Moto G scores in Antutu benchmark not improving - Moto G Q&A, Help & Troubleshooting

After the Antutu v5 update, scores for every device improved substantially, but it didn't improve a bit on the Moto G... Why is that? Even the nexus 4 now has a higher score than the Moto G!
BTW, the score in mine is ~17400

Its Normal...
Sent from my XT1033

The higher score I had until now in 4.4.4 is 18448, and I'm all stock.. no root, anything.. but Nexus 4 is 21000+ on antutu so, it seems something has changed on antutu's score system or what!?

Please post questions in the Q&A section
Thread moved

Nexus 4 got better GPU, better CPUs, is clocked higher and it has more RAM.
Do you actually still wonder?
Antutu 5 has implemented new 3d tests, which are much heavier, thus the better hardware on the Nexus 4 shows it's power.

How could every other device which scored lesser than 17000 score higher than 21000???? I still can't understand how the unite 2 scored 19000... More than the moto g...

liveroy said:
Nexus 4 got better GPU, better CPUs, is clocked higher and it has more RAM.
Do you actually still wonder?
Antutu 5 has implemented new 3d tests, which are much heavier, thus the better hardware on the Nexus 4 shows it's power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But then, why did it score lesser earlier? Was it intended to be a marketing gimmick from Motorola?

layman806 said:
But then, why did it score lesser earlier? Was it intended to be a marketing gimmick from Motorola?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More like, that it was some limitation of antutu I guess.Or they have implemented some new techniques for benchmarking given part's performance..
Last, but certainly not least, could be some bug.
PS. They have also implemented a new single-thread benchmarking method, which may be the cause. The A15 cores in the S4 Pro have got way higher performance, than the modest low end A7s in the moto g's S400. The Snapdragon S4 Pro is close to Snapdragon 600, that S400.

[emoji29]OK... It means I was fooled all this time that moto g was better than a nexus... [emoji17]

layman806 said:
[emoji29]OK... It means I was fooled all this time that moto g was better than a nexus... [emoji17]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, you've lived in a lie
Also, the moto g was never meant to be better or compete with the Nexus 4. It it's better in some aspects like battery life, but overall these 2 devices are not the same class.Not to mention the price of N4 is still double that of moto g.

liveroy said:
Yea, you've lived in a lie
Also, the moto g was never meant to be better or compete with the Nexus 4. It it's better in some aspects like battery life, but overall these 2 devices are not the same class.Not to mention the price of N4 is still double that of moto g.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm... Looks like it... Are the graphics at least better than Nexus 4?

layman806 said:
Hmm... Looks like it... Are the graphics at least better than Nexus 4?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If by "graphics" you mean GPU, then no, S4 Pro comes with Adreno 320, whereas S400 has Adreno 305.
Both are the same generation and the 320 is the top dog (found also in S600).It was replaced later by Adreno 330, which you can find in S800 and S801, which now is getting replaced by Adreno 420 (S805).

Related

HTC One X Tegra 3 and XL S4 Krait

Hello guys,
Well i need some advice from real people. There are two models in my country: international One X and One XL. You know what the differences are. So maybe someone tested both with same kernel and os version. Which processor is better? Tegra 3 or Snapdragon clocked Krait S4?
In your opinion which one to buy and why? Or just go for One S?
P.S. There are like 1 million reviews and benchmarks and like every single one is different.
Thank you for your opinion!
redh4t said:
Hello guys,
Well i need some advice from real people. There are two models in my country: international One X and One XL. You know what the differences are. So maybe someone tested both with same kernel and os version. Which processor is better? Tegra 3 or Snapdragon clocked Krait S4?
In your opinion which one to buy and why? Or just go for One S?
P.S. There are like 1 million reviews and benchmarks and like every single one is different.
Thank you for your opinion!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
S4 for the battery.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda premium
S4 because its the future.
S4 for the LTE.
S4 for the battery life.
S4 for the win
Sent from my One X
I really do not need LTE. The main thing is speed! And about battery? It is really big difference? Or just go for Galaxy S3...? I just love HTC design, and galaxy is just near ugly, but speed is more important, just hate lag so much.
28nm ftw
Sent from my JellyBean
S4 processor is better. The tegra 3 was rushed so they could be the first to get a quad core. It's crappy architecture. The s4 is better for everything but gaming but only by a little and it kills battery on the tegra
Sent from my One X using xda premium
Speed difference is negligible. S4 wins in a lot of benchmarks, and Tegra wins in a couple. And you would likely not see much difference in real world use. Same performance, but better battery life on the S4.
Also, at launch the Tegra version had graphical glitches, and a number of other bugs that were attributed to the Tegra chipset. Not sure if these were ever sorted out, as I don't keep up with that version. But many were doubting it would be fixed anytime soon, as NVIDIA is notorious for taking forever to address such issues.
And you might think you don't need LTE. But its not just about speed. I get fantastic data reception at my house now under LTE, where under HSPA+ it was dismal (1 bar, with frequent connection drops). At some point, you may find your self in a location(s) that has poor HSPA reception, and LTE will save the day.
Every Tegra device I've put my hands on has always seemed far too slow and glitchy for the supposedly excellent hardware and software behind it. Except the Zune HD, but everyone ignored the Tegra 1 for some reason. S4's got better battery, chances are they are basically identical in real world use. The only downside to the S4 is the lack of official support for the Tegra games, but I'm sure we'll be able to play them in time.
To be honest, we might be able to do them now if Chainfire3d works for us.
I'd buy a Qualcomm based device over a Tegra based one any day of the week for all of the reasons already mentioned.
The S4 may be "only" dual core, but it's the better chip.
sweet, another thread for this
you should of done something original, like ask one x vs. galaxy s3
gunnyman said:
I'd buy a Qualcomm based device over a Tegra based one any day of the week for all of the reasons already mentioned.
The S4 may be "only" dual core, but it's the better chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
there are s4 with quad core. a chinese phone maker jiayu, is making the jiayu s1 with s4 pro. that is 4 cores with gpu andreno 320! and with 2 gb ram with 32 gb memory with sd card slot and 2500 mah battery or 3000 mah battery!, with a 3.0 megapixel cam in front and 13 megapixel in the bag, and is thin!. only for 260 or more dollars!. incredible no? (gorila glass maybe, like the other older models!) and the value is near the nexus 4, but this one is better, with more battery, (the jiayu g4 with an older procesor with quadcore wins the nexus 4, this will win the samsum galaxy note 2 or more) jiayu is good with good performance battery and resistant products. and very beautiful too
http://www.gizchina.com/2013/01/30/jiayu-s1-prototype-spotted-alongside-g3/
and the definition isnt hd is full hd 440+ ppi !

Interesting new reviews/benchmarks N3 VS G2 VS Z1

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?

Adreno 418 gpu turn off

Why did they go with adreno gpu when nexus 6 that came out 1 year ago has adreno 420 already
Will you really be able to tell the diference? I doubt it. Its just a number game really
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Geordie Affy said:
Will you really be able to tell the diference? I doubt it. Its just a number game really
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
gtg465x said:
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but it sucks that the whole android ecosystem has to depend on qualcomm. Imagine if next year they screw up again... It seems like samsung cpu rock this year and apple too..
Sent from my LG-D800
ambervals6 said:
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point exactly lol. Whatever phone you buy it will be an upgrade in some way ... all this numbers game is becoming a tad OTT.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
ambervals6 said:
Yeah but it sucks that the whole android ecosystem has to depend on qualcomm. Imagine if next year they screw up again... It seems like samsung cpu rock this year and apple too..
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, it does suck. And it is a shame that Qualcomm could have made a great SOC instead of two meh ones. If they were smart, they would have put the Adreno 430 GPU in the 808 and marketed it as their flagship phone SOC, and marketed the 810 as a tablet only SOC, because tablets can better dissipate the heat. But none of that is Motorola's fault. I think Motorola chose wisely between the not so great choices they had.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using XDA Forums Pro.
gtg465x said:
Yep, it does suck. And it is a shame that Qualcomm could have made a great SOC instead of two meh ones. If they were smart, they would have put the Adreno 430 GPU in the 808 and marketed it as their flagship phone SOC, and marketed the 810 as a tablet only SOC, because tablets can better dissipate the heat. But none of that is Motorola's fault. I think Motorola chose wisely between the not so great choices they had.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using XDA Forums Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as long as there is no serious competition out there, qualcomm will continue not to give a single **** and unfortunately upgrades will come in lame increments.
Sent from my LG-D800
I think it's funny how all the new 810 soc have the cores down clocked to 1.8ghz.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
ambervals6 said:
Well as long as there is no serious competition out there, qualcomm will continue not to give a single **** and unfortunately upgrades will come in lame increments.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Competition is coming. Qualcomm should be worried. http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/0...qualcomm-begun-a-long-slow-fall-from-the-top/
gtg465x said:
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this isn't the full story + its a little misleading. here are the technical details:
the 418 is as good, if not better than the 420 for the following reasons:
1. The 418 has the same "system specs" as the 420, minus the down-throttling.
2. The 418 was fabbed on smaller architecture (20nm) vs. the 420 (28nm). This means greater power savings and less heat.
3. The 418/420 is to the 430 like the NVIDIA 960 is to the 980 GTX, but you wont get the 430 unless you get the 810.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adreno#Variants
640k said:
this isn't the full story + its a little misleading. here are the technical details:
the 418 is as good, if not better than the 420 for the following reasons:
1. The 418 has the same "system specs" as the 420, minus the down-throttling.
2. The 418 was fabbed on smaller architecture (20nm) vs. the 420 (28nm). This means greater power savings and less heat.
3. The 418/420 is to the 430 like the NVIDIA 960 is to the 980 GTX, but you wont get the 430 unless you get the 810.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adreno#Variants
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
gtg465x said:
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did anyone else notice how high the 2014 moto x was in those benchmarks. Motorola must really optimize the kernel.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
Positive spin time!
The 808's gpu handles games fine and consumes less power than the 7420's gpu (S6 & Note 5). I would rather have a GPU that handles games as is, rather than drains more battery and prefer a more power economical GPU for a portable device. There is a reason you see a lot of complaints about the S6 battery life and others do not. Most correlates to those that use apps that are GPU heavy.
rushless said:
Positive spin time!
The 808's gpu handles games fine and consumes less power than the 7420's gpu (S6 & Note 5). I would rather have a GPU that handles games as is, rather than drains more battery and prefer a more power economical GPU for a portable device. There is a reason you see a lot of complaints about the S6 battery life and others do not. Most correlates to those that use apps that are GPU heavy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lmao this guy
Sent from my A0001
What was comedic besides my awareness it is spin? True that games perform fine on the 808 and the 7420 gpu consumes more power. As far as bigger fancier games that need even more power, not very practical on a portable device so kind of moot with a small battery.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
If it's a concern you should wait for the nexus to drop with its rumored snapdragon 820 and next gen adreno.
Also for the issue of this year's qcom products sucking, remember that market pressure forced them to release chips with generic ARM cores because their in-house 64 bit designs weren't ready. The 820 ditches the octocore big.LITTLE architecture for a quad core qcom design. Lots to look forward to.
And I think the 808 is probably the best chip they could have picked for the X this year.
ambervals6 said:
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is, but you're all too spoiled to make it out
SchmidtA99 said:
I think it's funny how all the new 810 soc have the cores down clocked to 1.8ghz.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think 810 is way better than 808. Adreno 430 vs 418. The 430 is WAY BETTER. And if the 810 gets too hot, you can always turn off 2 high performance cores. But you can never have an adreno 430 in the 808
gtg465x said:
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's slower because Qualcomm halved the memory bus from 128-bit to 64-bit. The S810/A430 has the same bandwidth as the S805 because they doubled the speed of the RAM. So, 128-bit LPDDR3-800 (1600MHz effective) is equal to LPDDR4-1600 (3200MHz effective): 25.6 GB/s
Unfortunately, Qualcomm limited the S808 to LPDDR3-933 (1866MHz effective): 14.9 GB/s
The 418 and 420 are the same GPU, architecturally. The 418 could probably be slightly faster in non-bandwidth limited scenarios (low resolution 3D).
Memory bandwidth dropped from 25.6 GB/s to 14.9 GB/s. That's nearly a 25% loss and about equal to the real world performance losses. Hence, it's a 418.

S7 Edge benchmarks

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

S7 8890 or 820

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?

Categories

Resources