The Xiaomi Mi Note Pro and Mi Note Review
by Joshua Ho on September 11, 2015 9:00 AM ESTSystem Performance
Performance may be a rather nebulous thing - there are a number of factors that affect the performance of a smartphone in everyday tasks. One of the single most important components to overall performance is the SoC (System on a Chip). This one package will usually contain the CPU, GPU, DRAM interface, a number of fixed-function blocks, various DSPs, and other processing engines. Usually, DRAM itself is also mounted on top of the SoC package in a package on package (PoP) configuration. In order to test this and more in a smartphone, we rely on a set of benchmarks that are accepted within the industry that can reasonably represent smartphone performance. Of course, the state of the art in benchmarking is always changing, but we can say with reasonable confidence that if a smartphone or tablet performs well in our benchmarks that the SoC will be a good foundation for a smooth experience. Of course, if an OEM then decides to run unoptimized Android UIs on top of this SoC then any performance advantage could be wasted. In the case of the Mi Note, we’re looking at a relatively standard Snapdragon 801 with 3GB of LPDDR3, while the Mi Note Pro uses a more powerful Snapdragon 810 with 4GB of LPDDR4.
It's interesting to look at these results as we can basically see the differences that result from browser optimizations. It's also important to note here that the Xiaomi Mi Note was run with the Performance mode turned on as otherwise the CPU governor would be far too conservative for good performance. Unfortunately though, it looks like the Performance mode (as opposed to Balanced) is extremely aggressive, setting all cores online and to only use the 2.5 GHz state. Xiaomi needs to provide a more appropriate performance governor for everyday use. It's worth noting here that all benchmarks can be run without the performance governor, but the software will offer to turn it on if it detects a benchmark.
Fortunately, it seems the Mi Note Pro doesn't have these sorts of strange governor settings and performance is in line for what we'd expect from a Snapdragon 810.
In Basemark OS II we see that performance is roughly estimated to be equal to the Galaxy S6. It seems that most of this is coming from the NAND benchmark aspect and browser optimizations as in the System subtest the Mi Note is around the same level as the Exynos 5433. The graphics subtest shows performance is identical to the One M9, which suggests that the 30 MHz bump in clock isn't going to be particularly helpful.
At this point it's pretty fair to say that the Snapdragon 801 is a known quantity when it comes to performance, but when it comes to the Snapdragon 810 it's still in some level of flux. For the Mi Note at least, this is mostly interesting at an academic level as a pure 2.5 GHz 4x Krait comparison relative to the Snapdragon 810. Overall, it looks like the Mi Note Pro is about the same performance as the G4, which makes sense because the governor usually only allows two A57s to stay online in all but the most extreme loads. However, performance has a wide relative variation in cases where the OEM has either invested a lot of time in optimizing their build of Android or not as much. It looks like web browsing is a major point of optimization for the Mi Note Pro as it is competitive with the Galaxy S6 in that test, but in areas like the writing subtest Xiaomi is falling behind somewhat. I suspect this is mostly a software optimization problem as PCMark is extremely sensitive to changes in Android version as seen in the Note 4 and Note 4 Exynos which are surpassing the Mi Note due to an OTA update to Lollipop despite the Mi Note's use of a performance governor.
Overall, performance of Snapdragon 810 in these mostly CPU-bound tasks is acceptable. We can still see some performance gains over Snapdragon 801 and 805 but relative to the Exynos 7420 competition things aren't quite as rosy. Of course, we can talk about software optimization but in Basemark OS II the Mi Note only squeaks by due to a high NAND performance score rather than a strong showing in any SoC performance test. In PCMark we see a similar story of some tests where the Mi Note Pro is doing well, but others where it falls short to give an average score overall. Whatever the case, it's clear that the Mi Note Pro does have a good amount of performance on tap. The Mi Note is also clearly capable of being a strong performer as seen in the performance mode benchmarks, but the balanced governor mode needs to be much better to exploit that performance. Both phones should have enough CPU performance to do pretty much any everyday task.
94 Comments
View All Comments
hans_ober - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Still no update on the MotoG 2015 charge time using a powerful charger... seriously?wliles3 - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Please Review The Note 5 And Edge Plus.AussieinUS - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Thanks for a detailed review. I have the Note for 6 months now and use it on Tmobile in the US (no LTE) and Vodafone in Italy. It works very well. The review mirrors my experience down to the slippery and now cracked glass back. The advice on a cover came too late. My biggest challenge has not been the battery, the good camera, the video playback, or the google play services. It has been trying to get the change to the Mi Account for the auto sign in. It wants to use my now defunct Italian number and not the new number. It constantly tries to sign in. I have changed the browser based credentials for Mi Account but it cannot be accessed from the mobile. Claims by Xiaomi that they will get back to me within 3 days based on a "lost password" on the device results in nothing. It still works but is constantly trying to signin. This speaks to tech support away from the mothership. Thanks for this review and the constructive comments.eriri-el - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
I have a slight beef here regarding fast charge support. I own the Mi Note (non-Pro) and its charging time is more or less in line with what is shown in this review. But as for it not supporting fast charging, my Mi Note came bundled with the MDY-03-EB charger which is rated for 5V/2A as well as 9V/1.2A. According to the Qualcomm website on Quick Charge, both the charger and the Mi Note is certified for Quick Charge 2.0. given that it "just" supports 9V/1.2A, I think it doesn't charge that fast, but that doesn't mean it doesn't support QC, unless of course Qualcomm is lying to us.eriri-el - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Reference: https://www.qualcomm.com/documents/quick-charge-de...Xiaomi is at the bottom of the list in the pdf file
extide - Saturday, September 12, 2015 - link
It seems the hardware is definitely there for the support, but they may have disabled it as a way to differentiate between it and the Pro. Kind of an odd thing to do, but oh well.Peichen - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
The best selling Android phones have always been those that look and feels like an iPhone except cheaper and with dual-SIM and SD card. It is no wonder the Biggest and 2nd biggest Android OEMs releases phones that's basically iPhone 6.5As for Mi Note. I like it but feel $470 is getting too expensive for a phone that's not spectacular. $400 for the Pro model would be more app.
babadivad - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
How do you guys get the close ups of the screens like that? I want to try that with my phone. I've always thought that was so cool. It was one of the reasons I stayed around with you guys since the launch of the Note 2. I like the thorough way you do the phone reviews and the close up on screens to check for changes to sub-pixel placement and changes from year to year of the same line. So cool.edwpang - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
This review leaved out a very important area: call quality and data support. I am not keen on LTE. I am fine as long as I can use 3G on my Rogers network.melgross - Friday, September 11, 2015 - link
Another Chinese government supported company. It would be nice if web sites reviewing these devices from Chinese companies did a bit of research as why their prices are where they are