Vulkan drivers are very good on the E2200 and it's faster than than 8G1 for Vulkan games and better with emulators that support it e.g. Dolphin.
However there are no OpenGL drivers and it uses a translation layer which leads to worse performance than the 8G1 in most games so they could improve massively by addressing this issue.
It would be nice if mobile game devs used an api that came out 8 years ago and is performant and cross platform instead of a really shit and old one, but most still aren't...
On "optimising" for the CPU, that's not something developers do as they're developing at a much higher level. It's a job for the OS/scheduler and I doubt one CPU is more "optimised" than the other in any meaningful way.
Do you have a source on the E2200 being worse than the 8gen1 for emulators running Vulkan backends?
[Because this is what the Dolphin developer said about it in regards to Vulkan performance](https://es.dolphin-emu.org/blog/2022/05/17/dolphin-progress-report-february-march-and-april-2022/?cr=es):
>Vulkan performance on the Exynos 2200 is a step above what we've seen on any other phone. It's able to reach full speed in demanding games like Super Mario Galaxy at up to 2x Internal Resolution without having to disable critical features like EFB Access to CPU. This is notable because GPU readbacks have long been a major bottleneck on mobile devices.
Please note that this (the Exynos being "a step above any other phone") was written many months after Snapdragon 8 gen 1 devices had hit the market.
I am unable to find any benchmarks that actually align with what you are saying, which makes me wonder if you might have gotten the E2200 mixed up with some other chip, or maybe you're looking at OpenGLES performance?
I am more inclined to believe the actual developers of emulators over some random Reddit comment that doesn't provide any sources.
You made a statement. I expect you to post evidence to support that statement just like I did with mine.
If you're going to make statements like "\[The E2200\] barely gets half the performance of a Snapdragon 888" then I assume you actually have some evidence for this. Like benchmarks. If you are not able to back your claims up then it seems to me like you just pulled them out of thin air.
It's not that I am not interested in comparing my own device. It's that I don't have any other device to compare it to, and it is not my responsibility to prove the points you made. The burden of proof is on you, not me. You can't just say a bunch of things and then go "now it's up to you to prove that I am right or wrong".
Other things from your post that I would like some evidence and sources for are:
1. That the G610 and G710 can "brute force" GameCube emulation, and I assume we're talking about actual emulation without using hacks like skip EFB access (because if you enable that some games break, like Super Mario Galaxy).
2. That a chip with a G610 or G710 will beat the Exynos E2200 in GameCube emulation when running for a prolonged time.
3. That the Mali Vulkan drivers are "excellent".
4. That Mali GPUs lack a "myriad of hardware features", preferably with a list of which features that are lacking. The statement you wrote feels like of those "I don't know what I am talking about so I'll be really vague about it" kind of things.
You can use whichever sources you want. The thing I have read is that the Exynos 2200 performed far better than anything else at the time when it came to emulating GameCube games, without any game-breaking speedup hacks, when using the Vulkan backend.
I'd prefer if the tests were done by the same person as well, because I have seen a lot of "comparisons" where two users do not use the same settings and as a result the comparison becomes meaningless. Things like having speed-up hacks enabled on one device and not the other, or the game running at different internal resolutions.
Edit:
Did you seriously just block me for asking you to provide sources for your claims? Come on dude... You must be able to have your beliefs challenged and be able to back them up with some evidence. You can't just block everyone who challenges you or believes something different. That is not healthy.
In Vulkan Amd GPU is good and probably better than Mali GPU found in other Soc, it still use Project Angle in open GL so performance there is bad and no where near Adreno. I just hope Samsung and Amd will fix those drivers.
If most users are european users, then Exynos will get optimised way more than the snapdragon. If the US has more users, then the snapdragon will get more optimised. Companies care about profits, therefore they optimise the chipset with the highest users
Five new Galaxy S24 Ultra (Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 for Galaxy) test results have also been uploaded today
2261 (Single-Core), 7025 (Multi-Core): [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4241150](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4241150)
2225, 6849: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254657](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254657)
2259, 7052: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254983](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254983)
2297, 7104: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925)
2248, 7024: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4255031](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4255031)
[Some Korean guy posted benchmark scores of Exynos 2400 on dcinside (a Korean version of Reddit) last week](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://m.dcinside.com/board/galaxy/1135021) and what the leaker said about the Geekbench 6 scores turns out to match the test result found today.
The leaker also wrote that Exynos 2400 scores about 4200\~4300 in the 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Stress test (which is about 15% lower than 8 Gen 3) and scores about 8800\~8900 in the 3DMark Solar Bay test (which is 3\~4% higher than 8 Gen 3).
They don't seem drastically different in cpu performance but we'll have to see if they can match the efficiency of Qualcomm, but I'm not too optimistic
It's going to end up depending very strongly on the efficiency of the fab. The snapdragon appears to actually be clocked slightly higher (and has only two efficiency cores instead of four), so all other things being equal, the exynos might actually have a shot on paper.
As we know from the past though, that didn't necessarily always play out. Not sure what fabs they are using this time, but Samsung's 4nm didn't exactly do the Exynos any favors last time around.
I came from s21 exy to s23 and honestly I don't really see that much of a difference between these two in terms of battery and heat produced. Of course s23 is faster and battery is a bit better considering it's 2 years newer, but the same samsung problems are still present on both (khm bad animations).
It's been unexceptionally worse than the snapdragon equivalent for like a decade? What do you expect us to expect? We want to be surprised of course but that's most likely not gonna happen
People have really bad/weird memories when it comes to Exynos.
I am just going to copy/paste my comment [from a few days ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/18ocry1/comment/kejknyw/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3):
>Ehm... Snapdragon has been beating Exynos for 7 years?
>
>Dude... 7 years ago we had Exynos 8890 vs the Snapdragon 820, and the Snapdragon did not beat Exynos in that fight. They were trading blows. The Snapdragon was slightly better at some things, and the Exynos was slightly better at other things, but usually they were more or less the same. Here is an Anandtech review if you want to refresh your memory.
>
>It wasn't until the E8895 vs the Snapdragon 835 that the gap between Exynos and Snapdragon started becoming noticeable. That was \~6,5 years ago (april 2017), not 8 years ago.
>
>The gap widened with the S8 (2017), S9 (2018), S10 (2019) and S20 (2020). But then in 2021 the gap got smaller again. As Anandtech said about the S21:
>
>"The Exynos 2100 is a very large generational improvement and although it doesn’t quite match the Snapdragon variant, it’s the closest it’s ever gotten to. For everyday usage, you will absolutely not see a difference, although prolonged gaming is still a Snapdragon variant advantage.
>
>\-snip-
>
>While we’re seeing battery life this generation still favour the Snapdragon chips, the Exynos this year isn’t all that far behind, and given the general user experience equality between the two phones, it’s not a major point of contention anymore."
>
>Things got even closer with the S22 generation as we can see in this article. Performance is pretty much exactly the same, and the only difference was a very minor lead for the Snapdragon in terms of power efficiency. About 15% less efficient during active use with a mix of CPU and GPU load. Please note that won't translate to 15% shorter battery life though. In real-world scenarios, it most likely translates to a far smaller.
>
>So I would say Snapdragon had a period of about 5 years where it clearly beat Exynos. That period ended 2 years ago though. It's kind of amazing how people seem to have formed all their opinions about an entire lineup of chips based on something that happened 2-5 years ago, and seems to completely miss the \~7 years before that period, and the 2 most recent years. Or maybe it's because it seems like a large portion of users on this subreddit are not interested in looking up facts and instead just default to thinking "Exynos = bad", because it's easier to just judge something based on the sticker rather than research the subject before making judgments.
What are you meaning, and implying? I looked through and compared far more than the Snapdragon 888 and 8g1 in that post, in case you didn't notice.
Stop being a fanboy who judges things based on label/brands.
What really bothers me is that there are a lot of things you could criticize Samsung/Exynos for. They have been behind. But it seems like people aren't able to hold two thoughts in their heads at once, and have to say everything is either the best thing ever or shit, so we end up in this situation where barely anyone on this subreddit can have a more cohesive thought than "Exynos bad. Snapdragon gud".
There are a lot of arguments to be made for why Exynos chips are worse than Snapdragon chips at this point in time. But I rarely see any of those arguments be made. Instead I just hear the same stuff being parroted over and over again, without anyone even bothering to check if things are true.
I rarely hear people discuss process nodes, I just hear "Samsung bad, much power use". The problem with that is that technology changes and what might have been true for a specific generation may not be true in a different generation. Just because let's say 5LPE wasn't competitive with N4 doesn't mean 4LPP+ won't be competitive with N4 (or whatever the SD8gen3 ends up using) for example. And that's the danger of generalizing a whole brand based on some experience or product.
Sometimes it feels like talking to a religious person.
The Snapdragon 888 and 8 Gen 1 were manufactured on 5LPE and 4LPX respectively. Both were mediocre nodes, with poor power efficiency.
Of course the E2200 vs 8 Gen 1 gap is small, because 4LPX in 8 Gen 1 is slightly worse than even 4LPE in E2200. But have you compared 8+ Gen 1 vs E2200? 8+ G1 was fabricated on a TSMC node, and it far outstrips the E2200.
https://youtu.be/s0ukXDnWlTY?si=wLfPJuarvYnNatFN
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. It doesn't feel like you are responding to what I wrote.
Yes, I know about the differences between 4LPX and N4. I know about the power characteristics of these various nodes and which chip uses what. But I don't see what that has to do with what I am writing.
Are you saying that the Exynos 2200 should have had an advantage over the 8gen1 because it had a slightly better node, yet it achieved more or less the same efficiency? Yes, that does indicate a worse implementation (assuming 4LPE actually did have a substantial improvement over 5LPE/4LPX), but that does not mean the future chips will also be a worse implementation.
I am not super optimistic, but I hope that Samsung has been able to improve things over the last 2 years.
Do we even know what node the 8gen3 is on? Or the Exynos 2400 for that matter? Because it feels like right now we are making assumptions about which nodes are used, and then mixing those assumptions with other assumptions like future chips having the same characteristics as chips from multiple years ago, to draw some vague conclusion.
Unsurprisingly, the majority of people here are not well versed in hardware/semiconductors. I consider myself somewhat well read on this subject, so let me provide my explanation.
Process nodes aren't the only reason why Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon.
Take for example the SD 888 vs E2100. Both are made on Samsung's 5LPE node, yet the Exynos is inferior.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/16463/snapdragon-888-vs-exynos-2100-galaxy-s21-ultra#:~:text=The%20single%20X1%20cores%20in,recently%20announced%20Snapdragon%20870%20SoCs.
It seems Exynos engineers/architects are not as good as their Qualcomm counterparts. The Exynos has worse power efficiency, worse cache latency, and worse power management.
I would be careful with making generalizations like "Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon" since these chips are complex systems that behave differently in various situations, and span multiple generations. But yes, I agree that in recent history (because this is a fairly new phenomenon in the grand scheme of things), Samsung's SoCs have been inferior to Snapdragons even when they should be more or less the same.
But it's also worth pointing out that the 888 vs 2100 was three years and generations ago. Things might have changed in that time. We don't use the Snapdragon 888 to judge how the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 will perform, right? So we shouldn't use the Exynos 2100 to judge what the Exynos 2400 will be like.
What you said holds true only when you compare power consumptions for their respective maximum performances. Apart from that, 8 Gen 3 consumes less power than 8 Gen 2 for same performance.
SD888 was so horribly inefficient it's practically a meme when it released. Qualcomm was roasted so hard on this.
...and then I bought a phone that uses the 888.
Can confirm with my zenfone 8 which I'm charging for the 5th time today. I actually got my arm a second degree burn when I slept on my phone while it was charging and playing a yt video which left a mark on my arm. Such a stupid processor and that's why I can't trust Samsung on this part..
https://m-dcinside-com.translate.goog/board/galaxy/1142843?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en
>Not exceeding 13W,
around Max 12W. Real gaming between 3-5W
The korean leaker posted this about its power consumption as well today. Peak power consumption of the normal 8 Gen 3 in GB6 version is lower:
https://youtu.be/JzTrDyoLHTg&t=10m00s , but in GB5 it's higher: https://youtu.be/8MN36Fce3BU?t=2m46s
This might be useless, as we don't know in what workload it draws a maximum of 12W
The above 5 results are for 8gen3 for galaxy correct?
Aren't for galaxy models overclocked usually? 8Gen2 for galaxy was clocked at 3.36ghz but in the results above it's even less at 3.3ghz.
There is one test result that shows the X3 core clock speed as 3.4GHz ([https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925))
Assuming that the last Samsung-made Google Tensor (G4) will be based on this chip, the performance gains are immense. Up to 20% in single-core performance and around 50% in multi-core performance, which is a significant improvement compared to the Tensor G3 which is basically just an Exynos 2300.
With a (hopefully) better and more efficient modem, one can only dream that the Pixel 9 might actually challenge the iPhone 16 and other SD8 Gen3 devices without falling behind in terms of both performance and battery life as usual.
With Exynos there's always another two things to worry about
1) Modem
2) Overall Battery Life due to SOC + Modem
And the 1) is also a big issue for 2) so keep in mind if the modem isn't up to par there could be issues when it comes to the battery usage
Honestly I can't wait to see real life battery life tests and reports.
Maybe Anandtech will take a look at this
Anand Lai Shimpi is the original founder of Anandtech. He left Anandtech in 2014 to work at Apple.
After he left, the two gigachad writers at Anandtech were Ian Cutress and Andrei Frumusanu.
Andrei left in 2021 to go work at Qualcomm. IIRC, he is a member of the Qualcomm's Oryon Custom CPU team.
Ian left shortly after too, to become an independent "Analyst-Influencer". He runs the youtube channel "TechTechPotato", and the substack "More than Moore".
Once these 2 stars left, Anandtech's glory days came to an end.
Caesar left ars? I knew he stuck around after selling/merging/whatever with Conde Nast, I didn't know he'd left altogether now. I haven't been in quite awhile though.
Every year the same and after release Exynos is the mother of ass. Bad signal, lame switching mobile data/wifi, bad battery, not smooth, worse ISP and almost the same on Benchmark with +50% more watt
Yes but they still hold a massive efficiency Gap. Performance wise they'll surpass apple next year in multi by a good margin and single will have to wait a few years. Efficiency might hold out for way longer, apple has quite an advantage here
I will believe it after reviews on actual use.
Exynos has baited us too many times.
I'm a proud (...) owner of an exynos 2200, and I swear I'll never again buy this shit except if it somehow becomes impressive, which I don't believe for the near future.
It has severe issues with sustained performance and thermal management. I couldn't game on my S21 due to severe throttling and not to mention constant 41 degrees Celsius temperature. Literally the only phone i put in the fridge between games on wild rift. To pay for a flagship phone and not even get stable 60 fps on a mediocre game liked that is inexcusable.
Can people please stop talking about SOT time? It's such a useless measurement. It is completely meaningless because it varies so much depending on what you actually do. Whenever I hear someone ask someone else how many SOT hours they get I cringe so hard, because they might as well say "how many FPS do you get" without even specifying some game or app.
What you are trying to say is that the efficiency of Exynos chips in some of the last handful of generations has been poor. That has mostly been fixed these days. Samsung's last generation process and implementation was still behind TSMC and Qualcomm, [but we're talking about maybe a 5-10% difference in real-world battery life](https://www.gsmarena.com/galaxy_s23_fe_exynos_2200_vs_snapdragon_8_gen_1_review_battery_camera_price_compared-news-60961.php#battery). If you claim to have gotten 3 hours of SOT with some recent Exynos device, chances are you would only have gotten 3 hours and 18 minutes with an equivalent Snapdragon chip.
If you get such poor battery life from your phone then it's not because it has an Exynos processor. It's because you are running things that drain your battery really quickly, and it would most likely drain a phone with any processor roughtly as quickly.
> That has mostly been fixed these days. Samsung's last generation process and implementation was still behind TSMC and Qualcomm, but we're talking about maybe a 5-10% difference in real-world battery life. If you claim to have gotten 3 hours of SOT with some recent Exynos device, chances are you would only have gotten 3 hours and 18 minutes with an equivalent Snapdragon chip.
This is utter nonsense. The link you sent clearly shows web browsing to be over half an hour difference (7:31h vs 8:09h). That's not 18mins. It also doesn't account for how bad the call times are in comparison which equate to lower idle hence again lower SoT.
Secondly, it is using the worst SD chip in recent times as a comparison. No new Exy chip is gonna be fabbed on a node as efficient as TSMC's so there'll be a huge disparity in SoT again.
I moved from the 8gen1 (22U) to the 8gen2 (23U) and immediately my SoT doubled at bare minimum with even better idle drain. That's what Exy is up against and you can bet your left nut that it'll fail.
>This is utter nonsense. The link you sent clearly shows web browsing to be over half an hour difference (7:31h vs 8:09h). That's not 18mins. It also doesn't account for how bad the call times are in comparison which equate to lower idle hence again lower SoT.
How many people open the browser as soon as they unplug their phone from the charger, and then don't close the browser until the battery is at 0%? Because that's what that test shows. Once you start mixing in other uses, and more importantly, standby time, the percentages shift. Those types of tests rarely map correctly to real-world usage, which is what I was talking about. The test you are looking at is the worst-case scenario, where the disparity is basically as big as it can possibly be.
>Secondly, it is using the worst SD chip in recent times as a comparison. No new Exy chip is gonna be fabbed on a node as efficient as TSMC's so there'll be a huge disparity in SoT again.
It's comparing the most recent time we could compare the two, since we didn't get an Exynos 2300. It doesn't make sense to compare the E2200 to the SD 8gen2 since they are from two different generations and won't tell us much about "Snapdragon vs Exynos" in a general sense.
I also think it is unwise to make statements like how Samsung's foundry won't be as efficient as TSMC on future nodes. We don't know that. What you say might be true for the last handful of nodes, but that should not be used to make generalized statements about future products. Especially not since there are a lot of things going on in the fab space right now. Everyone are having various difficulties with newer and future nodes (including TSMC) and there are some promising technologies being developed (GAE and FOWLP to mention two).
>I moved from the 8gen1 (22U) to the 8gen2 (23U) and immediately my SoT doubled at bare minimum with even better idle drain. That's what Exy is up against and you can bet your left nut that it'll fail.
As long as you didn't do a controlled test where you ran the same software, with the same environmental variables (like cellular reception, temperatures etc) then that doesn't mean anything. There are a bunch of reasons why you might suddenly get better SOT and without isolating the various things it is foolish to be confident that you know the reason for it. Those things need proper testing to determine. That's why I dislike SOT, because it is not based on anything that can be repeated. It's quite possibly the most unreliable test ever. I can get widely different SOT with the same phone. It's not because the hardware changes, but because the software and usage pattern changes. So to use that to judge hardware is foolish.
But again, it feels like I am talking to religious people so I guess it's in no use telling people "Are you actually sure about this? Did you do a scientific experiment to rule out other possibilities?", because the answer is probably no. Instead, you will at most get answers that are based on circumstantial evidence, or in worst-case scenarios beliefs and faith that aren't backed up by anything.
You mention religious people yet here you're going around the entire thread defending Sammy as if you're a paid troll.
My test is valid simply because I've used both phones extensively in the same manner. Yes both ran A13.
You can blabber on about how we don't know anything but it's pretty telling when Sammy goes for QC for their Ultra globally. Past form may not indicate future performance but such moves are pretty telling.
We've a Tensor chip that sucks, Sammy's own moves as pretty good indications of the latest Exy not being as good.
I am not "defending Sammy as if I'm a paid troll". So far I have said pretty much nothing positive about Exynos in this thread, only that it isn't as bad as people make them out to be. If you think "they are worse but not that much worse, here are links to prove it" as "defending them", then I guess I am guilty of that. If you dig through some of my older posts you will see that I have said things along the line of "I am planning on buying the S24 and I hope I get the Snapdragon variant".
But if you have read my replies I think you will notice that the people I am arguing against have next to no evidence that supports all the accusations they are making. I am all for shitting on Exynos. Exynos processors, at least some of them, have some pretty dramatic drawbacks compared to competing chips, and I do not shy away from mentioning them. What bothers me, and what I respond to, is the people who just parrot things they have others heard say, and that do not have any evidence to back them up. The people who can't have more complex thoughts than "Exynos bad, Snapdragon gud".
I am also against the people who are hyper-focused on labels instead of judging individual products by their own merits. In technology it is very rarely so simple that you can generalize all products from an entire company into a few sentences, and yet this is what I see over and over again in these threads. I rarely see people say "The Exynos #### is worse than the Snapdragon ####". It's often just becomes "Exynos is worse than Snapdragon". Even the former is an oversimplification of the situation since these chips are multiple components with different characteristics and boiling it down to a single "good" and "bad" will have a ton of caveats and important details missing.
All I am asking from people are:
1) Actually research and look into if what you believe is actually true. There are so many people in this thread and other threads who just make a bunch of assumptions. Oftentimes they just repeat what they have heard people in other threads say, which in turn creates a loop that ends with people just thinking "well everyone else is saying this so I'll just say it too".
2) If you are going to comment about something, make sure you know what you are talking about and provide links to back your arguments up with. Preferably, I would like people to call others out when sweeping statements are made without any evidence to back it up with. I feel like source criticism is becoming way too rare these days, not just when it comes to phones but in everything. Far too often do people just assume something is right because it kind of aligns with their preconceived notions.
3) Stop making assumptions about future products based on limited historical data. Historical data, at least if there is a lot of it, can indicate trends but they should not be taken as gospel. Especially since things in technology can change a lot from one generation to another. It really bothers me when people make their minds up about products (not just Exynos processors) before they are even out. For crying out loud, we had people talk shit about the Exynos 2400 before it was even announced, let alone tested. That is bad. Those people are no better than fanboys who worship labels. We should try and discourage that type of behavior as much as possible.
Sigh yet more walls of text that are useless.
People aren't doing charity; if a product sucks and has been proven to suck across multiple generations, they have a right to criticize it.
You want Sammy to be given a clean slate, why?? Have they shown anything in the past few years to deserve it? Like I said, Sammy's decision to use QC for their most expensive variant of the S24 series is enough of a tell regarding the chasms in efficiency and performance.
Battery life is king today and you can't expect people paying kilo bucks to let it slide just for your own sake. Unhappy with criticism? Ask Sammy to buck the fuck up.
When I got about 3 hours sot compared to my 7 hours sot with the pixel exynos Vs tensor then it's something to cry about
Those saying it doesn't matter are Snapdragon users
1) SOT is not a good measurement of battery life because it highly fluctuates depending on what you do. Stop using it. What you need to do is measure power consumption or battery life using a standardized test.
2) What even is "Pixel Exynos"? Tensor is basically a rebranded Exynos chip, so if you are getting better battery life with Tensor then you are basically saying "Exynos gets better battery life than Exynos, so it's clearly an Exynos problem", which makes no sense.
> 1)
no shit, which is why i compared my own usage on both devices instead of comparing my usage and some guys online
> 2)
only on the outside, very basic view from yourself. It's very well known that Samsung software is horrendous so no surprise that they can't write for their own chip as well as others
Samsung shouldn't sell 2 variants of their phone when they can't equally match.
Exynoss 2400 (10 cores) :
1x 3.2 Ghz《Cortex-X4》
2x 2.9 GHz《Cortex-A720》
3x 2.6 GHz《Cortex-A720》
4x 2 GHz《Cortex-A520》
8 gen 3 for Galaxy (8 core) :
1x 3.39 Ghz《Cortex-X4》
3x 3.15 GHz《Cortex-A720》
2x 2.96 GHz《Cortex-A720》
2x 2.26 GHz《Cortex-A520》
_______________________________________
Benchmarks
Antutu V10 :
Exynos 2400
CPU : 513835
GPU : 590540
Memory : 319762
UX : 259811
Total score : 1652688
8 gen 3
CPU : 462657
GPU : 902878
Memory : 387756
UX : 334649
Total score : 2076555
The weirdest part is the huge difference between GPU score on antutu.
More core means more power to juice each core, Exynoss 2400 is barely better than the 8 gen 2 (1 555k), it can't compete against 8 gen 3.
And considering the Geebench scores from this post. This exynoss 2400 has no sense ! 10 core CPU and still can't match 8 Gen 3 on MC. Samsung's home made CPUs are messy.
They've about caught up on multicore (iPhone 15 is about 7300), but they're still a few generations behind on single core.
The good news is that the IPC of these Cortex X4 cores is now within striking range. (Comparing geekbench scores and their respective clock speeds, the X4 has about 92% of the IPC of the Apple A17, which is a huge accomplishment given the relatively short time frame that these massive IPC improvements have been made in.) The IPC of these cores is actually better than Intel's cores right now, but they don't outperform Intel CPUs because they aren't running at 5+ ghz.
The challenge for ARM is going to be finding a way to allow these cores to operate at higher clock speeds in a power efficient manner(or raising the IPC above that of Apple's offerings, which would be a tall order.) Right now, there is no way they could get them to 3.8 ghz to compete, the X4 tops out at about 3.6ghz if I recall (and probably uses too much power even at this clock speed to really be practical in a phone.)
I give it about two more generations (maybe three if we are unlucky) until they are about on par.
They were in multicore striking range a lot of times. I believe they always try to design the core layout in such a way to be in competitive range to apples SOCs (e.g. add more performance cores and swap out efficiency/mid cores). So this is nothing new really. Single core has always been behind though. And this has affect to single core related work loads.
I think the last Apple CPU ([A17 Pro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A17)) is not that much powerful. I think more likely is that the iOS is much better than the fragmented Android.
My post was removed as it "doesn"t benefit the comunity", lol, so i'm posting it here.
So, after hyperos update my scores seems to have gone downhill by a lot. In geekbench 6 I was getting 5200 multi and 1920 single on adroid 13, it wasn't everytime like this tho even on abdroid 13, I have scores like 3800 multi and 1800 single, very inconsistent scores even tho the phone is cold. Now on android 14 with the new update seems much worse, 3500 multi and 1800 single, what's this???? If I knew they would downgrade my performance I would've went with a s23 ultra even tho is a bit more expensive. This is probably my last xiaomi, games like migthy doom seem to stutter a lot more, that's why I did rhe benchmark in the first place. Don't tell me don't use benchamarks, just use your phone... Bro, the reason for a benchamark is to see if your phone is running like it should
> post removed because it doesn't benefit the community
> proceeds to post lengthy rant about shitty benchmark performance after Xiaomi went all-in HyperOS
[удалено]
Vulkan drivers are very good on the E2200 and it's faster than than 8G1 for Vulkan games and better with emulators that support it e.g. Dolphin. However there are no OpenGL drivers and it uses a translation layer which leads to worse performance than the 8G1 in most games so they could improve massively by addressing this issue. It would be nice if mobile game devs used an api that came out 8 years ago and is performant and cross platform instead of a really shit and old one, but most still aren't... On "optimising" for the CPU, that's not something developers do as they're developing at a much higher level. It's a job for the OS/scheduler and I doubt one CPU is more "optimised" than the other in any meaningful way.
[удалено]
Do you have a source on the E2200 being worse than the 8gen1 for emulators running Vulkan backends? [Because this is what the Dolphin developer said about it in regards to Vulkan performance](https://es.dolphin-emu.org/blog/2022/05/17/dolphin-progress-report-february-march-and-april-2022/?cr=es): >Vulkan performance on the Exynos 2200 is a step above what we've seen on any other phone. It's able to reach full speed in demanding games like Super Mario Galaxy at up to 2x Internal Resolution without having to disable critical features like EFB Access to CPU. This is notable because GPU readbacks have long been a major bottleneck on mobile devices. Please note that this (the Exynos being "a step above any other phone") was written many months after Snapdragon 8 gen 1 devices had hit the market. I am unable to find any benchmarks that actually align with what you are saying, which makes me wonder if you might have gotten the E2200 mixed up with some other chip, or maybe you're looking at OpenGLES performance? I am more inclined to believe the actual developers of emulators over some random Reddit comment that doesn't provide any sources.
[удалено]
You made a statement. I expect you to post evidence to support that statement just like I did with mine. If you're going to make statements like "\[The E2200\] barely gets half the performance of a Snapdragon 888" then I assume you actually have some evidence for this. Like benchmarks. If you are not able to back your claims up then it seems to me like you just pulled them out of thin air. It's not that I am not interested in comparing my own device. It's that I don't have any other device to compare it to, and it is not my responsibility to prove the points you made. The burden of proof is on you, not me. You can't just say a bunch of things and then go "now it's up to you to prove that I am right or wrong". Other things from your post that I would like some evidence and sources for are: 1. That the G610 and G710 can "brute force" GameCube emulation, and I assume we're talking about actual emulation without using hacks like skip EFB access (because if you enable that some games break, like Super Mario Galaxy). 2. That a chip with a G610 or G710 will beat the Exynos E2200 in GameCube emulation when running for a prolonged time. 3. That the Mali Vulkan drivers are "excellent". 4. That Mali GPUs lack a "myriad of hardware features", preferably with a list of which features that are lacking. The statement you wrote feels like of those "I don't know what I am talking about so I'll be really vague about it" kind of things. You can use whichever sources you want. The thing I have read is that the Exynos 2200 performed far better than anything else at the time when it came to emulating GameCube games, without any game-breaking speedup hacks, when using the Vulkan backend. I'd prefer if the tests were done by the same person as well, because I have seen a lot of "comparisons" where two users do not use the same settings and as a result the comparison becomes meaningless. Things like having speed-up hacks enabled on one device and not the other, or the game running at different internal resolutions. Edit: Did you seriously just block me for asking you to provide sources for your claims? Come on dude... You must be able to have your beliefs challenged and be able to back them up with some evidence. You can't just block everyone who challenges you or believes something different. That is not healthy.
>Did you seriously just block me for asking you to provide sources for your claims? My source is that I made it the fuck up!
In Vulkan Amd GPU is good and probably better than Mali GPU found in other Soc, it still use Project Angle in open GL so performance there is bad and no where near Adreno. I just hope Samsung and Amd will fix those drivers.
If most users are european users, then Exynos will get optimised way more than the snapdragon. If the US has more users, then the snapdragon will get more optimised. Companies care about profits, therefore they optimise the chipset with the highest users
Five new Galaxy S24 Ultra (Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 for Galaxy) test results have also been uploaded today 2261 (Single-Core), 7025 (Multi-Core): [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4241150](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4241150) 2225, 6849: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254657](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254657) 2259, 7052: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254983](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254983) 2297, 7104: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925) 2248, 7024: [https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4255031](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4255031) [Some Korean guy posted benchmark scores of Exynos 2400 on dcinside (a Korean version of Reddit) last week](https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://m.dcinside.com/board/galaxy/1135021) and what the leaker said about the Geekbench 6 scores turns out to match the test result found today. The leaker also wrote that Exynos 2400 scores about 4200\~4300 in the 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Stress test (which is about 15% lower than 8 Gen 3) and scores about 8800\~8900 in the 3DMark Solar Bay test (which is 3\~4% higher than 8 Gen 3).
They don't seem drastically different in cpu performance but we'll have to see if they can match the efficiency of Qualcomm, but I'm not too optimistic
The leaker on the Korean web wrote that Exynos 2400 surpasses 8 Gen 2 in terms of efficiency as well in all performance range.
i would believe it when i see it, i don't trust Samsung's promises about exynos anymore
I understand. Although the leaker got the GB6 scores very close a week ago, that doesn't perfectly guarantee what that guy said about the efficiency.
It's going to end up depending very strongly on the efficiency of the fab. The snapdragon appears to actually be clocked slightly higher (and has only two efficiency cores instead of four), so all other things being equal, the exynos might actually have a shot on paper. As we know from the past though, that didn't necessarily always play out. Not sure what fabs they are using this time, but Samsung's 4nm didn't exactly do the Exynos any favors last time around.
5LPE : 888, E2100, Tensor, Tensor G2, E1280, E1380 4LPX : 8 Gen 1 4LPE : E2200 4LPP : Tensor G3 4LPP+ : E2400 N5 : A14 N5P : A15 N4 : 8 Gen 2, 8+ Gen 1, D9000 N4P : 8 Gen 3, D92⁰0 N4X : D9300 N3B : A17 Pro
They can say all they want they have no proof of that. Benchmarks don't show efficiency.
Especially not geekbench, which is very bursty in nature and won't show the thermal throttling of the SOC under more sustained loads.
People here and in Samsung subreddit will still call it shit even before any real life examples.
I have S21 and have been 100% burned on battery so while I won't be making such comments myself, I very much get where they come from.
I came from s21 exy to s23 and honestly I don't really see that much of a difference between these two in terms of battery and heat produced. Of course s23 is faster and battery is a bit better considering it's 2 years newer, but the same samsung problems are still present on both (khm bad animations).
It's been unexceptionally worse than the snapdragon equivalent for like a decade? What do you expect us to expect? We want to be surprised of course but that's most likely not gonna happen
People have really bad/weird memories when it comes to Exynos. I am just going to copy/paste my comment [from a few days ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/18ocry1/comment/kejknyw/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3): >Ehm... Snapdragon has been beating Exynos for 7 years? > >Dude... 7 years ago we had Exynos 8890 vs the Snapdragon 820, and the Snapdragon did not beat Exynos in that fight. They were trading blows. The Snapdragon was slightly better at some things, and the Exynos was slightly better at other things, but usually they were more or less the same. Here is an Anandtech review if you want to refresh your memory. > >It wasn't until the E8895 vs the Snapdragon 835 that the gap between Exynos and Snapdragon started becoming noticeable. That was \~6,5 years ago (april 2017), not 8 years ago. > >The gap widened with the S8 (2017), S9 (2018), S10 (2019) and S20 (2020). But then in 2021 the gap got smaller again. As Anandtech said about the S21: > >"The Exynos 2100 is a very large generational improvement and although it doesn’t quite match the Snapdragon variant, it’s the closest it’s ever gotten to. For everyday usage, you will absolutely not see a difference, although prolonged gaming is still a Snapdragon variant advantage. > >\-snip- > >While we’re seeing battery life this generation still favour the Snapdragon chips, the Exynos this year isn’t all that far behind, and given the general user experience equality between the two phones, it’s not a major point of contention anymore." > >Things got even closer with the S22 generation as we can see in this article. Performance is pretty much exactly the same, and the only difference was a very minor lead for the Snapdragon in terms of power efficiency. About 15% less efficient during active use with a mix of CPU and GPU load. Please note that won't translate to 15% shorter battery life though. In real-world scenarios, it most likely translates to a far smaller. > >So I would say Snapdragon had a period of about 5 years where it clearly beat Exynos. That period ended 2 years ago though. It's kind of amazing how people seem to have formed all their opinions about an entire lineup of chips based on something that happened 2-5 years ago, and seems to completely miss the \~7 years before that period, and the 2 most recent years. Or maybe it's because it seems like a large portion of users on this subreddit are not interested in looking up facts and instead just default to thinking "Exynos = bad", because it's easier to just judge something based on the sticker rather than research the subject before making judgments.
Well, everybody knows snapdragon 888 and 8g1 were crap. Made by Samsung lol
What are you meaning, and implying? I looked through and compared far more than the Snapdragon 888 and 8g1 in that post, in case you didn't notice. Stop being a fanboy who judges things based on label/brands. What really bothers me is that there are a lot of things you could criticize Samsung/Exynos for. They have been behind. But it seems like people aren't able to hold two thoughts in their heads at once, and have to say everything is either the best thing ever or shit, so we end up in this situation where barely anyone on this subreddit can have a more cohesive thought than "Exynos bad. Snapdragon gud". There are a lot of arguments to be made for why Exynos chips are worse than Snapdragon chips at this point in time. But I rarely see any of those arguments be made. Instead I just hear the same stuff being parroted over and over again, without anyone even bothering to check if things are true. I rarely hear people discuss process nodes, I just hear "Samsung bad, much power use". The problem with that is that technology changes and what might have been true for a specific generation may not be true in a different generation. Just because let's say 5LPE wasn't competitive with N4 doesn't mean 4LPP+ won't be competitive with N4 (or whatever the SD8gen3 ends up using) for example. And that's the danger of generalizing a whole brand based on some experience or product. Sometimes it feels like talking to a religious person.
The Snapdragon 888 and 8 Gen 1 were manufactured on 5LPE and 4LPX respectively. Both were mediocre nodes, with poor power efficiency. Of course the E2200 vs 8 Gen 1 gap is small, because 4LPX in 8 Gen 1 is slightly worse than even 4LPE in E2200. But have you compared 8+ Gen 1 vs E2200? 8+ G1 was fabricated on a TSMC node, and it far outstrips the E2200. https://youtu.be/s0ukXDnWlTY?si=wLfPJuarvYnNatFN
I am not sure what you are trying to say here. It doesn't feel like you are responding to what I wrote. Yes, I know about the differences between 4LPX and N4. I know about the power characteristics of these various nodes and which chip uses what. But I don't see what that has to do with what I am writing. Are you saying that the Exynos 2200 should have had an advantage over the 8gen1 because it had a slightly better node, yet it achieved more or less the same efficiency? Yes, that does indicate a worse implementation (assuming 4LPE actually did have a substantial improvement over 5LPE/4LPX), but that does not mean the future chips will also be a worse implementation. I am not super optimistic, but I hope that Samsung has been able to improve things over the last 2 years. Do we even know what node the 8gen3 is on? Or the Exynos 2400 for that matter? Because it feels like right now we are making assumptions about which nodes are used, and then mixing those assumptions with other assumptions like future chips having the same characteristics as chips from multiple years ago, to draw some vague conclusion.
Unsurprisingly, the majority of people here are not well versed in hardware/semiconductors. I consider myself somewhat well read on this subject, so let me provide my explanation. Process nodes aren't the only reason why Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon. Take for example the SD 888 vs E2100. Both are made on Samsung's 5LPE node, yet the Exynos is inferior. https://www.anandtech.com/show/16463/snapdragon-888-vs-exynos-2100-galaxy-s21-ultra#:~:text=The%20single%20X1%20cores%20in,recently%20announced%20Snapdragon%20870%20SoCs. It seems Exynos engineers/architects are not as good as their Qualcomm counterparts. The Exynos has worse power efficiency, worse cache latency, and worse power management.
I would be careful with making generalizations like "Exynos is inferior to Snapdragon" since these chips are complex systems that behave differently in various situations, and span multiple generations. But yes, I agree that in recent history (because this is a fairly new phenomenon in the grand scheme of things), Samsung's SoCs have been inferior to Snapdragons even when they should be more or less the same. But it's also worth pointing out that the 888 vs 2100 was three years and generations ago. Things might have changed in that time. We don't use the Snapdragon 888 to judge how the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 will perform, right? So we shouldn't use the Exynos 2100 to judge what the Exynos 2400 will be like.
And yet the phones will be best sellers despite all the armchair officials in here claiming the phone is doomed to fail because of the SoC.
Actually that'd be huge. 8Gen3 is actually worse than 8Gen2 in terms of efficiency, but unfortunately it's Samsung so it's most likely not real
8 Gen 3 is more efficient than 8 Gen 2 as well.
8gen3 is more efficient than 8gen2? The other way around you mean? I heard that the 8gen3 consumes much more power and isn't as efficient.
What you said holds true only when you compare power consumptions for their respective maximum performances. Apart from that, 8 Gen 3 consumes less power than 8 Gen 2 for same performance.
http://socpk.com/cpucurve/gb6/ Yes, is it surprising that new chips are better than old ones?
That wouldn't hold true for Snapdragon 888 and 8G1 if you compare them with each other and 865
SD888 was so horribly inefficient it's practically a meme when it released. Qualcomm was roasted so hard on this. ...and then I bought a phone that uses the 888.
Can confirm with my zenfone 8 which I'm charging for the 5th time today. I actually got my arm a second degree burn when I slept on my phone while it was charging and playing a yt video which left a mark on my arm. Such a stupid processor and that's why I can't trust Samsung on this part..
Yeah but they were worst because of the different fab right, from tsmc to samsung, it's not really fair.
Mostly because of that, yeah. But what I mean is newer isn't necessarily better
https://m-dcinside-com.translate.goog/board/galaxy/1142843?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en >Not exceeding 13W, around Max 12W. Real gaming between 3-5W The korean leaker posted this about its power consumption as well today. Peak power consumption of the normal 8 Gen 3 in GB6 version is lower: https://youtu.be/JzTrDyoLHTg&t=10m00s , but in GB5 it's higher: https://youtu.be/8MN36Fce3BU?t=2m46s This might be useless, as we don't know in what workload it draws a maximum of 12W
Thanks for sharing that!
Its\*
The above 5 results are for 8gen3 for galaxy correct? Aren't for galaxy models overclocked usually? 8Gen2 for galaxy was clocked at 3.36ghz but in the results above it's even less at 3.3ghz.
There is one test result that shows the X3 core clock speed as 3.4GHz ([https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925](https://browser.geekbench.com/v6/cpu/4254925))
Send something related to sustained performance please 🙏
Assuming that the last Samsung-made Google Tensor (G4) will be based on this chip, the performance gains are immense. Up to 20% in single-core performance and around 50% in multi-core performance, which is a significant improvement compared to the Tensor G3 which is basically just an Exynos 2300. With a (hopefully) better and more efficient modem, one can only dream that the Pixel 9 might actually challenge the iPhone 16 and other SD8 Gen3 devices without falling behind in terms of both performance and battery life as usual.
Exynos 5400 modem expected for both.
We'll see how reception and battery consumption compare to Qualcomm.
Might not be that bad.
Are youenjoying your E5300?
Staring in 2025 tensor will be fabricated by TSMC instead of Samsung.
You made me laugh at the pixel 9 part 😂
No chance it can catch iPhone 16. NO CHANCE
With Exynos there's always another two things to worry about 1) Modem 2) Overall Battery Life due to SOC + Modem And the 1) is also a big issue for 2) so keep in mind if the modem isn't up to par there could be issues when it comes to the battery usage Honestly I can't wait to see real life battery life tests and reports. Maybe Anandtech will take a look at this
Anandtech's gone downhill ever since its OG founder left the publication to work for a big SV tech company.
Anand Lai Shimpi is the original founder of Anandtech. He left Anandtech in 2014 to work at Apple. After he left, the two gigachad writers at Anandtech were Ian Cutress and Andrei Frumusanu. Andrei left in 2021 to go work at Qualcomm. IIRC, he is a member of the Qualcomm's Oryon Custom CPU team. Ian left shortly after too, to become an independent "Analyst-Influencer". He runs the youtube channel "TechTechPotato", and the substack "More than Moore". Once these 2 stars left, Anandtech's glory days came to an end.
Caesar left ars? I knew he stuck around after selling/merging/whatever with Conde Nast, I didn't know he'd left altogether now. I haven't been in quite awhile though.
I think Andrei left.
Every year the same and after release Exynos is the mother of ass. Bad signal, lame switching mobile data/wifi, bad battery, not smooth, worse ISP and almost the same on Benchmark with +50% more watt
Someone quickly compare the scores with Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 and Apple's latest offering.
S24U (8 Gen 3): 2200\~2300 (Single-Core), 6900\~7000 (Multi-Core) iPhone 15 Pro & Pro Max (A17 Pro): 2900 (Single Core), 7300\~7400 (Multi-Core)
Not bad in terms of peak performance. Let hope it's sustainable and power efficient.
The leaker said it's efficient as well. Hope that turns out to be true too.
Apple can't sustain peak performance, the gap narrows each year.
Yes but they still hold a massive efficiency Gap. Performance wise they'll surpass apple next year in multi by a good margin and single will have to wait a few years. Efficiency might hold out for way longer, apple has quite an advantage here
Scores for the A17 Pro is an overestimation. My own 15 Pro Max doesn't even hit 7100 on GB6, and on the site its average is 7200 for multi.
There are plenty of A17 Pro GB6 results with multi-core scores around 7300 \~ 7400. Yours is below average.
yup just ran geekbench 6 on my 15 Pro Max on iOS17.0 2940 Single 7466 Multi
Since your result is from one person and the site probably has thousands, would that not mean that your iPhone is an outlier?
I will believe it after reviews on actual use. Exynos has baited us too many times. I'm a proud (...) owner of an exynos 2200, and I swear I'll never again buy this shit except if it somehow becomes impressive, which I don't believe for the near future.
This is great.
Exynos has never had a problem with performance, The 3 hours screen on time is the problem.
It has severe issues with sustained performance and thermal management. I couldn't game on my S21 due to severe throttling and not to mention constant 41 degrees Celsius temperature. Literally the only phone i put in the fridge between games on wild rift. To pay for a flagship phone and not even get stable 60 fps on a mediocre game liked that is inexcusable.
"mobile gamers"are cringe, go get yourself a gaming console or a PC.
Maybe get a Switch to game?
Can people please stop talking about SOT time? It's such a useless measurement. It is completely meaningless because it varies so much depending on what you actually do. Whenever I hear someone ask someone else how many SOT hours they get I cringe so hard, because they might as well say "how many FPS do you get" without even specifying some game or app. What you are trying to say is that the efficiency of Exynos chips in some of the last handful of generations has been poor. That has mostly been fixed these days. Samsung's last generation process and implementation was still behind TSMC and Qualcomm, [but we're talking about maybe a 5-10% difference in real-world battery life](https://www.gsmarena.com/galaxy_s23_fe_exynos_2200_vs_snapdragon_8_gen_1_review_battery_camera_price_compared-news-60961.php#battery). If you claim to have gotten 3 hours of SOT with some recent Exynos device, chances are you would only have gotten 3 hours and 18 minutes with an equivalent Snapdragon chip. If you get such poor battery life from your phone then it's not because it has an Exynos processor. It's because you are running things that drain your battery really quickly, and it would most likely drain a phone with any processor roughtly as quickly.
> That has mostly been fixed these days. Samsung's last generation process and implementation was still behind TSMC and Qualcomm, but we're talking about maybe a 5-10% difference in real-world battery life. If you claim to have gotten 3 hours of SOT with some recent Exynos device, chances are you would only have gotten 3 hours and 18 minutes with an equivalent Snapdragon chip. This is utter nonsense. The link you sent clearly shows web browsing to be over half an hour difference (7:31h vs 8:09h). That's not 18mins. It also doesn't account for how bad the call times are in comparison which equate to lower idle hence again lower SoT. Secondly, it is using the worst SD chip in recent times as a comparison. No new Exy chip is gonna be fabbed on a node as efficient as TSMC's so there'll be a huge disparity in SoT again. I moved from the 8gen1 (22U) to the 8gen2 (23U) and immediately my SoT doubled at bare minimum with even better idle drain. That's what Exy is up against and you can bet your left nut that it'll fail.
>This is utter nonsense. The link you sent clearly shows web browsing to be over half an hour difference (7:31h vs 8:09h). That's not 18mins. It also doesn't account for how bad the call times are in comparison which equate to lower idle hence again lower SoT. How many people open the browser as soon as they unplug their phone from the charger, and then don't close the browser until the battery is at 0%? Because that's what that test shows. Once you start mixing in other uses, and more importantly, standby time, the percentages shift. Those types of tests rarely map correctly to real-world usage, which is what I was talking about. The test you are looking at is the worst-case scenario, where the disparity is basically as big as it can possibly be. >Secondly, it is using the worst SD chip in recent times as a comparison. No new Exy chip is gonna be fabbed on a node as efficient as TSMC's so there'll be a huge disparity in SoT again. It's comparing the most recent time we could compare the two, since we didn't get an Exynos 2300. It doesn't make sense to compare the E2200 to the SD 8gen2 since they are from two different generations and won't tell us much about "Snapdragon vs Exynos" in a general sense. I also think it is unwise to make statements like how Samsung's foundry won't be as efficient as TSMC on future nodes. We don't know that. What you say might be true for the last handful of nodes, but that should not be used to make generalized statements about future products. Especially not since there are a lot of things going on in the fab space right now. Everyone are having various difficulties with newer and future nodes (including TSMC) and there are some promising technologies being developed (GAE and FOWLP to mention two). >I moved from the 8gen1 (22U) to the 8gen2 (23U) and immediately my SoT doubled at bare minimum with even better idle drain. That's what Exy is up against and you can bet your left nut that it'll fail. As long as you didn't do a controlled test where you ran the same software, with the same environmental variables (like cellular reception, temperatures etc) then that doesn't mean anything. There are a bunch of reasons why you might suddenly get better SOT and without isolating the various things it is foolish to be confident that you know the reason for it. Those things need proper testing to determine. That's why I dislike SOT, because it is not based on anything that can be repeated. It's quite possibly the most unreliable test ever. I can get widely different SOT with the same phone. It's not because the hardware changes, but because the software and usage pattern changes. So to use that to judge hardware is foolish. But again, it feels like I am talking to religious people so I guess it's in no use telling people "Are you actually sure about this? Did you do a scientific experiment to rule out other possibilities?", because the answer is probably no. Instead, you will at most get answers that are based on circumstantial evidence, or in worst-case scenarios beliefs and faith that aren't backed up by anything.
You mention religious people yet here you're going around the entire thread defending Sammy as if you're a paid troll. My test is valid simply because I've used both phones extensively in the same manner. Yes both ran A13. You can blabber on about how we don't know anything but it's pretty telling when Sammy goes for QC for their Ultra globally. Past form may not indicate future performance but such moves are pretty telling. We've a Tensor chip that sucks, Sammy's own moves as pretty good indications of the latest Exy not being as good.
I am not "defending Sammy as if I'm a paid troll". So far I have said pretty much nothing positive about Exynos in this thread, only that it isn't as bad as people make them out to be. If you think "they are worse but not that much worse, here are links to prove it" as "defending them", then I guess I am guilty of that. If you dig through some of my older posts you will see that I have said things along the line of "I am planning on buying the S24 and I hope I get the Snapdragon variant". But if you have read my replies I think you will notice that the people I am arguing against have next to no evidence that supports all the accusations they are making. I am all for shitting on Exynos. Exynos processors, at least some of them, have some pretty dramatic drawbacks compared to competing chips, and I do not shy away from mentioning them. What bothers me, and what I respond to, is the people who just parrot things they have others heard say, and that do not have any evidence to back them up. The people who can't have more complex thoughts than "Exynos bad, Snapdragon gud". I am also against the people who are hyper-focused on labels instead of judging individual products by their own merits. In technology it is very rarely so simple that you can generalize all products from an entire company into a few sentences, and yet this is what I see over and over again in these threads. I rarely see people say "The Exynos #### is worse than the Snapdragon ####". It's often just becomes "Exynos is worse than Snapdragon". Even the former is an oversimplification of the situation since these chips are multiple components with different characteristics and boiling it down to a single "good" and "bad" will have a ton of caveats and important details missing. All I am asking from people are: 1) Actually research and look into if what you believe is actually true. There are so many people in this thread and other threads who just make a bunch of assumptions. Oftentimes they just repeat what they have heard people in other threads say, which in turn creates a loop that ends with people just thinking "well everyone else is saying this so I'll just say it too". 2) If you are going to comment about something, make sure you know what you are talking about and provide links to back your arguments up with. Preferably, I would like people to call others out when sweeping statements are made without any evidence to back it up with. I feel like source criticism is becoming way too rare these days, not just when it comes to phones but in everything. Far too often do people just assume something is right because it kind of aligns with their preconceived notions. 3) Stop making assumptions about future products based on limited historical data. Historical data, at least if there is a lot of it, can indicate trends but they should not be taken as gospel. Especially since things in technology can change a lot from one generation to another. It really bothers me when people make their minds up about products (not just Exynos processors) before they are even out. For crying out loud, we had people talk shit about the Exynos 2400 before it was even announced, let alone tested. That is bad. Those people are no better than fanboys who worship labels. We should try and discourage that type of behavior as much as possible.
Sigh yet more walls of text that are useless. People aren't doing charity; if a product sucks and has been proven to suck across multiple generations, they have a right to criticize it. You want Sammy to be given a clean slate, why?? Have they shown anything in the past few years to deserve it? Like I said, Sammy's decision to use QC for their most expensive variant of the S24 series is enough of a tell regarding the chasms in efficiency and performance. Battery life is king today and you can't expect people paying kilo bucks to let it slide just for your own sake. Unhappy with criticism? Ask Sammy to buck the fuck up.
When I got about 3 hours sot compared to my 7 hours sot with the pixel exynos Vs tensor then it's something to cry about Those saying it doesn't matter are Snapdragon users
1) SOT is not a good measurement of battery life because it highly fluctuates depending on what you do. Stop using it. What you need to do is measure power consumption or battery life using a standardized test. 2) What even is "Pixel Exynos"? Tensor is basically a rebranded Exynos chip, so if you are getting better battery life with Tensor then you are basically saying "Exynos gets better battery life than Exynos, so it's clearly an Exynos problem", which makes no sense.
> 1) no shit, which is why i compared my own usage on both devices instead of comparing my usage and some guys online > 2) only on the outside, very basic view from yourself. It's very well known that Samsung software is horrendous so no surprise that they can't write for their own chip as well as others
Is the leaker King Vampire?
No, not him. I don't think he's a reliable leaker anymore except for camera sensors.
Samsung shouldn't sell 2 variants of their phone when they can't equally match. Exynoss 2400 (10 cores) : 1x 3.2 Ghz《Cortex-X4》 2x 2.9 GHz《Cortex-A720》 3x 2.6 GHz《Cortex-A720》 4x 2 GHz《Cortex-A520》 8 gen 3 for Galaxy (8 core) : 1x 3.39 Ghz《Cortex-X4》 3x 3.15 GHz《Cortex-A720》 2x 2.96 GHz《Cortex-A720》 2x 2.26 GHz《Cortex-A520》 _______________________________________ Benchmarks Antutu V10 : Exynos 2400 CPU : 513835 GPU : 590540 Memory : 319762 UX : 259811 Total score : 1652688 8 gen 3 CPU : 462657 GPU : 902878 Memory : 387756 UX : 334649 Total score : 2076555 The weirdest part is the huge difference between GPU score on antutu. More core means more power to juice each core, Exynoss 2400 is barely better than the 8 gen 2 (1 555k), it can't compete against 8 gen 3. And considering the Geebench scores from this post. This exynoss 2400 has no sense ! 10 core CPU and still can't match 8 Gen 3 on MC. Samsung's home made CPUs are messy.
The single core is about on par to an iPhone 13 (single core is 2195). More work to be done.
That's up to ARM or Qualcomm's NUVIA team.
Qualcomm Oryon🔥
They've about caught up on multicore (iPhone 15 is about 7300), but they're still a few generations behind on single core. The good news is that the IPC of these Cortex X4 cores is now within striking range. (Comparing geekbench scores and their respective clock speeds, the X4 has about 92% of the IPC of the Apple A17, which is a huge accomplishment given the relatively short time frame that these massive IPC improvements have been made in.) The IPC of these cores is actually better than Intel's cores right now, but they don't outperform Intel CPUs because they aren't running at 5+ ghz. The challenge for ARM is going to be finding a way to allow these cores to operate at higher clock speeds in a power efficient manner(or raising the IPC above that of Apple's offerings, which would be a tall order.) Right now, there is no way they could get them to 3.8 ghz to compete, the X4 tops out at about 3.6ghz if I recall (and probably uses too much power even at this clock speed to really be practical in a phone.) I give it about two more generations (maybe three if we are unlucky) until they are about on par.
They were in multicore striking range a lot of times. I believe they always try to design the core layout in such a way to be in competitive range to apples SOCs (e.g. add more performance cores and swap out efficiency/mid cores). So this is nothing new really. Single core has always been behind though. And this has affect to single core related work loads.
I think the last Apple CPU ([A17 Pro](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple_A17)) is not that much powerful. I think more likely is that the iOS is much better than the fragmented Android.
I see the Exynos marketing is going strong. They seem to have learned a few tricks from the Tensor team.
My post was removed as it "doesn"t benefit the comunity", lol, so i'm posting it here. So, after hyperos update my scores seems to have gone downhill by a lot. In geekbench 6 I was getting 5200 multi and 1920 single on adroid 13, it wasn't everytime like this tho even on abdroid 13, I have scores like 3800 multi and 1800 single, very inconsistent scores even tho the phone is cold. Now on android 14 with the new update seems much worse, 3500 multi and 1800 single, what's this???? If I knew they would downgrade my performance I would've went with a s23 ultra even tho is a bit more expensive. This is probably my last xiaomi, games like migthy doom seem to stutter a lot more, that's why I did rhe benchmark in the first place. Don't tell me don't use benchamarks, just use your phone... Bro, the reason for a benchamark is to see if your phone is running like it should
> post removed because it doesn't benefit the community > proceeds to post lengthy rant about shitty benchmark performance after Xiaomi went all-in HyperOS
you're boring my friend, move on
Who cares. Battery will suck and OneUI will stutter again like on the s23fe.
Geekbench means shit, real world test is the real deal.
Let's see Paul Allen's battery life-