CPU Performance

The original Note I played with was based on Qualcomm’s APQ8060 platform with MDM9200 baseband (the so-called Fusion 2 platform) and was for its time a pretty awesome piece of kit, combining LTE and a dual core SoC. The Note 2 I played with next was based on Samsung’s own Exynos 4412 SoC with quad core Cortex A9 at 1.6 GHz and Mali–400MP4 GPU. For the Note 3, I’m looking at a T-Mobile variant (SM-N900T if you want to be exact about it) which means it includes a Snapdragon 800 SoC, and Samsung has gone for the 2.3 GHz bin (really 2.265 GHz rounded up). Inside are 4 Krait 400 CPUs running at up to 2.3 GHz, and Adreno 330 graphics at up to 450 MHz, all built on TSMC’s 28nm HPM HK-MG process.

I should note that this is MSM8974 and not MSM8974AB which oddly enough one of Qualcomm’s customers already announced (Xiaomi for the Mi3) which boosts GPU clocks up to 550 MHz and the LPDDR3 memory interface up to 933 MHz, among a few other changes. I’ve confirmed that GPU clocks on the Note 3 are indeed maxing out at 450 MHz, and quite honestly it’s a bit early for 8974AB in the first place, though it wouldn’t surprise me to see Samsung eventually get that faster bin at some point and put it in something.

 

I should mention that the Note 3 (like many other Android devices - SGS4, HTC One) detects certain benchmarks and ensures CPU frequencies are running at max while running them, rather than relying on the benchmark workload to organically drive DVFS to those frequencies. Max supported CPU frequency is never exceeded in this process, the platform simply primes itself for running those tests as soon as they're detected. The impact is likely small since most of these tests should drive CPU frequencies to their max state regardless (at least on the CPU side), but I'm going to make it a point to call out this behavior whenever I see it from now on. Make no mistake, this is cheating plain and simple. It's a stupid cheat that most Android OEMs seem to be ok with and honestly isn't worth the effort. Update: Of our CPU tests only AndEBench is affected exclusively by Samsung's optimizations, the performance gain appears to be around 4%. Vellamo is gamed by all of the Snapdragon 800 platforms we have here (ASUS, LG and Samsung). None of this is ok and we want it to stop, but I'm assuming it's not going to. In light of that we're working with all of the benchmark vendors we use to detect and disable any cheats as we find them. We have renamed versions of nearly all of our benchmarks and will have uniquely named versions of all future benchmarks we use. We'll be repopulating our Bench data where appropriate.

CPU performance is honestly excellent. The Galaxy Note 3 is more or less the fastest Android smartphone we've tested up to this point. In the situations where we can do cross platform (OS/browser) comparisons, it isn't quite as fast as the iPhone 5s but in some cases it comes close.

AndEBench - Java

AndEBench - Native

SunSpider Javascript Benchmark 1.0 - Stock Browser

Google Octane Benchmark v1

Mozilla Kraken Benchmark - 1.1

Browsermark 2.0

Vellamo Benchmark - 2.0

Vellamo Benchmark - 2.0

GPU Performance

Samsung definitely likes to win, and the Galaxy Note 3 walks away with the GPU performance crown in literally every single offscreen test we've got here. The onscreen tests are obviously governed by display resolution, but all things being equal the Note 3 manages to get the edge over the PowerVR G6430 in Apple's iPhone 5s. It's also interesting to note that the Galaxy Note 3 appears to outperform all other Snapdragon 800 smartphones we've tested thus far. There's a couple of potential explanations here. First, the Galaxy Note 3 is using newer drivers than any of the other S800 platforms we've tested:

Note 3: 04.03.00.125.077
Padfone: 04.02.02.050.116
G2: 4.02.02.050.141

Secondly, it's unclear how much the manual CPU DVFS setting upon benchmark launch is influencing things - although I suspect it's significant in the case of something like 3DMark. 

Finally each manufacturer has the ability to define their own thermal limits/governor behavior, it could simply be that Samsung is a bit more aggressive on this front. We honestly haven't had enough time to dig into finding out exactly what's going on here (Samsung gave us less than a week to review 3 devices), but the end result are some incredibly quick scores for the Note 3. If I had to guess I'd assume it's actually a combination of all three vectors: drivers, high CPU frequencies and being more lenient with thermals.

Update: GFXBench 2.7 isn't affected by any optimizations here, but Basemark X and 3DMark are. We expect the Note 3's performance is inflated by somewhere in the 3 - 10% range. We're working on neutralizing this optimization across our entire suite.

GLBenchmark 2.7 - T-Rex HD

GLBenchmark 2.7 - T-Rex HD (Offscreen 1080p)

GLBenchmark 2.7 - Egypt HD

GLBenchmark 2.7 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)

3DMark Unlimited - Ice Storm

Basemark X - On Screen

Basemark X - Off Screen

Epic Citadel - Ultra High Quality, 100% Resolution

NAND & USB 3.0 Performance

Our Galaxy Note 3 review sample posted some incredible storage performance results, at least compared to all other Android smartphones we've tested. Sequential read and write performance are both class leading - the latter is nearly 2x better than the next fastest phone we've tested. Random read performance is decent, but it's random write performance that's surprising. Unlike the Moto X, the Galaxy Note 3 doesn't rely on a flash-friendly file system to get great random write performance - this is raw eMMC horsepower (if you can call ~600 IOPS that). The result isn't quite as good as what you get out of the Moto X, but it comes very close. Android 4.3 should bring FSTRIM support to the Galaxy Note 3, so as long as you remember to leave around 20% of your storage as free space you should enjoy relatively speedy IO regardless of what you do to the phone.

Sequential Read (256KB) Performance

Sequential Write (256KB) Performance

 

Random Read (4KB) Performance

Random Write (4KB) Performance

The Galaxy Note 3 ships with USB 3.0, unfortunately at least in its current state it doesn't seem to get any benefit from the interface. Although the internal eMMC is capable of being read from at ~100MB/s, sustained transfers from the device over adb averaged around 30MB/s regardless of whether or not I connected the Note 3 to a USB 2.0 or 3.0 host.

Update: USB 3.0 does work on the Note 3, but only when connected to a Windows PC with USB 3.0. Doing so brings up a new option in the "USB Computer Connection" picker with USB 3.0 as an option. Ticking this alerts you that using USB 3.0 might interfere with calls and data, but then switches over. Connection transfer speed is indeed faster in this mode as well, like you'd expect.

 

It only appears on Windows as well, my earlier attempts were on OS X where this popup option never appears. 

Battery Life & Charge Time Display
Comments Locked

302 Comments

View All Comments

  • Ph0b0s - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    Stupid copy and paste function, here's the correct link: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?s=c...

    And I confess it is brand loyalty that made me post the above. But rather that being a fan of a certain fruit, I am a fan and owner of all the note device's up until now and about to buy the latest one. So shows what you know. The link has many cases of people doing what Samsung says should work fine and finding it does not and then finding that even Samsung's customer service dept do not know what should and should not be working.

    It is because I am a fan of Samsung and their devices, that I believe they need to wake up and realize that this very anti consumer tactic is going to cost them. And they should change course very quickly.

    The only person spreading FUD around here is you. I am looking to spending £599 on an 'un-locked' phone. For that price I expect to get one that is un-locked, not this travesty. My advise for anyone, is holding off purchasing until there is an official update from Samsung on this whole situation. And before you say there has been, there hasn't.....
  • ddriver - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    Just hold your pants on - the note 3 looks like it is fairly buggy, probably the release has been rushed, plus as much testing as you do in the lab, it is nowhere as thorough as millions of consumers using the device daily. I expect the lock issue will be fixed soon enough.
  • Ph0b0s - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    You could be right. But until Samsung come out and confirm, that what numerous people are reporting, is not expected behavior and it is a bug, I for one will not be buying and I hope others do the same.

    I don't see the reason for your comments. One minute it is, there is not problem, then that is not as bad as all that, then oh it must be a bug and will surely get fixed soon. I don't get it.

    I am not saying don't buy the product. It looks awesome, which is why these revelations have been a real disappointment. I am just saying wait until the situtation is resolved one way or another before purchasing and then decide whether to buy or not. It will not hurt if Samsung see a temporary drop in sales, in order to give them the needed message that they need to pay attention to this issue.

    Also I wish review sites like this would better inform their readers of this, rather then a one liner in the otherwise very good review. Other sites can maybe get away with this, but this is anandtech. Informing their readership of things like this is anandtech's bread and butter. Remember the articles on iphone signal issues, explaining the need for the trim feature on SSD's, AMD frame pacing issues and micro-stutter. This is what I come here for...
  • bubblesmoney - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    One more post just blurting out what some 'anonymous samsung employee reportedly told a blog'. why is there no official statement on a samsung website... guess because it can be used as proof in a subsequent lawsuit while third party websites writing some gossip with some anonymous samsung person cant be used in court.

    Just head out to the enormous xda thread on this issue and read the numerous reports of people affected by this region lock even though they first used their phone in the region it was bought in with a same region sim and could not use foreign sims that were in the MCC block list. yes there are videos on youtube of people using foreign sims but they dont mention that those sims are NOT IN THE MCC black list on the csc of the phone. btw the MCC black list and csc varies depending upon where you bought the phone to make matters more interesting.

    see xda thread here http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2...

    if you cant be bothered with that massive thread then see some posts selected by me on the comments of the trusted reviews article http://www.trustedreviews.com/opinions/galaxy-note...

    and see samungmobileuk twitter channel replying to me that foreign sims wont work https://twitter.com/bubblesmoney/status/3830427989...
  • toboev - Friday, October 4, 2013 - link

    Actually, the truth about region unlocking is far from clear. The only words from Samsung on this are an unsourced statement from a 'spokesperson' emailed to UKMobileReview:
    http://ukmobilereview.com/2013/09/samsung-statemen...

    Meanwhile a highly respected UK retailer, Clove, has been doing its best to get to the bottom of it:
    http://blog.clove.co.uk/2013/09/25/samsung-galaxy-...

    Android Authority has also come to the conclusion that the "use your home SIM first to unlock" theory doesn not hold water:
    http://www.androidauthority.com/galaxy-note-3-regi...

    And whilst you digest all that, consider this - it seems that Samsung plan to roll out region-lock to all their recent mobiles, like the Note 2, GS3 etc. Maybe then people will smell the coffee.
  • ruzveh - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    My region doesnt come with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 platform but Samsung own processor. Sadly you have not reviewed that model and compared it with Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 platform. Secondly yes i am happy about the USB3 port but whats the use if we dont get to use its benefits. I mean not only speed but we could also get faster charging of this port and also better accessories supported in future
  • DougFrippon - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    I posted a comment about this, I think they might have forgot to enable USB 3.0.

    Quoting Myself:
    "There is a number of youtube video showcasing USB3.0 vs USB2.0 with the note3, and wether they test it againt itself (USB3.0 ON or OFF, btw did you guys just forget to enable USB 3.0 all together? because it's not enabled by default as it warns the user it might cause problems with the phone while activated). USB 3.0 is always about TWICE as fast.

    While USB 3.0 has a theoratical speed of around 10times more than USB 2.0, doubling transfer speed is pretty significant!"
  • Brian Klug - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    Nope, no USB 3.0 toggle on my Note 3: http://cl.ly/image/2j1U2b2D2S2i

    -Brian
  • Evil804 - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    was hoping to get some info on the supposed 24 bit DAC.
  • ddriver - Tuesday, October 1, 2013 - link

    The DAC is pretty good, -96.3 dB noise level, about 92-93 dB dynamic range, THD is very low and so is crosstalk. It is incrementally better than other devices in the same price range already on the market.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now