System Performance

In order to test the Exynos 7420 and the phone in general, we turn to our suite of benchmarks which are able to show how the device performs in common general computing workloads. Something as simple as web browsing is still surprisingly intensive on mobile phones, and in general Android can often be quite stressful to run in the constraints of a ~3W total TDP especially on any phone still running Dalvik due to its strong reliance on bytecode and a virtual machine that translates bytecode to machine code just before and during application runtime. ART improves this significantly, but is limited in the nature of optimization as AOT compilation optimizations are limited by the CPU power of the SoC and the need to compile the application in a reasonable amount of time.

As always, we'll start things off with our browser benchmarks. After getting to use the phone, it became clear to me that Chrome is poorly optimized against the Galaxy S6 as Samsung’s browser is clearly superior in performance. For that reason I've gone ahead and run our benchmarks on both Chrome and on the stock browser, as seen below.

Kraken 1.1 (Chrome/Safari/IE)

Google Octane v2  (Chrome/Safari/IE)

WebXPRT (Chrome/Safari/IE)

Needless to say, in order to see the full potential of the Exynos 7420 and its cluster of A57s, it’s necessary to use Samsung’s stock browser. This performance is really quite amazing when compared to Apple’s A8X, which has basically been the gold standard for performance in the mobile space in the context of ARM SoCs.

Moving on, as a part of our updates to the benchmark suite for 2015, we'll take a look at Basemark OS II 2.0, which should give a better picture of CPU performance in addition to overall device performance.

Basemark OS II 2.0 - Overall

The browser benchmarks seem to hide some pretty enormous variability as the Galaxy S 6 edge (which is comparable to the Galaxy S 6) sets a new record among Android devices. The only challenger is the iPad Air 2, which uses the A8X SoC with three Enhanced Cyclone cores and the semi-custom GXA6850 GPU.

Basemark OS II 2.0 - System

This system test contains a floating point and integer test, in addition XML parsing, which means that this test mostly stresses CPU and RAM. Interestingly enough, the Exynos 7420 pulls far ahead of both the Exynos 5433 and Snapdragon 810 in this test, and approaches the A8X. The difference between the 5433 and 7420 is likely a combination of the higher clocks on both the A57 and A53 clusters for the 7420 (1.9/1.3 on the 5433, 2.1/1.5 on the 7420), in addition to the ability to stay at a high 'overdrive' clock due to reduced leakage from the 14LPE process. The One M9 likely falls a bit short here due to HTC's governor settings restricting the use of all 8 cores simultaneously.

Basemark OS II 2.0 - Memory

While one might guess that the memory test of 'Basemark OS II 2.0 - Memory' is of RAM, this is actually a test of the internal storage. Once again we see the S6 edge come close to leading the pack due to the use of the new UFS (Universal Flash Storage) standard. Casual examination reveals that the S6 edge has a queue depth of 16, and that it identifies itself with the rather cryptic model name of KLUBG4G1BD-E0B1.

Basemark OS II 2.0 - Graphics

Basemark OS II 2.0 - Web

For the web test, it uses the built-in WebView rendering engine rather than Chrome and paints a distinctly different picture, especially because these tests are focused on HTML5 and CSS rather than JavaScript. Here we can see that the iPhone 6 and iPad Air 2 continue to hold their lead, but the Galaxy S6 is pretty much the king of the hill when it comes to Android devices.

Our next system benchmark is PCMark, which does a number of basic benchmarks designed to stress various aspects of the device in everyday workloads like video playback, web browsing, text editing, and photo editing. This tends to test every aspect of a mobile device, unlike microbenchmarks that can often miss aspects of the system that can affect performance.

PCMark - Work Performance Overall

PCMark - Web Browsing

PCMark - Video Playback

PCMark - Writing

PCMark - Photo Editing

In these tests, the Galaxy S6 continues to perform strongly here due to the fast NAND storage solution and the Exynos 7420 SoC. As we have already covered the Basemark OS II 2.0 results in previous articles, I would refer back to it as those scores are final and have already been contextualized.

Overall, in these general purpose computing tasks that stress CPU, memory, and NAND performance we can see that the Exynos 7420 is off to a flying start. Samsung Mobile should focus more strongly on optimizing the software stack against Chrome as mobile Chrome has around twice the user share of stock Android browsers. I often say that the SoC is the foundation to a good smartphone, and in the case of the Galaxy S6 it feels like this is especially true.

Display System Performance Cont'd: GPU Performance
Comments Locked

306 Comments

View All Comments

  • darkich - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    That SoC. And that storage. And that screen. And that camera. And that design and build quality...i just held this thing for the first time yesterday and was frankly smitten despite of my initial skepticism.

    Anyway the benchmark performance is EPIC. iPhone got thoroughly beaten throughout, (except, of course, in the on screen graphics test)

    I mean this phone scores higher in Geekbench than the freaking MacBook!!!
  • darkich - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    Oh and using synthetic tests for the battery is an absolute horse sh!t of unbelievable proportions!

    Why just not go common sense and no horsesh!t, like the actual tests of endurance for calling, music, video playback, gaming and browsing??

    According to GSMArena, the S6 scores over 11 hours of browsing and video playback, which is a GREAT result and perfectly on line with Samsung’s official slides.
  • akdj - Sunday, May 31, 2015 - link

    So comment A= 'Epic benchmarks!'
    And comment B= 'Why are you using synthetic benchmarks?' (In essentially the ONLY B/M that's throttled by the competition?)
  • Cryio - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    For future smartphone reviews, please use the current photography champion, the Lumia 930, in photo comparison tests.
  • JoshHo - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    I would love to include the Lumia 930 in photo comparisons if I had one.
  • Dj Gains Bond - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    I have a few questions to the complainers of no removable battery and lack thereof of storage.

    How many times have you had to replace the battery in your s5?

    How much storage were you actually buying/using?

    I went from s5 to s6, Why because I'm a phone addict and I like new things.

    The base s5 had 16gb while the s6 base, has 32gb. Technology moves at such a pace, either you like and use what you have or buy the newest thing. I personally don't care if it has a removable battery or storage. Heck, they have various cloud services along side the phones storage plus many other options to store things with and via the phone.

    Complaining does what? Perhaps the next variants will have that but wait, at what costs. Supposedly they're making a phone with removable battery and sd card.
  • Sandan - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    Well...This is a phone I will not buy. No sd card or not being able to replace the battery is a deal breaker....
  • Chaser - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    iPhones haven't had removable batteries and SD cards since creation and obviously they sell. Samsung rightfully sees that as a nitch market worth sacrificing to market a more appealing phone. Phones have all but replaced jewelry as the new social status device. People want appealing items to pull out of their pockets and display for all on the counter, table or bar. I'm sure another competitor will design a phone that will have those. So when you nerds pull out your phones you can proudly explain your joy about having a replaceable battery and SD card slots to your friends if they can stay awake that long.
  • sevin7 - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    Excellent review. I have been a Samsung fan for a while but sadly the lack of removable battery and sd card ruins this phone for me. Once you put the phone in a case it looks very similar to the older plastic versions. I'm extremely irritated that consumers have led Samsung to make a phone that compromises everything for the sake of looks. It looks like the LG G4 is going to be my next phone.
  • jrs77 - Saturday, April 18, 2015 - link

    No removable battery and no mSD-slot makes this just as crap as the iPhone.

    I'll never buy a phone without these two critical points covered.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now