Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Results: CPU Core Benchmarks

Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Review: Wi-Fi Vs. LTE
By

AnTuTu

AnTuTu is an Android system benchmark designed to test the performance capabilities of four major aspects of mobile devices: graphics (encompassing 2D, UI, and basic 3D); CPU (fixed, floating-point, and threading); RAM (read and write); and I/O (read and write).

The Tegra Note 7 and both Galaxy Note 10.1 models fall within striking distance of one another; the two Note 10.1 devices benchmark ahead of the Nexus 7 (2013) by a very wide margin.

While it's obvious that the Snapdragon S4 Pro-powered Nexus 7 (2013) would trail the other tablets, the performance difference between the Tegra Note 7 and pair of Galaxy Note 10.1s is quite narrow. With near-even UX, RAM, CPU, and I/O capabilities, the gap seems to mostly come from GPU performance. Unsurprisingly, the Tegra 4-powered Note 7 comes out with the best GPU score, followed closely by the ARM Mali-T626-powered Note 10.1 (2014) Wi-Fi, and then the Adreno 330-powered Note 10.1 (2014) LTE.

While the Wi-Fi and LTE models seem closely matched, remember that AnTuTu tests only a very basic implementation of 3D graphics, and we expect the gap to widen as the graphics tests become more intense.

Basemark OS II

Rightware is an experienced multiplatform benchmark developer. The company leverages this experience with Basemark OS II, an all-in-one tool designed for measuring the overall performance of mobile devices. The test is available on all major smartphone platforms, including Android, iOS, and Windows Phone 8. Basemark OS II uses a similar approach to Geekbench, but focuses on more application-specific areas, particularly User eXperience (UX), Web browsing, and rendering performance.

The Basemark OS II scores are quite interesting, as Apple's iPad Air beats the Snapdragon 800-powered Note 10.1 (2014) LTE by a slim margin. Both have a healthy lead over the Exynos 5 Octa (5420)-powered Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi, as well as the almost one-year-old Nexus 7 (2013). What's most surprising is that the Tegra 4-powered Note 7 falls far behind every other tablet, even on graphics performance.

In this metric, the LTE model's Adreno 330 blows away all other GPUs to the point that even the iPad Air, with its noticeably superior System and Web scores, just barely beats the Snapdragon 800-powered Note 10.1 (2014) LTE. The Exynos Octa-powered Note 10.1 (2014) Wi-Fi's score falls somewhere between the Note 10.1 (2014) LTE and Nexus 7 (2013). It seems like Nvidia's Tegra 4 simply doesn't run well in Basemark OS II, as it performs quite badly in the graphics portion of the benchmark, resulting in a score less than half that of the top two tablets.

Geekbench 3

Primate Labs' Geekbench is somewhat of an industry standard due to its long-standing database and wide cross-platform compatibility (Windows/OS X/Linux/iOS/Android). This simple system benchmark produces two sets of scores: single- and multi-threaded. For each, it runs a series of tests in three categories: Integer, Floating Point, and Memory. The individual results are used to calculate category scores, which, in turn, generate overall Geekbench scores.

The iPad Air benchmarks better by a country mile in the Single-Core test. This is one of the stronger scores for Apple's A7 SoC, dominating in Integer and Floating Point calculations, as well as Memory testing.

Both Note 10.1 (2014) units, as well as the Tegra Note 7, finish closely behind Apple's flagship tablet with scores in the mid-900s. Finally, the Nexus 7 2013 finishes with a much lower score, as expected, though not by nearly as much, since this test holds no graphics component.

Analysis gets more complicated in the Multi-Core scores, where the Note 7 trails Apple's iPad Air ever so slightly. Samsung's Exynos-powered Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi, on the other hand, bests the iPad Air ever so slightly, while the Snapdragon 800-powered Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) LTE leads, scoring just short of 3000 points.

MobileXPRT 2013

Principled Technologies' MobileXPRT 2013 is a modern SoC benchmark for Android. It consists of 10 real-world test scenarios split into two categories of testing: Performance and User Experience. The Performance suite contains five tests: Apply Photo Effects, Create Photo Collages, Create Slideshow, Encrypt Personal Content, and Detect Faces to Organize Photos.

The Snapdragon 800-powered Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi leads with 300 points, while the Snapdragon-powered LTE version follows closely behind at 214.5 points. The Tegra Note 7 trails significantly, achieving 206.5 points.

The User Experience suite also has five tests: List Scroll, Grid Scroll, Gallery Scroll, Browser Scroll, and Zoom and Pinch. These results are measured in frames per second. The category scores are generated by taking a geometric mean of the ratio between a calibrated machine (Motorola's Droid Razr M) and the test device for each subtest.

To many people, this is the most important test to look at, as User Experience measures the responsiveness of the most common gestures performed by users on their smartphones. Many purists clamor for the stock Android experience, often for its responsiveness. And these results might be the most convincing evidence for wanting a stock device. The much older Nexus 7 and Tegra Note 7—both of which run stock versions of Android—score better than both versions of the Note 10.1 (2014 Edition). There is a sharp difference between the two Galaxy devices. The often-better-performing Qualcomm Snapdragon 800 loses harshly to Samsung's Exynos 5 Octa. We'll have to chalk that one up to Samsung's production of more efficient drivers for its own in-house chips.

Display all 21 comments.
  • -3 Hide
    blackmagnum , July 8, 2014 1:05 AM
    The only possible way Samsung mobile devices can be a worthwhile alternative to Apple is when they ditch the every-man Android and create their own tightly controlled/ managed OS like Apple. Do that and consumers might not feel like they're just buying the Samsung for the hardware.
  • 0 Hide
    Farrwalker , July 8, 2014 8:33 AM
    On page 7. Results: CPU Core Benchmarks:
    Your bar graph "MobileXPRT 2013" seems to be in error.
    For example, the text says, "Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi leads with 300 points . . ."
    but the bar is the shortest and indicates less than 150 points.
  • 0 Hide
    blueer03 , July 8, 2014 9:30 AM
    You need to proofread this big time. From page 9:
    Samsung's Exynos-based Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi holds its own against the Tegra Note 7, while the LTE version of the Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) again falls significantly behind its Snapdragon 800-powered Wi-Fi counterpart.

    And this happens all throughout. The LTE is a Snapdragon, the Wifi is an Exynos. Keep repeating that to yourself as you re-write the descriptions and it will make this easier to read.
  • 1 Hide
    Kevin Harrelson , July 8, 2014 9:54 AM
    We got one of these for my son (age 13) to help with his school work. We got it from Best Buy and got the extended warranty. Both sound dumb, but it was actually a good move! The backlight has gone out on this thing TWICE. I happen to think that it is a lovely little tablet, but the backlight is a major reliability issue.
  • 1 Hide
    adamovera , July 8, 2014 10:48 AM
    Quote:
    On page 7. Results: CPU Core Benchmarks:
    Your bar graph "MobileXPRT 2013" seems to be in error. For example, the text says, "Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi leads with 300 points . . ." but the bar is the shortest and indicates less than 150 points.

    This benchmark's sub-tests produce scores in seconds (lower is better), and the overall score is given as a typical higher-is-better score, so the lowest bar indicates the fastest completion. Sorry about the confusion, I'll look into other ways to represent this test.
  • 2 Hide
    adamovera , July 8, 2014 10:51 AM
    Quote:
    You need to proofread this big time. From page 9:
    Samsung's Exynos-based Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) Wi-Fi holds its own against the Tegra Note 7, while the LTE version of the Note 10.1 (2014 Edition) again falls significantly behind its Snapdragon 800-powered Wi-Fi counterpart.
    And this happens all throughout. The LTE is a Snapdragon, the Wifi is an Exynos. Keep repeating that to yourself as you re-write the descriptions and it will make this easier to read.

    Good catch, thanks! Fixed.
  • 0 Hide
    Tomtompiper , July 8, 2014 1:30 PM
    The 2014 is almost 5 months old and has been superseded by the Amoled screened Galaxy Tab S 10.1 which wipes the floor with the opposition. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_tab_s_105-review-1097.php Do try to keep up!
  • 3 Hide
    adamovera , July 8, 2014 2:06 PM
    Quote:
    The 2014 is almost 5 months old and has been superseded by the Amoled screened Galaxy Tab S 10.1 which wipes the floor with the opposition. http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_tab_s_105-review-1097.php Do try to keep up!

    Actually, you'd think this has been phased out, but it's the current 10-inch Galaxy "Note" product, meaning it has the S Pen. The Galaxy "Tab" S does not - still unclear to me what makes the "S" stand out. I believe Samsung is literally attempting to offer an alternative product to every single other device in existence - complete mobile domination. I lost count of their current "Galaxy" line at 11 products, and that was awhile back.

    The duo of Note 10.1 (2014)'s came in very handy both as comparison data in other articles and as testbeds for compiling our benchmark suite. Unfortunately, the article had to be pushed back several times, but the huge hardware difference between products carrying the same name was always something we wanted to illustrate, initially for the chipset-vs-chipset angle, but later for the optimization aspect as well. We're currently working through a small backlog of mobility articles, but each will be more timely than the last. My apologies.
  • 1 Hide
    Blazer1985 , July 8, 2014 6:22 PM
    I really wish Samsung could help the end user distinguish what they are buying. The 2 Note are classified as "LTE" and "WIFI ONLY" which sounds like 2 equal devices except for the sim card slot while they actually have a totally different soc.
  • 0 Hide
    vaughn2k , July 8, 2014 9:03 PM
    ... and Samsung prices are now on par with Apple's. others are okay. Will wait for Asus and other competition. Should be cheaper though...
  • -2 Hide
    Ninjawithagun , July 9, 2014 6:53 AM
    These benchmarks are fundamentally flawed. No where is there mention that both the Nexus and Apple iPad Air use lower resolution displays, which dramatically reduces the overall load on the CPU and GPU vs. the Samsung Note devices. The benchmarks are completely useless since an "apples-to-oranges" comparison is not a valid methodology for comparing these uniquely different tablets. And why was the new Samsung Tab S used instead of the year old 2014 Edition versions? Another "fail" on behalf of the author.
  • 0 Hide
    godnodog , July 9, 2014 11:23 AM
    As a user of the Note 10.1 2012, I have to strongly disagree with the new multitasking sytem, as it is clearly a step backwards from what it used to be, now you can ONLY have 2 windows opened, as I, by not installing the update, can have 4 / 5 / 6 opened, obviously I don´t have them opened, but I frequently have 3 windows opened simultaniously, wich now I can´t have. Also it apperars that the multitask is no longer floating, agains mine that still does. I have experienced no problem whatsoever like you described "were slow, unresponsive, or just plain bad".
  • 1 Hide
    wiltjk , July 10, 2014 7:18 PM
    A key point of your review is that this is about a "pen" tablet. Not having used a physical keyboard since 2003, I am pleased to see some alternatives to the Intel/Windows dominated offerings.

    It is a good review for apples to apples on the Samsung hardware options.

    Would you suggest that this is "as-good-as-it-gets" for the few who prefer pen-based tablets? Any foresight in other pen based tablets?
  • 0 Hide
    Zarathvstra , July 11, 2014 2:23 AM
    Quote:
    These benchmarks are fundamentally flawed. No where is there mention that both the Nexus and Apple iPad Air use lower resolution displays, which dramatically reduces the overall load on the CPU vs. the Samsung Note devices. The benchmarks are completely useless since an "apples-to-oranges" comparison is not a valid methodology for comparing these uniquely different tablets. And why was the new Samsung Tab S used instead of the year old 2014 Edition versions? Another "fail" on behalf of the author.


    Ninjawithagun,
    Tablets are not modular like a pc... whilst it may have been good for the author the resolution issue with these benchmarks, an apples to apples comparison of the individual components would NOT help the user decide which unit as a whole is the fastest as indeed, they are NOT modular.
  • 0 Hide
    Ninjawithagun , July 12, 2014 8:46 AM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    These benchmarks are fundamentally flawed. No where is there mention that both the Nexus and Apple iPad Air use lower resolution displays, which dramatically reduces the overall load on the CPU vs. the Samsung Note devices. The benchmarks are completely useless since an "apples-to-oranges" comparison is not a valid methodology for comparing these uniquely different tablets. And why was the new Samsung Tab S used instead of the year old 2014 Edition versions? Another "fail" on behalf of the author.


    Ninjawithagun,
    Tablets are not modular like a pc... whilst it may have been good for the author the resolution issue with these benchmarks, an apples to apples comparison of the individual components would NOT help the user decide which unit as a whole is the fastest as indeed, they are NOT modular.


    Not true. Most (not all) tablets are in fact modular in that the CPU and GPU operate independently of one another. Case in point, the Apple A7 uses a dual-core 64-bit SOC processor and PowerVR G6430 graphics chip. The Samsung uses the Exynos 5 Octa processor with a Mali-T628 MP6 graphics chip. Your definition of modular is fundamentally flawed in that you think it pertains to physical ability for individual items to removed/replaced. Modular infers to the actual architecture of the system in that several different parts from different manufactures are integrated together to function as a whole unit.
  • 0 Hide
    Zarathvstra , July 12, 2014 6:04 PM
    Quote:
    Quote:
    Quote:
    These benchmarks are fundamentally flawed. No where is there mention that both the Nexus and Apple iPad Air use lower resolution displays, which dramatically reduces the overall load on the CPU vs. the Samsung Note devices. The benchmarks are completely useless since an "apples-to-oranges" comparison is not a valid methodology for comparing these uniquely different tablets. And why was the new Samsung Tab S used instead of the year old 2014 Edition versions? Another "fail" on behalf of the author.


    Ninjawithagun,
    Tablets are not modular like a pc... whilst it may have been good for the author the resolution issue with these benchmarks, an apples to apples comparison of the individual components would NOT help the user decide which unit as a whole is the fastest as indeed, they are NOT modular.


    Not true. Most (not all) tablets are in fact modular in that the CPU and GPU operate independently of one another. Case in point, the Apple A7 uses a dual-core 64-bit SOC processor and PowerVR G6430 graphics chip. The Samsung uses the Exynos 5 Octa processor with a Mali-T628 MP6 graphics chip. Your definition of modular is fundamentally flawed in that you think it pertains to physical ability for individual items to removed/replaced. Modular infers to the actual architecture of the system in that several different parts from different manufactures are integrated together to function as a whole unit.


    This does not argue to the point. Here's a fact and the crux of the matter... An apples to apples comparison of gpu's and processors does NOT tell the user how apps will perform on tablet x when constrained by their other components be it amount of ram, screen res, gpu, cpu etc.

    i.e. benchmarks are not "fundamentally flawed" (nor is my understanding and use of the term modular)
  • 1 Hide
    apertotes , July 14, 2014 4:36 AM
    I think it is deceiving to not point out on the table on first page that memory can easily be expanded with a cheap microsd card. It is not 16/32 gb, it's 16/32+128 gb.
  • 0 Hide
    szalkerous , July 16, 2014 9:21 AM
    At first I thought there was something new, and I realized this is a review for a tablet I bought last year.

    FYI, the KitKat update makes the SD card practically useless. Rooting these tablets is frustrating at best, and the KNOX system is the most terrible idea Samsung ever came up with.

    Looking back, I should have gotten a Nexus.
  • 0 Hide
    apertotes , July 16, 2014 10:06 AM
    Quote:

    FYI, the KitKat update makes the SD card practically useless.


    How can it be useless having 128 gb for music and videos/pictures? Maybe you can afford spotify and paying 15 dollars every month for an upgraded dropbox account, but many people don't, or even if they do, they do not have a reliable LTE signal 24/7.

  • 0 Hide
    SoPhat VaThana , July 17, 2014 1:29 AM
    good
Display more comments
React To This Article