2 cores.
On those first two cores, that is marginally more the 10% higher clock rate. On the other 2 cores, it is considerably more than 10%. Note that a system's performance does NOT scale linearly with CPU frequency.
The other thing to note is that the pixel specs show it operating at 2x2.15+2x1.6 GHz, just like the SD820.
So what we can read from that, is that the pixel's CPUs are **underclocked**. That will allow it to use less battery power, and run cooler, while still running *really really fast*. If you want more, unlock and clock it up to 821 spec, I think you will find that this phone is an "overclocker's" dream, even if it isn't really overclocking.
That 10% figure comes directly from Qualcomm's publications on performance for the 821 vs 820.
craig0r said:
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good read, thanks.