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

  • Richa - Friday, May 15, 2015 - link

    Am from India - Bangalore. I bought Samsung S6 edge 64 GB on 12th April 2015 and got to know battery is discharging rapidly within first week of use. I spoke to customer support and sent it for service center. Service center person and his manager said phone does not have any problem and returned same defect phone without fixing. Samsung is least bothered about their customers and service center guys are too unprofessional. Please help me what can be done. Battery back up is less than 3-4 hours.

    Samsung has the worst customer service. First they sell you defective pieces which starts showing problem within a week of purchase and then they will ask you to visit the service center 3-4 times a month just because their technical team is not strong enuff to recognizee the problem. Samsung doesnt value customer time money ... it has just some stupid people sitting at the call center whose work is to fool you and simply waste your time but wont provide genuine service or product .Samsung is the other name of Customer Harassment. My personal Experience which I am going through these days.
  • techconc - Tuesday, May 19, 2015 - link

    @Richa:
    You sound surprised. Why? Is there anything in your experience history with Samsung or even stories of their customer service that leads you to believe this is an anomaly? Your experience sounds pretty consistent with my experience with them.
  • An Droid - Monday, May 18, 2015 - link

    Try reading the article again. Maybe you will then grasp the advantages of UFS over eMMC. If you still do not understand it, look at the graphs (the pictures).
  • schilling - Wednesday, May 20, 2015 - link

    Can someone explain why the video bit rate is so high? It is common for 1080P30 H.264 video to be in the 3-5Mbps range. I get the idea of increasing bit rates to improve quality, but 17Mbps seems ridiculous. I've seen many studies that clearly show that 1080P30 H.264 quality improves very slowly for bit rates above 5Mpbs. Netflix streams 1080P30 in the 1-2Mbps range; and yes their are artifacts, but this is 17-8x higher! The only logical explanation is that Samsung Exynos 7 is taking radical short-cuts in their H.264 CODEC. For example, using only I-Frames, or keeping a very small motion search area.
    Does anyone have insight to this? Has anyone viewed their stream with a CODEC analysis tool like StreamEye?
    Why is Samsung's bit-rate so ridiculously high?
  • The Rogue Tomato - Saturday, May 23, 2015 - link

    Removable battery and no microSD card isn't a big deal anymore. You can get a great quick-charge-capable $20 10,000 mah external battery now that you can use with your own phone, or your girlfriend/wife/boyfriend/husband's phone, too. Just today I wanted to be able to have an extra power source for my phone and my wife's phone. A $20 thingy would be ideal for that.

    And although I have one with my Note 4, I don't see the point of having a microSD slot anymore. I'd rather have the faster internal storage. It's not like I'm going to carry around 100 movies on my phone. If I really want movies, I can put them on a cheap thumb drive and use OTG.
  • bloosted - Tuesday, July 7, 2015 - link

    You guys should revisit this and do an in-depth on the different camera sensors. Now that some time has passed, it's become very clear that the isocell sensors that some gs6 owners randomly end up with are greatly inferior to the sony sensors that you originally tested. Interestingly, it seems most (if not all) of the online reviews of the s6 and s6 edge were done on phones containing the fantastic sony sensor, which received near universal praise. Tom's hardware just did a review of the two sensors and found the isocell sensor greatly lacking.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now