Peak competition I9500 VS I9505 performance test | Aigaoji - 上海419贵族宝贝-上海后花园1314-上海品茶网-阿拉爱上海

Now the SoC of mobile phones is developing rapidly. Samsung has even launched the Exynos 5410 processor with "4+4 cores", and Qualcomm has also launched the Snapdragon 600 to strive for the high-end market. And just two versions of Galaxy S4 Exynos 5410 and APQ8064AB are also used in I9505 and I9505 respectively. This article is a comparative test of these two top SoCs.

Let's compare the product specifications first:

From the SoC parameters, it seems that the Exynos 5410 "4+4 core" and three core high-frequency GPU on the architecture are much better than the combination of APQ8064AB's four core Snapdragon with high-frequency Adreno 320. The advantage of APQ8064AB is the ultra-high CPU frequency, which reaches 1.9GHz, second only to Intel's 2GHz.

In the following tests, the I9500 firmware version is XXUAMDL, and the I9505 firmware version is XXUAMDN.

Theoretical test

In the theoretical test part, some commonly used scoring software is used to compare the performance of I9500 and I9505.

Angu rabbit evaluation V3.3

Although this test does not represent absolute performance, it can also be used as a reference. The advantages of the I9500 are in RAM performance and GPU performance, and the advantages of the I9505 are in floating point performance. It is obvious that both of them have frequency reduction. The I9500 displays 1.4GHz, and the I9505 displays 1.6GHz ▼

Since there is frequency reduction, of course, we should also try "refrigerator score". Through the low-temperature treatment of mobile phones, both scores have improved to a certain extent, including the I9500. In the refrigerator scoring, the I9500 still has the advantage, and has greatly improved the CPU's integer performance and floating point operation performance. The floating point performance has been on the same level with APQ8064AB. From the perspective of Anthare's scoring, the I9500 can "destroy" the I9505. By freezing the mobile phone, it can also be seen that the I9500's CPU frequency is identified as 1.6GHz, and the I9505 is identified as 1.9GHz ▼

Vellamo

HTML5, a web page testing software launched by Qualcomm, has similar performance and can be considered as a test error. In addition, the Optimus G Pro using Snapdragon 600 has more than 2400 points, so it can be considered that I9505 does not play well in this test. For Metal, I9500 performs better, which is also the advantage of A15 ▼

Pi calculation used to be used in PC CPU tests. Now Android phones also have corresponding applications for Pi calculation. The following is a test for calculating 10 million bits. It takes 33.9 seconds for I9500 and 36 seconds for I9505. The difference is not big, but we see that Xiaomi 2S using Snapdragon 600 is 35 seconds, Optimus G Pro only takes 34 seconds, reflecting that the I9505 with a higher nominal frequency is inferior to the APQ8064T (the lower the better) ▼ with 1.7GHz in actual testing

Anthare 3D

Compared with the overall score of Anthare's evaluation, the segmented 3D test is very accurate in measuring the GPU performance. The I9500 can still reach 34.6 frames at 1080P, while the I9505 is just 10 frames away. Although the score of 24.4 frames is a little lower than that of I9500, it still has a certain improvement compared with the previous Adreno 320 ▼

GLBenchmark 2.7

The new 2.7 version of the old GPU test software puts forward new requirements for GPU performance, and the 2.7 version also includes 2.5 tests. The Offscreen test of the absolute performance of the GPU tested here focuses on the Shader performance of the GPU, so the Adreno 320 device of Qualcomm will score high in this test. The score of I9505 finally exceeded that of I9500 in this test, but the extent of exceeding was not high. In the 2.5 version, the I9500 is 2 frames higher than the I9505, and their level is much higher than the general Adreno 320 ▼

BaseMark X

This software uses the Unity 4.0 engine and introduces a large number of particle effects, advanced lighting effects and post-processing, which will put a lot of pressure on the GPU of the mobile phone. This test also focuses on the Shader performance of the GPU. Therefore, the performance of Qualcomm Adreno 320 is still strong, and the performance of the I9505 is also eye-catching, which is better than other Adreno 320 devices we have tested in the past. The I9500 is still better than the I9505 due to its superior GPU specification ▼

3DMark

The mobile version of PC's old brand video card test software supports cross platform comparison, including iOS, Android and Windows RT devices, but only Android version is available for the time being. 3DMark's test includes the test of Ice Strom based on OpenGL ES 2.0. The default test is carried out here (the device will be tested in 720P). Adreno 320 device has always performed well in 3DMark, so we expected a higher score of I9505. The gap is mainly reflected in the number of frames in the second display test scenario, with a gap of 8 frames ▼

practical application

From the theoretical test, we can clearly see that the overall performance of the I9500 is still higher than that of the I9505. What are the differences between them in practical applications?

Sunspider web page Javascript

This is a highly referenced test to measure CPU single thread performance. The lower the test score, the better. The browser used is Chrome Beta. In Sunspider version 0.9.1, the I9500 has reached a very horrible 667ms, which is also the top level on mobile phones. The I9505 has just broken the 1000ms threshold, and the gap is not small (the lower the score, the better) ▼

However, in Sunspider 1.0, I9500's performance is still eye-catching, and it still has an excellent score of 774ms, while I9505's performance is relatively poor (the lower the score, the better) ▼

Comparison chart ▼

Video soft solution

Video software decoding is also an important test project to measure the general performance of the CPU. This test project tests the multithreading performance of the CPU, which is different from the video hard solution. It is a method to test the general computing power of the CPU, and multi-core processors will be used. The following tests use BSPlayer version 1.9.

The first test is a 1080P 60fps ref=16 MP4 video. The I9500 frame number reaches an average of 35, while the I9505 only has 28 frames, even worse than some 1.7GHz Snapdragon 600 ▼

The next test is to compare the "abnormal level". The high specification video above has overcome the two strongest processors, and we will raise the difficulty to another level. We will analyze a 1440P 30fps ref=3 mp4 video and see the difference between the two. The average frame number of I9500 is 18, while that of I9505 is 16. The difference is not big ▼

Comparison chart ▼

Game Test

The game test is mainly to measure the GPU graphics processing capacity of mobile phones. Of course, the gap between CPU and memory performance will also have some impact. The games used here are some large-scale 3D games, which are compared with the average frame number with the frame number detection software FPS Meter.

Modern War 4 (1.0.5)

The latest version 1.0.5 of Modern Warfare 4 is used here. The average frame number of I9500 is 35, and the average frame number of I9505 is 30. The image quality of both is not the highest special effect, and the characters lack dynamic shadows ▼

Real Racing 3 (1.1.7)

The picture quality of this game is excellent, and the requirements for GPU are also very high. The average frame number of I9500 is 34, and the average frame number of I9505 is 29 ▼

Iron Man 3 (1.0.5)

This is a new parkour game launched by Gameloft. Although it is nicknamed by netizens as "the combination of temple escape+fruit ninja", Iron Man is at a relatively high level in terms of its image quality performance and hardware configuration requirements. The I9500 does not perform very well in this game, with an average frame number of 22 ▼

Lightning Commandos (1.0.1)

Gameloft is the latest FPS game with cartoon style and high hardware requirements. The I9500 has about 35 frames and the I9505 has an average of 28 frames. There is a certain gap ▼

The popular games, Top Speed 17 and Dungeon Hunter 4, are too old and have poor support for the I9500. They cannot achieve the highest special effects, so it is a pity that they did not participate in this test.

Game Frame Comparison Chart ▼

In order to let you see the subtle differences between the two phones in daily use more intuitively, here is also a video specially recorded, in which there is a speed comparison of compressed 90MB folders at 4 minutes of the video. The result is I9500 takes 44 seconds, while I9505 takes 1 minute and 04 seconds ▼

Video decoding

Various formats of videos are used here to test the video capabilities of I9500 and I9505. The following is a list of videos:

720P group

FLV AOM OP, 1280 × 720, H.263

MP4 Jay Chou's Double Cut Staff, 1280 × 720, H.264 High Profile L5.1， Bit rate 17M

AVI The Circle of Realm trailer, 1280 × 720, Xvid

WMV Microsoft WMVHD official video, 1280 × 720, VC-1, MP@HL

RMVB Dark God Theater, 1280 × 720, RV40

FLV Lord of the Rings, 1280 × 720, HEVC, 1000kbps

1080P group

MP4 Clannad OP ，1920×1080，H.264 High Profile L5. ref16

MKV Conan Theater Edition 15 trailer, 1920 × 1080, H.264 Main Profile L4.0， Audio coding AC-3

WMV Microsoft WMVHD official video, 1440 × 1080, VC-1, MP@HL

MKV Fate stay night [Realta Nua]，1920x1080p，Hi10P，23.976fps

FLV Lord of the Rings, 1920 × 1080, HEVC, 1200kbps

MP4 Angel Beats，1920x1080，ref16，fps=60

MP4 2160x1440，ref3，fps=30

Comparison chart of decoding results ▼

fever

We have learned about the heating capacity of the "4+4 core" of the I9500. How much difference does it have compared with the heating capacity of the UHF I9505? The following test is the temperature after 20 minutes of modern war 4 games. The maximum temperature of I9500 front reaches 46 ℃, while I9505 also reaches 43 ℃ (room temperature 26 ℃). The "firepower" of the quad core A15 has impressed us in our last evaluation (the highest temperature is up to 50 degrees), and the high-frequency Krait does not seem to be a fuel saving light ▼

Endurance

Like the fever, many netizens also expressed concern about the endurance of the I9500. This test was divided into two parts, and the other part was a large-scale 3D game test with high load, which took 30 minutes. The other is daily low load applications, including 30 minute WiFi browsing of microblogs and web pages. The test results are amazing. The power consumption of the two is strikingly similar, After 30 minutes of modern war 4 games, both dropped from 100% to 86%. After another 30 minutes of online testing, both dropped from 86% to 81%, and the electric curve was very close 。 This is inconsistent with the assumption that the "4+4 core" version needs more power consumption. In addition, it is also a strange phenomenon that the power consumption of the I9505 "Google Service" ranks first. After opening it, it only takes five seconds of CPU time, so there may be a bug in this statistics. This is the case after several tests. When foreign media tested the I9505, they found that upgrading the firmware can greatly improve its endurance. I believe that the I9505 will reach a higher level in endurance through future firmware upgrades ▼

From the above tests, the overall performance of the I9500 is still much higher than that of the I9505. The quad core A15 of the Exynos 5410 has played a great role. Although Qualcomm APQ8064AB has made great progress compared with the previous APQ8064, its performance still lags behind that of the Exynos 5410, In addition, the I9505 itself has the problem of frequency reduction, which leads to the overall performance is not very ideal. The CPU's general performance is equivalent to that of the 1.7GHz APQ8064T 。 In terms of GPU, the frequency of Adreno 320 of I9505 is 450MHz, which is higher than that of ordinary Adreno 320. The game performance is also relatively good, but it is slightly weaker than that of PowerVR SGX544MP3 533MHz of I9500. From the performance of the game, the I9500 is still better than the I9505. In terms of heating, the temperature of I9500 is indeed higher than that of I9505 in the test, but the range is not large. In terms of battery life, the performance of the two is surprisingly consistent in the test. The battery problem of the I9500 is not as serious as we think (of course, it will be affected by firmware and test items here).

Learn more about new cool devices, stay tuned

Chart making: