My guesses:
1. Something related to Qualcomm security for Samsung Pay? Both US and China are supposed to have Qualcomm models. Then again Korea have Exynos!
2. Radios for CDMA, where Qualcomm clearly have upper hand. Probably China also have some of those bands where Qualcomm radios work better.
3. better gpu
I ran VFP Benchmark on my Exynos-based S7 Edge.
Looking at the results, one can deduce the AdvSIMD engine is 128-bit wide and it can run fmul/fadd/fmla every cycle (both SP and DP). This means >20 GFLOPS for SP (mul+add) and >10 GFLOPS for DP. Not bad.
What I find odd is that the MT score reaches 147 SP GFLOPS and 73 DP GFLOPS whichs means a 7x speedup, while I would have expected less than 6: 1-2 M1 run @2.6 GHz ,while if you run 8 cores 4 M1 run @2.3 GHz and 4 Cortex-A53 @1.6 GHz, 4*2.3 + 4*1.6 = 15.6 = 6.*2.6.
Can someone run the benchmark on an S820?
They are in line with what Exynos does: 128-bit wide, one instruction per cycle, with a core running at 2.1 GHz. The MT score is slightly higher than what I'd expect, but by a smaller margin than Exynos.
My scores seem kinda low.
They're already irrelevant in this part of the world, as for premium phones I'd say only Apple atm has a death grip on that segment & the rest (including Sammy) are falling by the wayside. I have the 2GB model of Redmi Note 3 & for the price, it's closer to 140$ including all the discounts & cashback one can muster, there's no better alternative out there.What's interesting to see will be a detailed perf/power analysis of both these chips in comparison to an A72 based SoC like used by the Kirin 950.
The mid-range A72 based chip-SD650(28nm) used in Xiaomi Redmi note 3 ~150/180$ easily outpaces SD808(20nm) and does quite well againt SD820(20nm) while not having as much thermal issues.Finally the big-core has arrived to lower ranges in some markets.SD650 based phones could make a lot of SD616/808/810 based phones irrelevant if priced right. A53 wasn't big enough improvement from A7 but A72 has definitely delivered over A57.
Looking at the results, one can deduce the AdvSIMD engine is 128-bit wide and it can run fmul/fadd/fmla every cycle (both SP and DP). This means >20 GFLOPS for SP (mul+add) and >10 GFLOPS for DP. Not bad.
Perhaps the CPU, or parts of it, are to be reused (or were to be reused, if the project was cancelled) on a desktop/server chip.1:2 SP to DP ratio on fmul/fmadd seems like an odd choice to me. I wonder how many are actually running FP64 code on these CPUs.
Maybe it'll help somewhere with PS2 emulation one day (not that PS2 has FP64 but it might be useful for emulating its weird FP32 behavior)
1:2 SP to DP ratio on fmul/fmadd seems like an odd choice to me.
How is this a choice? This is essentially given by the fact that you can pack double the amount of SP datatypes into single 128 bit NEON register. A NEON operation completes 2 DP operation or 4 SP operations per cycle best case. For Kryo and Mongoose this seems to be the case.
On Cortex-A5 for example even the integer datatypes need 2 cycles but you still have the ratio 2:1 between 16bit and 32bit.
When you have to add only two DP muladd units, the extra area is not that large (compared to the rest of the CPU), especially since these DP units can be used for SP computations too with some tweaks.The amount of work needed for a multiplication scales quadratically with input width. You can see this in Cortex-A8 and A9 with integer NEON multiplications: 4x16-bit issues in one cycle but 2x32-bit issues in two cycles. Going from single precision to double precision floating point is even worse because the multiplication part goes from 23 bits to 52 bits meaning that there's over five times as much work needed. But some other work is needed for FP calculations that don't scale as much so it's not quite that bad in terms of overall logic increase.
NotebookCheck's Galaxy S7 (Exynos 8 Octa 8890) Review
Here.
Exynos vs Snapdragon Speedtests:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=mI7jkyRwa8A
www.youtube.com/watch?v=r_sPVQ4VFvs
The amount of work needed for a multiplication scales quadratically with input width.
That's not determined yet.
I watched only the first movie and the Exynos is way more fluid, but it scores lower in benchmarks, does the NAND speed make it feel faster?
Not for another month minimum. Sometimes I wish we could get devices faster but that's life.
Yeaa. Or get the product on market this month.
Meh. Since last year Samsung is treating the Note line like an oversized S product with a stylus. This is your real flagship, so give me a new/updated SoC, state-of-the-art 4K AMOLED and different design/features.
That indeed is disappointing. The only interesting part is the increased RAM memoryMeh. Since last year Samsung is treating the Note line like an oversized S product with a stylus. This is your real flagship, so give me a new/updated SoC, state-of-the-art 4K AMOLED and different design/features.