A Samsung tablet with 4GB of RAM and a high-end, 14nm Intel processor spotted on Geekbench


An unknown Samsung tablet, codenamed CHOPIN-LTE, has been spotted in Geekbench's database of devices that have gone through its benchmark tests. 

A total of 4 passes through the software were recorded in the span of just 24 hours, starting on May 6th, giving Geekbench enough data about the device for us to start drawing some conclusions. Perhaps the most important one at this point is that the mysterious tablet will be positioned as a high-end product, considering the trail of rather impressive hardware specs.

So far, we only know that the CHOPIN-LTE runs on Android 5.1 Lollipop and is powered by the whopping 4 gigs of RAM and one of the 2015 crop of Intel processors for tablets — the Atom x5-Z8500. It's a new chip, built on the 14nm Cherry Trail platform, with four cores clocked at 2.24GHz and an 8th generation Intel graphics on board. The score the configuration managed is 1005 points in the single-core test and 3425 points in the multi-core test, suggesting performance similar to that of the Samsung Galaxy Note 4. Of course, given how the resolution of the slate in question remains unknown, it could be that the device actually performs even better, but is anchored by an even more monstrous pixel resolution.

Could this be the oft-rumored Galaxy Tab S2, which is said to be powered by an unspecified, 64-bit processor?

source: Geekbench via WinFuture


FEATURED VIDEO

58 Comments

1. ultratechguy unregistered

Might as well put Windows 10 or Ubuntu/Linux Mint in it at this kind of power.

3. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

The processor is powerful but not that great. Besides it might suffer from short battery life with Windows as against Android.

5. Settings

Posts: 2943; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

Between Windows and Android, Android is the one who is spec hungry. Windows on the other hand can be optimized to play well with last years specs and still deliver flagship performance. Short battery life is with Android.

8. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

Indeed. Android is famous for wasting resources of any kind.

10. Ordinary

Posts: 2454; Member since: Apr 23, 2015

Lumia 635 has the longest duration of Windows Phone at 9.35 hours while top Android have BLU Studio Energy at 14.53 hours

35. PorkyBurger

Posts: 585; Member since: May 18, 2013

and so? Lumia 635 has just 1850mAh battery, while BLU uses more than two times bigger, 5000mAh one. and the improvement in battery life isnt as big. Also, chipset on Lumia is better, imo...Mali-400 is just plain crap, god.

40. Ordinary

Posts: 2454; Member since: Apr 23, 2015

Compare pixel density

41. hemedans

Posts: 755; Member since: Jun 01, 2013

phonearena with their bias they dont want to test lumia 1520. go to gsmarena you will see who is the king

58. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

and what about their latest flagship Lumia 930 ? Lumia 1520 is a bulky phone with 3400mah battery. Ofc it will have good battery life. To compare a two year old phone with today's flagships with 2k displays isn't very smart.

59. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

Windows Phone's latest and greatest, Lumia 930, disagrees.

57. TechieXP1969

Posts: 14967; Member since: Sep 25, 2013

This is an Atom Processor. It's a low voltage cpu this low battery usage vs like a pent class cpu.

13. medicci37

Posts: 1361; Member since: Nov 19, 2011

If it's high end I don't see why Samsung would use a processor that is only about as powerful as the Note 4 when they have a more efficient 14nm exynos available.

16. Techist

Posts: 311; Member since: Jan 27, 2015

Agreed! The Note 4 with an Exynos 5433 Processor scores better on Geekbench: 1164 single core and 4012 multi-core (versus this one's 1005 and 3425). The Galaxy S6 processor does even better: 1306 and 4388. That leads me to conclude that this tablet is definitely not high end. Or maybe they are just comparing Intel's 14nm processor to their own.

42. hemedans

Posts: 755; Member since: Jun 01, 2013

x7-high end x5-mid x3-low this tab use x5 so it is not high end.

31. guest

Posts: 371; Member since: Jun 13, 2012

Uh I wouldn't be too quick to judge. http://anandtech.com/show/9261/asus-zenfone-2-preview/3 Check out the benchmarks from anandtech. That's a 22nm "archaic" Intel processor keeping up for the most part with 2015 flagships and even beating the 14 nm Galaxy S6 in one. Yet you go back and people like Tylergrunter were talking about how weak Intel moorefield was with cherry picked benchmarks. If Samsung uses their UFS memory along with the cherrytrail processor this thing is going to fly. Intel is supposedly inferior in mobile design yet able to keep up with current flagships on their soon to be discontinued 22nm process. Samsung 14 is not as good as the hype suggests.

37. Pulkit1990

Posts: 46; Member since: May 08, 2014

Exynos in S^ is like 50% faster in Cpu Department . What are you rambling about ?

44. guest

Posts: 371; Member since: Jun 13, 2012

Did you even look at the benchmarks or read the article before you posted? Let me help you. PCMark - Work Performance Overall - Higher is better Zenfone 2 - 5,600 S6 - 5,180 3D Mark 1.2 Unlimited - Overall - Higher is better S6 - 22,476 Zenfone 2 - 22,158

49. Techist

Posts: 311; Member since: Jan 27, 2015

You've been rather selective about which benchmarks to report. Let me round that out: Basemark OS II 2.0 - Overall - Higher is better S6 - 1,955 Zenfone 2 - 1,229 GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan (Offscreen) S6 Edge - 24.5 Fps Zenfone 2 - 13.3 Fps. Just balancing the picture.

47. Techist

Posts: 311; Member since: Jan 27, 2015

The one test in which the Intel processor in the Zenfone 2 beat the S6 and others was a test that focused on, to quote anandtech, "race to sleep scenarios where the CPU should run at its high frequency for a short period and then return to a low frequency to save power." Intel chips often do very well in that respect, which, admittedly, is a good test for normal everyday activities (again to quote anandtech, "playing and seeking within videos, writing text and into files, etc."). But in other tests the it gets beaten by the Exynos 7420 and others. I wouldn't say winning that one test automatically qualifies it as high end. That said, it would be interesting to see how the Intel 14nm processor discussed in this article does in a variety of benchmarks.

48. Techist

Posts: 311; Member since: Jan 27, 2015

On second thoughts, 14nm is cutting edge so perhaps in that respect it does qualify to be called "high end".

53. guest

Posts: 371; Member since: Jun 13, 2012

There's a reason I included the link. To round out the picture let me include that the basemark OS II 2.0 result is due to the S6 UFS which if the Zenfone 2 was so equipped I have a feeling it would be right up there with the S6 unlike what Pulkit was talking about. "Some of the newest devices pull ahead, with the Galaxy S6 being very far ahead due to its UFS memory. All the devices ahead of it also happen to cost upwards of $500, $600, and even $700, so ASUS and Intel should be proud." But for half the price of the S6 it reflects well on the Zenfone 2. It really puts to rest how advanced the 14nm Samsung process is as the 22nm Intel processor is very comparable except in the GPU department. We are constantly told how x86 can't compete with ARM but here it is on ARM's most advanced processor and Intel x86 is right up there. Intel 14nm is > Samsung 14nm. We will have to wait until 14nm Morganfield from Intel launches to compare both 14 nm processes but it's clear that Intel is making huge leaps with every generation and will soon be tick tocking past the competition.

2. waddup121 unregistered

OOh...ooooohhh

7. shimanto1123

Posts: 105; Member since: Nov 20, 2014

Uhu-Aha!

4. Settings

Posts: 2943; Member since: Jul 02, 2014

Samsung y u no use Exynos?

6. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

Samsung + x86 + Android = epic fail

14. RebelwithoutaClue unregistered

Thinking an Intel Atom cpu is x86 ... fail

15. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

Apparently you failed in educating yourself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom_%28CPU%29

17. RebelwithoutaClue unregistered

And you fail to see that this Intel Atom is a 64 bit based ARM cpu.

18. BobbyBuster

Posts: 854; Member since: Jan 13, 2015

What are you smoking? Intel stopped licensing ARM since XScale.

21. RebelwithoutaClue unregistered

I stand corrected, the website I looked it up on, got it wrong :)

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.