Help me understand phone specs

[ExalyThor]

First of all, dont tell me about resolutions, core count and frequency and memory capacity. Tell me how different gpus and cpus scale. You can talk in ryzen r3,5,7, intel i3,5,7, Gtx and Rx terms for me to understand. I like the j5 2018, but Im not sure how does it compare to other phones. I also cant buy anything above 250$. Cheers for everyone!

[Jurrunio]

Just look them up in Passmark's Android Benchmark list, or other benchmarks.

 

Phone CPUs have a confusing naming scheme (they arent meant for users to understand) so there's no way of knowing it's performance level just by the name. This is true for Qualcomm Snapdragon lineup, Samsung Exynos lineup, or even MediaTek's SoC, even though they are all based on ARM blueprints.

[ExalyThor]

43 minutes ago, Jurrunio said:

Just look them up in Passmark's Android Benchmark list, or other benchmarks.

 

Phone CPUs have a confusing naming scheme (they arent meant for users to understand) so there's no way of knowing it's performance level just by the name. This is true for Qualcomm Snapdragon lineup, Samsung Exynos lineup, or even MediaTek's SoC, even though they are all based on ARM blueprints.

I thought at this but for example the 7980xe is better at benchmarks while the 8700k is better at allmost every real world scenario so syntetic benchmarks arent viable

[Guest The Viking]

Benchmarks are the only real way to compare performance. You check AnTutute, firestrike, passmark, etc etc. and the ones with most points are the better phones.

 

http://www.antutu.com/en/ranking/rank1.htm

https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/mobile

https://www.androidbenchmark.net/passmark_chart.html

 

obviously each benchmark is optimized in different ways, so results will vary a lot. 

 

Your best bet is to just ask here on the forums what you're looking for and somebody will recommend you the best option in that category. So if what you want is the best gaming performance on a phone for under 250$, somebody will know.

[ExalyThor]

15 minutes ago, The Viking said:

Benchmarks are the only real way to compare performance. You check AnTutute, firestrike, passmark, etc etc. and the ones with most points are the better phones.

 

http://www.antutu.com/en/ranking/rank1.htm

https://www.futuremark.com/hardware/mobile

https://www.androidbenchmark.net/passmark_chart.html

 

obviously each benchmark is optimized in different ways, so results will vary a lot. 

 

Your best bet is to just ask here on the forums what you're looking for and somebody will recommend you the best option in that category. So if what you want is the best gaming performance on a phone for under 250$, somebody will know.

Well this sucks a lot... And you know why phone cpu manufactures focus on adding a stupid amout of cores instead of clock speeds?

[Jurrunio]

27 minutes ago, TheSponyX said:

I thought at this but for example the 7980xe is better at benchmarks while the 8700k is better at allmost every real world scenario so syntetic benchmarks arent viable

In the mobile platform this isnt the case, because those with more cores have higher single core performance as well. Within the same generation, that is.

[Guest The Viking]

7 minutes ago, TheSponyX said:

Well this sucks a lot... And you know why phone cpu manufactures focus on adding a stupid amout of cores instead of clock speeds?

higher clockspeeds means more power consumption. Phone makers are obsessed with having the most cores, higher clockspeed & smallest manufacturing process. 

 

Another issue is cooling, phones are passively cooled, so you can't clock a chip to 4Ghz and expect it to stay at 4Ghz. It's like cpus really, they can maintain those high clockspeeds for small amount of time then just thermothrottle.

 

So right now most soc designs are 10nm with 7nm on the way (CPUs are stuck at 12nm with Ryzen refresh so....), 8 cores and I think some manufacturers manage to reach 2.7Ghz, most stay around ~2Ghz. But the clockspeed isn't too important, the idea is to optimize for extra cores, such as on consoles and now on PCs with multithreaded applications.

 

And also, phone cpus are called SoCs. They include CPU+GPU+all the rest. Can't start clocking your cpu to 4Ghz and then your GPU to 1Ghz and expect it not to drain your battery and burn your phone. So they make compromises. For gaming, well, most phones can last what, 30 minutes in intensive tasks then just throttle and the fps/fluidity ingame drops?

[wasab]

Qualcomm snapdragon 4xx is entry level, 6xx is mid range, and 8xx are the trips that go into flagship. The middle number usually denotes generation. 

 

mediatek are all low end entry level SoCs except their helio lines which are consider upper mid range. Their gpus usually lags far behind Qualcomm in all chips except the helio x30 though

 

Exynos chips... I don’t see any regular naming rules but these are use only in Samsung phones mostly so you can be sure whatever in the flagships will be the top end. They are usually around snapdragon 8xx lines in performance. 

 

Kirin SoCs are generally the same as snapdragon 8xx in performance but their gpus can lack a bit just like mediatek. 

 

So comparing flagship SoCs as of now.....

 

snadragon 845 = Exynos 9810 > Kirin 970

845 ties the Exynos

 

Current gen mid range...

 

helio x 30 > sd 660 > helio p60 > sd 636 >  sd  630 = rest of helio p series = Kirin 659

After 636, these chips are all cortext A53 and mediocre gpu so pretty much tie there.

 

Current gen low end....

I only know snapdragons 450 and all those atrocious mediatek mt67xx here. I always pick the snapedragon ones over the mediatek in this range so snadragon > mediatek

[n8cwhite]

Snapdragons 400s are usually found on entry-level devices. Snapdragon 600 is on mid-range devices, and some budget phones. The 800s are usually only on flagships, such as the Pixel or Galaxy S8/9. 

 

On the benchmarking, Kirin 600 series is equivalent with the Snapdragon 600s.