The Samsung Galaxy S8’s headline features are its edge-to-edge Infinity Display and striking new design. Of course it still comes packed with the latest hardware and technology like previous Galaxy phones, including iris recognition, wireless charging, and a flagship SoC. Actually, there are two different SoCs for the S8 and S8+. Most regions around the world will get Samsung's Exynos 8895, while regions that require a CDMA modem, such as the US and China, will get Qualcomm's Snapdragon 835. Both SoCs are built on Samsung's 10nm LPE process and are paired with 4GB of LPDDR4 RAM and 64GB of UFS NAND.

While no market receives both types of phones through official channels, with the wonders of modern shipping, anyone with a bit of time and patience would have little trouble tracking down the out-of-region version of the phone. Consequently, for the nerdy among us, we simply have to ask: how do these dueling SoCs compare? Which SoC – and consequently which phone – is better?

Today we’ll delve into the performance differences between the Snapdragon 835 and Exynos 8895 to help answer those questions. We'll also see how well they work with the Galaxy S8’s other hardware and software when we evaluate its system performance, gaming performance, and battery life.

Samsung Galaxy S8 Series
  Samsung Galaxy S8 Samsung Galaxy S8+
SoC Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 (US, China, Japan)
4x Kryo 280 Performance @ 2.36GHz
4x Kryo 280 Efficiency @ 1.90GHz
Adreno 540 @ 670MHz

Samsung Exynos 8895 (rest of world)
4x Exynos M2 @ 2.31GHz
4x Cortex-A53 @ 1.69GHz
ARM Mali-G71 MP20 @ 546MHz
Display 5.8-inch 2960x1440 (18.5:9)
SAMOLED (curved edges)
6.2-inch 2960x1440 (18.5:9)
SAMOLED (curved edges)
Dimensions 148.9 x 68.1 x 8.0 mm
155 grams
159.5 x 73.4 x 8.1 mm
173 grams
RAM 4GB LPDDR4 (US)
NAND 64GB (UFS)
+ microSD
Battery 3000 mAh (11.55 Wh)
non-replaceable
3500 mAh (13.48 Wh)
non-replaceable
Front Camera 8MP, f/1.7, Contrast AF
Rear Camera 12MP, 1.4µm pixels, f/1.7, dual-pixel PDAF, OIS, auto HDR, LED flash
Modem Snapdragon X16 LTE (Integrated)
2G / 3G / 4G LTE (Category 16/13)

Samsung LTE (Integrated)
2G / 3G / 4G LTE (Category 16/13)
SIM Size NanoSIM
Wireless 802.11a/b/g/n/ac 2x2 MU-MIMO, BT 5.0 LE, NFC, GPS/Glonass/Galileo/BDS
Connectivity USB Type-C, 3.5mm headset
Features fingerprint sensor, heart-rate sensor, iris scanner, face unlock, fast charging (Qualcomm QC 2.0 or Adaptive Fast Charging), wireless charging (WPC & PMA), IP68, Mobile HDR Premium
Launch OS Android 7.0 with TouchWiz

Our initial look at Snapdragon 835 revealed that its Kryo 280 performance cores are loosely based on ARM’s Cortex-A73 while the efficiency cores are loosely based on the Cortex-A53. Samsung's Exynos 8895 also has an octa-core big.LITTLE CPU configuration, but uses four of its own custom M2 cores paired with four A53 cores. Samsung introduced its first custom CPU core, the M1, last year. Compared to ARM’s A72, integer IPC was similar but the M1 trailed the A72 in efficiency. The M2 does not appear to be a radical redesign, but rather a tweaked M1 that offers the usual promises of improved performance and efficiency. Are the changes enough to top Qualcomm’s flagship SoC?

Battery life is one of the most important metrics for a smartphone. A bunch of cool features and lightning quick performance will do little to temper your frustration if the phone is dead by lunchtime. This was an issue for the Galaxy S6, which came with a small-capacity battery that contributed to its at-times disappointing battery life. Samsung increased their battery capacity for the S7 models, but there’s no further increase for the S8s. The smaller S8 retains the same 3000 mAh capacity as the S7, while the the S8+ drops 100 mAh compared to the S7 edge. Any improvement to battery life for this generation will need to come from more efficient hardware, and indeed at least for Qualcomm, this is precisely the angle they've been promoting to hardware developers and the public alike.

Previous Galaxy phones delivered good performance, but shortfalls in one or more performance metrics have kept them from being a class leader. Will the updates to the S8’s hardware and software finally smooth away these performance wrinkles? Will efficiency improve with the new 10nm SoCs? Did Samsung reduce power consumption in other areas? It’s time to take a closer look at the Galaxy S8.

CPU & Memory Performance
POST A COMMENT

137 Comments

View All Comments

  • Meteor2 - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    Buy a tablet then. Reply
  • theuglyman0war - Wednesday, August 2, 2017 - link

    between wireless headpiece and watches I'd rather have a larger 19 to 20 " tablet for 90% of my mobile/telephony needs tucked away in a satchel/briefcase/docking workstation in conjunction with a watch to handle all my transitory mobile needs. The phone is either to small or to big and invariably dropped fumbling around for them. Which is to expensive for it's vulnerable pocket size vs expected heavy duty processing expectation. Why desire to go any bigger when I already wish Tablets would become bigger and lighter ( heck in art school I use to walkabout with a 2ft by 4ft homosote artboard custom strapped across my shoulder! )

    With the new flexible amoled's coming out... I wish I could just have a pressure sensitive display built into my briefcase ( with a fiber optic cover to bring the light to the hard protective surface instead of under thick glass like fiber optic stone ) where I could get real work done anywhere without compromise considering a satchel/briefcase could easily be a portable dock station with i/o devices and storage.
    For anything lighter I could just refer to a watch as long as I am wearing a headset for music anyway?
    Why am I wasting money and time arguing which phone platform is the best when it is a size/form factor that is beginning to rub me as the weakest link in my investment upgrades? ( between the watch, the phone and the tablet... The Phone seems like it is the redundant fat in the middle that serves the trivial and in-depth purposes poorly? )
    Reply
  • Meteor2 - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    Love the 5X too, but with modern components you could have a much larger screen for the chassis, and more speed with a longer battery life for the weight.

    I wish someone would put together such a phone for £500...

    (Can't beat ASOP either; I'm using Android O Preview and wouldn't use anything else. iOS simply feels old-fashioned now.)
    Reply
  • Tigran - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    Is it GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 OFF-screen in GPU Thermal Stability? Reply
  • Matt Humrick - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    The GFXBench Manhattan 3.1 battery test runs onscreen Reply
  • Tigran - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    It should, but how can be so high with 1440p? On GRXBench's site there is 19/17.6 in "Manhattan 3.1" and 13.3/12.2 in "Long term performance Manhattan 3.1" - x2 low than your result. Also I don't get this:
    ***
    Overall the Galaxy S8 delivers excellent peak graphical performance. It offers a significant performance uplift over the Galaxy S5 and S6, although its gains over the S7 and last year’s crop of S820/S821 flagships ARE NOT AS IMPRESSIVE.
    ***
    23-25 fps VS 10 fps in not impressive???
    Reply
  • Matt Humrick - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    Both of the Galaxy S8 models ran at the default FHD+ (2220x1080) resolution setting in this test. I also added this statement to the article for clarification. Reply
  • Tigran - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    OK, thank you. Reply
  • Tigran - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    Also "Battery lifetime - Manhattan 3.1" of E8895 and S835 is nearly the same (183 min & 190 min) according to GFXBench's site, there is no an hour difference. I wonder why there are so big differences between your results and GFXBench's site... Reply
  • Jhlot - Friday, July 28, 2017 - link

    All these benchmarks are great but the only one I am going to notice an actual difference from are the ones the Moto Z Play Droid just creams. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now