System Performance

As previously mentioned this year a major goal of ours was to focus on benchmarks with metrics that better indicate user experience rather than being subject to additional layers of indirection in addition to updating our previously used benchmarks. Probably one of the hardest problems to tackle from a testing perspective is capturing what it means to have a smooth and fast phone, and with the right benchmarks you can actually start to test for these things in a meaningful way instead of just relying on a reviewer’s word. In addition to new benchmarks, we’ve attempted to update existing types of benchmarks with tests that are more realistic and more useful rather than simple microbenchmarks that can be easily optimized against without any meaningful user experience improvements. With that said, let's get into the results.

Kraken 1.1 (Chrome/Safari/IE)

Google Octane v2  (Chrome/Safari/IE)

WebXPRT 2015 (Chrome/Safari/IE)

JetStream 1.1 (Chrome/Safari)

JetStream 1.1 (Stock)

Google Octane v2 (Stock Browser)

Kraken 1.1 (Stock Browser)

WebXPRT 2015 (Stock Browser)

Browser performance here is pretty much in line with expectations as pretty much every OEM using Snapdragon 820 is going to be using the same basic BSP and most of the optimizations here are going to be done by Qualcomm rather than the OEMs.

PCMark - Work Performance Overall

PCMark - Web Browsing

PCMark - Video Playback

PCMark - Writing

PCMark - Photo Editing

Again, performance is in line with expectation in PCMark, although there are some improvements here and there that are primarily centered about web browsing performance which is almost constantly being improved as developers figure out new optimizations for browsers. With that said we can move on to Discomark, which is a true high level benchmark designed to show exactly how quickly a suite of common Google and OEM applications load from NAND or from RAM.

DiscoMark - Android startActivity() Cold Runtimes

DiscoMark - Android startActivity() Hot Runtimes

Here the Galaxy Note7 shows some improvement on hot runtimes relative to the Galaxy S7, but the cold runtimes have dropped for some reason. It looks like much of the delta here is due to Dropbox which is now running significantly slower on the Galaxy Note7. I suspect that this is related to possible changes in Dropbox or its interaction with TouchWiz rather than any significant underlying difference in system performance relative to the Galaxy S7. Overall, the Galaxy Note7 performs about where you'd expect from a Snapdragon 820 device from Samsung given the performance of the Galaxy S7.

Battery Life and Charge Time System Performance Cont'd and NAND Performance
Comments Locked

202 Comments

View All Comments

  • theduckofdeath - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link

    The typical half glass full, negative approach when reviewing Samsung devices at Anandtech... I guess more of you guys wants a job at Apple like the one Anand managed to get?
  • theduckofdeath - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link

    Half glass empty, that is...
    See, I'm simply not capable of being as negative as an Anandtech writer. :)
  • jiffylube1024 - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link

    I hate to hear the "Anandtech is posting biased reviews" argument because they do such a good job of being in-depth, and I appreciate their reviews tremendously. However, I agree that there is a bias in the wording, intentional or not, against Samsung's recent Galaxy phones, which have been spectacular options in the Galaxy S6/S7 era, even in spite of Touchwiz's shittiness.

    Is Samsung's aluminum and glass industrial design and unique bezel-free design really so bad? Anandtech thinks it's tired and needs a refresh. In The Verge's review, they come up with a completely different conclusion - they say the Note 7 the best big phone ever, and praise how Samsung has out-designed the competition. Such a huge discrepancy down to essentially a matter of taste. Can we not reach a middle ground - every review of a Galaxy review on AT needs to mention how they need to spice up the "rectangle with rounded corners". It's fine for what it is!
    ----

    To take just one example to hone my point, The iPhone 6S's camera in the AT review was rightly praised for its improved video - 4K recording and 1080p 120 fps. However very little was made of how it was essentially the same damn sensor as the last gen with shrunken pixels giving it a nominal bump from 8MP to 12MP, with basically zero quality difference in stills.

    In the Samsung Galaxy S7 review, the super fast laser Autofocus was mentioned, but the overall image quality was described thusly "However, with that said the output of the Galaxy S7 and S7 edge’s camera is not that impressive. I would argue that while it’s not worse than the iPhone 6s Plus, it is basically comparable."

    It's not that impressive, yet equal to the iPhone 6S Plus. There was nothing in the iPhone 6S review or conclusion that described its camera as mediocre, yet that's how it comes off in the S7 review - Samsung has to be better, or it's unimpressive.
  • lilmoe - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link

    Samsung has to be a lot, LOT, better, or it's unimpressive. FTFY.
    It's a mentality that really kills me.
  • theduckofdeath - Wednesday, August 17, 2016 - link

    Exactly.
    Just because a person writes a ten page biased review it really doesn't make it less biased. This place just can't learn from old mistakes. Anandtech used to be a place you could go to to read reliable in-depth reviews about technology and gadgets. I don't know exactly when that changed, but I guess it was a long time ago when Anand had received enough gifts and perks from Apple to sway the whole writing culture on Anandtech.
  • thunderwave_2 - Thursday, August 18, 2016 - link

    Here in the UK, though, they're charging £700 for it. You could buy two OnePlus 3's (£329 each) and still have change. Don't get me wrong, this is surely the better phone. But is it really worth twice the price?
  • lilmoe - Saturday, August 20, 2016 - link

    Then why isn't the same being said about every other expensive phone???
  • Meteor2 - Saturday, August 20, 2016 - link

    It is.
  • theduckofdeath - Saturday, August 20, 2016 - link

    Read the first page of the iPhone 5 SE review and you'll get some perspective. An over-priced cynical release that Apple released thinking consumers were all stupid. Not a single complaint about Apple reusing the exact same hardware of a phone they had released several years earlier, and still asking for a stupid high price.
    This Galaxy Note 7 is still using a really unique design language that no other brand has managed to copy. Read the first page of this review again.
    This site has gone down the drain as an Apple marketing portal. Which I guess is why the comment sections are really starting to die. Because you know, people are not as stupid as Apple and Anand and his minions seem to think.
  • Bluetooth - Tuesday, August 16, 2016 - link

    How can you say that when they do absolutely the best reviews, which are based on actual and realistic measurements. If you prefer superfluous reviews go to The Verge.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now