While I didn't know antutu score of pixel c, it has scored highest in all other benchmarks.
Anonymous, 14 Mar 2016that i would debate with you, especially after all the real world usage in your other posts. I... moreI agree with your comments...
My statement, however, was with regards to the A9 chip that was in the market for a few months prior to these chips.
I am clear about these chips and their capabilities.
As well as the A9x, the present chip that would be fair to compare them to...
Which, hopefully won't throttle went put in a smaller device...
Good write though, cheers
AnonD-367917, 08 Mar 2016Title of article indicates 'smartphones' (A9X is in iPads). Although this does confirm the ... morethat i would debate with you, especially after all the real world usage in your other posts. I look at that bench and figure the a9 would be in 3rd 820 would be second on cpu and first on graphics , while the exynos would be first on cpu and 2nd on graphics. Just based on how the actual tests are done. that is an average score. and antutu even on the chipset test is skewed heavily towards graphics. the exynos is only in a phone with a Qhd screen so i can guarantee the average is fairly close as a mean product. while the snapdragon 820 is on phone anywhere from Fhd to Qhd so the average is just skewed higher with a greater range depending on the device. if more people are benchmarking the Fhd displays then it is going to be skewed higher score then what it really has . while if more of the benchmarks are with the qhd it is going to benchmark lower in average results. yet apple has never been known for high resolution. which is probably why there looking to part ways with there current vr chips and have been looking into custom chips of there own. so more then likely im probably spot on , on the actual rankings which would occur if you compared similar phones the exynos would be the more powerful cpu, but the gpu would fall to the snapdragon. but on a different note if im not mistaken, doesn't the s7 now have a gaming mode which allows you to lower the screen resolution while playing games. wonder how it would benchmark, if you ran antutu in the game mode to match resolution of an iphone.
AnonD-496804, 07 Mar 2016Mister, you have exemplified the best of this forum, that is reality. Snapdragon 820 is........ moredid u made pi55 with the words he posted booyyy ...... the only right thing is that sd is best in business.
want to buy s7 edge snapdragon version but samsung has done another shit by launching only exynos version for India
This comparison of results show that the sd820 is capable of so much more with an FHD phone, cos most of the phones that use the chipset use QHD resolution. Apple A9 isn't even competition b'cos the iPhone doesn't use that much power for the screen and therefore gpu doesn't push that much pixels. Would like to see what they do with their new chipset though, even though I seriously doubt they would use a QHD screen.
AnonD-399271, 08 Mar 2016Many users dont want QHD Samsung should use Exynos 8890 on 5" FHD display. Then antutu score ... moreyeah, they could make one version like this. Since Samsung is a display company, it would hurt seeing it is back to FHD - Samsung will never go back with its flagships. Also other users who used s6 would say 'oh wtf shamesung back to old QHD? I will skip this year...' just and example. But Going back to FHD would change all opinions from iDiots about 'lagdroid'.
AnonD-442781, 07 Mar 2016Nah, the one to wait for is a comparison between the two s7 versionsYeah, but looking for iPhone competitive Samsung is incorrect to test exynos/sd SoC vs A9 with QHD.
Anonymous, 08 Mar 2016It's good for Apple that they use lower screen resolution. They are right. QHD is totally poin... moreThe GLTools program may be a good alternative to Galaxy S7's gaming features for LG G5 to reduce the resolution.
It's good for Apple that they use lower screen resolution. They are right. QHD is totally pointless and useless in a phone. QHD is just a waste of GPU power and battery life.
It's good for both Apple A9 and Snapdragon 820 that they are the best single core performance CPUs. Because single core performance is the most important as most apps and games are single threaded. Especially the emulators (PS1 emulators, PPSSPP, DosBox).
It's good for Samsung that their S7 has heatsink pipe cooling system to dissipate the heat of CPU/GPU and provide constant performance with less throttling. S7 also has a Snapdragon 820 version.
It's also good for Samsung that their S7 has gaming features where you can reduce the resolution and framerate to save battery life and probably to get better GPU performance. Thanks to the gaming features, the QHD won't be a big problem anymore on S7.
I wish LG G5 had heatsink pipes and gaming features as Galaxy S7 has.
The chart shows that if you have Galaxy S7 with Exynos 8890 processor, you are not lucky. Because its performance is not as good as iPhone 6s. Samsung should cut its price.
wp_lover, 07 Mar 2016I'm not iPhone fan.. I use Windows phone.. But the performance of the iPhone makes me wonder..... moreApple, having complete control over hardware and software can build them around each other. This can give them all sorts of advantages.. For example the m9 coprocessor is now included with the A9 chip, the M9 processor can run 'Siri'...
Apple doesn't reveal its specs.
Most seem to refer to the A9 as dual core but it is vastly more than that. Given that iOS can make maximum use of the chipset (eg the A9X can supposedly edit multiple 4K video streams), it can do all sorts of 'offloading' to specific parts of the SoC.
The irony is some of the exact issues listed as reasons why people do not like Apple, even saying their hardware is underpowered or expensive for what it is.. Is what makes it anything but...
iOS devices run rings around 'vastly more powerful' alternatives.
We only have to hold one and use it for a moment to see this.
Don't read me wrong here, I used to be the person who argued they didn't truly multitask, and believed that was the reason for their speed. I was wrong.
I also noticed Win phones had phenomenal battery life and appeared zippy. I found them a little too aggressive with background app closing.
If it wasn't for M$ shafting Google on their platform so badly I would have endured with Winphone, even with all their countermeasures for actually enjoying my phone (FLAC playback and gmail were my final straws).
For me as a technician, using Android devices as external modems and a few specific apps.. My phone needs are met.
In all honesty, I would prefer to live in an Apple ecosystem. Productivity generally goes up, whilst issues are seldom to none. But it does take a few hours of reading to truly be able to use iOS 'easily' as most I-device loyalists claim they are (three and four finger gesture controls were not on my radar).
iOS is evolving well, but all three major platforms (okay two MAJOR platforms) have areas to improve that the others are doing better.
iOS now multitasks like a champion, android is getting specific app permission control as an example... (I'm too bitter about Nokias departure due to going with M$s OS to say anything positive about Winphone)
What we must take note of is real world vs synthetic benchmarks (and of course lies through use of misrepresenting statistics).
My super fast android phone, isn't.
Age old underpowered android phones with custom roms are super fast....
At the end of the day, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush..
I get that gamers might be excited about playing smoother games. The reality is that this hardware today will only deliver performance gains in very limited scenarios.
Real world usage is such that a top tier chipset from not that long ago, depending on how it is configured by the end user, might be practically faster in everyday usage.
The number of times I wait for my phone to catch up with my intentions is stupid.
We don't need more ram, we need faster ram and better optimisation.
I get that that is partly what we use excessive ram for.. Android looks at user usage patterns and loads everything to ram that might be needed.
Android ran WELL with 512mb. Even 1 gig of ram was overkill. 2 gigs of high speed ram would get my interest rather that3-4gb of slower ram.
That's kinda why Apple have a faster product in the real world.
We are all thinking better numbers on a spec sheet equal a better experience.
Maybe ironing out bottlenecks and having a total design philosophy in place makes more logical sense.
Other than for VR, I don't understand why small devices need 4K screens.
I cannot think what the average phone user (even 'heavy ones' like me) could do to make practical use of several gigabytes of ram.
And what use is all this extra speed when the OS makes poor use of it?
I did like when phones had batteries that would last for nearly a week. I guess back then we didn't stare at their low res monochrome screens all day long, whilst sipping down data loading YouTube clips or webpages. And, yeah, we didn't use our screens as a torch to light up the night...
Andro, 08 Mar 2016A less than 1% difference between the exynos and snapdragon variant should not have any influe... moreAnd that the sound output (DACs) on the Exynos variants is usually the vastly superior.
I would go out of my way for the Exynos variant, full well knowing it can take many months or years before graphics chipset is pushed or outdated... The graphics capability of ALL these devices will render mahjong and angry birds well enough... But a good sound output benefits all media.
Asphault 8 will render perfectly fine on both, but I'd actually ditch my music player if my local market had Exynos S7 (in fact I would get an S7 if my carrier had Exynos variant)
lek, 08 Mar 2016put QHD screen on your iPhone 6s/6s+ and see that off screen test score again. you'll feel bad... moreYou realise the point of 'offscreen' tests is to have the comparison fair, comparing the same frame data/ keep the units fair, and comparable.
If we were measuring onscreen, then, YES, the resolution of the screen would make a difference.
With regards to Apple; they (like Nintendo) when trying to render at higher screen resolutions, bump up the graphics processing power.
In Apples case, the iPad Pro has nearly six million pixels on its screen, so it comes with the A9X chip that has 12 graphics processing units, and enough grunt to render graphics on the screen at the same frame rate as the iPads without 5.6million pixels per frame to render.
AnonD-233130, 08 Mar 2016And what about the tablet chipsets? Example the iPad Pro score with A9X is 177266, and the GP... moreNot the topic, hence why commenters here are replying with how much faster their desktop CPU is...
The iPad Pro has proper heat dissipation and doesn't have to down clock itself.
Phones, by the nature of being small in size, have major issues with heat and throttling.
Comparing tablet chipset design with phone chipset isn't 'fair'
savan, 08 Mar 2016bench mark is fake for my point of view because adreno 510 is better then 418 and 430 so how p... moreWrong.
The first number indicates the generation of chip, the later two number where in the lineup...
Eg the Adreno 420, was a mid tier part that was the high end at the time (there was no 430 when the 420 released), so the ram/bus speeds/and clock speeds were doing everything they could to allow this chipset to shine.
Later iterations, eg 418, indicate that some aspects HAVE been reduced, hence why the Qualcomm 805 (Adreno 420) still registering in the gpu graph...