The Samsung Galaxy S7 and S7 edge Review: Part 2
by Joshua Ho on July 5, 2016 8:00 AM ESTSystem Performance Revisited
Now that we’ve covered battery life we can revisit another topic where our testing has changed dramatically for 2016, which is our system performance benchmarks. 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. As the Galaxy S7 edge is identical in performance to the Galaxy S7, scores for the Galaxy S7 edge are excluded for clarity.
In browser/JavaScript performance the Galaxy S7 in its Snapdragon 820 variants performs pretty much as you'd expect with fairly respectable performance about on par with the iPhone 6 at least part of the time, which frankly still isn't enough but a lot of this is more due to Google's lack of optimization in Chrome than anything else. The Exynos 8890 version comes a lot closer but it still isn't great. Subjectively browsing performance on the Galaxy S7 with the Snapdragon 820 is still painful with Chrome, and I have to install either a variant of Snapdragon Browser or Samsung's stock browser in order to get remotely acceptable performance. Even then, performance isn't great when compared to Apple's A9-equipped devices. The lack of single thread performance relative to other devices on the market in conjunction with poor software optimization on the part of Google is really what continues to hold OEMs back here rather than anything that Samsung Mobile is capable of resolving.
PCMark shows that the Galaxy S7 is generally well-optimized, with good performance in native Android APIs, although devices like the OnePlus 3 pull ahead in general, likely due to differences in DVFS, lower display resolution, more RAM, and similar changes as the hardware is otherwise quite similar. In general though unless you get something with a Kirin 95x in it you aren't going to get performance much better than what you find in the Galaxy S7, although the software optimization in cases like the writing test could be better for the Snapdragon 820 version of the phone.
As hinted by the PCMark results, the Galaxy S7 with the Snapdragon 820 is really nothing to write home about when it comes to actual software optimizations, while the Exynos 8890 version is significantly faster in comparison. The fastest devices by far here are still the Kirin 950-equipped phones, but even from cold start launches the HTC 10 is comparable, and pulls ahead slightly when the applications are pre-loaded into memory. The OnePlus 3 and Xiaomi Mi5 are closer to what the S820 GS7 should be achieving, which is really more a testament to just how strangely slow the Galaxy S7 with Snapdragon 820 is.
Overall though, the Galaxy S7 in both iterations are acceptably fast for general purpose tasks. However, with that said the Snapdragon 820 variant is noticeably slower, and the software stack seems to be less optimized for whatever reason even after multiple post-launch OTAs and all the latest app updates. Given that these devices have locked bootloaders it's difficult to really go deep and try to figure out exactly what's causing these issues, but it's likely that Samsung Mobile has the engineering staff to do this and resolve these issues as a 600 USD phone really shouldn't be performing worse than a 400 USD phone. On the bright side, the Exynos 8890 variants perform quite well here, with performance comparable to top devices and often beating out Snapdragon 820 devices, although usually not by a huge margin.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
266 Comments
View All Comments
Ryan Smith - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link
I won't argue about our timeliness. It's something we're working on.However this is the first time I've ever heard anyone say that they felt we were clickbaity. Could you please elaborate? I personally abhor clickbait, so if we're coming across like that, then that would be extremely helpful feedback.
wolfemane - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link
click·baitˈklikbāt/
nouninformal
(on the Internet) content, especially that of a sensational or provocative nature, whose main purpose is to attract attention and draw visitors to a particular web page.
"these recent reports of the show's imminent demise are hyperbolic clickbait"
Shall i point out the retarded PROMOTED STORIES that sprout out. Every time an article is clicked, the page loads straight to them.
Full page adds with video that drag the site load down (specially on mobile)!
Ads that load several seconds after the main page loads very close to a link or relevant title. On slower systems or mobile this forces a miss click on those damn adds, and then the whole process of backing up and reloading all that shit again.
POP UP ADDS.
Yeah, you're site is now full of this stuff. I don't care about long review times on high demand items, or instant articles on low demand items. There are plenty of reviews out there for me to get the gist of a product. I LOVE the drama that spews forth in the comments and lately is the main reason I visit this site! But most of all I thoroughly enjoy every writer that posts an article to this site.
What I can not stand is for you to make a post in user comments about how you don't feel your site is clickbait. Do we need to create a thread on the forums and upload every click bait piece of trash that comes up on this site. If you are truly unaware, I think you would be appalled by what would be posted.
Michael Bay - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link
Nothing you described is a clickbait.Beautiful.
wolfemane - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link
By definition, everything I described is clickbait.Here it is again: (on the Internet) content, especially that of a sensational or provocative nature, whose main purpose is to attract attention and draw visitors to a particular web page.
Promoted Stories with ridiculous titles pulling you to 8 other websites. Clickbait? CHECK
Giant add on front page "DO YOU NV ME?" by Toshiba taking up a 3rd of the screen. Clickbait? CHECK
Ad by Rockspace claiming no one supports microsoft exchange like they do, loads 5 seconds after page finishes loading, and becomes header ad damn near forcing a miss click (and on mobile). Clickbait? CHECK
There's three right off the bat. Thanks for contributing!
erple2 - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link
I still don't see anything as clickbait that you've described. Poor advertising choices, yes (Ryan, please add me to the list of people that despises anything taboola related, and has concerns over the usability of the site as a result). But not clickbait.So far all of the promoted stories have been ... sketchy at best and pretty awful. As wolfemane correctly points out, they make the site seem more like sites that tend to be more clickbait like. Though that gawker is going g under, what does that mean for taboola?
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, July 6, 2016 - link
Hi wolfemane,Thanks for the feedback. To get right down to business, clickbait is typically a description reserved for editorial. i.e. do I make the title of this review "The Samsung GalaxyS7 and S7 edge Review: Part 2" or the "You won't believe this amazing Samsung Galaxy S7 review"? It goes without saying that we avoid the latter, as I don't believe sensationalism does anyone any favors. Descriptions need to be accurate, and content needs to be meaningful.
Advertising on the other hand is a different matter. As you may be aware, advertising is handled by our publisher, Purch. Which is to say that it's not AnandTech's content and editorial has no control over it.
That said, while I don't directly control advertising, the feedback is very useful all the same. All of this feedback gets passed on to Purch, and I have made them aware of your concerns. If you have any concerns about the advertising, please continue to provide feedback, and I'll be sure it gets passed on.
Impulses - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
I'm not seeing any of these full page ads, videos, or pop ups, like at all... I do browse mostly on mobile. The promoted stories I do see and I'd agree they're kinda beneath AT, but they don't take up any more space than a standard square ad would.Alexey291 - Thursday, July 7, 2016 - link
Thank you sir.KoolAidMan1 - Saturday, July 9, 2016 - link
Anandtech has consistently been the most thorough, honest tech website around. Reality doesn't match up with your personal brand bias so you call them out for being shills.Give me a break.
h0007h - Tuesday, July 5, 2016 - link
Did you compare the still image peformance between 820 and 8890 variants? It is said that in low light, images thaken by 8890 is much better than 820.