Which Mobile CPU Snapdragon or Exynos GPU gives good performance bechmark compared

kumaranil13k said:

my questions

Before questions I had explained above my findings to easily clarify justify my questions to communicate and get better experts opinion advice and suggestions

On above benchmark as per cpu GPU performance poco x3 out performs samsung galaxy f62 and all models. But on battery standby time and camera resolution the samsung galaxy f62 is best bet.

1. Why samsung Exynos 9825 of samsung f62 outperformed in geekbench and AnTuTu scores of samsung galaxy m51 snapragon 730g CPU GPU and it's less performed the oppo pro Snapdragon 860 which will u say is good for long term less heating lagging and good for video editing graphic designing and gaming aa per graphic GPU and cpu performance

2. Which one of all is good for worth price in case of cpu camera GPU and overall performance and as per video editing requirements

Click to expand...

No real idea, I've never seen the devices you mention. And I've only ever done video editing on a Macbook using iMovie and Final Cut. I know about Galaxy Note20 Ultra 5G though, as I have one. But I will say that Exynos or Snapdragon in a Samsung phone, is decided by region and country. China, Japan, South Korea, and USA is Snapdragon, everywhere else is Exynos. The reason being CDMA carrier networks in those countries. Although that may change as the CDMA networks are been turned off. So what you get will depend on where in the world you are, otherwise you'll be buying a grey-import.

kumaranil13k said:

3. Does poco x3 pro have adoptbale storage option as its android 10 will storage manager (SM) command work on it

Click to expand...

Poco is actually Xiaomi, So no it doesn't, not without rooting and suitable custom ROM(if available).

kumaranil13k said:

4. Does any model have separate or dual micro sd card option or can the connect type c OTG hub and can we connect external usb SSD to it with multiple usb hub

Click to expand...

Provided the phone supports type-C OTG, then yes it should support external SSD storage. I've actually connected external 4TB USB hard-drives to phones via type-C OTG, and they've been recognised and worked.

i am a big fan of Qualcomm so snapdragon gets my vote......no concrete evidence or experience as i have only used sammy's here in the U.S. and we only get the snapdragon processors.

kumaranil13k said:

@mikedt bro thanks for ur reply sharing ur precious time opinion suggestions advice and ur precious knowledge. Thanks a lot obliged for ur opinions and advice


bro yes u r 100% right cpu and and config depends on country to country...I am in India...and while searching google phonearena I could find many phones is USA with same model and same processors. Yes band and CDMA volte is more in India and 5g band will. One soon dont know which band will be permitted in india in next year.
bro my query was to know technically as per benchmark of cpu GPU whose cpu GPU strength is better for video graphics gaming in terms of speed performance or any loophole cons which I left after looking to configuration which should be kept in mind.

Click to expand...

Well benchmark numbers makes my head spin, and so don't pay much attention to them, but bigger is better right?

I've read that some Snapdragon have a better graphic performance than their equivalent Exynos. As you're in India, that means if you want a Snapdragon Samsung, you'll have to import it from the US or China, etc. and good luck.

kumaranil13k said:

bro which type -C OTG hub u use which can give power to 4tb hdd to I want to purchase samsung evo pro 980 pcie gen 4 nvme which works in pcie4 3400mbps external sad casing ...how much read write speed technically OTG hub gives output and as usb 2.0 or 3.2 gen 2 (20gbps) compatible with phone. Which OTG hub u recommend for samsung galaxy m or f series phone...which can copy huge nandroid image or video edited huge 5gb-10gb-20gb files quickly means good speed

Click to expand...

Can that particular hub be powered from an external source, or is it just drawing power from the host device. The speeds should be up to USB3.0 specs I guess.

I've plugged one 4TB into a Huawei Mate10 and Samsung Note20 Ultra, but I didn't do it for long, as it was just to transfer some movies and TV shows. For one thing battery drain can be excessive with powering and running a hard drive from a phone.

I admit I'm a sceptic when it comes to synthetic benchmarks, even more so when I don't know the provenance. For example the performance of some devices can be very fast for a couple of minutes and then fall off a cliff as thermal limitations kick in, so a single run may give a nice score but not represent reality. So if some source just quotes a benchmark result for a phone is that a first run with a cold device or how it performs after running the benchmark for 10 minutes? They are likely to be very different. Also there are manufacturers out there who have been caught programming their phones to behave differently when running benchmarking apps from how they work with other apps, and some of them persist in doing it (OnePlus for example, which would also make me cautious about Oppo, Vivo and Realme, since all 4 are sub-brands of BBK).

Plus there's the fundamental question of how well any of these things translate into real world usage (which varies between individuals). So I personally attach little if any weight to benchmark scores, and never look at them when making my choices, and hence, unfortunately, am not well placed to comment on their significance for your choice. Also I know that I don't need the fastest processor on the market for my use, so if I were looking at these things I'd be looking for power efficiency benchmarks rather than performance ones for my personal priorities (though I don't think the SoC will be the thing that decides my next phone purchase anyway: since I dislike large phones there will only be 2 or 3 models available in total that I'd consider!).

One thing I would note: you seem to be judging camera quality from specifications (comments like "better camera"). Unfortunately that doesn't work: the quality of the image processing software is more important than the sensor, and the number of pixels doesn't tell you anything about the quality of those pixels, or indeed of the lens in front of them, so the specifications don't tell you anything of real importance for assessing camera quality. For judging camera quality there is no substitute for comparing images taken in different lighting conditions, especially since this is subjective: some people like "vivid" images with "pop", others think this looks horrible and artificial, so one person's "great camera" might be another person's "deal breaker". If camera quality matters, track down reviews which include samples of the output and make your own decision of what's good enough for you (because it's your preference that matters, nobody else's).

The camera's processing is what it is, unless you output raw and process it yourself (which some camera apps allow, some don't, but it's a much slower workflow so wouldn't be my first choice with a phone). But I'm not even thinking about quality of interpolation: handling of noise, tone, saturation, contrast, not over-sharpening, these things matter more for the image than simple pixel count. All phones use small sensors and are increasingly reliant on computational photography techniques, such as taking many underexposed pictures rapidly and combining them (stuff which you, as the user, never see going on). And spec sheets don't show any of this stuff. This is why I say that the way to judge a phone camera is to look at the pictures it takes and decide whether they are good enough (independent reviews or photos taken by users, not samples produced by the company themselves - more than one company has passed-off photos taken using professional cameras as phone samples).

But as a general point, you can never get 64MP images from a 48MP camera or whatever. Sure, there is upscaling software of increasing sophistication out there (the more sophisticated tools cost around $100 for a license, and require a real computer rather than a phone), but you can't create information this way, it's still just using a mixture of interpolation and using learned patterns to insert guesses at the detail that isn't recorded.

More seriously, don't assume that higher resolution = better camera. Most of these "64 MP" cameras produce 16MP output by default (pixel-binning, 4 pixels -> 1), while "48 MP" defaults to 12 MP. And while they generally have a mode that can output the full resolution, don't use it in anything other than bright light and don't assume that it will resolve as much extra detail as it sounds (I've looked at samples, such as in reviews on gsmarena.com, and often low-contrast detail, such as foliage, is smeared away by the noise you get with many small pixels, each of which is not collecting much light). And if the lens is not sharp it won't matter how high resolution the sensor is. So as I say, I judge phone cameras by the images they produce and not from specs.

(Also, as a final comment on phone specs, remember that a 64MP sensor only delivers 15% more resolution than a 48MP sensor, which is about the limit of what is perceivable when looking at an image of a reasonably large screen, and probably completely invisible when looking on a phone screen. This is because resolution improves as the square root of the number of pixels. And at this level differences in lens quality will matter far more than differences in pixel count).

I think I can't really advise on the last points because your usage is so different from mine. I hardly record video at all, so sequential write speed doesn't matter to me, and hence I have no reason to know whether these different things make a difference in reality - though UHS 2.1 is old technology, so presumably that's the manufacturer cutting costs. As for battery, I'd try to find reviews which test the actual battery life of the device rather than just look at the capacity: your table shows a longer battery life for the Poco despite a smaller battery, which can happen if the components are more efficient, but the question is how did they test the battery life (i.e. does their test reflect what you would use it for)? So maybe find some other reviews of these devices and see whether they agree about which device has the best battery life (e.g. GSMArena's reviews report a better battery life for the M51 than the X3 Pro, which makes sense for a larger battery and a more efficient processor). But also try to judge what you want in terms of battery life, and how that compares to other factors: unless you are like me, where one factor trumps all others to a huge extent, it will be a balance of factors, in which case "what is good enough?" is as important as "what is best?".