New Snapdragon 800 MDP benchmarks make us think we'll see real world difference with this one
0. phoneArena 18 Jun 2013, 19:58 posted on
In general, when we see benchmark results that blow the roof off of what we've seen before, there is always the question in the back of our minds, "Okay, but will it actually matter in real world usage?" For the most part, differences in benchmarks are designed for the spec fetishists, and don't make much difference in the real world. But, new benchmarks from the Snapdragon 800 MDP make us think that this time around, we'd feel the difference...
This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here
13. akki20892 (Posts: 3244; Member since: 04 Feb 2013)
Nokia too. but don't know which phone maybe phablet.
3. mottykels (Posts: 364; Member since: 15 May 2013)
Can you observe the difference snapdragon 600 and 800 without using benchmark apps?
4. Commentator (Posts: 2293; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
The point of this article is that PhoneArena is betting, based on benchmark scores, the difference will be observable. Since the 800 hasn't been featured in any devices yet, we don't know for sure.
19. TheLolGuy (Posts: 483; Member since: 05 Mar 2013)
Well due to the faster GPU I'd think the 'real world' difference would be a smoother UI and less jankiness for 1080p screens (I've noticed a little on the S4 I own)
Apps would load a tad bit faster, but nowadays the improvements are by milliseconds so it'd be barely noticeable by the average guy.
Poorly optimized code/apps would probably see a bigger boost I guess.
21. Droid_X_Doug (Posts: 5530; Member since: 22 Dec 2010)
"Poorly optimized code/apps would probably see a bigger boost I guess."
Yup-per. It would make poorly optimized apps run as if they had been designed for the device. UI performance would give a new meaning to butter (as in buttery smooth).
5. cheetah2k (Posts: 768; Member since: 16 Jan 2011)
Great benchmarks but at what clock speed? How about trying S800 vs Exynos at 1.6ghz and see who is faster... (I assume the S800 will be, but need to compare apples to apples)
35. pulkit.tyagi (banned) (Posts: 35; Member since: 15 Nov 2012)
at 1.6 ghz octa will be faster but s800 will be noticeably more power efficient .
we have to consider performance / power draw(TDP). since octa can not be clocked even at 2ghz(thermal limit) so effectively s800 offers more performance but at higher clock speed.
6. Nathan_ingx (Posts: 2992; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
With the benchmark score difference of more than 5k, i think real world performance can be differentiated from the rest.
8. faisolbauuz (Posts: 121; Member since: 05 Jan 2013)
Whoa even exynos octa are crushed by this considering it is the strongest avaible soc right now
10. VJo003 (Posts: 320; Member since: 11 Mar 2012)
"blow the roof off" has a whole new meaning now :-D
11. Commentator (Posts: 2293; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)
And to think, just a few years ago a Quadrant score of 1,000 was considered impressive.
12. PermanentHiatus (Posts: 267; Member since: 22 Jun 2012)
Impressive! This will be in the Galaxy Note 3.
14. Cha7520 (Posts: 206; Member since: 31 Oct 2010)
If you are not playing games on your smartphone, why do you need these insane speeds for??
25. Itchi (Posts: 2; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
If you are not playing games, your clockspeed should stay so low that you will notice this in your battery life;-) Thus better processors also result in a lower clockspeed for normal usage
16. varuntis1993 (Posts: 43; Member since: 13 Jun 2012)
i think intel silvermont will give it a tough competion.....:)
17. Shatter (Posts: 1967; Member since: 29 May 2013)
It should be about double the power of this while getting better battery life, intel has nothing to worry about.
26. livyatan (Posts: 650; Member since: 19 Jun 2013)
Wow, what utter BS
How deluded, biased and clueless can you be?
This SoC scores a bit over 4000 in geekbench.
The Haswell in new Macbook Air scores a bit over 6000.
So I guess your omnipotent Silvermont will absolutely trash the 3 times more expensive, most advanced Intel chip too!!
20. anGel_pLayer (Posts: 49; Member since: 29 Jun 2012)
Good for tablets... S600 would suffice for phones....
23. itsdeepak4u2000 (Posts: 2329; Member since: 03 Nov 2012)
Nvidia is also coming strongly with their chipsets.
24. rd_nest (Posts: 684; Member since: 06 Jun 2010)
This happens when uneducated people talk about technology.
If you put any trust in Quadrant scores you could use them to prove that dancing naked for 5 minutes in your garden affects device performance.
27. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 771; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)
Considering the fact that this runs at 2.3GHz, of course it will benchmark higher than any other SoC, now if we had the upcoming Tegra, the Exynos 5 Octa and the S800 clocked at 2.3GHz, THEN we'd see which is truly the best... although, I wonder, how do all these chips compare to the Apple A6X chip in the iPad4? Are we still waiting for a challenger or has it been beaten?
28. Insignificant (Posts: 189; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
And there's a reason why they are not clocked that high... thermal and battery efficiency, or lack of. The high clock of this doesn't take away from this, it adds to it. The battery life and thermal efficiency of this destroy the other two chips as the other two, at 2.3gHz would destroy probably most tablets let alone phones.
I can't understand why you think it takes away from the s800. The exynos and tegra have failed in this generation. When will you understand that?
30. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 771; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)
No, it's because they do not require to be clocked that high as they are powerful enough to handle the tasks similarly to their Snapdragon counterparts, Snapdragons have always required a higher clock to have any slight advantage over an Exynos going back to the S2 vs Exynos 4, the Exynos ran at 1.2GHz while the Qualcomm S2 ran at 1.5GHz, yet the Exynos could run rings around it, and when the Note arrived with a 1.4GHz Exynos 4, it destroyed the S2, which had manufacturers clocking it up to 1.7GHz for decent performance.
The proof is there, at 1.6GHz the Exynos is already close, at 1.8GHz it's on par with S800 and at 2.3GHz? Well, I think we both know it would destroy the Smapdragon.
How are the Exynos and Tegra a fail? One is in the best selling Android which has been the benchmark for 2013 so far and the other is hardly in any device, lol.
31. Insignificant (Posts: 189; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
Even a msm8960T is 'enough', what's your point?
It's as if you are intentionally ignoring basic reality. An exynos clocked at 2.3gHz would either melt a phone, or at the very least perform worse than an s4 pro because it would be throttled so bad.
In mobile devices, power isn't everything. The 4+4 exynos is half-baked anyway. Samsung rushed it out. Do they have any consideration for consumers? If this was a desktop with a few fans, then yes, exynos would be better. I can guarantee you won't see a 2 gHz exynos quad this year, the current one runs so hot...
And funny you should bring up 2 years old stories. You still living in yesteryears? Last year, the s4 dual rivalled the exynos quad, shown by the fact that both s3s had them. It also had LTE since the beginning of the year, which exynos in 2013 fails to address in a wide scale. The s4 pro beat it.
And about the tegra, that's my point. It's not in any device. Which is the biggest automatic proof of it being a fail so late in the year.
Qualcomm is dominating. I can't wait to see their next architecture.
39. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 771; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)
Even if the Exynos 5 is half baked, considering it made mince meat of the S600 at a lower clock says a lot, and the fact that it can hold its own against the newer and higher clocked S800 speaks volumes, Qualcomm require two products a year to actually try beat Exynos, so it's not in anyway a fail, it does not work in the way some expected, yes, but it has proven to be one hell of a SoC. nobody said you'll see a 2GHz Exynos, I doubt we will until late next year, A15 Cortex is seriously powerful and doesn't require ridiculously high clocks to match or beat Krait, the highest you'll see is 1.8GHz.
AFAIK the Tegra has been under development this year, so it's not a fail, not until we see it in an official device.
43. Insignificant (Posts: 189; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
Stick to talking about content on iPads and Samsung tablets. It seems you'll never understand basic points about this. I almost feel offended that you basically have just ignored basic facts and logic.
36. pulkit.tyagi (banned) (Posts: 35; Member since: 15 Nov 2012)
please understand there is a thermal limit that these arm chips have to meet in order to be used in fanless devices .
if octa is clocked at 2.3 ghz it will most definitely exceed 7w TDP while s800's TDP is in the range of s600 which is less than 3w.
38. true1984 (Posts: 582; Member since: 23 May 2012)
you're thinking of the s3 vs exynos 3 since the quad-core s4 killed the exynos 4 when they were clocked at the same speeds. but i'm not sure exynos was made to run as high as the s800 and it might actually kill the phone or tablet if it was
32. OptimusOne (Posts: 694; Member since: 22 May 2012)
Qualcomm: Yes, we'll have to go right to... Ludicrous speed!
[The entire Android World gasps.]
A brave user: Ludicrous speed?! Sir, we've never gone that fast before! I don't know if Android can take it!
Qualcomm: What's the matter brave user? Chicken?
A brave user: [stuttering, sounding much like a chicken] Prepare phones-- [more clearly] Prepare phones for ludicrous speed! Fasten all screws, seal all screens, close all micro-sd slots! Cancel the standard benchmarks! Secure all apps in the drawer--
Qualcomm: Give me that, you petty excuse for a user! (Takes the microphone) Now hear this! Ludicrous speed--
A brave user: Sir, you'd better buckle up!
Qualcomm: Ah, buckle this! Ludicrous speed, go!
[Qualcomm is screaming as he sees various warp trails on the monitor. Meanwhile, there are signs lighting up indicating "LIGHT SPEED", "RIDICULOUS SPEED", and a flashing "LUDICROUS SPEED" sign]
Qualcomm: What have I done?! My brains are going into my feet!
33. mrblah (Posts: 393; Member since: 22 Jan 2013)
i wonder how this will compare to A7/ this is good stuff!
34. Paradox (Posts: 123; Member since: 08 Aug 2012)
Quadrant test is a joke of a benchmark. I wouldn't use it to gauge a phone's performance. Let's see the snapdragon 800 run on a proper mark, like 3dmark.
37. pulkit.tyagi (banned) (Posts: 35; Member since: 15 Nov 2012)
yah anandtech has done a full battery of tests and come to a conclusion that wile cpu is impressive almost as fast as tegra 4 reference design , the gpu adreno 330 is the real start it is faster than sgx554mp4 in ipad 4!
40. Tsepz_GP (Posts: 771; Member since: 12 Apr 2012)
The Adreno330 GPU has certainly impressed me, but I doubt it will stay on top for long, as usual the next Apple iPhone and iPad will rock the most powerful hardware in mobile, put together by Samsung.
42. Insignificant (Posts: 189; Member since: 22 Sep 2012)
You're ignorance is beyond belief - it's like you're a cross Apple-Samsung sheep. Imagination technology gets no mention when it's actually their GPU, but the iPhone, with a weak CPU and Samsung who just fill the part of a manual labourer in this scenario do?
The s800, overall, will annihilate anything in the next iPhone or iPad, don't you just love system on chips with integrated LTE?
41. 46modnar (Posts: 14; Member since: 26 Mar 2013)
3DMark(normal) score = 19722 according to:
CNET review "qualcomm-snapdragon-800-incinerates-the-competition"
Sorry, PA won't let me post the URL 'cause I don't have enough posts.