Hello Xda-ians,does anyone know the difference between the processors of MI5 variants.As the processor of the 32gb variant is clocked at 1.8 ghz and rest of the two variants are clocked at 2.1 ghz i want to know that whether the 32gb variant processor is only underclocked or is there any difference in architecture also
Kulwinder Singh said:
Hello Xda-ians,does anyone know the difference between the processors of MI5 variants.As the processor of the 32gb variant is clocked at 1.8 ghz and rest of the two variants are clocked at 2.1 ghz i want to know that whether the 32gb variant processor is only underclocked or is there any difference in architecture also
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are technically the same chip, just lower quality and as such they are underclocked. (someone please correct me if that's wrong)
I've got the 32GB 1.8GHz variant and have found it to be extremely fast. With a custom kernel we might be able to squeeze a little more juice out of too. Really looking forward to that.
Pretty sure they're the exact same chip just underclocked. Correct ME if I'm wrong.
if they are lower-binned chips, besides being underclocked, they could have higher voltages to maintain stable work on each of frequency steps.
Sorry for pushing this old thread.
I searched the Internet but didnt found any information to this subject. Anyone knows more about it meanwhile?
I dont want to buy the 32gb version if it means worse battery life.
I can't tell you much in a very scientific manner. However, I bought this phone following a recommendation from a friend. He has the 32gb underclocked version whereas I got the 128gb on sale . We compare numbers often and with similar usage, at the end of the day I have maybe 10% more battery left.
Again, this is very unscientific - for example, I don't have the Facebook app installed, whereas he does, and the battery menu points that app as a heavy battery drain.
We do have similar soc and data/Wi-Fi usage, if that helps.
Thanks for your answer, there doesnt seem to be a large difference in sot between the two variants, im getting around 10 hours sot.
reggger said:
Thanks for your answer, there doesnt seem to be a large difference in sot between the two variants, im getting around 10 hours sot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
10h sot ?? which rom and which kernel ?? I usually get around 5-6h sot.
Related
When to expect > GHz Winmobile phones? Qualcomm has a chipset QSD8250/8650 for a while, though haven't found any appliance for it.
Htc has one on the website...
Shift i think. . I could be wrong about the name anyways it is a 1.3ghz pentium processor and 30 gig on board harddrive. And its quad band 3g and edge network. with a 7 inch screen..... Full Vista .....oh yeah its like 1600 bucks but hey just wait it will come down...
fingers crossed
Timdawg....
...
I believe he said WINMOBILE PHONE, not an UMPC. big difference. I dont think we'll see those specs for some time.
We'll see those Processors once we get better batteries that can handle 'em.
higher temp if the higher speed that's why dual core and quad-core processors are made so that they run at lower speeds and generate less heat but i think also needs less energy because lower speed. it would be more likely that we get in the future a dual processor running at 200mhz, 500mhz, or 600mhz or we just get a 800mhz chip with a high cap. battery but it wont be nice when the batt explodes.
a ghz processor would use up like 15-20 watts when running on full so its somehow not practical as of now.
battery life is given utmost priority in handheld devices.
I just bought 32GB model and find that it's a underclocked model.
Does anyone know will there be anyway to unlock this model to be like 64GB and 128GB model in the future ??
Thanks.
HOLYSHT said:
I just bought 32GB model and find that it's a underclocked model.
Does anyone know will there be anyway to unlock this model to be like 64GB and 128GB model in the future ??
Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are getting read only memory size and processor clock speed mixed up.
The ROM size for your model will always be 32GB as it does not have expandable storage. I'd say just make good use of online backup tools to free up space when necessary, use Titanium backup to backup (and offload after) games you don't play much etc.
The processor however is indeed underclocked, although it is the same CPU, it's one that didn't meet the stringent tests involved to certify it for it's top rated speed. Rather than bin them, they've smartly chose to put them in the lower price model.
With a custom kernel we can probably try ramping the CPU back up and possibly even undervolting it as well to keep temps down. But we need the kernel source for this and I get the impression round these forums that Xiaomi aren't fast at pushing them out (if at all!)
Sent from my MI 5 using XDA-Developers mobile app
kickassdave said:
... But we need the kernel source for this and I get the impression round these forums that Xiaomi aren't fast at pushing them out (if at all!)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are there any news about it? I bought the 32gb model too, with the underclocked CPU and RAM, with the hope that some XDA guy is able to speed up them back
I bought it too,so I hope there will be a crack or something soon ...
Not sure about this particular model, but usually increasing clock speeds on a lower binned processor is not a smart move lifespan-wise. There is (generally) a reason why these parts cost less.
I have a 32gb mi5 running at 2.15ghz with this kernel:
https://forum.xda-developers.com/mi-5/development/kernel-standard-snapdragon-820-t3596915
Very interesting read!
https://www.anandtech.com/show/12520/the-galaxy-s9-review
If Samsung doesn't fix this I'll sell my S9
Really wanted to buy one but I'm not going to as long as this issue is not fixed.
Fix what? It looks like any performance "fix" will be accompanied by loss of battery life anyway. There is a slim possibility that scheduler/governor could be improved somewhat, but that will not change the underlying hardware characteristics that much, meaning the gain from such a fix will not be significant and you will still pay a hefty battery cost..
Like i said in the comments there, i believe most of the deductions from that test will not impact your day to day life. Information is great, but one must know when you need a "summary" and when a "thesis"
I am still buying this beauty next month and i am sure i would be satisfied.
lopri said:
Fix what? It looks like any performance "fix" will be accompanied by loss of battery life anyway. There is a slim possibility that scheduler/governor could be improved somewhat, but that will not change the underlying hardware characteristics that much, meaning the gain from such a fix will not be significant and you will still pay a hefty battery cost..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Whenever a load is transferred from LITTLE cores to the big cores, SD845's big cores start at the max frequency while E9810's big cores start at the lowest frequency (and then increase gradually if load continues to be active).
If the load is of a longer nature (beyond 450ms iirc) then E9810 wins the race; but for short and burst loads the SD845 wins the race due to starting at max frequency.
So no, scheduler fix will not improve just somewhat; it will improve the performance substantially.
Sure, that might come with a battery hit since it will be a choice between 'a longer running load at lower power' vs 'a shorter running load at high power'; we will know better about battery drains when we get results from having used such a scheduler.
The way that exynos takes that long to ramp up the cpu, its like the only way one ever gets to 'experience' it in full speeds is synthetic benchmarks.
I was pumped coming from Snapdragon devices and thought the general consensus was that Exynos chips were typically better than Snapdragon. I'm saving to buy the Exynos version, but then a few of the big Youtubers ran speedtests of SD845 and 9810 and it seemed like the 845 generally performed better.
And after reading the anadtech article and battery life being worse (which is huge to me because I want the regular S9 and not the plus) I guess Snapdragon all the way.
Nurmi_CEO said:
I was pumped coming from Snapdragon devices and thought the general consensus was that Exynos chips were typically better than Snapdragon. I'm saving to buy the Exynos version, but then a few of the big Youtubers ran speedtests of SD845 and 9810 and it seemed like the 845 generally performed better.
And after reading the anadtech article and battery life being worse (which is huge to me because I want the regular S9 and not the plus) I guess Snapdragon all the way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think general every day battery life depends on a lot more than just benchmarking. I have both the exynos and snapdragon S9 with me right now and the exynos gets better battery life after 1 day of use. I just got the phone yesterday but both starting with a 100% charge and using both pretty equal amounts and doing testing and web surfing etc... my exynos has about 10% more right now. Driving to work yesterday my SD845 phone drained 14% with the screen off and not even music playing. Honestly coming from a Pixel 2 XL they both kinda suck hard on battery life. The SD version was dying in half a day of light use for me. I got through the rest of the day yesterday with the exynos which is doable but ill have to keep chargers all around to make sure it stays charged on heavy use days.
Edit: On a side note if you decide to get the exynos and you use T-Mobile you may want to wait because I get horrible reception and slow internet speeds. I dont know why sicne it supports every band for LTE except 71 but the snapdragon version is significantly better and much faster on tmobile network. Maybe there are settings I can change. IDK.
---------- Post added at 06:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 PM ----------
On a side note if you decide to get the exynos and you use T-Mobile you may want to wait because I get horrible reception and slow internet speeds. I dont know why sicne it supports every band for LTE except 71 but the snapdragon version is significantly better and much faster on tmobile network. Maybe there are settings I can change. IDK.
I would really like to have Band 71. I thought I saw a post from someone who was getting conflicting answers from Samsung if B71 was in the international unlocked version. However then he posted and said he received it and sure enough found B71 in it. But now it's looking like I'll just bite the bullet and get the T-Mo SD845 version. Would have be nice to have an unlocked bootloader.
Nurmi_CEO said:
I would really like to have Band 71. I thought I saw a post from someone who was getting conflicting answers from Samsung if B71 was in the international unlocked version. However then he posted and said he received it and sure enough found B71 in it. But now it's looking like I'll just bite the bullet and get the T-Mo SD845 version. Would have be nice to have an unlocked bootloader.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How can you find out if it has Band 71 on it? I can test side by side my US and international verison and the US version gets about 30-40mbps and right beside it is the international getting about 1.5-3mbps max. Soemthing is obviously wrong with the settings or the radio on the international to be doing that bad on tmobile. Its not bad location. Something is just missing either software, hardware or settings but I just odnt know. Id love to make this thing work.
jrharvey said:
I think general every day battery life depends on a lot more than just benchmarking. I have both the exynos and snapdragon S9 with me right now and the exynos gets better battery life after 1 day of use. I just got the phone yesterday but both starting with a 100% charge and using both pretty equal amounts and doing testing and web surfing etc... my exynos has about 10% more right now. Driving to work yesterday my SD845 phone drained 14% with the screen off and not even music playing. Honestly coming from a Pixel 2 XL they both kinda suck hard on battery life. The SD version was dying in half a day of light use for me. I got through the rest of the day yesterday with the exynos which is doable but ill have to keep chargers all around to make sure it stays charged on heavy use days.
Edit: On a side note if you decide to get the exynos and you use T-Mobile you may want to wait because I get horrible reception and slow internet speeds. I dont know why sicne it supports every band for LTE except 71 but the snapdragon version is significantly better and much faster on tmobile network. Maybe there are settings I can change. IDK.
---------- Post added at 06:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:53 PM ----------
On a side note if you decide to get the exynos and you use T-Mobile you may want to wait because I get horrible reception and slow internet speeds. I dont know why sicne it supports every band for LTE except 71 but the snapdragon version is significantly better and much faster on tmobile network. Maybe there are settings I can change. IDK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
jrharvey said:
How can you find out if it has Band 71 on it? I can test side by side my US and international verison and the US version gets about 30-40mbps and right beside it is the international getting about 1.5-3mbps max. Soemthing is obviously wrong with the settings or the radio on the international to be doing that bad on tmobile. Its not bad location. Something is just missing either software, hardware or settings but I just odnt know. Id love to make this thing work.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You'll have to look through the forum here. I have other things going on, but I remember someone created a thread and stated that it did. I have no further info.
Well, it's not like the phone is slow in any way so stop making a chicken of a feather.
Skickat från min SM-G960F via Tapatalk
jrharvey said:
I can test side by side my US and international verison and the US version gets about 30-40mbps and right beside it is the international getting about 1.5-3mbps max.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've been holding out on an upgrade for the S9, but this is concerning (I use T-Mobile).
Snapdragon is a non-option for me as having proper backup (aka Titanium) is IMO a bare essential. Now after having seen reviews that the S9 Exynos' battery life is even worse than the S8's, I'm wondering if I should just get the S8 instead. Anyone have any thoughts - S8 Exynos or S9 Exynos? If that Anandtech article's results are at all representative of what to expect, does it not seem silly to pay more for a newer phone that's a *downgrade* in battery life? Or maybe I just need to wait a bit longer for the kinks to get worked out? I mean, if it can really only do 1.5mbps on T-Mobile...ummm....
metal450 said:
I've been holding out on an upgrade for the S9, but this is concerning (I use T-Mobile).
Snapdragon is a non-option for me as having proper backup (aka Titanium) is IMO a bare essential. Now after having seen reviews that the S9 Exynos' battery life is even worse than the S8's, I'm wondering if I should just get the S8 instead. Anyone have any thoughts - S8 Exynos or S9 Exynos? If that Anandtech article's results are at all representative of what to expect, does it not seem silly to pay more for a newer phone that's a *downgrade* in battery life? Or maybe I just need to wait a bit longer for the kinks to get worked out? I mean, if it can really only do 1.5mbps on T-Mobile...ummm....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok well I did so many things to try and fix this and SOMETHING worked. Im now getting pretty much full speed although still not quite as good as teh US version for some reason although very very close. I went to Tmobile and got a new sim card in case this one was damaged or soemthing. i also played around with the APN settings and restarted several times. Something jolted the phone into working. SO when I test the two phones side by side now the US version might get 21mbps and the international 18mbps. Again the US will get 31mbps and the international 26mbps. US 13mbps and international 11mbps. The US version is always just slightly ahead. I drove around town and found some low reception spots where the US version was getting 2mbps and the international was crawling at .65 mbps. Out of probably 30 different test I did driving around I think only 1 time the international got better speeds and it was like 31mbps vs the US getting like 28. Id say its usable for sure but here is where it might matter most. I was in a bad reception part of town in a big mall type building and I rarely ever get service there. You have to stand next to a window to get any bars at all. The US version could barely get a connection but it did get something. The international didnt see anything until I completely left the building. Coming from a google pixel 2 XL that phone was about the same as what the US version of the galaxy s9 got. I walked all around the building and saw similar results. We dont even have band 71 in my city and that is the ONLY band that is missing from the international version that I have. Theoretically the international version SHOULD be performing the same however ive done plenty of test I can pretty much say in my case the international is slower.
Ironically the International version has been killing the US version in battery life. Im very happy about that. In standby mode the US version seems to drain very quickly for me while the exynos seems to just barely sip power. I can go an hour in standby and only use 1-2% while the US version can easily use 8% just sitting there and not doing anything. This morning I woke up and cleaned the house and both had 100% when I started. I didnt touch the phones at all. Both on wifi. About an hour later the exynos was at 98% and the US was at 93%. Both phones have the same apps and theoretically the same services running. The international actually SHOULD have more running in the background since my allo accound and texts/calls go to that phone and my wifes sim is in the other phone.
jrharvey said:
Im now getting pretty much full speed although still not quite as good as teh US version for some reason although very very close.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's relieving to hear. 1 of my 3 concerns ticked off the list!
jrharvey said:
I was in a bad reception part of town in a big mall type building and I rarely ever get service there. You have to stand next to a window to get any bars at all. The US version could barely get a connection but it did get something. The international didnt see anything until I completely left the building.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn, that's definitely an issue, especially since I live in a very low-signal part of town (in the mountains). I wonder how Exynos S8 vs Exynos S9 does in this regard...or if anyone else has any similar experiences as you...
jrharvey said:
Ironically the International version has been killing the US version in battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Super odd, considering that's the exact opposite of what all the reviews seem to be saying! I'd be curious if anyone else could replicate this result - or again, to see something similar with Exynos S8 vs Exynos S9...
One more question: have you been able to get T-Mobile Wifi calling on the Exynos S9? I'm guessing not, but here in my low-signal area that's pretty essential. I figure someone on here will eventually work it out, but I was just hoping it might somehow already be up & running
metal450 said:
Well that's relieving to hear. 1 of my 3 concerns ticked off the list!
Damn, that's definitely an issue, especially since I live in a very low-signal part of town (in the mountains). I wonder how Exynos S8 vs Exynos S9 does in this regard...or if anyone else has any similar experiences as you...
Super odd, considering that's the exact opposite of what all the reviews seem to be saying! I'd be curious if anyone else could replicate this result - or again, to see something similar with Exynos S8 vs Exynos S9...
One more question: have you been able to get T-Mobile Wifi calling on the Exynos S9? I'm guessing not, but here in my low-signal area that's pretty essential. I figure someone on here will eventually work it out, but I was just hoping it might somehow already be up & running
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree the battery life thing is very odd when you look at the word around town about the exynos. I think all that talk is sparked by the Adandtech review of the two phones and what you have to consider is those are synthetic benchmarks and they were also dealing with the snapdragon S9+ and the exynos S9 so completely different screen sizes and battery sizes. Now they used the cpu efficiency to come up with this idea that the exynos would theoretically perform worse than the snapdragon but thats all synthetics. I saw many online reviews of the battery life from the exynos and snapdragon versions and compared them and took a leap of faith that the exynos would be better. That was before the anandtech review came out. Thank god I was kinda right because battery life could not have been worse than my snapdragon s9 which just seemed to kill battery even when screen off and idle. Maybe its just my unit was bad but who knows. My review of battery life is strictly based on normal every day use and not synthetic benchmarks that nobody just does all day every day. Benchmarks are nice but they dont do crap for how you actually use the phone.
jrharvey said:
I agree the battery life thing is very odd when you look at the word around town about the exynos. I think all that talk is sparked by the Adandtech review of the two phones and what you have to consider is those are synthetic benchmarks and they were also dealing with the snapdragon S9+ and the exynos S9 so completely different screen sizes and battery sizes. Now they used the cpu efficiency to come up with this idea that the exynos would theoretically perform worse than the snapdragon but thats all synthetics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me that particular comparison is irrelevant, because a Snapdragon is non-unlockable -> non-backupable -> non-option. I was concerned about the results showing Exynos S9 is even inferior to Exynos S8.
And I agree that every-day use is what matters, not synthetics. However, I would also assume that synthetics would have *some* correlation to real-world; obviously they aren't a perfect representation of it, or they may exaggerate the difference, etc. But it's pretty surprising to find the exact opposite result. Makes me wonder if the S8 vs S9 result could be backwards too...
Give me an exynos over a snapdragon anyday.
Im more than happy with a small loss of performance over not being able to unlock my bootloader and customize to my hearts content.
My s9 plus is a very good upgrade on my s8 (now with the wife)
Im not even going to read this article as its a moot point tbh. Real world performance wise, this phone blows anything else i have used out of the water.
Yes with both battery and performance abd despite it being an exynos lol.
Performance is excellent with my galaxy s9 it's just battery I wish was better.
I used my wife's Note 9 (Snapdragon - ATT ) and ran ANTUTU Benchmarks for grins and giggles and the phone got a score of about 284,000 - very respectable.
When I received my N960F - a Note 9 from Clove in the UK, I ran the same Benchmark from ANTUTU and the best score I could get was 236,000 - a HUGE difference.
I really expected more parity between those phones and wonder why there is such a big difference? Is the Exynos Process that far behond Snapdragon's latest?
(I know these benchmarks don't mean much - but just the same, after spending nearly a grand on this phone, I would have expected better)
Any thoughts?
same chips but on the S9. should give you an idea
Geekser said:
I used my wife's Note 9 (Snapdragon - ATT ) and ran ANTUTU Benchmarks for grins and giggles and the phone got a score of about 284,000 - very respectable.
When I received my N960F - a Note 9 from Clove in the UK, I ran the same Benchmark from ANTUTU and the best score I could get was 236,000 - a HUGE difference.
I really expected more parity between those phones and wonder why there is such a big difference? Is the Exynos Process that far behond Snapdragon's latest?
(I know these benchmarks don't mean much - but just the same, after spending nearly a grand on this phone, I would have expected better)
Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are your thoughts on battery life between the 2?
lawtq said:
What are your thoughts on battery life between the 2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
great question but I haven't used either long enough to really get a sense for it - On first blush, battery seems similar on both - I can easliy get thru an entire day without charging - though I find myself automatically placing my phone in my wireless charger from time to time because I have always had to - I think I can break myself of that habit though - will play around a bit more on both and see how they fair in a comparison of daily use....
soraxd said:
same chips but on the S9. should give you an idea
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lawtq said:
What are your thoughts on battery life between the 2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Geekser said:
great question but I haven't used either long enough to really get a sense for it - On first blush, battery seems similar on both - I can easliy get thru an entire day without charging - though I find myself automatically placing my phone in my wireless charger from time to time because I have always had to - I think I can break myself of that habit though - will play around a bit more on both and see how they fair in a comparison of daily use....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did Samsung work on the kernel sources to improve the Exynos 9810's efficiency and performance to be on par with Snapdragon 845 ?
The answer is "NO".
Looks like the the tides have turned recently in favor of the snapdragon chipset.
Sent from my SM-N960U1 using Tapatalk
Virgo_Guy said:
Did Samsung work on the kernel sources to improve the Exynos 9810's efficiency and performance to be on par with Snapdragon 845 ?
The answer is "NO".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know and I don't understand why. I think Exynos could be as good or better than the Snapdragon - but for some reason - it lags behind...
Geekser said:
I know and I don't understand why. I think Exynos could be as good or better than the Snapdragon - but for some reason - it lags behind...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could the Exynos 9810 be better in the s9/s9+/Note 9? - Probably to an extent working on the kernel but would still be behind the SD.
Geekser said:
great question but I haven't used either long enough to really get a sense for it - On first blush, battery seems similar on both - I can easliy get thru an entire day without charging - though I find myself automatically placing my phone in my wireless charger from time to time because I have always had to - I think I can break myself of that habit though - will play around a bit more on both and see how they fair in a comparison of daily use....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks. Look forward to hearing from you
Snapdragon Note 9 : Will Allow you to Play FASTER Gamecube/Wii/PSP Emulation. But Will not allow you to install custom roms or root your device.
Exynos Note : Will not play gamecube/Wii Games Smoothly but will allow you to install custom rom.
Personally if I didn't want Wii/Gamecube emulation, I would have easily bought exynos.
Ok in synthetic benchmarks such as antutu the 845 gets a higher score because of the better graphics processor. When it comes to the cpu side of things the 9810 is at least as good and sometimes better.
Cool Person said:
Snapdragon Note 9 : Will Allow you to Play FASTER Gamecube/Wii/PSP Emulation.But Will not allow you to install custom roms or root your device.
Exynos Note : Will not play gamecube/Wii Games Smoothly but will allow you to install custom rom.
Personally if I didn't want Wii/Gamecube emulation, I would have easily bought exynos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dolphin emulation on both chipsets recently took a massive jump forward. exynos included.
you can root on international snapdragon variants of the Note 9. I believe China has unlocked snapdragon. I've heard chit chat mentioning Canada as well, fact check these yourself tho.
mikey_sk said:
Ok in synthetic benchmarks such as antutu the 845 gets a higher score because of the better graphics processor. When it comes to the cpu side of things the 9810 is at least as good and sometimes better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aha, but then the real world performance of the sd is far better than the exynos + it's more efficient leading to a lot better battery life + the modem is better. Then you throw in a GPU that is literally another class in a phone that potentially will be used also for gaming and this year a lot of heavy games were released with vastly different experience on the two variants (last year samsung got a free pass on their lossy g71 mp20 as no heavy games released, not the case this year and it's shaping more to release frequently in the future).
g72 mp18 can't even come close to the PREVIOUS year sd 835 in real world gaming. sd 845 benefits heavily from the note 9 cooling as it had some thermal restrictions and sustain performance was close to the sd 835 one (still far better than g72 mp18 sustain for both snapdragons), while the mali GPU doesn't benefit that much from the new cooling, the GPU is just slow.
In Europe we actually pay more for that phone, 1000 euros are not equal to 1000 us dollars, all that while we get a SOC that is between midrange and highend instead of the highend one that is for the US market. Previous years the exynos was better (galaxy s7 for example), but the difference between the two variants were never that big as this year.
Edit: check the other real world benchmarks like pcmark, browser benchmarks and so on - the sd variant wipes the floor with the exynos. Still, benches are not all, sadly the real world difference is also there and noticeable.
Again if you look at the geek bench scores for cpu (android central, did a comparison) the cpu side of the exynos 9810 outperformed the 845. I would agree when factoring in the 845 graphics the overall score of the 845 is better. Again you would be VERY hard pressed to notice the difference in the real world. And there is zero lag on either of these variants I found.
I know people in the industry and alot of the perceived difference is due to the scheduler for the 9810 not being as optimised as for the 845. Rule on the street is that Sammy will redress this soon with an update.
Also the woolfson DAC on the exynos provides a better quality audio experience and fuller sound stage than that of the aqstic DAC on the 845.
Again the difference is slim. I've noticed zero lag even on fortnite.
Reast assured both chips ate brutes. After all both the 845 and 9810 are currently fabricated/manufactured by samsung.
mikey_sk said:
Again if you look at the geek bench scores for cpu (android central, did a comparison) the cpu side of the exynos 9810 outperformed the 845. I would agree when factoring in the 845 graphics the overall score of the 845 is better. Again you would be VERY hard pressed to notice the difference in the real world. And there is zero lag on either of these variants I found.
I know people in the industry and alot of the perceived difference is due to the scheduler for the 9810 not being as optimised as for the 845. Rule on the street is that Sammy will redress this soon with an update.
Also the woolfson DAC on the exynos provides a better quality audio experience and fuller sound stage than that of the aqstic DAC.
Again the difference is slim. I've noticed zero lag even on fortnite.
Reast assured both chips ate brutes. After all both the 845 and 9810 are currently fabricated/manufactured by samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's a lot more complicated than a simple scheduler and if it was going to be fixed, it was going to be fixed for the note 9 launch as it's a good few months from the s9/s9+ release with the same SOC (that is a lot in the fast moving forward mobile industry). Most likely they won't do any improvements even in future major android releases. Geekbench score is peak performance on burst load tasks, it's not counting task migrations, frequency scaling, cores hotpluging and so on. There are good articles for the 9810 in anandtech, how it can be improved, why it can not be improved beyond given point, but they are kinda techy and not easy to read if you are not into it.
tl:dr The CPU cores are great, but has some flaws and everything around them is sh*t (sorry for my language, but yeah). The DAC is great tho, this is totally true.
For the GPU part there are a lot of materials about adreno 630 vs g72 mp18 with actual stats like max fps, min fps, FPS stability and so on. Fortnite will run ok, but on the sd845 it can run maxed out fluently (for the most part). Also when one spend 1000 euro, he should think about future proving and gaming is moving fast forward this year. If you game on your phone, it's kinda a bummer to settle for lower GFX settings on one of the most expensive phones this year, if you want smooth experience.
Not saying the exynos is super bad, it's not, but it's not on par with the sd845.
Again you would be hard pressed to notice the difference. Both variants are perfectly fine so everyone buy either with confidence.
It's not true, marvel strike force is unplayable on exynos version
9810 user here and i have to limit the exynos speed for it to get to a day. This sucks. I paid usd1000 but need to turn pn battery saver every morning
No rows written here reflect the reality. Just snapdragon users happy with their chipset. Another report on the S9 test that is outdated. The smallest SOT with exynos is 7h with only mobile data. Who does not know how to use an android or uses it as a playstation is his job. For a normal user it's great.
roticanai said:
9810 user here and i have to limit the exynos speed for it to get to a day. This sucks. I paid usd1000 but need to turn pn battery saver every morning
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't even have to do that with my Note 8. You can likely squeeze more out of it, but a lot depends on usage patterns of course.
I normally don't give a damn about benchmarks but lately I've been watching comparison videos between the Exynos and the Snapdragon model and I saw that people got way higher scores and lower temperatures on their Exynos model while I'm getting way lower fps and scores.
I tried 3DMark Wild Life Test and my score was ~5100. Phone was idle at that moment and cold to the touch. Others get easily 5700-5800 points and on the Stress Test they peak at 5700 while I'm barely over 5000.
Is something wrong with my S21 Ultra Exynos?
you can by 10 same smartphone, you will neve have same result, like for graphic card or cpu .... that's normal but maybe is just software issue or bad device in your case, try toclear your data cache in recovry mode thant test again, if not good, reset your phone by factory settings and try again if still not good...change the device
iamnotkurtcobain said:
I normally don't give a damn about benchmarks but lately I've been watching comparison videos between the Exynos and the Snapdragon model and I saw that people got way higher scores and lower temperatures on their Exynos model while I'm getting way lower fps and scores.
I tried 3DMark Wild Life Test and my score was ~5100. Phone was idle at that moment and cold to the touch. Others get easily 5700-5800 points and on the Stress Test they peak at 5700 while I'm barely over 5000.
Is something wrong with my S21 Ultra Exynos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should have gotten the HK variant with snapdragon tbh