Samsung again caught doping benchmarks for Galaxy Note 3
An early review of Samsung's Galaxy Note 3 noted that it "scores really, really well in benchmark tests," but also explained that edge is achieved through some phony doping that kicks in a steroid boost only when running synthetic benchmark apps.
The review, by Ron Amadeo of ArsTechnica, details that Samsung is up to the same shenanigans it was called out on in an earlier report by AnandTech.
The AppleInsider review of Apple's iPhone 5s, running a dual core A7 at half the clock speed (1.3 GHz) and using less than half the RAM (1 GB), reported 64-bit scores that were essentially tied between the two others, and slightly higher in memory performance.
The two Android phones from Samsung and LG can't run 64-bit versions of the GeekBench 3 app because they are based on older technology. Instead, they are designed to scream through 32-bit benchmarks with more cores clocked twice as fast. That generates heat and wastes battery life, necessitating a larger device with a bigger battery.
Amadeo now points out that Samsung's repeat performance with the Galaxy Note 3 does the same for the company's latest flagship phablet even on the U.S. version powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 rather than Samsung's own chip.
Simply changing the name of the benchmarking app turned in scores that were between 20 and 50 percent lower, a phenomenon explained by extracting code on the device that revealed Samsung expressly designed the phone to turn in faster that real-world results when running known benchmark tests.
The report noted that Samsung earlier issued an official statement that claimed its "benchmark boosting" on the Galaxy S 4 was actually used in other processor intensive apps such as the web browser, camera and in video playback, not just in benchmarking apps. But that isn't true, ArsTechnica noted.
Instead, according to Samsung's configuration files, "the function is used exclusively for benchmarks, and it seems to cover all the popular ones. There's Geekbench, Quadrant, Antutu, Linpack, GFXBench, and even some of Samsung's own benchmarks," Amadeo wrote.
Samsung also appears to be faking its graphics performance, tipped off by a "suspicious 'frame rate adjustment' string" and the inclusion of GFXBench, an OpenGL ES benchmark targeting GPU performance.
Doped benchmarks don't just show up in reviews; they also appear on benchmark sites as user submitted rankings, making Samsung's falsifying of its performance a case of false advertising. But Samsung has also launched its own benchmark app, branded "MobileBench."
"To measure and monitor system performance, you must install many applications for many different purposes; however, MobileBench? provides an all-in-one solution," the company explains.
"MobileBench? measures H/W performance, scores user experience, and compares results with other devices," the company says. "Take advantage of your results to promote your products and optimize your devices."
Now that Samsung is heavily invested in the design of its Exynos chip it can only sell on a fraction of its high end handsets, and faces a race to catch up with Apple's entirely different approach to performance (using a more modern, custom designed A7 engine) the leading Android phone maker is now focusing on fooling its customers with phony performance numbers.
The review, by Ron Amadeo of ArsTechnica, details that Samsung is up to the same shenanigans it was called out on in an earlier report by AnandTech.
Snapdragon 800 vs Apple A7
Without any cheating, Geekbench 3 portrays the Samsung SM-N900P Note 3 as being essentially tied with LG's Optimus G2, with the same 2.3 GHz quad core chip and slightly more RAM (2.38 GB vs LG's 1.38 GB).The AppleInsider review of Apple's iPhone 5s, running a dual core A7 at half the clock speed (1.3 GHz) and using less than half the RAM (1 GB), reported 64-bit scores that were essentially tied between the two others, and slightly higher in memory performance.
The two Android phones from Samsung and LG can't run 64-bit versions of the GeekBench 3 app because they are based on older technology. Instead, they are designed to scream through 32-bit benchmarks with more cores clocked twice as fast. That generates heat and wastes battery life, necessitating a larger device with a bigger battery.
Samsung cheating to look better than it does
Back in July, Anand Lal Shimpi & Brian Klug noted that versions of Samsung's Galaxy S 4 equipped with the company's Exynos 5 Octa were designed explicitly to report better that real-world scores that were not actually attainable.Amadeo now points out that Samsung's repeat performance with the Galaxy Note 3 does the same for the company's latest flagship phablet even on the U.S. version powered by Qualcomm's Snapdragon 800 rather than Samsung's own chip.
Samsung is now covering its tracks, making it more difficult for reviewers to access the true CPU clock speed and discern that the company is faking performance.
Simply changing the name of the benchmarking app turned in scores that were between 20 and 50 percent lower, a phenomenon explained by extracting code on the device that revealed Samsung expressly designed the phone to turn in faster that real-world results when running known benchmark tests.
The report noted that Samsung earlier issued an official statement that claimed its "benchmark boosting" on the Galaxy S 4 was actually used in other processor intensive apps such as the web browser, camera and in video playback, not just in benchmarking apps. But that isn't true, ArsTechnica noted.
Instead, according to Samsung's configuration files, "the function is used exclusively for benchmarks, and it seems to cover all the popular ones. There's Geekbench, Quadrant, Antutu, Linpack, GFXBench, and even some of Samsung's own benchmarks," Amadeo wrote.
Samsung also appears to be faking its graphics performance, tipped off by a "suspicious 'frame rate adjustment' string" and the inclusion of GFXBench, an OpenGL ES benchmark targeting GPU performance.
Samsung doubles down on doping
Amadeo also reports that Samsung is now covering its tracks, making it more difficult for reviewers to access the true CPU clock speed and discern that the company is faking performance.Doped benchmarks don't just show up in reviews; they also appear on benchmark sites as user submitted rankings, making Samsung's falsifying of its performance a case of false advertising. But Samsung has also launched its own benchmark app, branded "MobileBench."
"To measure and monitor system performance, you must install many applications for many different purposes; however, MobileBench? provides an all-in-one solution," the company explains.
"MobileBench? measures H/W performance, scores user experience, and compares results with other devices," the company says. "Take advantage of your results to promote your products and optimize your devices."
Now that Samsung is heavily invested in the design of its Exynos chip it can only sell on a fraction of its high end handsets, and faces a race to catch up with Apple's entirely different approach to performance (using a more modern, custom designed A7 engine) the leading Android phone maker is now focusing on fooling its customers with phony performance numbers.
Comments
Also looking at that chart makes me drool wondering what the A7X is gonna do.
Schiller can say "shenanigans" on Twitter...Samsung will reply back with "20+ millions sold"
But to make the user experience better, they put on these governors. Without them, we get the "cheat" scores...
...ok, I have to go shower now after writing all that...
Also, I like this "new" Apple. Cagey. I dig it.
Schiller can say "shenanigans" on Twitter...Samsung will reply back with "20+ millions sold"
I know. It's terrible when they just can't stop lying
I don't think Samsung was surprised by Apple's 64 bit architecture (lol, they built it). What caught them off guard was the media hype Apple was able to get out of it. Many tech oriented people questioned why you'd even need it with the state of current phones' hardware (there will be a need in the future).
The 32 bit note is faster than the 64 bit flagship Apple 5s.
Except for when Samsung cheats- then it is a lot faster.
Schiller can say "shenanigans" on Twitter...Samsung will reply back with "20+ millions sold"
'20+ millions sold accomplished by lying to our customers.'
These devices that are locked down and have proprietary code that can be used to hide the actual GPU/CPU performance characteristics are the opposite of freedom. If only those sheeple would use Android phones which are completely open source and nothing can be hidden from the user.
Oh Wait...
Something that will expose this low life company wide open to the whole world !
The 32 bit note is faster than the 64 bit flagship Apple 5s.
Except for when Samsung cheats- then it is a lot faster.
Did you even read the benchmarking article? The 5S is much faster than the Note. The Note is sweating to beat the LG. Reading is fundamental.
I don't think Samsung was surprised by Apple's 64 bit architecture (lol, they built it). What caught them off guard was the media hype Apple was able to get out of it. Many tech oriented people questioned why you'd even need it with the state of current phones' hardware (there will be a need in the future).
The 32 bit note is faster than the 64 bit flagship Apple 5s.
Except for when Samsung cheats- then it is a lot faster.
Interesting point on the apple surprise. That may have been the impetus.
However note that both samsung and the other high end phones are absolutely pounding clock-rate to stay near Apple and its quiet and cool A7.
Scamsung once again shows its' true colors.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Fandroids and Android got nothing on Apple.
They even need to lie about their benchmarks now.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
What a bunch of lowlife losers!