Slashdot Mirror
AnandTech Reviews Samsung's Exynos 9810 SoC (and Galaxy S9) (anandtech.com)
The Galaxy S9 and S9+, the flagship smartphones from the South Korean electronics manufacturer Samsung are powered by company's homegrown Exynos 9810 SoC (in most markets) or Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845 SoC. In its review of Samsung Galaxy S9, AnandTech comments on the differences it observed on the S9 model powered by Samsung's own SoC and the variant with Qualcomm's processor. From the review: Finally, the biggest story for the Galaxy S9 is its big contrast in terms of SoC hardware. Ever since we first heard about the Exynos 9810 we had very large expectations and we knew there would be some tangible differences between Exynos and Snapdragon variants. The expectations couldn't be more shattered than the results we got. While the Snapdragon 845 variant of the Galaxy S9 performed largely as advertised and as we had been told to expect by Qualcomm, the Exynos 9810 failed to live up to its hype in real-world scenarios. Effectively, the Exynos 9810 variant and as evidenced by all the data we collected, is the slower variant of the two. The root cause here has been identified as the extremely conservative scheduler and DVFS mechanisms which essentially nullify any advantage the new M3 cores have in synthetic benchmarks.
In 3D benchmarks, the Exynos 9810 posted very healthy efficiency improvements and even sometimes managed to catch up to last year's Adreno 540 -- something I hadn't expected. Qualcomm's new Adreno 630 raises the bar in terms of peak performance, however the promises of increased efficiency have not materialised in the commercial hardware as the performance boost comes at a cost of increased power. Effectively, when looking at sustained workloads, the Snapdragon 845 isn't any faster than the Snapdragon 835 in its GPU department. Fortunately for Qualcomm, they're still in the lead and this is not a deal-breaker for the Galaxy S9. While the performance advantage of the Snapdragon 845 variant over the Exynos 9810 variant is something we could live with, the battery life results of the Exynos is definitely a deal-breaker.
In 3D benchmarks, the Exynos 9810 posted very healthy efficiency improvements and even sometimes managed to catch up to last year's Adreno 540 -- something I hadn't expected. Qualcomm's new Adreno 630 raises the bar in terms of peak performance, however the promises of increased efficiency have not materialised in the commercial hardware as the performance boost comes at a cost of increased power. Effectively, when looking at sustained workloads, the Snapdragon 845 isn't any faster than the Snapdragon 835 in its GPU department. Fortunately for Qualcomm, they're still in the lead and this is not a deal-breaker for the Galaxy S9. While the performance advantage of the Snapdragon 845 variant over the Exynos 9810 variant is something we could live with, the battery life results of the Exynos is definitely a deal-breaker.
There are two companies I will NEVER buy a cellphone from, Apple and Samsung. The tech world would be better off without either of them.
" Fortunately for Qualcomm, they're still in the lead "....err....ahem.
Ever wondered why Samsung wastes time putting two different chips in their flagship phone? Isn't that a huge waste of time, money resources? Developing two completely different products internally?
It is!
So why?
Qualcomm. Qualcomm literally forces Samsung to ship their SoCs in their phones because they hold a near-monopoly on high-end cell modems. No Snapdragon in the S9? Well.. It would be terrible if you didn't have enough modems to meet your sales targets, wouldn't it?
Paints that fight Apple has with Qualcomm in a more interesting light, doesn't it?
Why do people buy these expensive phones? Status symbols?
Follow the crowd
advertising through me
consumerism...unable to see
come quickly for your s9
your life will not change but
the fantasy is sublime.