X

Sign in

Sign in to confirm

Have you forgotten your password?

... or login with Facebook:

Don't have an AndroidPIT account yet? Sign up

Galaxy S5 premium and standard models: battle of the benchmarks

Kris Carlon
5

Over the weekend two very different benchmarks results appeared at AnTuTu for what looks to be two variants of the upcoming Galaxy S5. There had already been rumors that the new S5 would have a standard version and a premium version, and these benchmarks seem to lend some credibility to that rumor. These things are never set in stone, the benchmarks could be faked and so on and so forth, but if you like your rumors fast and furious, here's the battle of the benchmarks for the upcoming Galaxy S5.

galaxys5antutuleak
Pick your Galaxy S5: premium or standard version. / © crave.cnet.co.uk

Galaxy S5 (SM-G900R4)

The 'premium' Galaxy S5, the G900R4 is more in tune with the specs and rumors we've been hoping for over the last little while: a quad-core Snapdragon 800 chipset beating at 2.4 - 2.5 GHz, 3 GB of RAM and the elusive 2K display (2,560x1,440 pixels). There's also Adreno 330 graphics, a 16 MP camera with a 2.1 MP selfie cam and, of course, Android 4.4.2. The benchmarked G900R4 was playing host to 32 GB of internal storage, so there's nothing to confirm the possibility of a 64 GB or even 128 GB version.

AndroidPIT Galaxy S5 G900R4 AnTuTu
The so-called 'premium' Galaxy S5 AnTuTu scores up against the Note 3 (right). / © AndroidPIT/AnTuTu

Galaxy S5 (SM-G900H)

The 'standard' Galaxy S5, this benchmark showed up less inspiring specs that may not get your pulse racing, and may well get Samsung into hot water for putting out a successor the current flagship that isn't so different from the current one (something they were accused of when the S4 replaced the S3). The G900H looks to run an octa-core Exynos 5422 chipset running at 1.5 GHz with 2 GB of RAM and the ARM Mali T628 graphics processor. This standard version also has Full HD resolution (1,920x1,080 pixels) and 16 GB of internal storage along with the same camera setup and the latest version of Android. There's no battery news on either device.

AndroidPIT Galaxy S5 G900H AnTuTu
The so-called 'standard' Galaxy S5 AnTuTu scores outrank the 'premium' S5 and Note 3. / © AndroidPIT/AnTuTu

Strangely, the Exynos equipped S5 beat out the Snapdragon S5 by a long shot in the AnTuTu benchmark, with the 'premium' model scoring 31,843 points, which is actually lower than the current Galaxy Note 3 (which, however, runs a less processor-intensive display resolution). The 'standard' version, however, racked up an impressive 35,445 points in the same benchmark test, blowing both the Galaxy Note 3 and the premium S5 out of the water. Before you get too creative with your comments, I'll remind you that benchmarks don't necessarily mean all that much and these are far from the final versions of the devices, if they are indeed what we will even see in a few weeks. 

And just to demontrate how suspicious you should be of these benchmarks being 'definitive proof' of anything at all, here's some other benchmarks that appeared recently that sit right in between the two we've just covered:

s5t2
s5t1
s5t
© HDBlog.it

What do you think about a premium and standard variety of Galaxy S5? Do you think the standard S5 is too close to the S4?

Related Topics

From the forum. Join the discussion now!

Related Articles

News / Hardware
3 4 days ago

HTC One M8 vs. Galaxy S5 vs Xperia Z2: flagship unite!

News / Hardware
5 1 week ago

Get the latest Galaxy S5 Android update for performance improvements

News / Hardware
5 1 week ago

How to speed up the Galaxy S5

Comments

Write new comment:
  • Tito 5 months ago Link

    I was reading the article but I had to stop where you say "Strangely, the Exynos equipped S5 beat out the Snapdragon S5 by a long shot in the AnTuTu benchmark,".
    I don't understand how a tech blog gets surprised because of that
    .
    There is not much difference ibetween the cpu/gpu supposedly used in the premium and standard models, but there is a big difference technical diffference in screen resolution.

    A 2K display requires a much better cpu and gpu specs than a 1080p display and that's why it has a worst results in the benchmark but it also will have worst real performance specially when it comes to gaming.

    0
    0
    • User picture
      Admin
      Kris Carlon 5 months ago Link

      Hey @Tito, you are absolutely correct. I'm not surprised by the strain the 2K display puts on the SoC, what I'm surprised by is that Samsung wouldn't compensate in some other way to ensure the 'premium' S5 would still beat out the 'standard' version in terms of performance.

      As you say, the Snapdragon S5 will suffer in general performance because of the display, so both models will end up performing about the same with the only noticeable difference being a difference in display resolution. That doesn't strike me as a good way to distinguish between a premium and standard model - normally you want to see something noticeably faster, not just with a better display.

      0
      0
      • Bojan M. 5 months ago Link

        And that's just because they jumped on 2K display bandwagon for no logical reason. Just to be first in something. Those displays are absolutely unnecessary. Mobiles should stop at 1080p for a couple of years more, at least.

        0
        0
      • User picture
        Admin
        Kris Carlon 5 months ago Link

        Did you happen to read that r/android thread about visual range (or something like that) on Reddit recently? I didn't go into the science of it, but the general point was that your eyes can't really perceive resolutions that high (from a foot away), and that the Nexus 5 already has about the best screen your eyes can register the resolution on. Makes sense I guess, but I'm still dying to see the S5's display. I'm sure I'll still be able to spot the difference!

        0
        0
      • Bojan M. 5 months ago Link

        Yeah, I read it and it's true. But, it's also true that there is a customer for every product out there.

        0
        0