Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 benchmark scores here: testing the Exynos 4412
In the Galaxy Note 8.0 we have an 8-inch 1,280 x 800-pixel IPS display powered by the Exynos 4412, the same chip that powered last year’s Galaxy S III and definitely a great processor on its own. The clock speed is set at 1.6GHz for each of the four cores. The graphical unit is ARM’s Mali 400, which we found on the Note 10.1. There is also 2GB of RAM memory. And now we get to see the first benchmark scores from the device.
We ran Quadrant Standard Edition on the pre-release unit of the Note 8.0 we saw on the showroom floor and got a pretty decent (but not stellar in any way) score of 6,995. Take a look at our quick hands on to see how the device performed.
18. AnTuTu posted on 24 Feb 2013, 19:28 1 2
Very nice Sammy. And also I am really very impressed with Alcatel's new champ as well :) way to go guys :)
21. kclgphilsbsa posted on 24 Feb 2013, 21:33 1 0
will the galaxy note8 be the only device we'll see from samsung this MWC??
wer are the tab3s?
2. rihel_95 posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:04 9 2
I think PA refering 6000+ score as "pretty decent score" as HTC One has 12000 score on Quadrant. But clearly we can see that 6000+ score is a lot of score when compared with others(i.e HTC One X, S3 etc). For me, its a great score.
4. Whateverman posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:20 4 2
Your comment made me wonder if HTC will get back into tablets with a design based on the One. Throw in the Snapdragon 800 and they may have another hit on their hands.
8. kartik4u98 posted on 24 Feb 2013, 14:01 3 1
But...Snapdragon 800 isn't out yet...
I think that 600 will be enough considering the perfomance of it..
23. Whateverman posted on 24 Feb 2013, 22:49 0 0
Hey, technically neither is the 600 but somebody has to be the first. Can you imagine an even more powerful chip than the 600 in a tablet? Oh, yeah!
17. KingKurogiii posted on 24 Feb 2013, 18:59 1 0
as long as they don't grossly overprice it like they did with their last suite of Tablets they should do fine.
26. terabyteRouser posted on 27 Feb 2013, 08:34 0 0
problem is, is that 6000 is a last gen score. def don't want to buy a new under performing device when better stuff is already here.
3. drpain posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:16 8 6
1280x800 is not good enough for 2013, especially on an 8 inch device. Who the hell designs these things.....?
5. urtard (banned) posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:40 7 5
and who do you think you are to say what the standards are? rofl fatass neckbeard
6. maccess posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:46 6 1
the designer just want to avoid the lawsuit from apple i think.. lol.. but in terms of performance & features i think it's more than decent..
7. g2a5b0e posted on 24 Feb 2013, 13:48 7 2
Why is everyone a resolution snob all of a sudden? There are no tablets in the 7-8" range that have hit 1080 yet. The highest I've seen is the Nook HD with a 1440x900 resolution on a 7" screen. Considering you don't hold a tablet anywhere near your face like a phone, 1280x800 on a 8" is more than adequate.
12. darac posted on 24 Feb 2013, 15:54 0 4
What are you saying?
That you hold a tablet at twice greater distance than a phone?
Then why would you use a tablet in the first place?
The relative viewing surface size would be almost the same!
When a look at ipad mini from 35 cm (a bit more than one ft), I can see so much pixelization it really bothers me.
22. g2a5b0e posted on 24 Feb 2013, 21:40 0 0
I'm not sure that anything you said makes any sense.
24. darac posted on 25 Feb 2013, 01:59 0 0
Let me dumb it down to you then.. at sub 200ppi, the jaggines is totally visible on a tablet, if you hold it at normal viewing distance.
The screen needs to be at least in the 230+ ppi range, to look decently sharp.
You can make it look sharp by holding the tablet at 2ft distance, but then what's the point?
8'' tablet at 2ft looks as large as the 4.8'' phone from 1ft
25. g2a5b0e posted on 25 Feb 2013, 10:21 0 0
Judging from the thumbs on your last, no one else understood what you were saying either.
14. _Bone_ posted on 24 Feb 2013, 16:53 0 2
True. If Samsung goes bold and cuts under the iPad Mini (that's the one it's going against), at $299 it'd be a great buy. Better specs and slightly better resolution, microSD slot, Wacom digitizer, AirView & MultiView, Jelly Bean experience, low power consumption, great package.
If it goes over the iPad Mini price however (with the digitizer it's unfortunately probable), then much ado about nothing, I'll rather look for the updated Nexus 7, iPad Mini or Nexus 10 for slightly more around June.
9. k1ng617 posted on 24 Feb 2013, 14:17 1 0
Wow it really is like they just stuck a Galaxy Note 2 into an enlarging ray and poof Galaxy Note 8.0. Same specs just bigger...
10. Rafyvitto posted on 24 Feb 2013, 15:03 0 0
Using quadrant to benchamrk todays devices is a joke....using Egl 1.0 graphics to benchmark an egl 3.0 directx9 capable device is unacceptable, stop using outdated benchmarking tools, use epiccitadel.GLbenchmark 2.5 etc etc....
11. darac posted on 24 Feb 2013, 15:45 3 1
The first Tegra 4 benchmarks!!
The scores are nothing short of staggering:
Antutu - 36 000
Quadrant - 16 000
Glbenchmark 2.5 offscreen - 57fps
15. Hemoroid posted on 24 Feb 2013, 17:11 1 3
This Sammy octacore is a best, HTC one cannot compare! And you applefanboys just stop wining...
27. terabyteRouser posted on 27 Feb 2013, 08:35 0 0
but htc one is twice as fast? what are you saying?
19. DerryAhmad posted on 24 Feb 2013, 20:15 1 0
I was thinking to get this device to replace my Galaxy Tab 7,7. The Note 8.0 has newer OS, the S-Pen functionality and better processor. But I like the Tab 7,7 aluminium design better not to mention it has S-Amoled display, and bigger battery.
Wonder why Samsung ditch the Tab 7,7 design and premium build and go with the plasticky and tired S-III /Note II/S-III Mini design??
20. kclgphilsbsa posted on 24 Feb 2013, 21:19 0 1
im hoping that they just want to make the space filled.. and when the next generation of this note8 will arrive with the next gen note and note10.1
anyway, when will the tab3 be unveiled?
how abt the note 10.1 2?