|
Qualcomm QCS4290 vs Apple A10 Fusion |
|
Comparisons 18-02-2023 Comprehensive comparison data of Qualcomm QCS4290 vs Apple A10 Fusion, testing of graphics chips (GPU). A thorough analysis of all the technical characteristics of the processors, to make it easier to read, is summarized in the table. From the comparison video, you can get the results of parallel examination in synthetic type tests such as 3DMark, Vellamo, Neocore, AnTuTu, GFXBench, PCMark, Quadrant, Geekbench, PassMark, even the gaming performance of chips in PUBG, Madout2, Fortnite, Asphalt 9, Call of Duty, GTA, Minecraft etc. After reading the results of parallel tests and videos, you can already make an informed decision about which CPU is better to buy QCS4290 or A10 Fusion.
Summary benchmark resultsAs a percentage of the maximum value based on a sample from the entire base of all processors CPU Benchmark Based on Antutu and Geekbench score Battery life test Power Consumption efficiency (how quickly the processor reduces the battery charge) Gaming performance Which CPU is better for gaming
Antutu v10, 9Antutu benchmark separately tests the performance of the CPU, GPU, and memory speed | QCS4290 |
A10 Fusion | Total score | 175559 | 255607 | CPU | 49149 | 71565 | GPU | 66709 | 97125 | MEM | 28099 | 40905 | UX | 31609 | 46008 |
GeekBench 6, 5.2This benchmark shows Multi-threaded and Single-threaded processor performance | QCS4290 |
A10 Fusion | Single-Core | 359 | 762 | Multi-Core | 1511 | 1652 |
Comparison of specifications
CPU and Memory | QCS4290 |
A10 Fusion | Frequency | 2000 MHz | 2340 MHz | Cores | 8 | 6 | Bit | 64 | 64 | Lithography | 11 nm | 16 nm | Transistors count | | 3800 millions | Core configuration | 4x2.0 GHz Kryo 260 4x1.8 GHz Kryo 260 | 2x2.34GHz Hurricane 4x1.46 GHz Zephyr | Power consumption (TDP) | 9 W | 5 W | Memory type | LPDDR4x (Dual Channel) | LPDDR4 | Max. Memory | 8 Gb | 3 Gb | Memory Frequency | 1866/933 | 2133 | Memory bandwidth | 13.91 | | Neural Processor (NPU) | Yes | Yes | L1 cache | | 64 KB | L2 cache | | 3 MB | L3 cache | | 4 MB | Instruction set architecture (ISA) | ARMv8-A | ARMv8-A | In this comparison block, you should pay attention to the differences in clock speed and the number of cores. Here A10 Fusion is 14% better than QCS4290 in terms of CPU frequency. Another difference is that QCS4290 has -2 more core than A10 Fusion. Also keep in mind that high CPU frequency affects battery life through power consumption.
GPU and MediaGPU | Adreno 610 | PowerVR GT7600 | GPU Frequency | 750 MHz | 900 MHz | GFloPS | 312 | 186 | # of Cores | | 6 | # of Shader Units | 192 | 196 | Display | 1600 x 900 pixels | 2048 x 1536 pixels | The frequency of the GPU does not always directly indicate its performance. To fully evaluate all the capabilities of a graphics chip, you should take into account the number of Shader Units and Cores, as well as how many GFlops it has.
Gaming benchmarkFortnite Mobile | 23.3 | 28.4 | PlayerUnknown's Battlegrounds (PUBG Mobile) | 27.4 | 45.7 | Garena Free Fire - The Cobra | 58.6 | 40.3 | Call of Duty: Mobile | 30.4 | 35.8 | Grand Theft Auto V (GTA 5 Mobile) | 24.8 | 42.6 | Minecraft: Pocket Edition | 33.8 | 59.2 | Real Racing 3 | 73.3 | 70.5 | Sniper 3D | 93.4 | 76.6 | Need for Speed No Limits | 82.9 | 64.5 | Mortal Kombat X | 93.1 | 64.5 | CSR Racing 2 | 82.4 | 52.4 | The numbers in this table indicate the maximum FPS that was received on the device with the corresponding processor. Depending on the configuration of the gadget and graphics quality settings (Ultra, Medium, Normal), the results may differ quite significantly. We recommend that you better study the results of the Antutu v10, 9 and GeekBench 6, 5.2 becnmarks.
CamerasCamera resolution | 48 MP | 32 MP | Dual Camera resolution | 16 MP | 12 MP | Image Signal Processor (ISP) | Triple ISP | Apple ISP | Video Encoding FPS | 60 | 960 | Video Encoding resolution | 4K (Ultra HD), 2K, FullHD | 4K (Ultra HD), 2K, FullHD | Codec support | H.264/AVC, H.265/HEVC | Dolby Vision, H.265 (HEVC), HDR10+, HLG, HDR10, H.264 (AVC), VP8, VP9 |
Networks and NavigationModem | Qualcomm QCM4290 LTE modem | Qualcomm MDM9645M | Download speed | 410 MBit/s. | 600 MBit/s. | Upload speed | 170 MBit/s. | 100 MBit/s. | Navigation | SBAS, Beidou, GPS, Galileo, NavIC, GLONASS, GNSS, QZSS | Galileo, GLONASS, Beidou, GPS | NFC support | No | Yes | 5G support | Yes | No |
Result:
The number of parameters for which Qualcomm QCS4290 is better: 16
The number of parameters for which Apple A10 Fusion is better: 27 Please note that you do not need to blindly trust the software comparison on the table. You can watch video from beginning to end of parallel comparison and listen to what those who really appreciated the capabilities of both chips think, and also read the test results on the links under the article.
QCS4290 SoC Comparisons • Vs Samsung Exynos 9 Octa 8895 • Vs Qualcomm QCM4290 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 662 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 710 • Vs MediaTek Kompanio 500 • Vs MediaTek Helio G70 • Vs Samsung Exynos 880 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 712 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 720G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 730G • Vs MediaTek MT8788 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T618 • Vs MediaTek Helio G80 • Vs Samsung Exynos 9810 • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 600 5G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 678 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T612 • Vs MediaTek Helio G85 • Vs Samsung Exynos 980 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T7520 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T7510 • Vs Unisoc T740 Tanggula • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 810 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T710 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T700 • Vs MediaTek Helio G88 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 5G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 680 • Vs Unisoc T760 Tanggula • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 835 MSM8998 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T610 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 675 • Vs MediaTek Helio P95 • Vs MediaTek Helio P65 (MT6768) • Vs MediaTek Helio P90 • Vs MediaTek Helio P60 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 970 • Vs Samsung Exynos 9610 • Vs Samsung Exynos 9611 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T616 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 665 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 670 • Vs MediaTek Helio P70 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 821 MSM8996 Pro • Vs Samsung Exynos 9609 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 460 • Vs MediaTek Helio X30 (MT6799) • Vs Unisoc Tiger T606 • Vs Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7885 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710A • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710F • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 710 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 MSM8996 • Vs Samsung Exynos 8 Octa 8890 • Vs MediaTek Helio P40 • Vs Samsung Exynos 850 • Vs MediaTek Helio G37 • Vs Samsung Exynos 7 Octa 7884 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 660 MSM8976 Plus • Vs Qualcomm QCS8250 • Vs Qualcomm QCS2290 • Vs Qualcomm QCM6490 • Vs Qualcomm QCM2290 • Vs MediaTek Helio G90T • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 700 • Vs MediaTek Helio G90 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 732G • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 8c • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 765G • Vs MediaTek Helio G95 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 480 Plus • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 720 5G • Vs Unisoc T770 Tanggula • Vs Apple A11 Bionic • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 750G • Vs Samsung Exynos 9 9820 • Vs MediaTek Helio G96 • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 800U • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 855 Plus • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 690 5G • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 800 • Vs Apple A9 • Vs MediaTek Helio G35 • Vs Unisoc Tiger T310 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 955 • Vs MediaTek Helio G25 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 950 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 960 • Vs MediaTek Helio A25 • Vs MediaTek MT8768T • Vs MediaTek MT8168 • Vs MediaTek Helio P22T • Vs MediaTek Helio P35 • Vs MediaTek MT8176 • Vs Unisoc SC79863a • Vs MediaTek MT8766 • Vs MediaTek Helio P22 • Vs HiSilicon Kirin 659 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 810 MSM8994 • Vs Unisoc SC9863A • Vs Qualcomm QCS7230 • Vs Qualcomm QCS6490 • Vs Unisoc SC9863A1
A10 Fusion SoC Comparisons • Vs Apple A16 Bionic • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 4 Gen 1 • Vs Apple M2 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdargon 782G • Vs MediaTek Dimensity 8200 • Vs Qualcomm QCS8250 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c Gen 2 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 7c+ Gen 3 • Vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 850 • Vs Apple A17 Bionic
| |
|