Xiaomi Mi 6 passes  the time by playing Geekbench, waiting for next week's reveal

14 April 2017
The Snapdragon 835 chipset is a lock, but how long will we have to wait for it?

Sort by:

  • D
  • AnonD-649781
  • pTE
  • 14 Apr 2017

Anonymous, 14 Apr 2017No you shut up. That's not even 10% over last year's exynos... moreActually it's almost 30% better than last year's Exynos (According to the numbers on geekbench) However it doesn't have to get that better every year to make you buy it.

    • ?
    • Anonymous
    • 6jq
    • 14 Apr 2017

    Anonymous, 14 Apr 2017First... Geekbench doesn't use all cores. Second... It's cl... moreOh, oh ... someone failed in statistics. 10% is stressing it, it's actually less than that.
    My phone (running on exynos 8890):

    https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/2537921

    Like I said, Qualcomm is about a year behind the rest of the world. She's -like- the Intel of mobiles. Enjoying a semi-monopoly one court case at a time. If true competition existed they would be long out from the race.

      • Q
      • Qwerty2017
      • KiQ
      • 14 Apr 2017

      Anonymous, 14 Apr 2017No you shut up. That's not even 10% over last year's exynos... moreLOL, the PATHETIC one is YOUR KNOWLEDGE, DUDE...

      SD835 Kyro 280 is similar to Exynos 8890, 4 "custom core" based on Cortex A73 + 4 "Standard" Cortex A53.
      The differences are the "naming" of the SoC, clocks on both SoC, & GPU.
      Samsung named its custom core as "M1 Mongoose" , while QC named the WHOLE CPU as Kyro 280.

      Samsung clocked Exynos 8890 with 3 different clock & 2 versions:
      Standard: 2core M1 @ 2.6GHz & 2Core M1 @ 2.3GHz + 4Core Cortex A53 @1.6GHz
      GPU Mali T880MP12
      Lite: 4Core M1 @ 2.0GHz + 4Core Cortex A53 @1.5GHz GPU Mali T880MP10

      QC clocked SD835 with 1 version known so far:

      4core custom Cortex A73 @ 2.45GHz (max) + 4core custom Kyro @ 1.9 GHz & Adreno 540 GPU.

      the LITTLE 4core part is said to be custom Cortex A53, given its lower multicore result, similar to Exynos 8890 score last year, but with smaller fabrication, which is more fbenefit or power-saving rather than better performance.

      Moreover, DID U REALLY BUY/NOT BUY A PHONE BECAUSE OF ITS BENCHMARK SCORE, DUDE?
      That's what STUPID SMARTASS people do, buying the HIGHEST SCORE CPU, then saying CRAP like "pathetic improvement", comparing it to Apple SoC which have THE WORST energy efficiency in mobile SoC, VERY similar to Intel CPU. That's why Apple NEVER move on from its "dual core" tradition, ever since iPhone 4s era in 2011!

      (don't tell me A10 is quad core, because it is in fact TWO CORES CPU + 2 "companion" cores work only for battery-saving purposes, since ever since A6 in iphone 4s, Apple cannot solve how to fix its SoC's energy inefficiency, thus have to add 2 additional core as stop-gap solution; copying nVidia solution for its power-hunger Tegra K1 by adding 1 additional cores for power management, making it "actually penta-core (4 normal cores + 1 "companion" core for battery-saving purposes).



        • ?
        • Anonymous
        • 0xI
        • 14 Apr 2017

        Anonymous, 14 Apr 2017No you shut up. That's not even 10% over last year's exynos... moreFirst... Geekbench doesn't use all cores. Second... It's clearly at least a 50% improvement in overall performance.

          • ?
          • Anonymous
          • pVN
          • 14 Apr 2017

          Gabipe, 14 Apr 2017Shut up and take my moneyNo you shut up. That's not even 10% over last year's exynos. Pathetic.

            • G
            • Gabipe
            • a02
            • 14 Apr 2017

            Shut up and take my money

              2 of 2