Related
When I came here 2 days ago hoping to get answers about the differences between i9500 and i9505, I've had a very hard time and had to look through 40+ pages of discussion. So here I am trying to create a shorter and easier list for people who want to decide.
Samsung Galaxy S4 i9505
Qualcomm APQ8064T Snapdragon 600
Quad-core 1.9ghz processor
- LTE (4G) support - most countries do not have 4G yet
- Uses battery slightly more efficiently (talk time difference is significant, 17 hours on i9505 vs 11 hours on i9500)
- Open-source, good for developers
Samsung Galaxy S4 i9500
Exynos 5 Octa 5410
Quad-core 1.6ghz processor
Quad-core 1.2gz processor (8 cores, not actually used all simultaneously)
- Sound and Camera quality are slightly better
- A little cheaper in some places
- Slightly faster than the i9505. All around I would say 5%-10% faster.
Benchmark comparisons: google "gsmarena i9505 vs i9500" - I liked this comparison as it included everything but there are many others out there.
Notice how most sentences include the word 'slightly' or 'a little' - this is because most differences are hardly noticable for the average user. LTE support and open-source may be very noticable for some.
I hope this helps with the very confusing task of choosing which one is more fitting for you. Feel free to suggest additions/changes to the list.
i9505 vs i9500
This thread has some usefull information.
All comparative information between i9505 vs i9500 can be posted here
In the i9500 variant you should correct it to 1.2Ghz instead of 1.3Ghz.
also add that the Audio chip is better on the i9500...
frrlod said:
Samsung Galaxy S4 i9505
- Uses battery slightly more efficiently (talk time difference is significant, 17 hours on i9505 vs 11 hours on i9500)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is something I'm not sure is true.
I've also read the GSMArena comparison and was a bit surprised because until that comparison, I've mostly seen the opposite.
Check Erica Griffin's comparison for example :https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...=KGyf72N6tEqF4_iAI_0uAw&bvm=bv.47380653,d.ZWU
On the battery thread in the General forum, you can also see that most of the time, people with the i9500 can often get more than 6 hours screen time in a 24-48 hours period (some get close to 8 hours actually), while the i9505 struggles to reach 5 to 6 hours.
I might be wrong, but this seems to be the trend.
I also got great battery on my i9500, around 6 to 7 hours screen time over 2 days last week end, but since I only got the device last thursday and I don't use it as much during the week, I'll need more time to see if this is a regular thing
I think that the battery will be better on the i9505 for people who do a lot of heavy gaming or other intensive tasks since the Snapdragon 600 is more efficient than the A15, but when doing light or background tasks or while the device is idle, the i9500 will consume less battery because it'll use the A7 CPU.
About the camera quality : the i9500 has the new Sony IMX135 chip (Exmor RS) which has a stacked CMOS, while the i9505 probably has a IMX091PQ (Exmor R) which is an older sensor, still a great one though
Also, the i9500 can record slow motion videos (up to 1/8 speed) at 720p resolution, while the i9505 can only record that at 800*450 (probably due to the newer sensor and/or the CPU as well).
I thought those might be useful info, hope this helps
Mithrandir007 said:
This is something I'm not sure is true.
I've also read the GSMArena comparison and was a bit surprised because until that comparison, I've mostly seen the opposite.
Check Erica Griffin's comparison for example :https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...=KGyf72N6tEqF4_iAI_0uAw&bvm=bv.47380653,d.ZWU
On the battery thread in the General forum, you can also see that most of the time, people with the i9500 can often get more than 6 hours screen time in a 24-48 hours period (some get close to 8 hours actually), while the i9505 struggles to reach 5 to 6 hours.
I might be wrong, but this seems to be the trend.
I also got great battery on my i9500, around 6 to 7 hours screen time over 2 days last week end, but since I only got the device last thursday and I don't use it as much during the week, I'll need more time to see if this is a regular thing
I think that the battery will be better on the i9505 for people who do a lot of heavy gaming or other intensive tasks since the Snapdragon 600 is more efficient than the A15, but when doing light or background tasks or while the device is idle, the i9500 will consume less battery because it'll use the A7 CPU.
About the camera quality : the i9500 has the new Sony IMX135 chip (Exmor RS) which has a stacked CMOS, while the i9505 probably has a IMX091PQ (Exmor R) which is an older sensor, still a great one though
Also, the i9500 can record slow motion videos (up to 1/8 speed) at 720p resolution, while the i9505 can only record that at 800*450 (probably due to the newer sensor and/or the CPU as well).
I thought those might be useful info, hope this helps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The synthetic battery tests done by various websites usually include having a webpage refresh every x amount of seconds - it might be disadvantageous for the i9500 since it'll be firing the A15's up and down frequently. It really depends on the refresh-rate they have in their battery test scripts.
Also if I'm not mistaken (not sure), the i9505 doesn't have the dedicated Audience ES325 audio voice chip for noise cancellation.
AndreiLux said:
The synthetic battery tests done by various websites usually include having a webpage refresh every x amount of seconds - it might be disadvantageous for the i9500 since it'll be firing the A15's up and down frequently. It really depends on the refresh-rate they have in their battery test scripts.
Also if I'm not mistaken (not sure), the i9505 doesn't have the dedicated Audience ES325 audio voice chip for noise cancellation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would explain it then.
And I didn't know about the audio voice chip, thanks for the info
I think we should list problems of the 2 devices too.
e.g i9505's audio has crackling with certain headphones
i9500 has camera startup issues? (From what I've read)
etc...
DevilzGtr said:
I think we should list problems of the 2 devices too.
e.g i9505's audio has crackling with certain headphones
i9500 has camera startup issues? (From what I've read)
etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the camera issue has been corrected by the newer firmwares.
At least, I never had any trouble, and I updated my phone as soon as I got it.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
DevilzGtr said:
I think we should list problems of the 2 devices too.
e.g i9505's audio has crackling with certain headphones
i9500 has camera startup issues? (From what I've read)
etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In me1 not have any reboot using since 22 May, in my country only advantage is cm full support.
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda app-developers app
AndreiLux said:
The synthetic battery tests done by various websites usually include having a webpage refresh every x amount of seconds - it might be disadvantageous for the i9500 since it'll be firing the A15's up and down frequently. It really depends on the refresh-rate they have in their battery test scripts.
Also if I'm not mistaken (not sure), the i9505 doesn't have the dedicated Audience ES325 audio voice chip for noise cancellation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong. Both the i9500 and the i9505 have the Audience eS325.
Besides BB/AP/RF, the only IC differences between the two solutions are the CODEC, GPS, and ISP.
racerex said:
Wrong. Both the i9500 and the i9505 have the Audience eS325.
Besides BB/AP/RF, the only IC differences between the two solutions are the CODEC, GPS, and ISP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Something up with their voice processing then, there are videos showing night and day differences between the two in record quality.
I was comparing the Exynos i9500 and Snapdragon i9505 as well. The quick Down and dirty "subjective" comparisons from several XDA Senior members are below ( read original question to understand), but Andrei has a great thread here which gives background info on the Exynos Octa Core which will help consumers decide on which S4 version to purchase. http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191850 . I posted comparisons below but the thread has tons of info.
Here's my original question giving the parameters for i9500 vs. i9505 comparison so you understand the answers I got.
Cap'nO said:
My Help Challenge
I buy phones for the long haul, so appreciate the phone with the most potential for the future.. Which S4 has the most potential to still be a relevant device 3 years from now?
Potential for me =
power efficiency because I'm on the metro or bus a lot. I browse net, play games, email, stream movies, hotspot, etc. also fly a lot
good hardware to support anticipated software or development ( sorry if I say it wrong) longer without being all super slow (sic).....*edit*which version will have better development so it can be relevant longer using the mods put out by developers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are the answers I received from XDA Senior Members.
Answer Provider Username: warfareonly
Status:Senior Member
warfareonly said:
1.) I dunno about that. The S600 SoC is quite power efficient, but I have no idea about the exynos 5410(in the i9500 variant)
2.) If you mean development support from the xda community, then I'd suggest you to go for the i9505 without any qualms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Answer Provider Username:demlasjr
Status: Senior Member
demlasjr said:
@Cap'nO Totally agree with @warfareonly. To have a good mobile for 3 years from now, I9505 is a great selection.
- First of all you have 4G LTE (just in case you have 4G or will have in the future in your location)
- The GPU is better, you have OpenGL ES 3.0 (I9500's GPU have only 2.0), which may become a standard, not this year, but maybe next one or in 2 years
- Even if Samsung will not update your phone after 2 years and you will want the last Android version on your phone, Cyanogen will always have a stable and complete version for the S600 CPU (even if you probably will lose some features. Exynos never released their code
- Ignore those small results in the benchmarks, there is enough space to improve through upgrades and the difference are not visible in normal use. Also, if you play games, your battery life will be lower on I9500 due to A15 cores. Resuming this, with I9500 you have better battery life in standby but weaker while playing or browsing, while I9505 you have balanced battery life.
Cheers !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Answer Provider Username:i9100g user
Status: Senior Member
i9100g user said:
1.As for battery life,I would say Exynos variant may turn turnout to be better ,if a different implementation of big.LITTLE (Cluster migration is not the "most" battery friendly)
is implemented.
2. AOSP support would be better on snapdragon variant, so if you plan to install CM roms or you like pure/stock android then snapdragon S4 is for you.
All in all both variants should provide good support in future as there are developers working for both of them.
But as you live in a country where 4G would become a huge necessity in a year or so(and you are planning to keep your phone for a longer period of time) ,I would say go for snapdragon variant.
Also snapdragon variant should be better for handling games in future(like 2-3 years).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best info that helps you understand the advantages/disadvantages of Exynos vs Snapdragon is in Andrei's first post:
AndreiLux said:
I'm going to write this as an guide/information page so we stop as soon as possible the stupid discussions about how 8 cores are useless.
[Update 25/05]
The below information was based on how things should have been. Reality is the Exynos 5410 has some serious issues with its cache coherent interconnect / CCI which cripples the chip to only cluster migration, effectively making the major parts of the big.LITTLE operating scheme useless. This is an issue in silicon which cannot be solved.
[/update]
What's it all about?
The Exynos Octa or Exynos 5410 is a big.LITTLE design engineered by ARM and is the first consumer implementation of this technology. Samsung was their lead partner in terms of bringing this to market first. Reneseas is the other current chip designer who has publicly announced a big.LITTLE design.
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
The point of the design is to meld the advantages of the A7 processor architectures, with its extreme power efficiency, with the A15 architecture, with extreme performance at a cost of power consumption. The A7 cores are slightly slower than an A9 equivalent, but using much less power. The A15 cores are in another ballpark in terms of performance but their power consumption is also extreme on this current manufacturing generation.
The effective goal is to achieve the best of both worlds. Qualcomm on the other does this by using their own architecture which is similar in some design aspects to the A15 architecture, but compromises on feature and performance to achieve higher power efficiency. The end result is for the user can be expressed in 2 measurements: IPC (Instrucitons per clock), and Perf/W (Performance per Watt).
In terms of IPC, the A15 leads the pack by quite a margin, followed by Krait 400, Krait 300, Krait 200, A9, A7, and A8 cores, in that order.
In terms of Perf/W, the A7 leads by a margin, followed by A9's and the Krait cores, with the A15 at a distant last in terms of efficiency.
Real-world use
Of course, the Exynos Octa is the first to use this:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Currently, the official word seems to be that the A7 cluster is configured to run from 200 to 1200MHz, and the A15 cluster from 200 to 1600MHz.
There are several use-cases of how the design can be used, and it is purely limited by software, as the hardware configuration is completely flexible.
In-Kernel Switcher (IKS)
This is what most of us will see this in our consumer products this year; Effectively, you only have a virtual quad-core processor. The A15 cores are paired up with the A7 core clusters. Each A15 has a corresponding A7 "partner". Hardware wise, this pair-up has no physical representation as provided by an actual die-shot of the Exynos Octa.
The IKS does the same thing as a CPU governor. But instead of switching CPU frequency depending on the load, it will switch between CPUs.
Effecively, you are jumping from one performance/power curve to another: And that's it. Nothing more, nothing less.
The actual implementation is a very simple driver on the side of the kernel which measures load and acts much like a CPU governor.
The above is a demonstration; you can see how at most times the A7 cores are used for video playback, simple tasks, and miscellaneous computations. The A15 cores will kick in when there is more demanding load being processed, and then quickly drop out again to the A7 cores when it's not doing much anymore.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Heterogeneous Multi-Processing (HMP)
This is the other actual implemented function mode of a big.LITTLE CPU. In this case, all 8 cores can be used simultaneously by the system.
This is a vastly more complex working mechanism, and its implementation is also an order of magnitude more sophisticated. It requires the kernel scheduler to actually be aware of the differentiation of between the A7 and A15 cores. Currently, the Linux kernel is not capable of doing this and treats all CPUs as equals. This is a problem since we do not want to use the A15 cores when a task can simply me processed on an A7 core with a much lower power cost.
The Linaro working-group already finished the first implementation of the HMP design as a series of patches to be applied against the Linux 3.8 kernel. What they did is to make the scheduler smart enough to be able to track the load of single process entities, and with that information to schedule the threads smartly on either the A7 cores or the A15 cores. This achieves much lower latency in terms of switching workloads, or better said, switching the environments (CPUs) to the respective work-loads, and exposes the full processing capabilities of the silicon as all cores can be used at once.
You can follow the advancements of this in the publications of the Linaro Connect summits that happen every few months. The code was only published in the middle of February this year for the first working implementation equivalent in power consumption to the IKS.
Misconception #6: Yes the CPU is a true 8-core processor. It's just not being used a such in its initial software implementations
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A lot of reading but should help inform decisions.
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?
Bad news for fellow Exynos users.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Note...t-core-performance-patch-says-Samsung_id47977
It seems that Exynos 5420 is capable of HMP but will get too hot for the chip to handle.
But the Samsung Engineer does mention that they would comment the HMP update only after a complete testing process to ensure trouble free operation.
Note 3 and Galaxy S4 are unlikely to receive the full octa-core power in their Exynos chipset versions, advised a chief technical expert from Samsung's Mobile Solutions department. Recently the company said that it is able to unleash all the eight cores working at once, which can bump performance significantly, compared to the maximum of four cores restriction we have now with Exynos 5 Octa in these handsets.
The thing is, the engineer comments, that even though Samsung can release a software patch that will allow both the quad-core Cortex-A15 set, and the frugal Cortex-A7 cores, to get together for a task, the thermal envelope of these Exynos chips hasn't been cut for the job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think this is a good move, they can't force this and overheat the phones.
im tempted to buy the exynos here in saudi as they are cheaper than the snapdragon ones even without the 4k part....
system.img said:
Bad news for fellow Exynos users.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Note...t-core-performance-patch-says-Samsung_id47977
It seems that Exynos 5420 is capable of HMP but will get too hot for the chip to handle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
out of 3 aspects of big little(core migration,cluster migration,hmp), core migration is the most important aspect, since the hardware is fixed any custome kernel for exynos note 3 moght have core migration which will surely increase the battery efficiency
bala_gamer said:
out of 3 aspects of big little(core migration,cluster migration,hmp), core migration is the most important aspect, since the hardware is fixed any custome kernel for exynos note 3 moght have core migration which will surely increase the battery efficiency
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So Exynos 5420 has Core migration instead of cluster migration?
bala_gamer said:
out of 3 aspects of big little(core migration,cluster migration,hmp), core migration is the most important aspect, since the hardware is fixed any custome kernel for exynos note 3 moght have core migration which will surely increase the battery efficiency
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah. HMP is the real thing. Said Andreilux
HMP is extremely useful for power efficiency because you can migrate stupidly faster than DVFS allows you to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from My GT i9300
If its true, then its very dissapointing step from Samsung
My question is, if there is so much problems in that chip then why he is selling these faulty chip...and why in india, asian and african small countries where government dont do anything agains this kind of behaviour...and costmers also ignoring these issue..which not good for future.
1 many problems in s4
2 sim locking
3 knockon
....many more ..and some may be coming soon
And now no HMP update for s4 or note 3 ...seems like samsung has over confident of their market share and profit...
Isnt this is kind of monopoly???
ipsuvedi said:
If its true, then its very dissapointing step from Samsung
My question is, if there is so much problems in that chip then why he is selling these faulty chip...and why in india, asian and african small countries where government dont do anything agains this kind of behaviour...and costmers also ignoring these issue..which not good for future.
1 many problems in s4
2 sim locking
3 knockon
....many more ..and some may be coming soon
And now no HMP update for s4 or note 3 ...seems like samsung has over confident of their market share and profit...
Isnt this is kind of monopoly???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung wants to maximise profits by selling phones made with its in-house chip but is not able to integrate LTE in the chip. So, all it can do is to sell the phone with the Exynos chip in non-LTE areas.
But still, I think the Exynos is good too. It's CPU is damn powerful(considering a clock speed of only 1.9 Ghz)
Thermal problems are a poor excuse considering cluster migration is going to be much worse for thermals.
It's also a poor excuse considering HMP is best for power efficiency, meaning over all temperatures should be lower.
Unless they're worried that people will benchmark each thread and burn the chip out, but all they need to do is put thermal throttles and speed throttles with large A15 use.
I don't want to say Samsung are lazy because that's simply a stupid thing to say. Obviously all of this is very difficult and Samsung don't have the right combination and amount of time, talent and money to make it happen.
Core migration is going to be fine, anyway. If they ever bother with that.
Still disappointing anyway :/
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
SirCanealot said:
Thermal problems are a poor excuse considering cluster migration is going to be much worse for thermals.
It's also a poor excuse considering HMP is best for power efficiency, meaning over all temperatures should be lower.
Unless they're worried that people will benchmark each thread and burn the chip out, but all they need to do is put thermal throttles and speed throttles with large A15 use.
I don't want to say Samsung are lazy because that's simply a stupid thing to say. Obviously all of this is very difficult and Samsung don't have the right combination and amount of time, talent and money to make it happen.
Core migration is going to be fine, anyway. If they ever bother with that.
Still disappointing anyway :/
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They have the Linaro team to do the work. They have already accomplished it but it has been shown off with only a prototype tablet.
ipsuvedi said:
If its true, then its very dissapointing step from Samsung
My question is, if there is so much problems in that chip then why he is selling these faulty chip...and why in india, asian and african small countries where government dont do anything agains this kind of behaviour...and costmers also ignoring these issue..which not good for future.
1 many problems in s4
2 sim locking
3 knockon
....many more ..and some may be coming soon
And now no HMP update for s4 or note 3 ...seems like samsung has over confident of their market share and profit...
Isnt this is kind of monopoly???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, someone write a news without any confermation and users say it's good
So.. now.. i'm going to write a news.. santa is real! And all beleave in it..
Too many sheeps in the world
Big little is over any other arch.. it has the best efficiency ever.. and will have it with hmp..
Yup, if you turn on all 8 cores in maxfreq for 10 minutes.. phone burns.. but.. the logic of big little is: use low power cores (A7) for low tasks.. use high power cores (a15) for hugh tasks..
Than.. now you are using the cluater migration, it has 2 "bugs"
1) all cluster switch, so, is alminented the A15 even if it's not necessary, it happes when 1 core goes to A15
2) the switch from 2 clusters blocks computation for little time
The core migration fix the first problem of cluster migration
The hmp fix each 2 "problems"
So.. if cluater migration is good.. core migration is better, and hmp is better and better
Hmp has high overheating? Well, so n3 with cluster will have more overheating.. all with n3 has this issue?
for me.. all of you use too less the brain.. brain is a muscle.. use it!
I do not find thermal envelope explanation for HMP logical. Cluster Migration switches all the cores to A15 even when one thread requires power hence this design is more battery hungry. If Samsung is really worried about crossing thermal envelope, then they can implement something like Intel has done which they call it Turbo Boost. They can effectively reduce max clock speed to 1.5 GHz when all A15 are running but allow it to run to 1.9 GHz when only 1 or two threads are running.
If Samsung refuses to do so, I hope developers find ways to unlock HMP. It is not that I need 8 cores running simultaneously when my laptop hums at 1.3GHz in dual core mode, but when Samsung teases us and there is treasure hidden ready for unlocking, then it is just human nature to want MORE.
voice of my heart
Absolutely right brother. The die hard snapdragon fans can not digest the Exynos big Little processing and just throwing out rumors and I am really shocked how people believe it. I saw in many discussions that readers and mostly writers were not even software or hardware literate they were just speaking and forwarding the rumors. Actually due to lack of sdk from Samsung for exynos the third party custom rom writers can not do much in exynos as they were able to do in snapdragon so this makes them angry and they spread rumors. I have note 3 SM900 exynos and previously I had s4 exynos one. Did not face any problem in s4 ever and it's my 4th day with note 3 and going great so far. In my thinking the little big processing is better than all 8 cores working at the same time and people should see that the big a15 quad core 1.9 ghz gave very very closer benchmarks test results to Snapdragon 800 2.3 ghz and some were higher. People don't understand the chip architecture and just play on rumors.
iba21 said:
Well, someone write a news without any confermation and users say it's good
So.. now.. i'm going to write a news.. santa is real! And all beleave in it..
Too many sheeps in the world
Big little is over any other arch.. it has the best efficiency ever.. and will have it with hmp..
Yup, if you turn on all 8 cores in maxfreq for 10 minutes.. phone burns.. but.. the logic of big little is: use low power cores (A7) for low tasks.. use high power cores (a15) for hugh tasks..
Than.. now you are using the cluater migration, it has 2 "bugs"
1) all cluster switch, so, is alminented the A15 even if it's not necessary, it happes when 1 core goes to A15
2) the switch from 2 clusters blocks computation for little time
The core migration fix the first problem of cluster migration
The hmp fix each 2 "problems"
So.. if cluater migration is good.. core migration is better, and hmp is better and better
Hmp has high overheating? Well, so n3 with cluster will have more overheating.. all with n3 has this issue?
for me.. all of you use too less the brain.. brain is a muscle.. use it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
willstay said:
I do not find thermal envelope explanation for HMP logical. Cluster Migration switches all the cores to A15 even when one thread requires power hence this design is more battery hungry. If Samsung is really worried about crossing thermal envelope, then they can implement something like Intel has done which they call it Turbo Boost. They can effectively reduce max clock speed to 1.5 GHz when all A15 are running but allow it to run to 1.9 GHz when only 1 or two threads are running.
If Samsung refuses to do so, I hope developers find ways to unlock HMP. It is not that I need 8 cores running simultaneously when my laptop hums at 1.3GHz in dual core mode, but when Samsung teases us and there is treasure hidden ready for unlocking, then it is just human nature to want MORE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People doesen't understand what is an hotplug and how it works
The real goal of that arch is called "power gating".. simply it's a technique developed by intel witch AUTO shuts down transistors if those are not in use..
The hotplug uses a software decision to shut down cores.. it's not hardware..
the difference?
Simply, for linux, all cores are everytime turned on, even if the transistors of the core are shutted down.. that's prevent time spent to re-schedule the tasks.. and sure.. linux is a multithreading kernel, it means, more core = more parallelization = less frequency = less power usage
That's the real goal of big.little!
And you understand, if there are 8 cores.. tasks will be shared on more cores, it means it has the best efficiency ever
An ex.. phone ALWAYS have low tasks to be compilet to permit the phone using.. as like the audio task, video task, or, wireless taks.. well, why use an high performance arch for low performance tasks? That's why arm creates A7..
CORTEX.A7 has the best efficiency ever.. so.. the same task in a cortexA7 is compiled with LESS ENERGY than other arch.. so.. it's a perfect way to preserve energy
Sure, A7 is not a performance arch, that's why arm choses to create the A15.. when tasks are too high to be compiled with an A7.. system auto switch task on a A15.. so.. the goal is.. low tasks in A7 (best efficiency) and high tasks in A15 (best performance)
Mix best efficiency + best performance = best arch :thumbup:
Got a feeling they're testing the HMP tech / heat / performance / power consump in NOTE 3 already .........
They were brave enough to have it on display at an exhibition ..... the update seems promising from what I can see!
On the "tune.pk" site there's a "video 1058551" showing "Samsung-Exynos5420-HMP-bigLITTLE-demo" with all 8-cores running!
Hoping to see some actual benchmarks so we know what the before / after results are like!!!
gudodayn said:
Got a feeling they're testing the HMP tech / heat / performance / power consump in NOTE 3 already .........
They were brave enough to have it on display at an exhibition ..... the update seems promising from what I can see!
On the "tune.pk" site there's a "video 1058551" showing "Samsung-Exynos5420-HMP-bigLITTLE-demo" with all 8-cores running!
Hoping to see some actual benchmarks so we know what the before / after results are like!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be inclined to agree with you. The Lite/Neo Note 3 has it enabled for all 6 cores apparently according to Sammobile
radicalisto said:
I'd be inclined to agree with you. The Lite/Neo Note 3 has it enabled for all 6 cores apparently according to Sammobile
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The lady from Samsung and Samsung wasnt hiding the Note3 device either ……
My contract is up soon ……
I hope benchmarks show up soon so I can get an idea of either the LTE or 3G one to get!
If you see some of the tweets of SamsungExynos on twitter here https://twitter.com/SamsungExynos it's easy to have a wild guess HMP will be soon released, just a wild guess though looking at their tweets.
radicalisto said:
I'd be inclined to agree with you. The Lite/Neo Note 3 has it enabled for all 6 cores apparently according to Sammobile
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
5260 in note3 lite is obbly to be used with hmp.. why?
Cluster and core migrations may have the equal numbers of cores for each clusters, or kernel code won't works
I don't think if samsung will release hmp for the n900 or not.. the only thing i could say is: if samsung will relase a good source code.. I will extract the hmp from the note3 lite code , modify, and add it in my own kernel build.. and this for all kernel modders..
sure, i hope for a direct hmp upgrade by samsung, it will be better, but, we'll do all to try to run it..
I tryed to compile a code takken from internet witch tryes to load hmp.. but.. no possibilities due to an incompatibility with too mouch dependencies of the kernel code, traduct, actual source code is RUBBISH!
We are running universal drivers without any CCI code nor the real base of hmp..
source code core and cluster migration were writes TWO YEARS AGO!
We are runnin a code wroted for the 5410!! Not the 5420!!
That's why our exy suks compared to hmp features!
**** you samsung
Why do we want HMP activated ? The Android OS is not that advanced to be able to manage heat & conserve batteries even on KitKat. Enabling HMP will only ruin the phone hardware and shorting its age. Decision must have been made with careful reasonings.
See benchmark details here
Top scores....
Note 3: 5130
Note 4: 4942
Duh...
Quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A53 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A57 (SM-N910C)
quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A15 (N9000)
The Exynos CPU in the N3 and N4 hava exactly the same speed... And yet the N9005 only has a 1920x1080 screen, whereas the Note 4 has to render 2560x1440.
Thank you for proving why I absolutely hate Exynos.
I'd like to know the Snapdragon variants. Since the Note 4 does have a significantly more powerful Snapdragon CPU, and the Snapdragon is the 80% of the market model, the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Quad-core 2.7 GHz Krait 450 (SM-N910S)
Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400 (N9005)
But the Exynos in the Note 4 is pretty awesome already:
http://anandtech.com/show/8718/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-exynos-review
Good things are to come with the one in the Galaxy S6.
If you would run the PCMark test yourselves and post the results, that would be great!!
Thanks
ShadowLea said:
the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is kind of offending!, and I am non emotional guy who hates Exynos too :|
devilsdouble said:
This is kind of offending!, and I am non emotional guy who hates Exynos too :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If a market sells less or requires less high-level hardware due to an older, less sophisticated network system, it's considered a lower market. The demand and proceeds are lower compared to the high-selling markets, thus the word lower.
That's not a personal attempt at insult, it's a corporate definition.
Until 4G was rolled out, the Netherlands was one of those lower markets. (Though, frankly, I still consider it as such..) In the days of the S3, every non-US country was considered a lower market.
(Besides, I'm a sociopath, I don't do emotional )
Marketing aside: Temasek's CM12 + arter97 kernel + data&cache partitions in f2fs.
The phone is superfast as hell, but benchmark result was this:
Times are changing, for the worse and for better, i know it makes no sense, but so doesnt sammy.
They seem to drop Snapdragon, and with 810 in sight (ignored too), Exynos is going for a PR fight with overheating accusations, and being the sucky ones in performance and the best in sales (Samsung generally), they just made their phones even less open to the people, HOWEVER...they are dropping bloat too.
As i said, they are making no sense.
sirobelec said:
Marketing aside: Temasek's CM12 + arter97 kernel + data&cache partitions in f2fs.
The phone is superfast as hell, but benchmark result was this:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stock Note N900 seems to perform better
PCMark for Android claims to......
Measure the performance and battery life of your Android smart phone and tablet using tests based on everyday tasks, not abstract algorithms.
ShadowLea said:
If a market sells less or requires less high-level hardware due to an older, less sophisticated network system, it's considered a lower market. The demand and proceeds are lower compared to the high-selling markets, thus the word lower.
That's not a personal attempt at insult, it's a corporate definition.
Until 4G was rolled out, the Netherlands was one of those lower markets. (Though, frankly, I still consider it as such..) In the days of the S3, every non-US country was considered a lower market.
(Besides, I'm a sociopath, I don't do emotional )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ShadowLea said:
Duh...
Quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A53 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A57 (SM-N910C)
quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A15 (N9000)
The Exynos CPU in the N3 and N4 hava exactly the same speed... And yet the N9005 only has a 1920x1080 screen, whereas the Note 4 has to render 2560x1440.
Thank you for proving why I absolutely hate Exynos.
I'd like to know the Snapdragon variants. Since the Note 4 does have a significantly more powerful Snapdragon CPU, and the Snapdragon is the 80% of the market model, the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Quad-core 2.7 GHz Krait 450 (SM-N910S)
Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400 (N9005)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why don't you simply run the test yourself with the superior phone/network you have and let the results speak for themselves?
PCMark for android
4354 here UK note 3
If Samsung do end up dropping Qualcomm in their next generation of phones, my N9005 Note 3 will be my last Samsung for the foreseeable future. Exynos holds no interest for me, as it's closed source nature inevitably means little to no support for non-stock AOSP/CM roms. And the non-stock roms that are available are generally unstable and bug ridden.
^ +100
We know S6 is not going to have S810, why wouldnt they follow the same path with Note's too?
SM-N9005 is my last Samsung device, i am not going to drag myself to pain with Exynos.
New top score... 5130
Benchmark scores between flagship phones mean precisely jack s**t these days, they're little more than **** waving. Discernible features is what should be compared.
"Wow, my Android phone scored 200 more points than your Android phone! And please, let's ignore the fact it will make precisely zero difference in real world use!"
Beefheart said:
Benchmark scores between flagship phones mean precisely jack s**t these days, they're little more than **** waving. Discernible features is what should be compared.
"Wow, my Android phone scored 200 more points than your Android phone! And please, let's ignore the fact it will make precisely zero difference in real world use!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ignorance is bliss!!
The whole point of these tests is to show that most of the other benchmarks don't show a true picture of real-life use.
Why else would Note 3 appear to perform better than Note4?
The PCMark webpage states the following...
PCMark for Android introduces a fresh approach to benchmarking smart phones and tablets. It measures the performance and battery life of the device as a complete unit rather than a set of isolated components. And its tests are based on common, everyday tasks instead of abstract algorithms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that completely changed my opinion.*
* may contain sarcasm.
Beefheart said:
Yeah, that completely changed my opinion.*
* may contain sarcasm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have it your way... at least , I, am actually investigating
It's in the interest of the benchmark app developers for users to believe their offerings aren't pointless.
Beefheart said:
It's in the interest of the benchmark app developers for users to believe their offerings aren't pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you on this....... generally.
I however found this particular benchmark interesting for the following reasons....
1. It proves software is the biggest bottleneck in android phones, not hardware. ( Lollipop on Note3 >>beats>> kitkat onNote4 )
2. It proved that my Note 3 performs better in everyday use than my Note4 ( This I have always known but no benchmark showed it.)
So, it's soon going to be time for my annual upgrade. I've gone from a Galaxy S2, to a Moto G, and I'm now thinking about getting an Elephone P7000 (when it's released around April). But, I've been researching and I'm now unsure.
I've found a couple of performance graphs online, and they show that the CPU (an Arm A9) in a Galaxy S2 actually performs better per clock than the A7 in the Moto G. And even more, the A53 (in the P7000) performs around the same as the A9, in fact slightly less in some situations.
From what I've seen on the internet, many android apps only take advantage of one core, with some taking advantage of two, and very few taking advantage of more than that. When I had my Galaxy S2, I had it rooted and (insanely) overclocked to 1.8GHz, so does this mean that the (now ancient) Galaxy S2 performs better than my current Moto G (at 1.2GHz) in general and real world usage, and somehow even better than a brand new A53 at 1.7GHz?
Or does more cores somehow equate to better performance (like, can modern CPUs split up single threaded workloads to be processed by multiple cores?) If they cannot, then was the CPU in my old Galaxy S2 still better than what could be found in a completely modern phone? Each year I find a phone that I can get for about £150 at the time... surely the CPU performance must have improved in that time? And I mean in pure performance... I know the power efficiency has improved a lot, but that doesn't effect me as I always carry a mahooosive power bank with me (for my phone and my laptop).
I want to upgrade my phone (for the better screen, bigger (and removable) battery, more RAM, micro-SD expansion slot, fingerprint scanner and the camera), but all of these are just extra "brownie point" features to me, and I'm not sure if I can justify the upgrade if the CPU isn't even any faster clock for clock. I'm really hoping someone can tell me that I'm wrong about the performance-per-clock (despite the numbers being on arm's website), or someone can tell me how an octa core CPU would provide any actual benefits (when either in a heavy application or just in everyday browsing and usage).
Sorry about the long mass of text, I'm just trying to get my head around how an S2 can be as fast as a modern phone in terms of instructions per clock. Any insights on how androids actually do benefit from octa-core CPU's would be great, as I can't find anything online about it