Am I the only one who sees the clear issue here? Single core performance effects multi core performance as well. If you increase your CPU with great single core performances, it will reflect on the multithreaded performance. Exynos chips have 4 efficiency and 4 performance cores. So supposing SC perf improved 2x on just the 4 perf cores, that should increase multithreaded performance by at least 50% overall (even more so, seeing as the efficency cores, are noticably weaker/smaller). We should also assume their efficiency cores have improved, which clearly puts multithreaded performance even higher. There's of course the possibility that they have decreased the amount of cores, or reduced the size of their efficiency cores compared to the performance ones. Apple manages to have such a fantastic single core performance because of their massive performance cores. Surely, Samsung can't match their performance with 4 performance cores?
In any case, it' highly unlikely SC has improved 2x. Such an increase is unprecedented in the mobile world (the A7, which was a massive innovation, improved perf by 70-80%), and Samsung would market the shit out of it. Not write a single, modest line about it on their site.
If it actually turns out to be true that the Exynos 9810 has improved by 80-100%, i'd hate to be a US costumer with Snapdragon S9's. Because then it would obliterate the Snapdragon 845 in performance by 70-80%.Their current Mali GPU have already surpassed Snapdragon's Adreno solutions in performance.
I wouldn't be surprised if they boosted single core performance close to 2x in geekbench. I also wouldn't be surprised to find out that the various ARM SOC vendors are now optimising their designs around getting high geek bench scores at the expense of actual performance. They'd almost be insane not to when this single metric has somehow become the defacto benchmark of processor performance. Imagine what would inevitably happen if the GPU-buying market assessed the speed of GPUs almost entirely based on their 3DMark scores. GPUs would get very good at 3DMark in very short order.
We desperately need a wider variety of benchmarks for mobile that reliably isolate processor performance.
Lol, what are you smoking? Geekbench is very representative of actual performance. Also, there's various other CPU tests being used on other sites as well. You also discredit 3DMark, even though even that is very representative of actual performance: take a look at how various GPUs rate in 3DMark compared to gaming benchmarks. The differences are similiar.
But in the end it's not about raw performance, but good software. Which is why the Pixel 2, despite having a chip that has half the SC of the A11, provides just as fast of an experience as the iPhone X, and a smoother experience than iOS overall.