http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/for...ion-samsungs-implementation-of-arm-cortex-a9/
^^^^^^
I'm sick of hearing people cry omg Tegra2 awesome. NO. It's great, but it's not going to make the Hummingbird obsolete. The Hummingbird has a better GPU. Balance it out and you get unnoticeable performance gains from a Tegra2. Not to mention the Tegra2 phones are coming out with Froyo which simply put doesn't have dual core optimizations, so in the end, it might even be SLOWER than the Nexus S.
What you should be waiting for is the Snapdragon and OMAP dual cores as well as the Orion. But these won't be out for a while, so why not get the Nexus S?
It's either or in this case. Don't choose a Tegra2 phone because it's a Tegra2. Choose it because it is the right phone you want, that will get upgades when you want, and is on the right carrier you want. Get a Tegra2 or a Hummingbird, that's all I have to say. They're about equal.
Just sick of the overpraise that the Tegra2 gets when we already have that power in the Nexus S.
NVIDIA - they went from ARM11 (Tegra 1) to Cortex A9 (Tegra 2), skipping Cortex A8 design altogether. Tegra 2's CPU core will be competitive but its GPU appears to be weaker than even PowerVR SGX540. Heck, even Qualcomm's Adreno 205 may outperform this GPU. On the plus side, Tegra 2 is already available on the market NOW, and smartphones based on Tegra 2 will appear during Q4 of 2010. (Read this article for more details on Tegra 2). Samsung, LG and Motorola have announced their intention of producing phones based on Tegra 2 so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Power SGX540 = Hummingbird.
By no means am I saying to not get a Tegra2. All I'm saying is to not avoid the Hummingbird because you think the Tegra2 is that much better or something.
Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
If you're that desperate for a Tegra branded chip, hang onto your Nexus S until next Christmas and go for a quad core Tegra 3...
Jayrod1980 said:
Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THANK YOU, WELL SAID...I was explaining this to someone the other day and it just wasnt making sense to them for som reason
Well you have the right spirit but little miss informed. What you fail to see is it has dual die so 2 proc thread can run each at 1ghz compared to 1 die 1ghz. I love how Samsung folks always has to bring the GPU in it whats your point? SGX540 is slightly by very small margin wins against Adreno 205. So does that mean NS can hold its ground with MT4G it has better GPU following your argument? No why due to higher memory that is allocated at faster speed.
But I myself would be waiting for Qualcomm to deploy dualcore for me thats when its serious business. Far as Samsung device goes it is already obsolete this is not rant of any from if you want to be head in the Tech world then you better have money for the changes which you will be required every 4-6months.
Jayrod1980 said:
Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong, I love my Nexus S. Having had an Epic and an Evo I can easily say this is the most powerful phone I've ever owned; a fact that the people in the epic IRC like to try and dispute as we've established a stable 1.5GHz OC and they've never gone over 1.2GHz.
I love the graphics power it possesses and I definitely love that my friends with iPhones get jealous of how gorgeous the screen is and how blazingly fast the phone runs, even bone stock. However, I do have a few qualms:
I remember when the Nexus one came out. I still had a dumbphone but I had started looking at phones to get and then I found the Nexus One. It was by and large the most powerful phone on the market, nothing else even came close. Being on T-Mobile had given me access to the HTC Dream (G1) and the HTC Magic (MyTouch 3G) and neither of those phones were even close to what the Nexus One could do. Sadly, I was on a family plan and I couldn't afford to buy it off contract so I settled for a MT3G.
The memory of it faded and I had a chance to get off of my Family Plan on T-Mobile and join my wife on Sprint (who were going to be getting the Epic 4G) so I did it. Of course, it was a massive upgrade from my MT3G but I never particularly liked it. Eventually, I traded my Epic for an Evo and it was great. Not as fast or as powerful but I still quite enjoyed it. Then again, I had a chance to leave Sprint (I'd been very unhappy with them from the start) so I went back to T-Mobile and having read a little about the Nexus S I decided to buy one for both myself and my wife.
Again, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love it and so does my wife, but really when it comes down to brass tacks the Nexus S is pretty much a Vibrant without TouchWiz and with a NFC chip and a LED flash. The 'WOW' factor I had with the original Nexus just isn't there.
Is there anything wrong with the Hummingbird chip? Absolutely not. Its the most powerful processor in any phone on the market in the US without a doubt. But the Nexus line, to me, should be the pinnacle of Android performance. It should be the shining example of what the platform can do and where its going (like the Nexus One did with the Snapdragon and its eventual acceptance into most high-performance phones) and not feel like a re-badged five month old phone even if that phone is one of the best on the market. Had Samsung held off a little bit and made the Nexus S a dual-core phone I think it would easily usurp the Motorola Atrix from its lofty throne but as it stands it feels (and seems to be selling) like an afterthought.
Now, I'm still on the fence about these Tegra2 phones. Of course the gadget-whore in me wants to run out and buy one but the sensible part of me wants to see how they run and see how badly they eat battery life (as I'm sure no one can dispute they will). Will I eventually get one? Its more than likely, but I can't say when as I'm pretty happy with the Nexus S and I really like that updates are pushed out from Google and not a carrier or a manufacturer focused on selling more new handsets and less on supporting the ones they've already sold. Only time will tell.
That's just my two cents though.
I typically buy every new phone that comes out to try them and see if I liked it more them my blackberry bold 9700.. I would always end up selling them on ebay bc I didn't find much to love about them (i.e.- g2, vibrant, mt3g, g1 etc), after buying the nexus s, I was hooked. I had a nexus 1 for about two months and then sold that. It cracks me up to hear all the people already downing this nexus s. this phone is solid. I won't be switching to another phone unless it is pure google, no sense or touch whiz, and accompanies higher data speeds. A dual core would be nice , but until that happens, my nexus s is what I'm sticking with!
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
The simple fact is Tegra 2 and the Hummingbird wont stand a chance against Qualcomms dual core processors. Android at this point in time is more optimised for Qualcomm and being an owner of the Desire HD and Nexus S i can tell you the desire HD is much smoother even with its HTC Sense bloatware. But i can't stand waiting for updates so i gave it to my sister. But my advice would be don't get any Tegra 2 devices and just wait for the big guns (qualcomm)!
nice GPU is nice, but GPU is mostly for games......for kids....you kids wanna play some games, get yourself an xbox or some ****....
bratfink said:
The simple fact is Tegra 2 and the Hummingbird wont stand a chance against Qualcomms dual core processors. Android at this point in time is more optimised for Qualcomm and being an owner of the Desire HD and Nexus S i can tell you the desire HD is much smoother even with its HTC Sense bloatware. But i can't stand waiting for updates so i gave it to my sister. But my advice would be don't get any Tegra 2 devices and just wait for the big guns (qualcomm)!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, as when Qualcomm drops it thats when you know its serious business. Terga2 for the time being will hold the crown and make no mistake Hummingbird does not stand a chance against it.
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
LOL?
shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait? The hummingbird has always been faster cpu at the same Mz then a Qualcomm? Lets think about where your getting that idea..
The Hummingbird deffinitly outperforms the Nexus 1, Htc Desire etc etc which btw are all 1st gen yet i agree have the same 1Ghz clock speed. But still in cpu extensive tasks the 1st gen qualcomms are still not that far behind. Looking at the 2nd gen qualcomms however such as the HTC Desire HD we see the cpu out performing the Hummingbird and only been let down my an extremely marginal difference in the GPU performance. So forget about spec sheets and look at real world usage. Grab yourself a HTC Desire HD with a gingerbread rom (what i had) and a Nexus S and see for your self which wins. Im sorry but Samsung are ****, Google is the only good thing about the Nexus S, but thats good enough for me.
shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
honestly i always thought that the first gen snapdragon, such as the nexus one, outperformed the current hummingbird CPU in a lot of certain types of computational tasks/tests. cpu vs cpu, its very close, the hummingbird doesnt have that much of an advantage. it does have a much better GPU, which is where it shines.
so i'd imagine if the first gen snapdragon is nearly matching current hummingbird, then imagine what second gen snapdragon dual core, smaller die, will do. (i understand hummingbird dual will also come out, but just saying it will still be close).
RogerPodacter said:
honestly i always thought that the first gen snapdragon, such as the nexus one, outperformed the current hummingbird CPU in a lot of certain types of computational tasks/tests. cpu vs cpu, its very close, the hummingbird doesnt have that much of an advantage. it does have a much better GPU, which is where it shines.
so i'd imagine if the first gen snapdragon is nearly matching current hummingbird, then imagine what second gen snapdragon dual core, smaller die, will do. (i understand hummingbird dual will also come out, but just saying it will still be close).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second-gen snapdragon is the processor in the G2 and the Evo Shift 4G, isn't it?
shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, to expand upon this, the Orion will have a Cortex A9 which actually has "the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks," along with more features not found in the Snapdragon.
To be more specific, the Snapdragon has elements of speculative execution with branch prediction, which is most important area in which it differs from the Cortex A8 reference design. This causes its floating point performance (very important in 3D calculations) to be very high. Unfortunately for Qualcomm, though, even the Adreno 205 falls short in terms of performance. Thus, even though the Scorpion CPU core in the Snapdragon is better at 3D than the Hummingbird's Cortex A8, the Snapdragon's GPU is so castrated that it's much slower in games overall. As a side note, the Cortex A8 in the Hummingbird actually has 2 times the L2 cache compared to the reference A8 design.
The Cortex A9 in the Tegra 2, on the other hand, supports full out of order execution (in addition to speculative execution and branch prediction found in the Snapdragon's Scorpion CPU core). This yields roughly 25% higher IPC compared to the Cortex A8, which is why the CPU section of Tegra 2 benchmarks seem to be roughly that much faster than our Hummingbird. Benchmarks have been mixed for its GPU, as I pointed out here, though that could have been due to a higher screen resolution or immature drivers.
Bottom line is that while the CPU will be ~25% better per clock cycle than our Cortex A8 (when only using one core), its GPU is roughly on the same level--sometimes performing better, sometimes worse. Another thing to remember is that since the Hummingbird uses a PowerVR architecture, it is tile-based deferred rendering. This basically means that fillrate and memory bandwidth are much less of an issue than they are in traditional rendering methods.
What will differentiate Tegra 2 though (in my humble opinion) is software tailored for its strengths, which is what Tegra Zone will likely bring. Sure the Hummingbird's fast, and perhaps even better for GPU rendering, but the code optimized for the Tegra 2's GPU may perform better on a Tegra 2 than on our possibly-faster SGX 540.
Relax, just wait until all that Tegra 2 phones released.
Certainly there will be some reviews, comparisons, benchmarks, etc.
In the mean time, enjoy your Nexus S. It is fast enough for current apps that are available You don't need dual core to run Angry Birds
Then we can wait the next Nexus 3 !
kolyan said:
nice GPU is nice, but GPU is mostly for games......for kids....you kids wanna play some games, get yourself an xbox or some ****....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Err what? GPU relates to the smoothness in transitions of the home screen, the smoothness of the browser, the smoothness of everything. It's not just about games good sir. Compare screen swiping with a live wallpaper on G2 vs Galaxy S on stock Launcher2 and prepare to see why GPU matters.
Or use a phone that doesn't even have a GPU. Like a Wildfire. Then throw it out the window.
Going further, you can't count Quadrant 3d scores on the Nexus S because it doesn't render properly due to Gingerbread incompatibility.
The other reason the Optimus 2x scores higher is the i/o part. If we do the same ext4 lagfix that is probably built into the 2x we get the same i/o as it, and about the same Quadrant, maybe a little lower due to the GPU not running properly ever on Quadrant with Gingerbread.
As for CPU, yes the Tegra2 will be better. It's an A9. However the differences will be subtle at best until the end of 2011 when things are optimized for the Tegra2, which by then both the Qualcomm and Orion god processors will be out.
As far as processing power between the Hummingbird and Snapdragon, it definitely is more powerful than the Nexus One's processor, and GPU knocks it off it's feet.
As for the 2nd gen Snapdragon vs Hummingbird, they're probably about equal processors. The GPU gives the Hummingbird the edge and you will notice it if you take a Live wallpaper and compare Launcher2.apk screen swipes on a G2 vs Nexus S. It is very nudgy on the G2, but smooth on Nexus S.
What causes the Snap Dragon to score so high in Linpack for instance is the FPU aka float processing unit which isn't really worth caring about when it comes to every day tasks.
But yes, the Tegra2 will definitely be a bit more powerful than the Hummingbird. But it won't be tons tons tons rapejob over 9000. This is why Google released the Nexus S with the Hummingbird without second thought.
kenvan19 said:
The second-gen snapdragon is the processor in the G2 and the Evo Shift 4G, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well yes, i was referring to the original snapdragon in the nexus one. i think the snapdragon in the G2 and evo shift is just the same snapdragon CPU with an improved GPU. so there's kinda 2 separate topics, CPU vs CPU, and then the GPU vs GPU. i believe the hummingbird and snapdragon CPU vs CPU is rather close, sometimes the snapdragon beats it, sometimes the hummingbird does. then add in the GPU, i believe the hummingbird GPU is better than the new snapddragon adreno. not sure by how much though.
but an example of why it's important for the GPU to actually be taken advantage of in code, the nexus s web browser doesnt seem to be using the GPU properly, so relying soley on CPU vs CPU, we see the nexus one perform BETTER on some types of web pages as the snapdragon seems to be either coded properly, or it is just better for those certain types of tasks. basically my opinion is snapdragon is a better CPU, but the hummingbird has the better GPU.
Edited... I was ranting very off topic
The Nexus S really looks great, but I have doubts if I should really buy it when it's available in Germany/Austria or Switzerland...
The point is I start studying software development in the autumn 2011 and can't afford a new phone each year and would use the phone for about 2 years.
So my question is:
Will I have fun with this phone (as a developer) for the following 2 years or should I buy a more powerful phone?
Note: Currently I have a Nokia 5800 and I definitely want a new one because the bugs are annoying even with ported C6-Firmware it is not really satisfying...
thanks you very much!
Related
So we all remember when dual core CPUs for computers first became mainstream back in about 2004… Everyone had to have one but almost no software was written to use them. So it was almost all bragging rights and no real world performance. Then 1 to 2 years later when software did come out that could take advantage of multiple cores those first dual cores CPUs were obsolete and a joke.
Will the same thing be true with dual core phones or will they be useful right away? Can Android currently utilize dual cores?
And this is not a guy with a single core phone trying to feel better about it. I have an old droid 1 and am ready to buy a new phone now; I am all but set to wait for the Bionic but I'm questioning if the dual core will really mean that much when it’s out.
Theres absolutely no advantage. they're nothing more but a placebo effect and all of the hundreds of benchmarks showing the brute strength of dual cores are fake. you're better off buying a first gen snapdragon like the toshiba tg01, xperia x10, nexus one, etc., or sticking with your droid pro. don't buy into the hype. id say wait until we have an octa-core THEN it'll be worth it.
HawkStream said:
So we all remember when dual core CPUs for computers first became mainstream back in about 2004… Everyone had to have one but almost no software was written to use them. So it was almost all bragging rights and no real world performance. Then 1 to 2 years later when software did come out that could take advantage of multiple cores those first dual cores CPUs were obsolete and a joke.
Will the same thing be true with dual core phones or will they be useful right away? Can Android currently utilize dual cores?
And this is not a guy with a single core phone trying to feel better about it. I have an old droid 1 and am ready to buy a new phone now; I am all but set to wait for the Bionic but I'm questioning if the dual core will really mean that much when it’s out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As of right now, only in some small circumstance with certain games. I say wait until Android is really ready to utilize dual core and for second gen hardware. Right now it's mostly hype and bragging rights....
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.
Hmm. I want the Incredible 2!
Um, hate to break it to you, but Android is multi core optimized in the first place, so dual cores will have a pretty major impact on the flow and operation of the OS itself.
op has a very good point.
Goodthing I can be content with my HD2 for a few years.
IMO it's really for the games, and I'd rather play hi def games on my computer at home.
sonsofblades said:
Um, hate to break it to you, but Android is multi core optimized in the first place, so dual cores will have a pretty major impact on the flow and operation of the OS itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. True. But as of now no apps (with the exception of the Tegra Zone (whatever) none are taking advantage. It really still is only bragging rights. Maybe in the next
year when everyone else catches up.
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.
wattttttttt
Android 3.0, the kernel itself lacks true understanding of both cores. It can see them, and code can be launched to either available CPU thread, but it is as yet not managing those threads, and the queue manager launches ALL applications to core 1 regardless of its load. It manages threads on core 1 just fine, but it does not manage core 2. (This explains my point perfectly quote from a poster on ars technica)
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.
lude219 said:
Theres absolutely no advantage. they're nothing more but a placebo effect and all of the hundreds of benchmarks showing the brute strength of dual cores are fake. you're better off buying a first gen snapdragon like the toshiba tg01, xperia x10, nexus one, etc., or sticking with your droid pro. don't buy into the hype. id say wait until we have an octa-core THEN it'll be worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you might be right
* pats his thunderbolt* meh I'm perfectly satisfied with this one.
Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt.
Well,there is much more to dual-core chipsets than just the CPU itself.Much more powerful GPUs,faster or dual-channel memories(RAM),larger RAM,usually a BETTER CPU(Not mentioning the second core,rather the fact that the cores themselves are evolutions of the single core ones) and the list can go on.Don't just hear only about the two CPU cores,that's a small piece of the mosaic.
http://nena.se/nenamark/view?version=2
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_sensation-review-605p4.php
nraudigy2 said:
http://nena.se/nenamark/view?version=2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talk about troll
tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who cares? All of our phones will be obsolete by the end of the year anyways
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
tomeu0000 said:
who cares? SGSII stills faster... and G2X it's just 5FPS under...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SGS II is faster due to the lower resolution. learn the facts before commenting.
xamadeix said:
SGS II is faster due to the lower resolution. learn the facts before commenting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope, the resolution isnt the finally factor, ( Tegra 2 is powerfull than adreno220 in benchmarks, but Atrix with qHD resolution scores like the sensation, so Adreno220 isnt more powerfull ) just watch CF-Bench, Vellamo bench and other bench, SGSII still superior, in CPU and GPU.
And that % more resolution, will take about 10FPS, max 15 FPS so if at 800x480 Adreno220 stills not more powerfull.
i have a sensation, but for now SGSII is more powerfull.
With optimization maybe, but on default definetly NOT.
Excuse my bad english.
tomeu0000 said:
Nope, the resolution isnt the finally factor, ( Tegra 2 is powerfull than adreno220 in benchmarks, but Atrix with qHD resolution scores like the sensation, so Adreno220 isnt more powerfull ) just watch CF-Bench, Vellamo bench and other bench, SGSII still superior, in CPU and GPU.
And that % more resolution, will take about 10FPS, max 15 FPS so if at 800x480 Adreno220 stills not more powerfull.
i have a sensation, but for now SGSII is more powerfull.
With optimization maybe, but on default definetly NOT.
Excuse my bad english.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 220 is much better than Ad 205..But sometimes even my dhd is MUCH faster than Sensation..I believe it is the optimization's difference..With the optimization we can have ad 220's best performance..I believe at that time ad 220 will be better than optimized SG2
missing2 said:
Who cares? All of our phones will be obsolete by the end of the year anyways
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, 6 months from now it will be quad core phones, and really, do you care if it takes you 1.275ms longer to type in a phone number on one phone over another?
Seriously guys, get a frikin life, you buy the phone you prefer, everyone's preference is different.... and that's that.
Think of it like this.. A girl will go out with the guy she prefers. Highly unlikely that she will get you to flop it out and make a decision on the millimeter difference here and there.
Moreover, she won't be arguing with other girls on a forum about it either.
.... GET. OVER. IT.
GET. A. LIFE.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710a (S-ON GRRRR!) using XDA Premium App
This pretty much sums it up...
http://www.gsmarena.com/htc_sensation-review-605p4.php
artymarty said:
True, 6 months from now it will be quad core phones, and really, do you care if it takes you 1.275ms longer to type in a phone number on one phone over another?
Seriously guys, get a frikin life, you buy the phone you prefer, everyone's preference is different.... and that's that.
Think of it like this.. A girl will go out with the guy she prefers. Highly unlikely that she will get you to flop it out and make a decision on the millimeter difference here and there.
Moreover, she won't be arguing with other girls on a forum about it either.
.... GET. OVER. IT.
GET. A. LIFE.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710a (S-ON GRRRR!) using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who would want a quadcore phone? @[email protected] I mean, no application in a mobile requires that kind of processor. even a 800mhz processor can process most of the apps now. and besides, who would think of developing an app that would require quadcore? @[email protected]
I'm excited for our phones to be cracked open. I think that is when we will really start to see what they can do. Numbers well dramatically increase.
Can't wait!
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
vitusdoom said:
Who would want a quadcore phone? @[email protected] I mean, no application in a mobile requires that kind of processor. even a 800mhz processor can process most of the apps now. and besides, who would think of developing an app that would require quadcore? @[email protected]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Some people would still buy it even if it is overkill. I can't imagine why quad core would be needed in a phone but I think it doesn't stop there.
brusko1972 said:
Some people would still buy it even if it is overkill. I can't imagine why quad core would be needed in a phone but I think it doesn't stop there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For gaming purposes I suppose. 30% of all gaming takes place via smartphones so it's a ripe market for developers. Quadcore devices would pretty much put devices on par with console systems.
People would buy a quad core phone (such as I) the same reason why some people get sports car. Are sports car absolutely needed for everyday driving? Most of the time, I would highly doubt it, but it sure is nice as hell to have, no?
twomix9900 said:
People would buy a quad core phone (such as I) the same reason why some people get sports car. Are sports car absolutely needed for everyday driving? Most of the time, I would highly doubt it, but it sure is nice as hell to have, no?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not the correct question. lol. you didn't get it.
question is, why would people buy a sports car when in the case he only knows how to drive a bike.
Well, surely, quadcores are great. and mentioned above, games needs it. looking at games today, most of them are not that resource consuming at all. just needs a decent graphic emulator. not processor. you definitely don't understand what a processor does. it only process the loading of a certain app. surely it does process during the game but you can measure the speed clearly during app loading. what does a game that loads up real fast but in the short run, it hangs up like hell? mind you guys, most of the games usually are just 10-25megabytes (most that i've seen) any single core processor can process that fast. should we say, its like 200mb of a game. single cores can process that. but when you say gaming, you should think about graphics first.
From what I have been reading... it will not only be quad core... but also we'll have speeds up to 2.5GHz. That's faster than my laptop
Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....
KingKuba13 said:
Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think most beanchmarks are utilizing these dual core CPU's properly. That goes for all of them. Not just the Sensations. I wouldn't trust any of these benches with dual core CPU's.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App
KingKuba13 said:
Too bad it loses in pretty much every other benchmark.
GS2 is teh suck, gets crushed in smartbench gaming...
But it's the fastest phone out there....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smartbench is weak stuff. Any 3D scene that is too weak will lower the score of GS2. For example it could do 300fps for Neocore benchmark app, but it has a 60fps limit so the app only reports 59fps for GS2, while another phone scores 80fps and yet GS2 has lower score. You just have to bench GS2 on strong benchmark apps like Nenamark2 and GLBenchmark2.
Understanding the current generation SoC and benchmark:
SoC stands for System on a Chip. But most of us care only about the CPU and GPU on it.
Snapdragon (all 3 iterations) used the same Scorpion CPU core, at different clockspeed. The one on the Sensation has two cores, both can run up to 1.2Ghz, so if a benchmark is single threaded and very CPU heavy, the latest Snapdragon can only be 20% faster than the first generation 1Ghz Snapdragon.
Qualcomm uses a custom design for the Scorpion. Roughly speaking, the performance of the Scorpion lies somewhere between Cortex A8 and A9. In general, SoC with dual core Cortex A9's like Exynos, Tegra 2, OMAP4 will be faster in CPU heavy apps and benchmark. Yet, the Scorpion is exceptionally good at FPU heavy task, so... if FPU matter for that app/benchmark, Scorpion could pull over.
GPU wise, this depends on resolution. Higher resolution means more pixel to generate and lower benchmark score, OTHER THINGS EQUAL. The GPU on the dual-core Snapdragon is as powerful as those on Exynos and OMAP4, with one winning in some benchmark and another winning in another. Due to different resolutions on different handsets, it's hard to tell, but they are among the same class. The Tegra 2, however, has a weaker GPU than the bunch mentioned above. This may come at a surprise to everyone consider Nvidia is a graphic card company and the chip is often being promoted as "most powerful". The truth is, the Tegra 2 was supposed to be released in mid 2010 but the market wasn't ready for dual-core phones back then. So the Tegra 2 got delayed for a year, and the design of Tegra 2 was set early. But that's also why Nvidia is almost ready to launch Kal-El/Tegra 3 whatever the next thing is, because the design of Tegra 2 was done long time ago.
So if a benchmark is graphically intensive, and doesn't depending too much on CPU, Snapdragon will be faster than Tegra 2, while Exynos will be the fastest (especially since there is no qHD Exynos device out there yet). On FPU heavy CPU bench, like Linpack, Snapdragon perform exceptionally well due to its CPU design. But with benchmarks that test a wider variety of CPU function, Cortex A9 equipped SoC will beat Snapdragon. And while Tegra 2 has a weaker GPU, it may perform better in some games..... because of Nvidia's "the way it meant to be played" program. Basically it's Nvidia way to fund developers to optimize the code for Nvidia's chips, and market their games. It is no uncommon to see games that are funded by Nvidia's TWIMTBP program run faster on Nvidia's card than on AMD's card.
But what does all the above mean? IT DOESN'T F***ING MATTER AT ALL. All the current dual-core SoCs are fast enough for everything you want to do on your phone. They are equally (not) future proof, and when the future comes that your current phone is too slow, the other current gen phones will be slow too. And honestly, these ARM based SoCs are evolving so fast that none of these SoCs is really future proof. Just pick the phone that feels right or you. IGNORE those stupid benchmark numbers, and pick the phone that physically appeal to you, and pick the phone that is less buggy, or has the best monitor (for you). And if you really care about benchmark numbers, get the GSII. It has the fastest ARM-based CPU right now, one of the fastest mobile GPUs, and a relatively lower resolution screen so that it dominates all benchmarks. It also has enough plastic to be a true successor to the GS I as the most plasticky Android phone, if that matters.
ive done so many benchmarks on htc sensation nd gs2..but i still find the gs2 win by a huge margin...but on the other hand..the anandtech benchmark on 1.5ghz msm 8660 showed that it beats all the other gpu's such as mali 400 with its adreno 220...but still y cant it cant beat up the gs2? what is the main reason for this?? and is the msm 8660 on cdma evo 3d is jus d same as 8260 except for cdma connectivity? or it has its differences?? will there b a better benchmark on msm8260 anywhere soon?? even the latest smartbench 2011 which supports dual cores also lists the 8260 at lower benchmark!!! sum1 plz explain,,,...and y msm 8660 is way powerfull than exynos though it shows low benchmarks??
The Exynos is IMO an overall better processor than any Qualcomms. The Exynos is a ARM Cortex-A9 processor while the Sensation's is from what I understand similar to ARM Cortex-A8 architecture. The only advantages the Sensation's processor has over the GS2's are on paper: the Adreno 220 GPU is supposedly better, and the Sensation has asynchronous cores, which the GS2 doesn't have. Otherwise, I don't really know what makes the Exynos better, and I also don't know what the difference is between the Sensation and Evo 3D units.
the 8660 is the CDMA version of the 8260
I don't put alot of stock into benchmarks, and very few are accurate because they can't truly read dual cores.
To the two noobs in post 1 and post 2
The Sensation processor really isnt inferior compared to the SGS2
Why do i say that, because your sensation at this moment in your time in your hand is probably ONLY using one core. the 2nd core will be in an idle state and only activate when you need it.
THE SGS2 no matter what u do, both cores will work together, even when your just looking at touchwiz you are using two cores, even with the screen off in your pocket your using two cores, there is no way to turn one off, thus consumes a little more battery.
With the sensation the 2nd core kicks in when you need the power. they do not work together. Currently if you are looking at the dev thread in the development section you will see the progress.
SImpler term
think of a turbocharger
SGS2 uses two turbos continuously,
Sensation uses one turbo but when it needs more power the 2nd turbo kicks in
I'm well aware that no one has really been able to push the Sensation's processor to what it's capable of. That said, I have done my research on the SGS2 and Sensation processors and still believe that the Exynos is superior to the Qualcomm. I am excited to see what the Sensation can do when we can explore its power, but I still think that it will fall a little short of the Exynos because of the similar to A8 vs. A9 architecture. My prediction is that once proper dual-core support comes for us, we will easily be able to get better performance than the SGS2 has stock, but when it comes to fully modded out Sensation vs. fully modded out SGS2, the SGS2 will still be faster.
To use another car analogy, it's like saying "my car isn't inferior" just because if you throw on some bolt-ons you will be able to get marginally better performance than a stock competitor. But, if both cars were to be fully modded (bolt-ons, FI'd, proper custom engine management, better rubber, etc.), the other car would pull ahead. Essentially, I think that the ultimate the SGS2 can achieve is greater than the ultimate that the Sensation can achieve (but it won't be by much once proper support comes out).
Exynos's A9 has shorter pipelines and is fully out of order and the Sensation's Adreno, despite being faster, has to render at a higher resolution.
Sure, the Qualcomm may win some synthetic benchmarks, but the A9 is still faster due to a better architecture. Same way how K8 was better than Netburst despite the latter having higher clocks, cache, etc, but its deep pipeline was ultimately one of its bigger flaws.
The A9 will always have a 20-25% performance benefit over the A8 if they are running at the same clock speed. The Scorpion architecture is based off of the A8, but it also has some A9 elements because there's so such thing as a dual-core A8 processor. The performance of the Scorpion is somewhere in between an A8 and an A9 because of this. The Exynos at its current state inside of the GSII is clocked at the same speed as the MSM8x60 inside of the Sensation and EVO 3D which is why it has a performance advantage. If it were clocked at 1.5 GHz, then the MSM8x60 would probably have the same type of performance, if not better.
Anand Tech said:
From a CPU standpoint, Apple has a performance advantage at the same clock speed, but Qualcomm runs its cores at a higher clock. NVIDIA claimed that the move to an out-of-order architecture in the A9 was good for a 20% increase in IPC. Qualcomm has a 20% clock speed advantage. In most situations I think it's safe to say that the A5 [ARM Cortex-A9] and the APQ8060 [dual-core Scorpion] have equally performing CPUs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope that helped.
thank u so much to all of u guys out here...!! nd from wat ive studies...as u all said the msm8660 in sensation nd evo 3d uses only 1 core and the 2nd strts oly wen needed thanks to the asynchronous architecture of the 8660..!! and the cpu nd gpu of sg2 is jus "ordinary" as compared to 8660 though it has a9 architecture...and 8660 isnt a a9 nor an a8..its different..it may resemble a8 but its different..i has the advantages of both a8 nd a9....check the anandtech review of 8660 along with the review of exynos side by side then u will know what really has the power...the latest optimus 3d's chipset matches to that of qualcomm with a great score in GLegypt.. thanks alot for all of u guys..
I really feel the benchmarks are pointless as they never relate to real world use. Who here could possibly use the CPU like the benchmark can?
After the 2.3.4 update, my phone is faster. The web browsing is twice as fast for me!
I eagerly await CM7 but really dont think it can improve my phone that much more. I am stock, rooted, S-OFF and use ADW EX along with Sense 3.0 FROZEN solid. My battery life (chichitec) is more than I need with moderate use. I like to charge my phone at night while I sleep, so if it lasts me until I am done for the day...GREAT!
At this point, when I look at the SGS2, I feel my phone works just as well but looks 100 times better!
I do feel that the Sensation CPU will wind up outperforming the SGS2 once it is used like it should be...
Matt
It doesnt matter if msm8260 is better than exynos or adreno 220 is better than mali 400, the only thing that matters is real life performance and Samsung optimized their devices better than htc. If only htc take the time to better optimized their drivers and such it would be a faster and better device than samsung. HTC already wins hands down when it comes to design and choice of materials,too bad they are too lazy to optimize for a more superior experience.
brusko1972 I agree with your point that Samsung hardware and software collaboration that makes Samsung efficient than HTC. HTC need to work on hardware and software match to improve their performance specially with power efficiency and distribution. HTC Sense UI is quite heavy and more power and hardware consuming where as Touchwiz is very light UI. That may be also the reasons for low benchmarking results.
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
MultiLockOn said:
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior. You also have to consider how many more pixels the gpu has to power on the iPad 3's display. While high res is nice, it takes more power to render it.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
speedyink said:
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 gpu is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
MultiLockOn said:
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
speedyink said:
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
lesp4ul said:
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kmow what you mean. Im extremely happy with my galaxy s2, I cant say I ever recall it lagging on me in any way whatsoever. Im not sure what makes the droid razr and galaxy nexus comparable to the s2. From what Ive read Omap processors tend to lag and consume battery, and the mali 400 is better than what either of those phones have. Id say its ICS but the razr still
Runs gingerbread
I was hoping for some more attention in here :/
I agree, omaps are battery hungry beast. Like my previous Optimus Black, man... i only got 12-14 hours with edge (1ghz UV smartass v2, also ****ty LG kernel haha). Same issue as my friend's Galaxy SL. I dunno if newer soc has a better behaviour.
Sent from my Nokia 6510 using PaperPlane™
Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Read the thread "Those of your who are waiting too compare GSIII to HTC One X" in this forum. It only has about 6 pages but has a ton of information. Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
shaboobla said:
Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes and no, the tegra 3 does have a better gpu so in theory, better games. however, game makers cater to the mass. most androids that are active are mid-range, android 2.2 or 2.3, have a resolution of 480x800, and last years (or older) processors. although most will be made to work on the t3 and s4, it will be compatibility issues, not optimization. nvidia will have a couple games "t3 only" but even those will be made to work on other phones. now that ics is cleaning up some of the splintering of apps, we'll see some better options on both fields.
in short, yes the t3 is a better gaming chip. but for the battery life, games available, and current bugs i would suggest the s4. i may change my mind when the refreshs come out q3-4, we'll see.
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct. However, most games are not optimized to utilize the Tegra to its fullest potential. That should change by the end of the year. The other point is that the S4 is just as good as the Tegra un terms of gaming performance. IMO, you should decide between these 2 processors by looking at the main area where the S4 truly has the advantage thus far, and that is battery life. So far, the battery life advantage goes to the S4. Just read the battery life threads in this forum and for the international X. It took a few updates to the Transformer Prime to start having pretty good battery life. The One X, will get better in that department with a couple more updates for battery optimization. The S4 starts with great battery life and will get even better in that department.
Sent from my HTC Vivid using XDA app
I say the snapdragon S4 is a better chip right now. The tegra 3 gpu is great and with the tegra zone games it really looks great. But he 4 cores CPU is really for heavy multitasking so you candivise the work between all four cores. They are A9 cores vs the custom qualcomm which is close to A15. It mans that for single threaded task and multi threaded task the snapdragon will whoop tegra 3' ass. Opening an app, scrolling through that app sect... also browser performance is slightly better on the qualcomm chip. Basically tegra 3 can do lots of things at the same time with decent speed vs the S4 chip which can do 1 or few more things at lighting speed.
The S4 is almost 2x faster than any other dual core out there. Anandtech did a few nice articles on the S4, including benchmarks vs tegra 3.
In real use, the S4 should be much better, because not all apps are multithreaded for 4 cores. The S4 completely kicks the Tegra 3's ass in singlethreaded benchmarks. I also expect the S4 to be better at power management, because it is made on 28nm node, instead of 40 nm, so its more compact and efficient.
About 23 I'd say
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
tehdef said:
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to add to that and to be fair, S4 is at around 7000 at antutu benchmark while tegra 3 is at around 10000. I still prefer the S4
Eh...
It wins in 1 benchmark specifically enabled to take advantage of more than 2 cores. So if you want to play tegrazone games and have some basic lag, the T3 is for you. If you want to have a near flawless phone experience, and have decreased graphical performance in some wanna be console games, then the S4 is the way to go.
Actually you wont really notice the lack of graphics performance on the snapdragon s4. Its about 10% slower in most benchmarks but outperforms the tegra3 in a few as well. However i have a sensation xl with the adreno 205 which is only a quarter as fast as the adreno 225 and all games including deadspace, frontline, blood glory runs smoothly on it. To say the snapdragon s4 is inferior because of the slower Adreno 225 is really nit picking to me. For me bigger reason to choose one graphics chip over another is flash performance and this is where the exynos mali 400 kicks the adreno 225 in the balls. It handles 1080p youtube videos in browser without a hiccup while the 225 chokes even on 720p content.
Let me answer this. How good is it? More than good enough. Almost all apps and games are catered to weaker phones so the T3 and S4 are both more than good enough.
And my two cents, the S4 beats tegra 3
MattMJB0188 said:
Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
The S4 compared to the Tegra3 says it all. dualcore that beats a quadcore in almost everything.
Intel released the first native dual core processor in 2006 and shortly thereafter released a quad core which was basically two dual cores fused together (this is what current ARM quads are like).
That was 6 years ago and these days pretty much all new desktop computers come with quad cores while laptops mostly stick with dual. Laptops make up the biggest share of PC sales so for your everyday PC usage, you'll be more than comfortable with a dual core.
You really can't assume mobile SoCs will follow the same path, but it's definitely something to consider. I think dual core A15-based SoCs will still rule the day this year and next at the very least.
I was really on the fence about the X or the XL. But the S4 got me. Not having 32GB is already bugging me. But the efficiency (and my grandfathered unlimited data paired with Google Music) is definitely worth the sacrifice. Very happy so far! Streaming Slacker, while connected to my A2DP stereo, running GPS was great. I'm not a huge gamer though. I miss Super Mario Bros being the hottest thing!
krepler said:
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Tankmetal said:
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is inaccurate.
The Exynos 4 and the Tegra 3 are based on the ARM A9 reference design.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 is "roughly equivalent" to the A15, but not based on the A15. The same was true for Qualcomm's old S3 (which was equivalent to something between the A8 and A9 design)
One thing that most people don't realize is that Qualcomm is one of the very few companies that designs its own processors based on the ARM instruction set, and while S4's is similar to the A15 in terms of architecture, it's actually arguably better than the ARM reference design (e.g. asynchronous clocking of each core which is a better design than the big.LITTLE or +1 design).