System Performance Cont'd: GPU Performance

As previously mentioned, the Galaxy S6 uses a Mali T760MP8 clocked at 772 MHz, which should provide a healthy improvement in GPU performance over the Exynos 5433. To test this, we run through our standard suite of game-style GPU benchmarks. However, there are still some CPU benchmarks present within these tests such as the 3DMark physics test. In general though, a strong GPU is needed to perform well in these tests. For those interested in an architectural deep-dive of the Mali T760, I would refer to Ryan’s article on the Midgard architecture for more information.

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Overall

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Graphics

3DMark 1.2 Unlimited - Physics

The Galaxy S6 starts out fairly strong in 3DMark. Overall performance is boosted by a chart-topping physics score, while pure graphics performance trails a bit. In this case the S6 is roughly on par with the iPhone 6 Plus, but would have to close quite a gap to catch up to the HTC One (M9).

BaseMark X 1.1 - Overall (High Quality)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Dunes (High Quality, Offscreen)

BaseMark X 1.1 - Hangar (High Quality, Offscreen)

BaseMark X finds the S6 the runaway winner. The phone is well ahead in both the Dunes and Hangar test, beating the next-best phones (primarily Adreno 420/430 based) by 25% or more depending on the test. The increase over the S5 is especially remarkable; Samsung has more than doubled their performance in this benchmark in barely a year.

GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan (Onscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan (Offscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 T-Rex HD (Onscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 T-Rex HD (Offscreen)

GFXBench 3.0 is another strong showing for the S6. In both offscreen tests it's 15% or more ahead of the next closest phone, which is once again the HTC One (M9). Meanwhile compared once more to the S5, Samsung's performance has more than doubled. Consequently even the onscreen tests show significant gains, as the GPU performance gain more than outstrips the additional performance required to drive the higher resolution 1440p AMOLED display of the S6.

Overall, as we can see the performance of the S6 is in line for what is expected from its Mali T760MP8 configuration. Interestingly though the phone's performance exceeds the scaling we'd expect from adding two shader cores and increasing frequency to 772 MHz, as compared to the Exynos 5433-powered Note 4 Exynos. This suggests that the Exynos 5433's GPU was bandwidth-limited to some extent, in addition to any possible thermal throttling that would occur over the course of a GFXBench run. But I suspect we'll have to save the deep dive for a future article as I can't take the review unit apart to find out.

System Performance NAND Performance: The First UFS Phone
Comments Locked

306 Comments

View All Comments

  • nerd1 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Glad that anandtech FINALLY included the browser benchmarks using sammy's stock browser.
  • lilmoe - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    It's an improvement. But still, "browser benchmarks" are just that; a benchmark to software side of the browser engine. It's only good for testing CPU performance when we're ONLY looking at generation improvements of the *same* platform/browser/OS.

    I wish we had a more "open"/transparent cross platform benchmarking suite... Anyway, it looks Exynos is truly back as a market leader, as in being a generation above everything else. I'd expect it to stay in lead well till the Note 5 is here.
  • nerd1 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    "Although the dynamic range of the Galaxy S6’s IMX240 sensor is inherently lower than an equivalent 1.5 micron pixel-size sensor due to the nature of CMOS image sensors"

    This is not true. Pixel size rarely affects daylight dynamic range of the sensor. D800 series (36MP FF sensor) has actually tiny bit wider dynamic range than 12MP FF sensor of A7s.
  • Alien959 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Yes, that's true for dslr's because they still have large enough pixel size so dynamic range isn't affected. Even d800 have many times larger pixel photo sensor than 1.5 micron used in SG6. For bigger densities in smaller sensors dynamic range is lower compare some high end compact like panasonic LX7 and cheap point and shoot.
  • nerd1 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Various review sites direct comparison between phone cameras and Note 4/GS6 actually had LESS highlight clipping than iPhone 6.
  • Alien959 - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Yes, I have read some of the so maybe sony definitely improved the sensor so samsung is using that versus their own. Different generation sensor and processing also affect the final image.
  • Hairs_ - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    It's a very hindsight-heavy negative view of the s5 in this review. I'm surprised sales weren't great for it as it fixed most of the issues with the s4's performance and camera.

    Losing waterproofing, removable battery and SD card are killers for me but apart from that I don't see what makes the s6 a brilliant. The improved software performance will hopefully be brought down to older devices, the improvements in SOC design and battery efficiency are offset by the pointless resolution increase, and the mantra "must follow apple's cue to be considered premium" isn't convincing.

    Switching to white backgrounds for apps wastes the advantage of AMOLED as well.

    Still, it's selling well so I doubt Samsung care.
  • lilmoe - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    The GS5 didn't sell well because of "perception", not merit. It was a HUGE upgrade over the GS4 in almost every aspect IMHO. I'm one of those who actually liked the "band-aid" plastic back. I would have preferred if Samsung made the GS6 closer to the Alpha's design; metal frame with plastic back, but less squarish (IE: the same exact shape/corners of the GS6 but with the same plastic back as the Alpha).

    I believe that Samsung nailed the design with the Alpha and Note 4, but it seems that reviewers and consumers didn't agree. That stupid twisting of the back cover by reviewers to prove that it was "flimsy" only proved that they were completely ignorant of the quality of materials and the functionality/practicality it entails.
  • Ammaross - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Yep. It's the reviewers that forced Samsung's hand into copying the metal+glass design that the iPhone has. Personally, I think it's horrible as the S6's glass back makes it far too slippery in-hand. I'm definitely putting a bumper on it just so I can hold on to it (which of course entirely defeats the metal+glass design anyway!). Plastic does not mean "cheap," merely flexible (in application/texture, not just robustness).
  • FlushedBubblyJock - Friday, April 17, 2015 - link

    Well, yes, I agree, the reviewers had nothing but disdain if it wasn't "the solid and simple apple industrial design that feels expensive in my hand" but add in the drooling sheep and parrots in their responses, they certainly totally contributed as well.

    Since these people function on mindless perception, not facts, we have the cloned result.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now