Notebookcheck Logo

Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G vs Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G

Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G

► remove from comparison Qualcomm SD 695 5G

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G (SD695) is a fast mid-range ARM-based SoC largely found on Android tablets and smartphones. It features 8 Kryo 660 called cores (64-Bit capable) that are divided in two clusters. A fast cluster of two cores with up to 2.2 GHz based on the ARM Cortex-A77 design. And a power saving efficiency cluster with up to 1.7 GHz based on much smaller ARM Cortex-A55 cores. Both clusters can also used together.

In addition to the 8 CPU cores, the SoC integrates a lower mid range Adreno 619 GPU, a X51 5G radio (up to 2.5 Gbits download, no mmWave), a 802.11ac (Wi-Fi 5, 8x8 sounding, Dual Band, 2x2), a Bluetooth 5.2 radio, satellite positioning (GPS, QZSS, GLONASS, SBAS, Beidou and Galileo) and a video engine (support for H.265, H.264, VP8 and VP9).

Compared to the previous SD690, the SD695 is now manufactured in 6nm (instead of 8nm) and offers a higher clocked performance cluster. However, the SD695 only supports Wi-Fi 5 instead of Wi-Fi 6 of the SD690.

Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G

► remove from comparison Qualcomm SD 778G+ 5G

The Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G (SDM778G Plus 5G Mobile Platform) is a fast mid-range ARM-based SoC largely found on Android tablets and smartphones. It integrates eight cores (octa-core) divided into two clusters. A fast performance cluster with four cores based on the ARM Cortex-A78 architecture with up to 2.5 GHz and a power efficiency cluster with four small ARM Cortex-A55 cores at up to 1.9 GHz. Depending on the workload only single clusters or all cores can run at different clock speeds. Compared to the older non-plus variant, the 778G+ offers 100 MHz higher clocked CPU cores.

Thanks to the new Cortex-A78 cores, the CPU performance increases by up to 40% compared to the old Snapdragon 768G according to Qualcomm. In our benchmarks, the 778G+ is able to reach the performance of the old high end chip Kirin 990

The integrated X53 5G modem supports up to 3.3 Gbps with sub 6Ghz. The FastConnect 6900 Wi-Fi modem supports the current Wi-Fi 6e standard with 6GHz.

The integrated Qualcomm Adreno 642L offers a 40% higher performance compared to the old Adreno 620 in the predecessor. This is partly thanks to the fast memory controller with LPDDR5-3200 support.

The integrated 6th gen AI engine called Hexagon 770 offers a 2x improvement and up to 12 TOPS of performance. The Spectra 570 ISP (image signal processor) supports up to three cameras. The satellite system supports all major standards like Beidou, Galileo, GLONASS and GPS.

The G specifies an optimized SoC for gaming and e.g. Qualcomm offers updates for the graphics driver.

The Snapdragon 778G Plus is manufactured in the modern 6 nm process at TSMC (vs the 5LPE of the 780G).

ModelQualcomm Snapdragon 695 5GQualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G
SeriesQualcomm SnapdragonQualcomm Snapdragon
CodenameKryo 660 Gold (Cortex-A77) / Silver (Cortex-A55)Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)
Clock1700 - 2200 MHz1900 - 2500 MHz
Cores / Threads8 / 88 / 8
Technology6 nm6 nm
FeaturesAdreno 619 GPU, X51 5G Modem, Hexagon 692 DSP, Spectra 355L ISP, FastConnect 6200 (Wi-Fi 5)Adreno 642L GPU, X53 5G Modem, Hexagon 770 DSP, Spectra 570L ISP, Wi-Fi 6E
iGPUQualcomm Adreno 619Qualcomm Adreno 642L
ArchitectureARMARM
Announced
ManufacturerQualcomm Snapdragon SD 695 5GQualcomm Snapdragon SD 778G+ 5G
Series: Snapdragon Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 780G 5G compare1.9 - 2.4 GHz8 / 8 cores Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G « 1.9 - 2.5 GHz8 / 8 cores Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 5G compare1.8 - 2.4 GHz8 / 8 cores Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)
Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G 4G compare1.8 - 2.4 GHz8 / 8 cores Kryo 670 (Cortex-A78/A55)

Benchmarks

min: 4518     avg: 4659     median: 4547 (57%)     max: 4912 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Sling Shot (ES 3.0) Unlimited Physics
min: 3170     avg: 3432     median: 3463 (49%)     max: 3562 Points
4732 Points (67%)
min: 813     avg: 821     median: 824 (36%)     max: 826 Points
min: 2872     avg: 2933     median: 2929 (10%)     max: 2998 Points
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Single-Core
min: 3057     avg: 3172     median: 3209 (33%)     max: 3249 Points
min: 3758     avg: 3760     median: 3760 (39%)     max: 3762 Points
Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 - Geekbench 4.1 - 4.4 64 Bit Multi-Core
min: 6998     avg: 7780     median: 8040 (9%)     max: 8302 Points
min: 11089     avg: 11342     median: 11342 (13%)     max: 11595 Points
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Single-Core
3162 Points (49%)
min: 3632     avg: 3641     median: 3640.5 (56%)     max: 3649 Points
Geekbench 4.0 - Geekbench 4.0 64 Bit Multi-Core
7773 Points (19%)
min: 10488     avg: 10675     median: 10674.5 (26%)     max: 10861 Points
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Multi-Core
6758 Points (11%)
min: 10323     avg: 11834     median: 11833.5 (19%)     max: 13344 Points
Geekbench 3 - Geekbench 3 64 Bit Single-Core
2415 Points (36%)
min: 2966     avg: 3441     median: 3440.5 (52%)     max: 3915 Points
Mozilla Kraken 1.1 - Kraken 1.1 Total Score *
min: 1501.9     avg: 1975     median: 1980.3 (2%)     max: 2501.3 ms
min: 1236.1     avg: 1456     median: 1335 (2%)     max: 1796.1 ms
Octane V2 - Octane V2 Total Score
min: 17849     avg: 21915     median: 21723 (22%)     max: 27593 Points
min: 24488     avg: 29797     median: 32109 (33%)     max: 32794 Points
WebXPRT 4 - WebXPRT 4 Score
min: 58     avg: 62.7     median: 61 (19%)     max: 75 Points
min: 69     avg: 85     median: 93 (29%)     max: 93 Points
WebXPRT 3 - WebXPRT 3 Score
min: 75     avg: 89.6     median: 88 (22%)     max: 112 Points
min: 102     avg: 115     median: 116 (29%)     max: 127 Points
Antutu v9 - AnTuTu v9 Total Score
min: 344344     avg: 388907     median: 392404 (28%)     max: 409358 Points
min: 553328     avg: 564791     median: 558781 (39%)     max: 582264 Points
min: 138027     avg: 154764     median: 162368 (54%)     max: 163897 Points
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile V1 CPU Tests
4737 Points (1%)
min: 6225     avg: 6514     median: 6514 (1%)     max: 6803 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Storage 2.0 score
min: 13482     avg: 17018     median: 16542.5 (32%)     max: 22328 Points
min: 30076     avg: 30829     median: 30828.5 (60%)     max: 31581 Points
min: 11662     avg: 13225     median: 12820 (67%)     max: 15194 Points
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Computer Vision
6971 Points (37%)
PCMark for Android - PCM f. Android Work Score 2.0
11690 Points (76%)
min: 730     avg: 741     median: 732 (28%)     max: 760 Points
min: 4.05     avg: 4.6     median: 4.4 (20%)     max: 5.36 Watt
min: 0     avg: 0.9     median: 1.1 (3%)     max: 1.58 Watt

Average Benchmarks Qualcomm Snapdragon 695 5G → 100% n=20

Average Benchmarks Qualcomm Snapdragon 778G+ 5G → 138% n=20

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2023, 2022
v1.22
log 29. 00:13:45

#0 checking url part for id 14148 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 14526 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Wed, 25 Jan 2023 08:57:11 +0100 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#4 composed specs +0.02s ... 0.021s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.021s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 14148 +0.002s ... 0.022s

#7 got single benchmarks 14148 +0.029s ... 0.051s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 14526 +0.002s ... 0.053s

#9 got single benchmarks 14526 +0.008s ... 0.061s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.061s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.07s ... 0.131s

#12 return log +0.022s ... 0.153s

Please share our article, every link counts!
.170
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)