Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 benchmarks: Better and worse than we hoped

Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 reference design
Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 reference design (Image credit: Daniel Bader / Android Central)

Every year, Qualcomm gives tech media the opportunity to benchmark the newest Snapdragon Reference Device so they have a baseline to compare them to shipping devices that come months later, and what kinds of improvements they can expect over previous Snapdragon platforms.

The Snapdragon 865 is a big deal for a number of reasons, but in terms of straight-up year-over-year benchmark improvements, it's pretty iterative.

The Benchmarks

While in Hawaii for Qualcomm's Snapdragon Tech Summit, me and my colleagues, Andrew Martonik and Nirave Gondhia spent a couple of hours running a set of very specific benchmarks — AnTuTu, Geekbench 5, GFxBench, Androbench, PCMark, Speedometer, Jetstream, and a couple others — so we could glean a few numbers and figure out that, yes indeed, the Snapdragon 865 is faster than the 855.

But that shouldn't come as a surprise. Here are a few of the results comparing the Snapdragon 865 RD to the 855 from the previous year:

Swipe to scroll horizontally
BenchmarkQualcomm Snapdragon 855 RDSnapdragon 865 RD% difference
AnTuTu 7.1.1Row 0 - Cell 1 Row 0 - Cell 2 Row 0 - Cell 3
GeekbenchRow 2 - Cell 1 Row 2 - Cell 2 Row 2 - Cell 3
Single core60492735%
GFXBench 4.0Row 5 - Cell 1 Row 5 - Cell 2 Row 5 - Cell 3
ES 3.1 Manhattan 1080 offscreen7188.6820%
ES 2.0 T-Rex 1080 offscreen163.54204.8520%
Jetstream 265.5469.425.6%
Speedometer 264697.2%

Whether the benchmarks are CPU- or GPU-constrained, the Snapdragon 865 performs better than its predecessor across the board. That's a good thing, because it shows that year over year gains in performance are obtained despite not ramping up clock speeds but by optimizations to the CPU and GPU designs themselves. In particular, it's noteworthy that Qualcomm relied on an unmodified ARM Cortex-A77 design for the prime and performance cores versus making changes to the Cortex-A76 cores in last year's platform.

Our colleagues at Anandtech took a much deeper dive into the Snapdragon 865 and here's what they said about the CPU system performance:

Performance is exactly where Qualcomm advertised it would land at, and we're seeing a 25% increase in SPECint2006 and a 29% in SPECfp2006. On the integer side, the A77 still trails Apple's Monsoon cores in the A11, but the new Arm design now has been able to trounce it in the FP suite. We're still a bit far away from the microarchitectures catching up to Apple's latest designs, but if Arm keeps up this 25-30% yearly improvement rate, we should be getting there in a few more iterations.

In other words, Qualcomm still falls behind Apple's 2017 A11 processor in some respects but is now ahead in others. But there's another narrative that we haven't mentioned: sustained GPU performance. Qualcomm said that while average GPU performance should be around 20-25% better in most workloads, those workloads shouldn't tax the graphics chip the same way as they did in previous generations.

Anandtech once again:

Overall, we were able to verify the Snapdragon 865's performance improvements and Qualcomm's 25% claims seem to be largely accurate. The issue is that this doesn't seem to be enough to keep up with the large improvements that Apple has been able to showcase over the last two generations.During the chipset's launch, Qualcomm was eager to mention that their product is able to showcase better long-term sustained performance than a competitor which "throttles within minutes". While we don't have confirmation as to whom exactly they were referring to, the data and narrative here only matches Apple's device behaviour. Whilst we weren't able to test the sustained performance of the QRD865 today, it unfortunately doesn't really matter for Qualcomm as the Snapdragon 865 and Adreno 650's peak performance falls in at a lower level than Apple's A13 sustained performance.

Remember me

Snapdragon 865 benchmarking

Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central)

But one area the Snapdragon 865 will likely delight people, especially when it comes to app load times and general snappiness around the OS, is its improved memory latency. Anandtech again:

One of the larger changes in the SoC this generation was the integration of a new hybrid LPDDR5 and LPDDR4X memory controller. On the QRD865 device we've tested the chip was naturally equipped with the new LP5 standard. Qualcomm was actually downplaying the importance of LP5 itself: the new standard does bring higher memory speeds providing better bandwidth, however latency should be the same, and power efficiency benefits, while there, shouldn't be overplayed. Nevertheless, Qualcomm did claim they focused more on improving their memory controllers, and this year we're finally seeing the new chip address some of the weaknesses exhibited by the past two generations; memory latency.We had criticised Qualcomm's Snapdragon 845 and 855 for having quite bad memory latency – ever since the company had introduced their system level cache architecture to the designs, this aspect of the memory subsystem had seen some rather mediocre characteristics. There's been a lot of arguments in regards to how much this actually affected performance, with Qualcomm themselves naturally downplaying the differences. Arm generally notes a 1% performance difference for each 5ns of latency to DRAM, if the differences are big, it can sum up to a noticeable difference.While it's a very good improvement in itself, it's still slightly behind the designs of HiSilicon, Apple and Samsung. So, while Qualcomm still is the last of the bunch in regards to its memory subsystem, it's no longer trailing behind by such a large margin.

Poor memory latency is not something that comes up a lot in benchmarking, but Qualcomm made it clear that a lot of work was done to alleviate some of the issues from previous generations, and that's without even supporting LPDDR5 memory.

You can call me AI

Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central)

One of the main areas of improvement in the chip is how it processes machine learning- and AI-heavy tasks. The Snapdragon 865 claims to have an AI engine twice as powerful as the 855, hitting 15 trillion operations per second. That's an astounding number, for sure, but it doesn't always translate properly in terms of real-world performance, mainly because the use cases for these kinds of apps and operations are kind of limited.

XDA-Developers has a really good overview of how Qualcomm eked out such incredible numbers from its fifth-gen AI engine. I like their conclusion, as it sums up why the AI Engine is important, if not now then into the future:

Services that involve translation, object recognition and labeling, usage predictions or item recommendations, natural language understanding, speech parsing and so on will gain the benefit of operating faster and consuming less power. Having a higher compute budget also enables the creation of new use cases and experiences, and moving processes that used to take place in the cloud onto your device. While AI as a term has been used in dubious, deceiving and even erroneous ways in the past (even by OEMs), many of your services you enjoy today ultimately rely on machine learning algorithms in some form or another.

Why these benchmarks are not the whole story

Qualcomm Snapdragon 865 reference device

Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central (Image credit: Source: Daniel Bader / Android Central)

I don't love benchmarks, which is why this article is in the format it's in. I'll be the first to admit other people do it better and more comprehensively than I do, and I choose to be dubious about how synthetic or even organic benchmarks actually translate to real-world experiences in the smartphone space.

I'll give you an example: the Snapdragon 670 found in the $399 Google Pixel 3a does not translate to demonstrably worse performance than the Snapdragon 855-powered Pixel 4. Mid-range is no longer a dirty word, and Snapdragons in the 600 and 700 series are more than capable of getting the job done for the vast majority of people.

As impressive as they are, these are synthetic benchmarks that barely touch the surface of what a commercially released phone is asked to do, and is capable of doing

So does that mean the iterative improvements we see in the Snapdragon 865 aren't noteworthy? Of course not — as workloads get more complicated, they move off the CPU and onto the GPU and DSP (AI Engine), these high-end chips will enable more specialized and less generalized tasks. Think heavy computational photography abilities or real-time translation, things that only trickle down to the 600 and 700 series platforms a year or two after they debut on the 800s.

The synthetic benchmark narrative also doesn't touch on many of the other areas in which the Snapdragon 865 excels: 5G, which comes on all devices (for better or worse), and most notably, camera abilities. Those evaluations will have to wait until we get the first smartphones running the Snapdragon 865, likely in late Q1 with the Galaxy S11 series.

Given the warm but muted reception awarded to the Snapdragon 855 this year, the days of massive annual performance bumps between generations is probably over. Instead, it's the stuff on the edge that's most exciting, and I can't wait to take that picture in the coming months.

Daniel Bader was a former Android Central Editor-in-Chief and Executive Editor for iMore and Windows Central. 

  • Apple's A series CPU's are just on a whole another level compared to the competition
  • On paper.
    In the real world, it's another story.
  • These tests never take into consideration screen resolutions, especially when the Qualcomm devices are pushing around a million more pixels compared to even the highest resolution iPhone 11 pro max. So to say the A13 SoC is at another level is completely wrong, and deceiving.
  • I watched several YouTube videos of well known and trusted people who did live performance reviews of the prototype 865 device against the iPhone 11 Pro Max. The 865 prototype device was as fast and even faster than the iPhone.
    So not sure what the "debby downer" tone is all about here. Right now its looking like the 865 CPU is faster than the A13 but the GPU is slower.
  • Apple's mistake is in the RAM allocation for iPhones. It has to dump things sooner than recent Android devices because it runs out of RAM. The last few beta builds of iOS were so bad with memory management that just launching the camera app would kill just about everything else.
  • That's not a mistake. No one uses their phones that way (ever). You can see the difference in the chips whenever you ask them to do any heavy task (decoding a file, 4k video etc...). Loading a webpage does not test the cpu, it does test the moderm and other aspect but not the cpu/gpu. Adding more rams uses more power, its all about tradeoffs.
  • Toukale - You don't open apps on your phone? The reason "real world" tests are done the way they are is because launching an app is usually the most significant wait. You wait 5 to 10 seconds for Subway Surfer to launch (for example), and everything after that is pretty instant. Some apps can be CPU intensive after the launch, like Photoshop express exports, and converting 3D surround sound audio from 45 minute concert videos into hi-res audio only files, or video editing and compiling clips in FiLMiC Pro, or doing film format conversions. But, even though I do all those things, most people don't, so app launching and RAM management tests are an acceptable way of comparing speed. For the record, my most recent purchase was the iPhone 11 (AT&T, 64GB, in Black), and it does decoding and exports at the same rate as my 2018 HTC U12 Plus. And the thing is that photo effects processing on the U12 is a bit more work because it takes more detailed photographs than the iPhone. Which iPhone? All of them.
  • Regardless of RAM allocation that does not have affect on raw CPU performance.
  • You saying that Android has better memory management than iOS?
    Never happen.....
  • "Qualcomm still falls behind Apple's 2017 A11 processor in some respects" - Lagging behind Apple's 2017 chipset. It's 2019. I wonder how it fares against Apple's 2019 chips.
  • So apple uses 2019 chips on their 2017 software and android uses 2017 chips on their 2019 software Got it.
  • So do the fruit company have some special tech that Qualcomm an SOC company of many years don't have? What could be so drastically different in what both are building?
  • It's call "cold hard cash." Apple can afford to spend money on silicon that QC can't. Qualcomm still need to make money on every chip they sell, something Apple does not have to worry about.
  • This is what I've read as well. It's as simple as Apple spends more money on the expensive silicon in the CPU to make them better because they make such an insane overall profit on their phones. Qualcomm literally just provides the cpu and modem so they must make money on those parts that they sell to Samsung/Google/Sony/Huawei etc. If Qualcomm owned the phone hardware like Apple, their chips would be neck and neck or better.
  • Big mistake that Google didn't put the 865 in the Pixel 4. But then Google never wants to make the Pixel the best Android phone out there, hardware wise.
  • You're really at a loss with time aren't you? The pixel 4 was released in October, the 865 was announced in December. Even if Google wanted to put the 865 in the pixel 4 they couldn't have because it simply wasn't even publicly announced and the first phones with it are expected to come in 2020.
  • Everyone needs to stop using iAnantech as a point of reference.
    It is an Apple shill site.
    Both the owner and former top editor are now working at Apple.
  • I would be incline to side with you if they did not have the data to back it up, but they do. You can't argue with facts, its not just someone's opinion with no data to back it up. You may not agree with their testing methods (no test is perfect) but it gets the job done.
  • Yes, i do agree apple SoC have x faster then QC 865, but i remember buying apple product are playing premium fees to it's software and hardware, but i still have a lot to complain on ip11, on paper look so much perfect, but in real world... i still prefer android over apple,
    now IOS13.3 must have earth icon on bottom screen it leave blank even i remove all other keyboard, only my 3rd party language keyboard have to move up a lot. changing custom ringtone is so complicated, itune is a must? else another $$ for another premium apps...? 1 iphone is enough, no more next time. in short.. are you buying iphone to do use as a phone, or just export video file? professional level cpu for... convert mkv file in sec but not able to (easy way)set ringtone on phone like all android do...? why placing a MP3 into phone is so hard yet can not directly set to ringtone?
  • Just a commodity, at this point. I've got enough power in my old phone. Will be keeping it until it dies a slow ugly death.