x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Hidden picShow menu
  • Home
  • News
  • First Galaxy TabPRO benchmarks show Samsung's upcoming tablets will cope with the high resolution

First Galaxy TabPRO benchmarks show Samsung's upcoming tablets will cope with the high resolution

First Galaxy TabPRO benchmarks show Samsung's upcoming tablets will cope with the high resolution
Being among the bigger names at this year's CES tradeshow, the new Samsung Galaxy TabPRO tablet series easily made it to the list of devices that we wanted to spend a bit more time with. And what better way to spend time with some cool, new devices than to enjoy the grandeur of the most popular benchmark applications running seamlessly on those big screens! Yes, we've run Quadrant, AnTuTu, GFXBench and other popular benchmarking tools on Samsung's complete Galaxy TabPRO line, and we have the results right here, compared to some of the signature devices in the industry.

Before you dive in, though, we have to point out that the benchmark tests have been run on early versions of the Snapdragon 800-powered Galaxy TabPROs, so the results below may not be entirely indicative of the performance of the retail units, which will hopefully launch soon.

BENCHMARK

Quadrant
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 22656
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 20948
Sony Xperia Tablet Z 7657
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 19172
Google Nexus 7 (2013) 5854
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 22270
AnTuTu
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 33129
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 32806
Sony Xperia Tablet Z 19675
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 32408
Google Nexus 7 (2013) 19786
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 31543
GFXBench Egypt HD 2.5 onscreen (fps)
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 45
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 45
Apple iPad Air 49
Sony Xperia Tablet Z 31
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 36
Google Nexus 7 (2013) 40
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 54
Vellamo Metal
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 1126
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 945
Sony Xperia Tablet Z 646
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 1258
Google Nexus 7 (2013) 692
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 1214
Vellamo HTML 5
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 1792
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 1168
Sony Xperia Tablet Z 2260
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 2721
Google Nexus 7 (2013) 1571
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 2766
Sunspider
Lower is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 784.0
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 612.6
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 599
GFXBench T-Rex HD on-screen
Higher is better
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 10.1 17
Samsung Galaxy Tab Pro 8.4 17
Apple iPad Air 23.2
Samsung GALAXY Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) 13.8
Samsung Galaxy Note 3 26
View all


15 Comments
  • Options
    Close






posted on 09 Jan 2014, 07:44

1. Chakra (Posts: 130; Member since: 02 Dec 2009)


interesting to see that there really isn't any consistency within the benchmarks with similar spec'd devices.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 07:47

3. Birds (Posts: 1164; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)


IKR... Its all the reason for me to believe OEMs employ benchmark inflation to make their devices stand out from the crowd....JS...

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:05 1

6. _Bone_ (Posts: 2155; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


Wrong. Numbers differ cause of testing environment differs, temperatures, CPU/GPU load, background processes and screen brightness all affect performance, "cheated" or "not cheated". Firmware, charging also makes a difference.

If a benchmark tool shows the same exact number every time without 5-10% of fluctuation, that benchmark tool is useless.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 11:21

13. Chakra (Posts: 130; Member since: 02 Dec 2009)


I'm just referring to how they compare to each other. Let's take actual numbers out of the equation shall we, and just rank the them. In parenthesis, just rank them by TabPro.

Quadrant
TabPro 10.1 - 1st place (1)
TabPro 12.2 - 3rd place (2)
TabPro 8.4 - 4th Place (3)

Antututu
TabPro 10.1 - 3rd place (3)
TabPro 12.2 - 1st Place (1)
TabPro 8.4 - 2nd place (2)

GFXBench Egypt
TabPro 10.1 - Tied 3rd
TabPro 12.2 - Tied 3rd
TabPro 8.4 - Tied 3rd

Vellamo Metal
TabPro 10.1 - 4th (2)
TabPro 12.2 - 3rd (1)
TabPro 8.4 - 5th (3)

Vellamo HTML5
TabPro 10.1 - 3rd (1)
TabPro 12.2 - 4th (2)
TabPro 8.4 - 5th (3)

Sunspider
TabPro 10.1 - 2nd (2)
TabPro 12.2 - 1st (1)
TabPro 8.4 - 3rd (3)

GFXBench T-Rex
TabPro 10.1 - tied 2nd (1)
TabPro 12.2 - 4th (2)
TabPro 8.4 - tied 2nd (1)

So my point is, you'd think logically the 12.2 would be fastest, then 10.1, and then 8.4, across the board, regardless of what actual numbers is shown. Now how did they test these devices I don't know. For all we know, it's numbers from a Samsung powerpoint slide. What's even funny is that the Note 3 is just as, or more powerful than these tablets - and before the argument is made that the note 3 is smaller, then that same argument could made with the 8.4 vs 10.1, but 8.4 vs 10.1 doesn't reflect it. Just interesting.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 15:29

15. Birds (Posts: 1164; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)


I know that much but that wasn't what I was talking about...I'm actually talking about a reputation not the scores in relation to specs and benchmarking conditions.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:42

10. hipnotika (Posts: 353; Member since: 06 Mar 2013)


BECAUSE OF RESOLUTION , FLASH DISK AND RAM SPECS :)

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 07:46

2. Birds (Posts: 1164; Member since: 21 Nov 2011)


Who cares about benchmarks... Anything with an A15 processor (Dual core, quad core, hexa core, octa core, ninacore, decacore, a trillion cores, whatever) of any kind with a minimum of 2 gigs of DDR3 ram will be relatively lag-less on android.... And anything with Adreno 305, comparable or greater will do fine in real world performance.

I mean the Nexus 7 (2013) and Xperia Tablet Z both have re-branded snapdragon 600s or, refined S4 Pros if you will, that upgrades the memory cache from DDR2 to DDR3 compared to the older, 2012 S4 Pros.... And considering the extreme optimization present with kitkat, benchmarks just don't matter to me anymore....

Not to mention, Samsung has a track record of inflating their scores... I just wouldn't be surprised if their devices have slow downs and hangups considering how heavy their skin is. Benchmarks say one thing but real world performance says another. I'll wait and see....

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:02

4. _Bone_ (Posts: 2155; Member since: 29 Oct 2012)


The Exynos version I believe runs at 1.9GHz on stock, which is about the clock the Note 3 & 2014 did while "cheating". It's also supposed to be a true Octa.

Good times!

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:04

5. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 3718; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)


This is great, performances with powers.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:17 1

7. kaikuheadhunterz (Posts: 1157; Member since: 18 Jul 2013)


...at a hefty price

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:25

8. PapaSmurf (Posts: 10457; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Benchmarks shouldn't be an indicator if something is great or not. Don't believe me? Look at the iPad Air on that graph up there.

PS - Did anyone notice the change on PA with the author and time of the article written?

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 08:39

9. Rajanvir (Posts: 56; Member since: 11 Dec 2013)


Xolo-Play-Tegra-Note scores more from this running on TEGRA 4

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 10:07 1

12. theoak (Posts: 324; Member since: 16 Nov 2011)


Samsung tweaks their OS anyway for benchmarks ... so can the benchmark results be trusted?

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 12:29

14. JMartin22 (Posts: 1984; Member since: 30 Apr 2013)


Every OEM optimizes their code to achieve the highest marks possible. This isn't a Samsung thing.

posted on 09 Jan 2014, 18:19

16. Palladium (Posts: 21; Member since: 09 Nov 2013)


I'm pretty sure I got 36K in Antutu with a stock Note 3 N9005.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories