GPU Performance & Power

The Kirin 980 is the first SoC to sport Arm’s newest generation Mali G76 GPU. The new IP differs significantly to previous generations, in more or less simplified terms, in that the GPU cores are essentially twice as big and capable as the previous generation Mali G72 cores. So while the G76MP10 configuration of the Kirin 980 might sound small, it’s not small at all in terms of theoretical performance.

GPU performance and efficiency has been a big thorn in the side of both the Kirin 960 and 970, as both SoCs showcased less than stellar power figures, which in turn also resulted in forced limited clocks and performance of the GPUs. It’s here that Huawei made the biggest promises in terms of improvements: a claimed 46% increase in performance while showcasing a staggering 178% increase in power efficiency. The latter figure especially caught some attention, as you just don’t see such increases in the industry.

3DMark Sling Shot 3.1 Extreme Unlimited - Physics

Starting off with 3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Unlimited and the Physics sub-test, we see the Mate 20’s showcase some leading peak performance figures. This test is mainly a CPU test with just some more minor GPU load. The performance jump here undoubtedly comes from the new Cortex A76 microarchitecture.

In terms of sustained performance, we see some diverging figures between the Mate 20 and Mate 20 Pro, as the Pro is able to reach much higher sustained scores. Before getting into any conclusions, it’s worth to also look at the GPU results.

3DMark Sling Shot 3.1 Extreme Unlimited - Graphics

On the Graphics sub-test, we see both new Mate 20’s reach respectable peak performance figures, however they are both still throttling quite a lot until they reach thermal equilibrium. Comparing the results to the stock firmware Kirin 970’s, such as the P20 Pro, the performance increase is nevertheless quite significant.

GFXBench Aztec Ruins - High - Vulkan/Metal - Off-screen GFXBench Aztec Ruins - Normal - Vulkan/Metal - Off-screen

In the new Aztec Ruins Vulkan benchmarks, both in High and Normal quality modes, we see some really odd performance behaviour. While the peak performance isn’t all that great, the sustained performance is pretty much almost identical. On the Normal run the Mate 20 Pro actually was able to maintain a higher performance than the Mate 20, something that we also saw on the 3DMark Physics run. It would be definitely interesting if the benchmark is in some way CPU bound, or if the devices have different thermal limits between Vulkan and OpenGLES workloads.

GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 Off-screen

In Manhattan 3.1, we see again respectable performance gains both in peak and sustained figures. Compared to the Vulkan runs, these scores showcase a more expected delta between peak and sustained. The Kirin 980 here generally matches most Snapdragon 845 devices – short of the OnePlus 6 and G7 which seem to allow much higher sustained power limits.

GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 Offscreen Power Efficiency
(System Active Power)
  Mfc. Process FPS Avg. Power
(W)
Perf/W
Efficiency
iPhone XS (A12) Warm 7FF 76.51 3.79 20.18 fps/W
iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak 7FF 103.83 5.98 17.36 fps/W
Galaxy S9+ (Snapdragon 845) 10LPP 61.16 5.01 11.99 fps/W
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Kirin 980) 7FF 54.54 4.57 11.93 fps/W
Galaxy S9 (Exynos 9810) 10LPP 46.04 4.08 11.28 fps/W
Galaxy S8 (Snapdragon 835) 10LPE 38.90 3.79 10.26 fps/W
LeEco Le Pro3 (Snapdragon 821) 14LPP 33.04 4.18 7.90 fps/W
Galaxy S7 (Snapdragon 820) 14LPP 30.98 3.98 7.78 fps/W
Huawei Mate 10 (Kirin 970) 10FF 37.66 6.33 5.94 fps/W
Galaxy S8 (Exynos 8895) 10LPE 42.49 7.35 5.78 fps/W
Galaxy S7 (Exynos 8890) 14LPP 29.41 5.95 4.94 fps/W
Meizu PRO 5 (Exynos 7420) 14LPE 14.45 3.47 4.16 fps/W
Nexus 6P (Snapdragon 810 v2.1) 20Soc 21.94 5.44 4.03 fps/W
Huawei Mate 8 (Kirin 950) 16FF+ 10.37 2.75 3.77 fps/W
Huawei Mate 9 (Kirin 960) 16FFC 32.49 8.63 3.77 fps/W
Huawei P9 (Kirin 955) 16FF+ 10.59 2.98 3.55 fps/W

Looking at the power efficiency during Manhattan 3.1, we unfortunately see that the phone and chipset didn’t quite meet my projections in efficiency. Performance is exactly where it should be, however the power is off by about 1W as I had hoped to see about 3.5W peak power. At peak performance of both chipsets, the Kirin 980 showcases a 100% efficiency gain over the Kirin 970, which is still a pretty massive generational improvement, even if the previous generation didn’t exactly set the bar all that high.

In regards to Huawei’s 178% power efficiency claim during the chipset’s announcement: I still think this number is correct, however evidently this was a traditional case of somewhat misleading presentation or a mixup between “or” and “and” in the relationship between the performance and power efficiency improvements. Now in hindsight, the 178% efficiency figure likely refers to the efficiency advantage of the Kirin 980 at the same performance of the Kirin 970, which given the measured power figures here, is something that’s definitely plausible.

GFXBench T-Rex 2.7 Off-screen

In T-Rex, the peak performance improvements over the Kirin 970 are far less, and I do wonder exactly what the bottleneck here is. Nevertheless, the sustained performance jumps 50%, but yet again this is just for the Mate 20 Pro as the regular Mate 20 sees far more severe throttling. T-Rex would be in many ways CPU bound as it’s hitting very high frame-rates on modern SoCs.

GFXBench T-Rex Offscreen Power Efficiency
(System Active Power)
  Mfc. Process FPS Avg. Power
(W)
Perf/W
Efficiency
iPhone XS (A12) Warm 7FF 197.80 3.95 50.07 fps/W
iPhone XS (A12) Cold / Peak 7FF 271.86 6.10 44.56 fps/W
Galaxy S9+ (Snapdragon 845) 10LPP 150.40 4.42 34.00 fps/W
Galaxy S9 (Exynos 9810) 10LPP 141.91 4.34 32.67 fps/W
Galaxy S8 (Snapdragon 835) 10LPE 108.20 3.45 31.31 fps/W
Huawei Mate 20 Pro (Kirin 980) 7FF 135.75 4.64 29.25 fps/W
LeEco Le Pro3 (Snapdragon 821) 14LPP 94.97 3.91 24.26 fps/W
Galaxy S7 (Snapdragon 820) 14LPP 90.59 4.18 21.67 fps/W
Galaxy S8 (Exynos 8895) 10LPE 121.00 5.86 20.65 fps/W
Galaxy S7 (Exynos 8890) 14LPP 87.00 4.70 18.51 fps/W
Huawei Mate 10 (Kirin 970) 10FF 127.25 7.93 16.04 fps/W
Meizu PRO 5 (Exynos 7420) 14LPE 55.67 3.83 14.54 fps/W
Nexus 6P (Snapdragon 810 v2.1) 20Soc 58.97 4.70 12.54 fps/W
Huawei Mate 8 (Kirin 950) 16FF+ 41.69 3.58 11.64 fps/W
Huawei P9 (Kirin 955) 16FF+ 40.42 3.68 10.98 fps/W
Huawei Mate 9 (Kirin 960) 16FFC 99.16 9.51 10.42 fps/W

Again, the power efficiency as measured on T-Rex sees a significant jump over the Kirin 970, however most of this improvement is simply going towards reducing the actual power usage from the ridiculously high values of its predecessor, with only a little gained peak performance.

I wouldn’t take this as a definitive verdict on the Mali G76 as of yet, as over the last 3 generations Samsung has been able to extract much better results out of their GPU implementations inside the Exynos SoCs than what HiSilicon was able to achieve in the Kirins. The next generation Exynos 9820 should be able to do better than this, so maybe that’s where the Mali G76 will hit its projected targets.

Overall, the Kirin 980 definitely is posting substantial improvements over its predecessor, however Arm’s Mali GPU still seems to lag a tad behind the higher end competition from Apple and Qualcomm. What is definitely positive for Huawei is that the new SoC finally is able to shed off the atrocious performance showcased in the previous generation chipsets, and is now actually competitive with most recent devices.

System Performance Display Measurement & Power
Comments Locked

141 Comments

View All Comments

  • name99 - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    Please don't treat me like a child; read my comments and treat me accordingly.
    DDR as a rate (transactions) DOUBLE the clock was only relevant to the transition from SDR to DDR.
    What do you think is the difference between DDR and DDR2, or DDDR2 and DDR3, or DDR3 and DDR4?

    Part of the problem seems to be that no-one can agree on what "clock" actually refers to.
    There are at least two clocks of interest - the internal DRM clock, and the external bus clock.

    As far as I can tell:
    - DDR doubled the transfer rate over the external bus. (External bus, internal clock the same, just like SDR). Internal clock is ~100..200MHz
    - DDR2 runs the external clock at twice the internal clock.
    - DDR3 runs the external clock at 4x the internal clock. (still running from ~100 to 266MHz)

    - At DDR4 I'm no longer sure (which is part of the whole reason for this confusion).
    The obvious assumption is that the external clock is now run at 8x the internal clock; but that does NOT seem to be the case. Rather what's defined as the internal clock is now run twice as fast, so that the internal:external multiplier is still 8x, but the internal clock speeds now range from ~200 to ~400MHz.

    Meanwhile, is LPDDR following the same pattern at each generation? I haven't a clue, and can find no useful answer on the internet.
  • anonomouse - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    I think the discussion of internal/external clock ratios is somewhat orthogonal to your originally posed question: the clock that is being advertised is the IO clock for the LPDDR4 modules, since they're telling you what the peak bandwidth of the module is. Commands are on the same clock but SDR instead of DDR and each command takes multiple cycles. Don't quite see what is so confusing about the 2133MHz clock though, since the way they are describing it is entirely accurate and is no different from previous practices. DDR4-3200 has a 1600MHz IO clock too.

    Also worth remembering that while pin speed is higher, individual LPDDR4 channels are 16bits vs 64bits, so it's not like the actual bandwidth is necessarily higher. This phone has 4-channels to get 34.1GB/s, which is the same bandwidth you'd get from a 2-channel DDR4-2133 system, but much more feasible to scale up capacity/channels/clocks on DDR4.
  • frostyfiredude - Saturday, November 17, 2018 - link

    Look, I have no idea where you're going with all the internal clocks and DDR4, DDR3, etc differences so I'm not commenting. But, here are the facts on the Mate 20 Pro:

    The DRAM - Memory controller interface is clocked at 2133Mhz.
    Due to being of the DDR family, 2 bits are transferred per clock.
    Together, this mean 4266Mbits/s transfer rate per pin.
    Finally its a 64-bit bus, meaning 64 data pins. 273024Mbits/s aggregate bandwidth.
    That breaks down to 34.1GB/s.
    In standard DIMM form on your favourite PC parts store, this is advertised as DDR4-4266 or PC4-34100.
  • ternnence - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    closer from ram to cpu core, higher frequency ram could get. HBM is another example.
  • eastcoast_pete - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    @Andrei: thanks for this in-depth review! I wonder how S.LSI takes your pessimistic take on their M4; it seems they have a hard time backing away from their in-house design that doesn't seem to cut it. Also, I appreciate that you're live-updating the review with additional information; I trust reviews that add and update their findings as new data become available much more than the one-and-done style.
    Question: Did you have a chance to ask Huawei along those lines: "What is your commitment to OS updates, how quickly will you make them available, and for how many years?". Having been burned by Huawei a few years ago (promised OS update never arrived), I am still a bit once burned, twice shy. These devices are pricey, and if Huawei wants to take on Apple at Apple prices, they should mirror Apple's commitment to provide OS updates for several years.
  • rayhydro - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    I'm using the mate 20 now, and I can confirm it has the same stereo setup as the mate20pro. maybe your unit's top tweeter is faulty ?
  • rayhydro - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    I tested both side by side in the stores, both model's stereo speakers sound pretty much the same or extremely similar to my ears. I opted for mate 20 due to it's smaller notch and headphone jack :D
  • lucam - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    I still think Mali GPU is a garbage GPU
  • Lolimaster - Friday, November 16, 2018 - link

    To put it simply, at the same year, they're 1 year behind.

    Mali G76 MP10 ~ Adreno 540 (a bit faster on the mali side, maybe)
  • lucam - Saturday, November 17, 2018 - link

    Adreno is always been better. Still think Imagination has the best solution tho

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now