Battery Life

The other principal differing area between the Snapdragon and Exynos models is energy efficiency. With past smartphones that had both types of SoC, Snapdragon had a pretty pregnant battery life advantage, ordinarily lasting 2 to three hours extra during my usage and testing. The new generation of SoCs used in the Galaxy S5 should encounter this gap shut.

The primary fashion Snapdragon SoCs conserve power is through downclocking cores and even switching them off fully where necessary. Qualcomm has go especially good at optimizing their SoCs to boost up to deliver performance every bit chop-chop as possible, and the Snapdragon 801 in particular is 1 of the most power efficient fries I've used.

As far as the Exynos 5422 is concerned, the Cortex-A7 "LITTLE" cores are more ability efficient than the Cortex-A15s, so the thought is to use these cores as frequently as possible. Samsung also employs core gating and underclocking to achieve high levels of efficiency, merely the main method for conserving energy is offloading depression power tasks to the A7s.

In previous Exynos SoCs, this system of relying on the low-power cores has worked to an extent, only hasn't been every bit constructive as Qualcomm's aggressive method. Some of this can be attributed to a lack of HMP in previous chipsets, as the migration procedure from cluster to cluster consumed energy through the 'copying' of tasks.

Keeping in mind that the size of the battery and the display module used in both Galaxy S5 models is the same, nosotros'll become on to the bombardment benchmarks, starting with the video playback test.

This test – which sees a 720p video looped at 75% brightness, in plane fashion, until the bombardment dies – isn't overly intensive on high-end chipsets, which include very capable dedicated hardware decoding blocks. Still, the Snapdragon 801 pulls ahead by 14%, lasting nigh an actress two hours longer compared to the Exynos 542.

Our usual Wi-Fi benchmark is particularly interesting, as the Qualcomm Snapdragon 801 has an integrated Wi-Fi modem, whereas the Samsung Exynos 5 Octa uses an external flake for all connectivity. Here the Snapdragon 801 has a small-scale, 5% battery life advantage, although both devices perform very well in lasting longer than 11 hours.

With the G900F supporting LTE and the G900H only supporting HSPA+, our usual cellular web browsing battery criterion isn't as useful equally if both supported LTE. However, you can run across that if yous're using the maximum connection speeds available to you, the Exynos-powered G900H volition last around an hour (or 13%) longer.

If yous only have access to HSPA+ networks on the G900F, I'd estimate both devices will terminal a very like amount of time, every bit browsing on LTE consumes more than energy.

When playing intense 3D games or doing other high performance tasks, both the G900F and G900H volition last a very like amount of time. The Snapdragon 801 pulled alee here past 3%, merely the gap is small enough to exist discounted every bit benchmark variance.

Again with charge time, we run across very lilliputian divergence, indicating both devices will charge in essentially the same amount of fourth dimension from a 10W charger.