FR- Home page
-
Smartphone - Comparison
Xiaomi Poco F4 GT vs Samsung Galaxy S5 (octa-core)
Comparison of the technical features between smartphones, with the Xiaomi Poco F4 GT on one side and the Samsung Galaxy S5 (octa-core) on the other. The first has a processor with 8 cores, 8 threads, a maximale frequency of 3.0GHz. The second chips has a total of 8 cores, 8 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 2.1GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the amount of RAM memory, the date of first broadcast, the values obtained in Geekbench 4.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specifications:
| Smartphone | Xiaomi Poco F4 GT | Samsung Galaxy S5 (octa-core) | ||||||
| Model version(s) | 21121210G, 21121210I |
Samsung SM-G900H |
||||||
| Release date | Q3 2021 | Q2 2014 | ||||||
| Network | 5G, GSM, HSPA, LTE | GSM, HSPA | ||||||
| Dimensions | 6,40 x 3,02 x 0,33 in | 5,59 x 2,85 x 0,32 in | ||||||
| Weight | 7.41 oz | 5.11 oz | ||||||
| Body | Front and back glass, aluminum frame |
Plastic body | ||||||
| Screen size, colours | 6.7 inches, 800 nits, 1B colours | 5.1 inches, 16M colours | ||||||
| Screen type | AMOLED, 120Hz | Super AMOLED | ||||||
| Resolution | 1080 x 2400 pixels | 1080 x 1920 pixels | ||||||
| Screen ratio | 20:9 | 16:9 | ||||||
| Density | 395 ppi | 432 ppi | ||||||
| Operating system | Android 12; MIUI 13 | Android 4.4.2 | ||||||
| Processor | Qualcomm SM8450 Snapdragon 8 Gen 1 | Samsung Exynos 5 Octa 5422 | ||||||
| Lithography | 4 nm 4LPE | 28 nm HKMG | ||||||
| Cores | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Threads | 8 | 8 | ||||||
| Energy cores | 4x Qualcomm Kryo Silver @ 1.80 GHz |
4x ARM Cortex-A7 @ 1.5 GHz |
||||||
| High performance cores | 1x Qualcomm Kryo Prime @ 3.0 GHz, 3x Qualcomm Kryo Gold @ 2.5 GHz |
4x ARM Cortex-A15 @ 2.1 GHz |
||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | Qualcomm Adreno 730 | ARM Mali-T628 MP6 | ||||||
| GPU execution units | 3 | 6 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | 768 | 96 | ||||||
| GPU clock | 818 MHz | 533 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | 2,764.8 GFLOPS | 102.4 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Memory | 8 / 12 GB RAM | 2 GB RAM | ||||||
| Storage | 128 / 256 GB | 16 / 32 GB | ||||||
| Memory card | - | Up to 256 GB | ||||||
| Photo | 64 MP, f/1,9, 26mm, 8 MP, f/2,2, 2 MP, f/2,4 |
16 MP, 1/2,6" |
||||||
| Video | 4K@30/60fps, 1080p@30/60/120fps, 720p@960fps |
4K@30fps, 1080p@60fps |
||||||
| Front photo | 20 MP, f/2,4 |
2 MP |
||||||
| Front video | 1080p@30/60fps, 720p@120fps |
1080p@30fps |
||||||
| WLAN | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac/6 | Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac | ||||||
| Bluetooth | 5.2, A2DP, LE | 4.0, A2DP, LE | ||||||
| USB | USB Type-C 2.0 | microUSB 3.0 | ||||||
| Battery capacity | 4,700 mAh | 2,800 mAh | ||||||
| Battery type | Non removable Li-Po | Non removable Li-Ion | ||||||
| Battery life (versatile use) | ~ 13 hours and 50 minutes | ~ 11 hours | ||||||
| TDP | - | 6 W | ||||||
| Head SAR | - | - | ||||||
| Body SAR | - | - | ||||||
| AnTuTu | 968,376 | 28,571 | ||||||
| Android PassMark Rating | 13,693 | 1,023 | ||||||
| Amazon |  |
|
||||||
| eBay |  |
|
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can easily compare the technical characteristics between these two smartphones. Both phones have an equivalent number of cores, the maximum frequency of Xiaomi Poco F4 GT is greater. The Xiaomi Poco F4 GT has a newer release date.
Autonomy: the autonomy given is the one for a versatile use with video playback, web browsing, various applications, games, photos, etc ...
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
Performances :
Performance comparison between the two smartphones, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark softwares such as Geekbench 4.
| AnTuTu - Total score | |
|---|---|
Xiaomi Poco F4 GT |
968,376 |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 (octa-core) |
28,571 |
The difference is 3289%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
AnTuTu is one of the most popular apps in the world to evaluate and compare the power of a mobile device with the competition. It tests above all the power of calculation, the display of Web pages, the modeling of decorations in 3D, the management of the memory, the transfer of data.
| Android PassMark Rating | |
|---|---|
| Xiaomi Poco F4 GT |
13,693 |
| Samsung Galaxy S5 (octa-core) |
1,023 |
The difference in performance is 1239%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these smartphones, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
Disclaimer:
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
This page includes affiliate links for which the administrator of GadgetVersus may earn a commission at no extra cost to you should you make a purchase. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad.
Information:
We do not assume any responsibility for the data displayed on our website. Please use at your own risk. Some or all of this data may be out of date or incomplete, please refer to the technical page on the respective manufacturer's website to find the latest up-to-date information regarding the specifics of these products.