Nearly two weeks ago, Qualcomm invited tech journalists to Maui for the 2019 Snapdragon Tech Summit. At the event, the company unveiled its latest high-end SoC for mobile devices: the Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 mobile platform. Qualcomm says the new Snapdragon 865 boasts a 25% CPU performance increase and a 20% GPU performance increase over the previous generation Snapdragon 855. Also, the new SoC supports LPDDR5 memory and is manufactured on a newer 7nm process. Qualcomm's latest silicon will make its way to 2020 flagships like the Xiaomi Mi 10, OPPO Find X2, and many other high-end smartphones.

But just how much faster is it than the previous generations? We benchmarked Qualcomm's Snapdragon 865 reference device at the event to find out. We pit the new SoC against the Snapdragon 855+, the Snapdragon 855, the Snapdragon 845, and the Kirin 990 from Huawei's HiSilicon. We would have loved to test the Snapdragon 865 against the MediaTek Dimensity 1000 or Samsung Exynos 990, but sadly, there aren't any devices with the new MediaTek and Samsung SoCs. Once we get our hands on real devices with the Snapdragon 865, we'll be testing the real-world performance outside of benchmarks, too.


Qualcomm Snapdragon 865, Snapdragon 855, Snapdragon 845, and Kirin 990 Specifications

Qualcomm Snapdragon 865

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855

Qualcomm Snapdragon 845

HiSilicon Kirin 990 (4G)

CPU

  • 1 Kryo 585 'Prime' (ARM Cortex-A77-based), up to 2.84GHz
  • 3 Kryo 585 'Performance' (ARM Cortex-A77-based), up to 2.4GHz
  • 4 Kryo 385 'Efficiency' (ARM Cortex-A55-based), up to 1.8GHz

25% Performance improvement over the previous generation

  • 1 Kryo 485 'Prime' (ARM Cortex-A76-based), up to 2.96GHz
  • 3 Kryo 485 'Performance' (ARM Cortex-A76-based), up to 2.42GHz
  • 4 Kryo 385 'Efficiency' (ARM Cortex-A55-based), up to 1.8GHz
  • 1 Kryo 485 'Prime' (ARM Cortex-A76-based), up to 2.84GHz
  • 3 Kryo 485 'Performance' (ARM Cortex-A76-based), up to 2.42GHz
  • 4 Kryo 385 'Efficiency' (ARM Cortex-A55-based), up to 1.8GHz

45% Performance improvement over the previous generation

  • 4 Kryo 385 'Performance' (ARM Cortex-A75-based), up to 2.8GHz
  • 4 Kryo 385 'Efficiency' (ARM Cortex-A55-based), up to 1.8GHz

25% Performance improvement over the previous generation

  • 2 ARM Cortex-A76, up to 2.86GHz
  • 2 ARM Cortex-A76, up to 2.09GHz
  • 4 ARM Cortex-A55, up to 1.86GHz

GPU

Adreno 65020% Performance improvement over the previous generation

Adreno 640 (15% overclocked)

Adreno 64020% Performance improvement over the previous generation

Adreno 63025% Performance improvement over the previous generation

Mali-G76MP16

Memory

4x 16bit, 2133MHz LPDDR4X4x 16bit, 2750MHz LPDDR5

4x 16bit, 2133MHz LPDDR4X

4x 16bit, 2133MHz LPDDR4X

4x 16-bit, 1866MHz LPDDR4X

4x 16-bit, LPDDR4X-4266

Manufacturing Process

7nm (TSMC N7P)

7nm (TSMC)

7nm (TSMC)

10nm LPP (Samsung)

7nm (TSMC)


Quick Overview of Each Benchmark

Benchmark explainer by Mario Serrafero

  • AnTuTu: This is a holistic benchmark. AnTuTu tests the CPU, GPU, and memory performance, while including both abstract tests and, as of late, relatable user experience simulations (for example, the subtest which involves scrolling through a ListView). The final score is weighted according to the designer’s considerations.
  • GeekBench: A CPU-centric test that uses several computational workloads including encryption, compression (text and images), rendering, physics simulations, computer vision, ray tracing, speech recognition, and convolutional neural network inference on images. The score breakdown gives specific metrics. The final score is weighted according to the designer’s considerations, placing a large emphasis on integer performance (65%), then float performance (30%) and finally crypto (5%).
  • GFXBench: Aims to simulate video game graphics rendering using the latest APIs. Lots of onscreen effects and high-quality textures. Newer tests use Vulkan while legacy tests use OpenGL ES 3.1. The outputs are frames during test and frames per second (the other number divided by the test length, essentially), instead of a weighted score.
  • Speedometer, Jetstream: Javascript, core language features and performance on various operations; Javascript math, crypto, and search algorithm performance.
  • 3DMark (Sling Shot Extreme OpenGL ES 3.1/Vulkan): The test runs on a mobile-optimized rendering engine using OpenGL ES 3.1 and Vulkan (on Android) or Metal (on iOS). It comes with two subscores, each in turn featuring multiple subscores, all of which ultimately use frames per second as their metric across multiple testing scenarios. This benchmark will test the full range of API features, including transform feedback, multiple render targets and instanced rendering, uniform buffers, and features such as particle illumination, volumetric lighting, deferred lighting, depth of field and bloom in post-processing, all using compute shaders. Offscreen tests use a fixed time step between frames, and rule out any impact caused by vertical sync, display resolution scaling and related OS parameters. The final score is weighted according to the designer’s considerations.
    3DMark score weights
  • PCMark 2.0:  Tests the device as a complete unit. It simulates everyday use cases that can implement abstract algorithms and a lot of arithmetic; the difference is that these are dispatched within an application environment, with a particular practical purpose, and handled by API calls and Android libraries common to multiple applications. The test will output a variety of scores corresponding to the various subtests, which will be detailed below; the composite, Work 2.0 score is simply the geometric mean of all of these scores, meaning all tests are weighted equally.

Source links for each benchmark can be found at the end of the article.


Test Devices

Qualcomm Snapdragon 865

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855

Qualcomm Snapdragon 845

HiSilicon Kirin 990

Device Name

Qualcomm Reference Device (QRD)

ASUS ROG Phone II

Google Pixel 4

Google Pixel 3 XL

Huawei Mate 30 Pro

Software

Android 10 (Qualcomm customized AOSP software)

Android 9 (ZenUI 6.0 OEM software with October 2019 security patch)

Android 10 (Google Pixel OEM software with December 2019 security patch)

Android 10 (Google Pixel OEM software with December 2019 security patch)

Android 10 (EMUI 10.0 OEM software with October 2019 security patch)

Display

2880x1440 @ 60Hz

2340x1080 @ 60Hz

2280x1080 @ 60Hz

2960x1440 @ 60Hz

2400x1176 @ 60Hz

Memory

12GB LPDDR5

8GB LPDDR4X

6GB LPDDR4X

4GB LPDDR4X

8GB LPDDR4X

Storage

128GB UFS 3.0

128GB UFS 3.0

64GB UFS 2.1

64GB UFS 2.1

256GB UFS 3.0

Performance Mode

Yes*

No

No

No

No

*Performance mode on the Snapdragon 865 QRD makes workloads appear 20% "heavier" to the scheduler. This means that a CPU that is loaded 80% will appear 100% loaded to the scheduler, ramping up clocks faster and migrating tasks from the little to the big cores faster. However, CPU clock speeds are NOT boosted.


Benchmark Results

Main Scores

Benchmark

Version

Qualcomm Snapdragon 865

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855+

Qualcomm Snapdragon 855

Qualcomm Snapdragon 845

HiSilicon Kirin 990

AnTuTu

8.0.4

565,384

425,963

386,499

278,647

389,505

Geekbench single-core

5.0.2

929

760

600

521

750

Geekbench multi-core

5.0.2

3,450

2,840

2,499

2,125

2,887

GFXBench ES 3.0 1080 Manhattan offscreen

5.00

126

110

92

82

104

GFXBench ES 3.1 1080 Carchase offscreen

5.00

50

48

40

35

38

GFXBench ES 3.1 1080 Manhattan offscreen

5.00

88

78

67

61

67

GFXBench ES 2.0 1080 T-Rex offscreen

5.00

205

185

164

152

105

GFXBench 1440p Aztec Ruins Vulkan (High Tier) Offscreen IFH

5.00

20

19

16

14

16

GFXBench 1440p Aztec Ruins OpenGL (High Tier) Offscreen IFH

5.00

20

18

16

14

18

Speedometer

2.00

80

36

53

49

65.4

JetStream - Geometric mean

1.10

123

116

98

85

95.8

PCMark - Work 2.0

2.0.3716

12,626

9,068

9,311

8,988

8,667

Androbench Sequential Read (MB/s)

5.0.1

1,459

1,398

873

659

1,451.09

Androbench Sequential Write (MB/s)

5.0.1

225

217

189

231

443.66

Androbench Random Read (IOPS)

5.0.1

50,378

41,315

37,600

32,376

53,114.78

Androbench Random Write (IOPS)

5.0.1

48,410

35,422

41,340

37,417

55,972.18

Androbench Random Read (MB/s)

5.0.1

195

161

147

126

207.47

Androbench Random Write (MB/s)

5.0.1

189

138

161

146

218.64

Androbench SQLite Insert

5.0.1

3,705

3,187

3,207

2,627

4,968.81

Androbench SQLite Update

5.0.1

4,014

3,931

3,996

3,333

6,090.65

Androbench SQLite Delete

5.0.1

5,037

4,964

4,558

4,081

7,664.88

3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Open GL ES 3.1 Overall Score

2.0.4646

7,008

6,201

5,174

3,431

5,677

3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Vulkan Overall Score

2.0.4646

6,449

5,339

4,339

3,273

4,303

Subscores

Main Scores Comparison

Subscore

Versus Snapdragon 865

Versus Snapdragon 855+

Versus Snapdragon 855

Versus Snapdragon 845

Versus Kirin 990

AnTuTu

1x

1.33x

1.46x

2.03x

1.45x

Geekbench single-core

1x

1.22x

1.55x

1.78x

1.24x

Geekbench multi-core

1x

1.21x

1.38x

1.62x

1.2x

GFXBench ES 3.0 1080 Manhattan offscreen

1x

1.15x

1.37x

1.54x

1.21x

GFXBench ES 3.1 1080 Carchase offscreen

1x

1.04x

1.25x

1.43x

1.32x

GFXBench ES 3.1 1080 Manhattan offscreen

1x

1.13x

1.31x

1.44x

1.31x

GFXBench ES 2.0 1080 T-Rex offscreen

1x

1.11x

1.25x

1.35x

1.95x

GFXBench 1440p Aztec Ruins Vulkan (High Tier) Offscreen IFH

1x

1.05x

1.25x

1.43x

1.25x

GFXBench 1440p Aztec Ruins OpenGL (High Tier) Offscreen IFH

1x

1.11x

1.25x

1.43x

1.11x

Speedometer

1x

2.22x

1.51x

1.63x

1.22x

JetStream - Geometric mean

1x

1.06x

1.26x

1.45x

1.28x

PCMark - Work 2.0

1x

1.39x

1.36x

1.4x

1.46x

Androbench Sequential Read (MB/s)

1x

1.04x

1.67x

2.21x

1.01x

Androbench Sequential Write (MB/s)

1x

1.04x

1.19x

0.97x

0.51x

Androbench Random Read (IOPS)

1x

1.22x

1.34x

1.56x

0.95x

Androbench Random Write (IOPS)

1x

1.37x

1.17x

1.29x

0.86x

Androbench Random Read (MB/s)

1x

1.21x

1.33x

1.55x

0.94x

Androbench Random Write (MB/s)

1x

1.37x

1.17x

1.29x

0.86x

Androbench SQLite Insert

1x

1.16x

1.16x

1.41x

0.75x

Androbench SQLite Update

1x

1.02x

1x

1.2x

0.66x

Androbench SQLite Delete

1x

1.01x

1.11x

1.23x

0.66x

3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Open GL ES 3.1 Overall Score

1x

1.13x

1.35x

2.04x

1.23x

3DMark Sling Shot Extreme Vulkan Overall Score

1x

1.21x

1.49x

1.97x

1.50x

Subscores Comparison


Concluding Highlights

Analysis by Mario Serrafero:

  • For AnTuTu’s final score, we observe a large 33% bump over the 855+ and a massive improvement of around 45% over the 855. The CPU subtests showcase massive improvements, with uplifts in each subscore ranging from 15% to 97%. These results are surprising given that Qualcomm posted a respectable 25% CPU performance uplift over the Snapdragon 855, yet we see all CPU subscores go up by over 40%, and even 70%. The GPU side of the subscores, however, sees a much more restrained increase of around 13% on average, compared to the 855+, or 24% to 56% compared to our 855 scores from the Google Pixel 4.
  • The popular PCMark 2.0 saw a massive jump of almost 40% in its “Work 2.0” final score, compared to the 855+. Looking at the subscores, it seems that most of the improvement lies in the Photo Editing 2.0 subtest, which nearly doubles in score, followed by a Web Browsing score improvement of around 80%. The final score is simply the average between all subscores, so these massive bumps end up being balancing out the more conservative figures of the other subscores, which remain constant or rise by less than 25%.
  • Geekbench 5 subscores gave us a decent look into where the resulting ~20% increase in Single-core and Multi-core scores comes from. The crypto tests (which are weighted the least in calculating the final scores) had a performance increment of 36% and 44% (single and multi, respectively) compared to our 855+ results, whereas integer and floating-point performance only rose by about 19% to 25%, perfectly in-line with Qualcomm’s figures. The gap is much larger if we compare the 865 to our 855 results from the Pixel 4, as crypto goes up by 66% while integer and floating-point improvements sit over 50% for single-core tests and over 35% for multi-core tests. Given the 865 features the same clock speeds as the 855, we see a bump in integer and floating score performance per MHz.
  • 3DMark scores also fall more-or-less in line with the expected 20% faster graphics rendering that Qualcomm boasted at the Snapdragon tech summit. The graphics and physics scores saw an increase of 15% and 11% (respectively) over the 855+ for the OpenGL ES 3.1 test, and 25% and 22% for the Vulkan test. This suggests the 865 is a healthy upgrade for gamers.
  • GFXBench only saw a performance boost of 5% to 15% over the 855+, though when comparing it against the regular 855 those numbers jump above the 20% year-on-year increments posted by the company.

Recommended Reading


Benchmark Sources

CPU, GPU, and Memory

CPU and Memory

System

PCMark for Android Benchmark Developer: UL LLC
Price: Free
3.3
Download

GPU

GFXBench Benchmark Developer: Kishonti Ltd.
Price: Free
3.3
Download

Storage

Browser

Speedometer 2.0 ||| JetStream 1.1


Thanks to TK Bay for the featured image. Thanks to Max Weinbach for providing the Kirin 990 results from his Huawei Mate 30 Pro.