[ad_1]
One of the most thorough covers of AnandTech last year was our analysis of two different versions of the Galaxy S9 and Galaxy Note9. In particular, we explained the fairly large differences between the units offered with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845 and Samsung's own Exynos 9820.
This year again, we see Samsung continuing its double sourcing strategy in the new Galaxy S10. This time we compare the new Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 to Samsung's Exynos 9820. We have been able to thoroughly compare the new Snapdragon 855 at CES, but we know little about the new Exynos 9820.
At the unveiling of last year's Galaxy S9 at the MWC2018, we were able to rate the phone immediately after the press conference. Unfortunately, this year, when Samsung dedicated the launch to a completely different event in San Francisco, we could not get our hands on the units immediately. It took a while, but with the help of colleagues at TechRadar, I was able to briefly access the two units of the Galaxy S10 and run a few quick fixes.
I kept things to a minimum and chose to use only PCMark and Speedometer 2.0 – the two benchmarks are among my favorite in terms of performance representation and performance. the actual perceived experience of a smartphone. Both phones were set up in performance mode and running the firmware sampled by Samsung.
In the PCMark web browsing test, the new Galaxy S10 works well. What is interesting to see here is that, compared to the scores we initially recorded on the Qualcomm reference device in January, the Snapdragon 855 Galaxy S10 represents a noticeable improvement and seems to be a better representation of the capacity of the chip compared to the QRD. .
It should be noted that the comparisons that I make today all relate to the new firmware of Android 9. I do not have the actualized figures for the Exynos S9 nor the Snapdragon Note9, but the latest figures for the Snapdragon S9 and Exynos Note9. which should be identical to their counterparts in the sister series.
The new Exynos 9820 Galaxy S10 now features a significant performance upgrade compared to the Exynos 9810 unit last year. The new chip numbers are better than the Snapdragon 845, but they can not match either the Snapdragon 855 or the HiSilicon Kirin 980 – both of which are based on the latest Arm Cortex A76 CPU cores .
The video editing test is less relevant nowadays because the differences in performance between different platforms are quite minor. Nevertheless, the new Exynos still displays a distinct difference in performance compared to its Snapdragon counterpart, similar to last year's.
The write test is probably the most important element of PCMark when it comes to representing the experienced performance of a device. The Snapdragon 855 Galaxy S10 matches the performance of the QRD, which is excellent.
The new Exynos 9820 Galaxy S10 represents a major breakthrough for Samsung, recording double what we had seen on Exynos 9810 devices last year. This probably means that Samsung has solved some of the most important performance issues that affect the Exynos S9 / Note9. The phone is still lagging behind the new Snapdragon 855 as well as the Kirin 980. We do not know if this persistent difference is due to the hardware or the planner. We will not be able to know it until further investigation later date.
In the photo editing test, we find that the new Exynos 9820 has a similar performance twice as good as last year's Samsung Silicon. It is clear here that the difference is due to the new improved responsiveness of the programmer, because the workload is not necessarily limited in terms of bit rate. Persistent performance losses on Snapdragon and Kirin chipsets, however, indicate that our Samsung APIs are still not optimized.
Finally, the data manipulation score is more of a workload limited to a single thread. Here, the new Snapdragon 855 Galaxy S10 takes the first place among the devices. The new Exynos 9820 does not lag behind and represents a significant advantage over the Galaxy S9 in both versions.
Turning now to a browser reference, the new Galaxy S10 has almost identical performance. The performance of the Snapdragon 855 is much better than the QRD we tested in January, but it still lags behind the Kirin 980.
The performance of the Exynos 9820 is a huge improvement over the Exynos 9810. The result presented here represents not only the best planner, but also hardware improvements from the new cluster and microarchitecture concepts.
Performance looks "OK" for Exynos – though Snapdragon seems to be in the lead
Overall, the new Galaxy S10 is up to expectations. The performance of the Snapdragon 855 Galaxy S10 is not surprising, as we had covered the chipset in detail during the Qualcomm performance preview event. In fact, the Galaxy S10 is more efficient than the QRD, which eliminates some of the worries we had originally. It should be noted that Qualcomm is still lagging behind HiSilicon Kirin 980 in some respects, probably due to the higher latency of the latter's memory.
The performance of the new Exynos 9820 is much better than last year's 9810. Samsung seems to have taken note of the slowness of the planner that has affected the three generations of Samsung SoC. In addition to some obvious software enhancements, the new M4 microarchitecture also seems to have improved its performance. Samsung claims that its performance is 20% higher than the 9810, which seems reasonable.
Battery life to be determined
Current results are only a bare minimum in terms of comparative analysis of Samsung's new devices. Although the new Exynos 9820 is not up to the performance of the Snapdragon 855, it is not as contrasted as last year.
More importantly, there remains a big open question: energy efficiency. As we saw in our Snapdragon 855 overview, the new Cortex A76 cores installed on a new 7nm process node deliver outstanding performance. The HiSilicon Kirin 980 is able to handle some of the most powerful endurance devices today, and I hope the Snapdragon 855 will be able to do the same. If the new Exynos is able to achieve the same goal, we will have to know it later. We must keep in mind that the Samsung chipset not only has to solve its microarchitectural efficiency problems, but also has a drawback in terms of process fabrication, because the chip is produced on a process (theoretically) lower than 8 nm .
Unfortunately, we will have the Galaxy S10 internally for review only after the March 8 public release.th – So we'll have to be a bit more patient before we can publish a more detailed analysis of Samsung's new flagship devices.
Related reading
[ad_2]
Source link