Benchmark Athlon 64 3400+ vs Snapdragon 600

[Hubb1e]

So I'm sitting here at my old desktop that I have hooked up for when I forget my laptop at home, and it's entirely usable for basic office tasks. So I decided to to a quick benchmark against my phone to give everyone an idea of how far mobile has come, and how usable old computers are vs new phones.

I have a Samsung S4 with the Snapdragon 600 quad core running at 1.9ghz.
The desktop is a single core S754 Athlon 64 3400+ Venice core at 2.4ghz with 1.5ghz of DDR400 ram on Windows XP. This CPU was released in 2004 ish

I ran the kraken benchmark both on chrome since web browsing is my primary use case on this machine.

6847ms - Athlon 64 3400+
10104ms - Snapdragon 600 at 1.9ghz

Frankly, I expected the 600 to match the Athlon but that wasn't the case.

 

[Cali3350]

Not too surprising, the Athlon still has a much larger and more powerful core in there. Remember, the A15, which is faster than the 600 clock for clock, is still competing with Atom around 2.3ghz.

Im not sure this is totally consistent anyway though, Chrome for android isnt an identical codebase to Chrome for Desktop.

Interesting experiment though.

 

[Hubb1e]

I wasn't looking for a scientific analysis of the CPU cores so the different chrome versions doesn't really matter. What I've always wondered is how do the CPUs in mobile devices compare to CPU's I've owned. I think a lot of us have owned an Athlon 64 so seeing how the Athlon 64 is still faster than the Snapdragon 600 for javascript demonstrates real world usability to me.

Like I said, I'm still using this Athlon 64 once in awhile and I find it a bit laggy compared to my dual core i5 laptop, but with a 50mbit internet connection it still loads pages quickly enough for me not to be affected by the speed, and word and excel are also just fine on it. The only issue it has is with high def flash video since it doesn't have a video card with h.264 decoding.

 

[ChronoReverse]

I'm not terribly surprised. As quick and smooth modern phones are, a large part of that is due to OS tricks designed specifically to hide the slowness in executing a task behind a mask of UI animation. As well as the dedicated chips for things like decoding high definition video.

In the end, the Snapdragon 600 is still constrained to be power efficient as well as low-powered while the Athlon 64 was only constrained by the thermal dissipation abilities of the stock cooler.

Still, not a definitive test since it's not the same javascript engine (it's not improbably that x86 has some advantages for javascript JIT over ARM).

 

[escrow4]

You have that kind of system and bought a phone that's worth a few hundred instead? Odd priorities here I think.

My Kraken results with a G1610 celeron and Win 8 with 4GB DDR3 1333MHz:

Total: 1882.1ms +/- 1.0%

 

[ShintaiDK]

Pretty much shows where ARM performance is on the CPU side. Tho often hyped and hoped to be better.

 

[Sweepr]

My Core i7 3517U (17W 2C/4T Ivy Bridge) results: 1697.6ms

Some results from Snapdragon 800 preview:

 

[podspi]

You have that kind of system and bought a phone that's worth a few hundred instead? Odd priorities here I think.

My Kraken results with a G1610 celeron and Win 8 with 4GB DDR3 1333MHz:

Total: 1882.1ms +/- 1.0%

Why? Arguably for most people the cell phone would be more useful.

 

[Hubb1e]

You have that kind of system and bought a phone that's worth a few hundred instead? Odd priorities here I think.

My Kraken results with a G1610 celeron and Win 8 with 4GB DDR3 1333MHz:

Total: 1882.1ms +/- 1.0%

The introduction to the thread clearly states that I have an old desktop hooked up in the event that I forget to bring my laptop to work. This morning I forgot my work laptop and I'm perfectly happy tooling along on this Athlon 64. At home I have an i5-2500K at 4.4ghz and at work I use a core i5-430 which is a mobile dual core at 2.5ghz.

And here in the US the S4 is only $200 on contract.

 

[SPBHM]

tomshardware compared Tegra3, Apple A5 and some other cheap SoCs to some old Athlon x2 3800+ Vista PC, a few interesting results

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/net-spc2-yf810-8g-review,3492-5.html
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/net-spc2-yf810-8g-review,3492-7.html