News:

Willkommen im Notebookcheck.com Forum! Hier können sie über alle unsere Artikel und allgemein über Notebook relevante Dinge disuktieren. Viel Spass!

Main Menu

Post reply

The message has the following error or errors that must be corrected before continuing:
Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.
Other options
Verification:
Please leave this box empty:

Shortcuts: ALT+S post or ALT+P preview

Topic summary

Posted by dazed1
 - March 23, 2020, 13:22:30
I talk about performance.
Posted by Ricci Rox
 - March 16, 2020, 13:23:25
Quote from: dazed1 on March 16, 2020, 13:12:26

Misleading. Check out android central article 865 vs 990.

SPEC is by far better than PCMark for determining actual power draw/ efficiency.
Posted by dazed1
 - March 16, 2020, 13:12:26

Misleading. Check out android central article 865 vs 990.
Posted by Ricci Rox
 - March 15, 2020, 23:38:29
Quote from: S.Yu on March 15, 2020, 23:21:09
Hmmm, you say Mongoose cores but the tweet says A76, so he should mean the mid cores, but how do you measure the mid cores alone without activating the M5 cores?

Yes, the tweet is referring to A76 cores. I was talking about some of the changes Samsung has/will implement in its SoC business.  ;)
Posted by S.Yu
 - March 15, 2020, 23:21:09
Hmmm, you say Mongoose cores but the tweet says A76, so he should mean the mid cores, but how do you measure the mid cores alone without activating the M5 cores?
Posted by Redaktion
 - March 15, 2020, 22:26:02
Death, taxes, and Exynos flagship SoCs lagging behind the competition. Most of the world only has the option of the Exynos 990-powered Samsung Galaxy S20 model and they're unlikely to be thrilled by new information that shows the Exynos 990 failing to catch up to the Snapdragon 865 in both performance and efficiency.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Benchmarks-show-the-Exynos-990-on-the-Galaxy-S20-phones-to-be-considerably-worse-than-the-Snapdragon-865.457542.0.html