CPU Performance

The state of CPU performance testing under Android is unfortunately still quite broken. We're using a mix of browser based tests with Java & Native apps (AndEBench). 

The key comparisons to look for are the Snapdragon 800 MDP/T vs. the Exynos 5 Octa (4 x ARM Cortex A15s) based Galaxy S 4 (SHVE300S), the Exynos 5 Dual (2 x ARM Cortex A15s) based Nexus 10 tablet and any of the Snapdragon 600 based smartphones (HTC One/T-Mobile Galaxy S 4) running two Krait 300s at 1.7/1.9GHz. 

Browsermark 2.0

Google Octane Benchmark v1

Mozilla Kraken Benchmark - 1.1

SunSpider Javascript Benchmark 1.0 - Stock Browser

Krait 400 seems to do very well against ARM's Cortex A15, trading positions in terms of performance depending on the test. As these are browser based benchmarks there's a big software component to variability that prevents big conclusions from being made here, but it's clear that Snapdragon 800 is in a similar performance class to current Cortex A15 based designs.

Vellamo Benchmark - 2.0

Vellamo Benchmark - 2.0

AndEBench

AndEBench - Java

AndEBench - Native

The Java and Native client AndEBench tests echo what we've seen elsewhere: Snapdragon 800 can definitely be quicker than ARM's Cortex A15, and at least is in a similar class.

Introduction GPU Performance - 3DMark
POST A COMMENT

115 Comments

View All Comments

  • Parhelion69 - Thursday, June 27, 2013 - link

    Why is it Android CPU benchmark broken? Please enlighten me.
    I thought Antutu was a very good benchmark. And probably Geekbench as well.
    Reply
  • darkice1111 - Tuesday, July 9, 2013 - link

    Great performance. Now if only we could get some more software optimizations on Android... My iPhone 5 iOS 7 beta 3 results: Sunspider 1.0 - 709.0ms; Kraken - 13783.9ms; Octane v1 - 3056; Browsermark 2.0 - 3056. So 9 month old dual core hardware that's faster than anything on the market today, and faster in some benchmarks than something that's not even on the market yet... Google, wasssssssup?? Reply
  • sna1970 - Tuesday, July 9, 2013 - link

    Hi,

    How About comparing this to Nvidia Tegra 4 ?
    Reply
  • MaxH - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    Thanks Brian for a great test of this chipset. I am especially interested in the video encoding performance, and your inclusion of the 'MediaInfo' screen capture is really useful to see how it is encoding H.264 video.

    Your MediaInfo clip clearly shows that this chipset can encode H.264/AVC at 2160p @ 25fps @ 120Mbps, (Baseline @Level 5.1). As a low-budget film-maker, I am speculating about the possibility that the encoder could alternatively be configured to handle 1080p @ 30fps (perhaps 60fps) @ 4:2:2 colour sampling @ 10-bit (perhaps 12-bit) depth. I have not been able to get confirmation of this, but if so - at this price point, this chipset could potentially unlock high quality video capture on regular consumer-level DSLR-type cameras; something that has been limited to commercial broadcast cameras (at high-budget prices) up to now. If anyone is familiar enough with AVC profiles and Levels (and related matters) to be able to speculate about this, I would like to hear your thoughts. Thanks again to Brian.
    Reply
  • Netwern - Tuesday, December 31, 2013 - link

    Meanwhile Apple engineers... Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now