Samsung Galaxy S II HD LTE benchmark tests
Share:
Out of the box, the handset is capable of executing most basic tasks, such as opening apps, kinetic scrolling, and pinch zooming will little problems at all. Furthermore, it delivers a great amount of fluidity while navigating through its various homescreens with a static wallpaper. However, after activating a live wallpaper, our spirits are dampened somewhat as it exhibits some bouts of lag and slowdown with its response. Furthermore, it doesn’t quite accurately track the movement as good as it did with a static live wallpaper. Again, we’ve seen this already with T-Mobile’s version of the Galaxy S II, but it’s not something that’s particularly evident in the Exynos packing versions of the handset. Nevertheless, the slowdown isn’t entirely a debilitating thing, but rather, it’s merely an annoyance that softens its overall processing prowess.
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |
From left to right AnTutu, AnTutu, Quadrant, Linpack, Vellamo, Vellamo, Neocore | ||||||
Moving on to the fun stuff, the benchmark results are undeniably stunning and catapults the handset easily into the upper echelon of things, but deep down in our minds, we can only contain our adulation for the simple reason that we’ll be seeing more quad-core packing devices very soon. So here are the results that we’re able to get:
- Quadrant: 3,300 to 3,777
- AnTutu: 6,574
- Linpack: 78.413 MFLOPS at 2.15 seconds
- Vellamo: 919
- Neocore: 57.8 FPS
Share:
We have nothing to do with Israeli tablet ad says Samsung 
Ed Norton and Daria Werbowy to be the faces of the LG Prada 3.0 
-
Yahoo's board agrees to $1.1 billion acquisition of Tumblr
-
Parting images and wrap-up from the last day of Google I/O
-
PhoneArena's John Velasco talks about the geek life
-
Up close demo of Epson Moverio glasses and YouTube functionality
-
Android talks and does Braille
-
Samsung officials confirm 5.9-inch Note III will come at IFA
40 Comments
19. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:27 3 0
I see samsung is still faking the I/O scores on the crapdragon. 3700 on a crapdragon?? lololol. nice try sammy.
for anyone that doesnt understand what im talking about. check the difference between the skyrocket HD and the Evo3D/sensation. They are both running the exact same chipset with just a minor variance in clock speed (which doesnt make that much of a difference). On quadrant, look at the increases in the Dark blue areas. On Velamo look how big the red and yellow are, but how small the "user experience" is... all while comparing it to the Evo3d/Sensation.
For those of you that think I worship Samsung, you obviously dont pay attention, since I nail them to the wall for this every darn time they try it.
2. JGuinan007 posted on 07 Feb 2012, 00:35 0 0
So how do thoughs scores compare to the SGS2 with Exynos processor?
3. GoodFella posted on 07 Feb 2012, 01:17 1 0
My Galaxy S II with Exynos (Overclocked to 1.6Ghz) will do about 4600 to 5000 on Quadrant.
7. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:21 3 1
they're pretty much the same which is BS because these S3s shouldn't be getting anywhere near those scores. i think it's a Samsung thing.
20. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:28 3 0
since samsung fakes the I/O scores on their crapdragon phones, its incomparable. If you want the real score difference, the proof is right there. Check the regular SGS2 vs the evo3d/sensation.
4. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 01:23 3 2
remixfa, why your "crapdragon " posted some pretty damn good results!
and oh my, it did that despite having a HD screen and gingerbread!
what happened?!
9. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:29 2 1
the scores are always sky high when you run Quadrant on a Galaxy S II for some reason regardless of SoC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LGnhXZxQb-Y
the first test this guy does in the video is of course Quadrant and so of course it's scoring highly but the next benchmark he performs is Smartbench which really knows what's up if you'll watch that through to the end you'll see. i'll take Smartbenches' word over Quadrant's because it shows consistent results.
6. cheetah2k posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:13 6 0
Are they cheating?
I'm pretty sure the real answer to this is that Samsung actually knows how to fully optimise the hardware for Android.....
10. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:51 2 1
@kingkurogii, what's BS is your reasoning, actually.
if Samsung is optimizing the s3, then what's Samsung doing with it's own Exynos?
can you give me some other phone running the Exynos?
oh yeah, it's Chinese Meizu phone!
12. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 03:17 1 1
actually it's not.
HTC optimizes the S3 for their Sense devices but it still sucks all the same. I'm not even saying Exynos should be getting those scores but it's far more likely based on real life performance. I have a Droid Razr and it's way snapper than my friend's sister's T-Mobile Galaxy S II. so really all you've done is add more BS reasoning to the pile. I never even mentioned Exynos. I'm saying these are unrealistic scores coming from anything running an S3 which is why I think Quadrant is pretty bad now hence my first comment.
22. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:32 1 0
what was your point, exactly?
All the proof you need is in the half dozen graphs at the top. Samsung messes with the I/O scores on the snapdragons to fluff the quadrant scores. Its as easy as looking at this phone vs the evo/sensation. Its the same chipset with only a minor variance in speed. If you want to say samsung is probably fluffing exynos, fine. Easy way to tell which chip is better without I/O scores is to ignore the dark blue area in quadrant.
11. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 02:53 2 1
.. my point is, there's no neutral reference.
for all we know , Exynos on HTC could suck compared to Exynos on Samsung
13. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 03:23 1 1
neutral reference? you're contradicting yourself for the sake of arguement. if Samsung is optimizing the S3 for their Galaxy S IIs then really the only differentiating factors between an S3 SII and an Exynos SII is sheer processor performance which means Exynos is simply better no matter what it's in, if it's an HTC device or a Samsung device, at least based on your logic.
14. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 04:00 1 2
no, you're not listening. how can HTC optimize s3?
you say so, so it makes it a fact?
what I'm bringing up are facts - snapdragon is a mass adopted soc, adopted by assemblers.
while Exynos is a basically exclusive used solution, by a chip know-how brand.
and since they both get pretty close in benchmarks on Samsung, that should mean they have pretty close base potential, right? it's a neutral reference.
HTC is not a chip manufacturer, they can just assemble what they get.
and you say you never mentioned Exynos but you nevertheless proclaimed s3 benchmark result to be BS, based on what?
your comparisons with previous s3 scores, which were, yeah, compared with Exynos. and again, that's not a neutral reference.
I'm just saying that until we see Exynos scores on some other brand than Samsung, we'll never have an objective picture about it
18. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:15 1 1
..wow, I've lost any faith in this being an intelligent conversation.
HTC's devices have been exclusively using Qualcomm chipsets for the past few years so naturally HTC devices are optimized for use with Qualcomm SoCs.
I say so because I believe it's fact like anyone would, yourself included and you're not exactly bringing any good arguments to the table.
no, they get similar scores on ONE benchmark which hasn't been updated in over a year. guess which factors I don't take very seriously. if you're going to think S3s are as good or better than Exynos just because Exynos is Homemade and Qualcomm is a more recognized mobile SoC supplier then you're really naive guy.
no, my proclamations were based off of S3s compared to...anything. they're trash. it doesn't even need to be compared to Exynos for you to be able to see that. maybe you should do some real life comparisons or you could just read this article if you'll take Phone Arena's word over mine.
so far there is really no reason to doubt the power of Exynos so believe me no one here wants to see Exynos on other brands more than me.
23. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:34 2 1
say it... say the word. u know you want to say it. :) :) :) come on KK, dont let me down!! :) lol
24. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:38 1 0
UH-OH! CRAPDRAGONS BE CRAPPING IT UP AGAIN. :P
*plays laugh track*
26. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:40 2 0
lolol. the laugh track just made it all good. :)
38. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 16:14 0 1
well i actually never thought you can make an intelligent argument to begin with.
by "mass adopted" i mean stock-generic used chip.
you know that ferrari and sauber and torro rosso f1 teams used the same ferrari engine?
guess which team had the strongest and best performing engine.
and say what you want, HTC didn't optimized snapdragon. pick your words carefully if you don't want to sound like a complete naive.
you and remixfa are obviously just a ginormous geeks that can't see beyond their benchmark chart picture collection.
40. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 21:44 0 0
you're the only one sounding naive here guy. xD
i'm starting to really stop caring about this discussion.
so just why hasn't HTC optimized their handsets to the S3 hmm?
39. darac posted on 07 Feb 2012, 16:21 0 1
well, i never thought you can make an intelligent discussion to begin with.
by "mass adopted" i mean stock, generic used material.
you know that ferrari, sauber and toro rosso f1 teams used the same ferari stock engine?
now guess which team's engine was by far the best performing.
and you can say what you wint, the fact is HTC can't optimize snapdragon.
pick your words carefully if you dont want to sound like a total naive.
you and remixfa are just a ginormous geeks that can't see beyond their benchmark photo collection(damn)..
25. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:38 2 1
there are so many differences between the exynos chip and the crapdragon chip its not funny. you dont have to be a big chip nerd like *ahem* some of us *ahem* to understand the difference. the crapdragon S3 is based on an different design than the more powerful exynos. There is a reason that crapdragon is bottom of the barrel. The Tegra2, Omap, and Exynos all follow a different design path than the crapdragon.
Being mass adopted doesnt make you special, it makes you cheap. Mass adoption is good for qualcomm's wallet, but that doesnt mean its the best chip around... not by far. Even the upcoming quad core S4 crapdragons are barely more powerful than the current Exynos 4210 processor. The updated 4212 dual core exynos is more powerful than the S4. And the quad core exynos that should be launching this year eats them both for breakfast.
PS.
There is another place you can find exynos besides samsung and chinese phones. Have you ever heard of.... the iphone4s? or the ipad2? The A5 chip that resides in them is a rebranded Exynos with a different GPU.
15. Bluesky02 posted on 07 Feb 2012, 04:30 0 0
I'm glad to see improvement for Qualcomm Snapdragon. I wish it brings those improvement to Windows Phones.
17. willardcw4 posted on 07 Feb 2012, 07:46 1 1
"and pinch zooming will little problems at all"
typo? will = with?
21. networkdood posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:30 1 0
I have seen pics of the Samsung Galaxy S1 get 2900 quadrant scores - quadrant scores really mean very little...there are better ways to test a phone out.....
29. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 09:27 0 0
https://plus.google.com/photos
/100459156021696505642/albums/ 5522416260905954785?authkey=CK nioemf7cu3mAE
that should be my whole benchmark album. Destroyed this skyrocket on the vellamo test as well, 1247 score. 3rd highest on the chart. :)
30. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 09:35 0 0
xD every time you post pictures via G+ it fails.
31. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 09:49 0 0
long battery life with 4.0.3
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/Kxoq5t3BrEwPR 03ILGCtHwxawqNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=dir&# 8203ectlink
4.0.3 proof
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/qXTxCpOdLC3resYa iA9bKQqNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=direc tlink
vellamo proof
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/cPLgBRfIy3JCNmdsUfSxAg qNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=directlin&# 8203k
vellamo chart (3rd place, it formats stupidly)
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/-sBBgo4qpxW37HsF0Yw1XQqNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=directlink
velamo score
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/R2srpe8u8wW6v-5SS8nGsQqNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=directlink
3200+ quadrant
https://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/z5W_0OLo_dewtGYpriPd4g qNjQApA-5NJOL7CbtFCfQ?feat=directlink
All on my SGS1
full album links
https://picasaweb.google.com/100459156021696505642/Benchmark s?authuser=0&feat=directlink
one of these has to work.. lol. i even went to picasaweb directly, changed sharing to everyone, and redid all the links. unless PA has some sort of way of killing the links. Worse comes to worse, u can always just add me on G+ :)
33. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 11:34 0 0
3 not founds and 4 bad requests. xD
34. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 11:37 1 0
W....T....F!?!?!!? lol. better find me on G+ then. lol
28. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 08:59 0 0
yea, i just got over 1200 on my SGS1 on the velamo score. And its just a single core Hummingbird (clocked at 1.4ghz), not the dual core snapdragon clocked to 1.5ghz
32. theBankRobber posted on 07 Feb 2012, 11:10 0 0
I don't trust any of these benchmark apps. After my og evo 4g got gingerbread, it scored lower on these test then it did on froyo.
36. remixfa posted on 07 Feb 2012, 11:48 0 0
i just found you on G+. took like 3 secs with all that info you have flying around :) :)
37. KingKurogiii posted on 07 Feb 2012, 11:54 0 0
YOU BETTER NOT HAVE FOUND MY SECRET FORTRESS OF EVIL! :P
