Related
i have heared that galaxy s Gpu can give 90M triangles/sec is that true as some sources claming that it only gives 28M tri/sec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR , and the higher one sgx 545 gives 40 m so how the sgx 540 gives 90M
hoss_n2 said:
i have heared that galaxy s Gpu can give 90M triangles/sec is that true as some sources claming that it only gives 28M tri/sec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR , and the higher one sgx 545 gives 40 m so how the sgx 540 gives 90M
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think the number listed on wikipedia is 'triangles' per second... It just says polys... So it could be a different shape thats harder to render?
Just my guess.
Besides if the 90M claimed is actually the 28 million then don't worry because the same thing for the iPhone's GPU (the 535) claims around 22m and wiki is listing it as 14.
Aaannnnddd if you're worried about the GPU feel comforted that no 3D benchmarks I've seen have even slowed it down so far and you can see tons of videos on youtube of Galaxy S series phones face rolling every single other Android device in gaming FPS benchmarks. Even if it isn't as amazing as the numbers they claimed there is no doubt that it's the best in the market at the moment, and by quite a lot too!
I'm not going to pretend that I read the comment thoroughly, but I've read a similar question. The person who seemed to know what they were talking about, said that essentially the 90m is a "theoretical number" and that about half of that number is what the phone should? can? will? potentially? do...(skimming, memory and probably comprehension make that a very difficult word to fill in accurately)....but this is how all manufacturers report their graphics capabilities (at least in smartphones, but I'll assume the same holds true for the desktop/laptop graphics cards).
So, while the number is definitely overstated, it's within the standard reporting convention...and relative to other numbers, still accurate (2x as many triangles is 2x as many whether everything gets cut in half of cut by a factor of 3).
*I'll remove my fuzzy language when someone better informed than me responds*
I also read a good article (don't know where it is now sorry) all about how the GPU relies heavily on the memory and bus between them etc and for example there could be a phone running the same GPU as another and have much less performance because they don't use much memory, or use slow memory. Apparently our SGS have done pretty well in all departments.
To untangle the confusion-
Triangles= "polys" (polygons)
The SGS does nothing bear 90M, but on the other side, none of the other phones are doing what the manufacturers are claiming them to do.
Plus, the wikipedia article is FAR from being reliable, it's been edited more than 5 times over the past 2 months, with ever changing results. No official specs are available from imgtec.
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Pika007 said:
...
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, one important fact is the pixelcount in the glbenchmark link you sent. iPhone4 and iPad share the same GPU. The difference in pixels is about 20%, and hence the difference between those two.
Let me make one ugly calculation to map SGS's score to iPhone4's. Pixelcount difference between i4 and SGS is a factor 0.625. That we would make the SGS score 1146 on the iPhone resolution. (or 1723 for i4 on 800*480 resolution). Offcourse there are more factors involved but this the best estimate i can make at the moment.
Difference turns out not te be that great after all.
I knew this argument was going to pop up soon enough, so i'll add one VERY important factor-
Score doesn't decrease proportionally to an increase in resolution.
For example, doubling the resolution won't give half the score. More like 70%~
Try running 3Dmark on your PC in different resolutions, you'll see some interesting results.
Personally, GLmark 1.1 for me is just a very crude example, for general demontstrations. It's not really close to be very accurate.
I'm waiting for GLmark 2.0 that should be a great tool to effectively compare the devices.
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Pika007 said:
To untangle the confusion-
Triangles= "polys" (polygons)
The SGS does nothing bear 90M, but on the other side, none of the other phones are doing what the manufacturers are claiming them to do.
Plus, the wikipedia article is FAR from being reliable, it's been edited more than 5 times over the past 2 months, with ever changing results. No official specs are available from imgtec.
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes it is edited more than 5 times but there is an offcial sources says that sgx 454 gives only 40M polygons so hw sgx450 gives 90M i know numbers are not important if there is nothing to use it but i only wanted to know
I think its due to fact that older chip has 2d acceleration too, while 450 is pure 3d and we use cpu for 2d. Thats why its faster.
It is important to note that PowerVR does not do 3D rendering using the traditional 3D polygon based pipeline, like those used in nVidia and ATi cards. It uses the unique tile based rendering engine. This approach is more efficient and uses less memory bandwidth as well as RAW horse power. IIRC, the original PowerVR 3D PC card is a PCI card that can compete head to head with AGP based cards from 3dfx and ATi at that time. Unfortunately, its unique rendering engine does not fit well with Direct3D and OpenGL which favor traditional polygon-based rendering pipelines.
So, the 90M figure could well be the equivelent performance number when using traditional 3D rendering pipeline as compared to Tile-based PowerVR setup.
Power VR does indeed use the traditional 3D polygon based pipeline.
Tile based rendering is in addition, not instead.
Do note that not all games (and actually, far from it) are using TBR properly (if at all).
Read the release notes and press release, it has enough details.
hoss_n2 said:
yes it is edited more than 5 times but there is an offcial sources says that sgx 454 gives only 40M polygons so hw sgx450 gives 90M i know numbers are not important if there is nothing to use it but i only wanted to know
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the given numbers for "official" specs about PowerVR GPU's are for a frequenct of 200mhz.
Those chips can do well above 400mhz, so for example, if an SGX530 does 14M polygons and 500Mpixels per second @200mhz, if you clock it up to 400, it'll do 28Mpolys/1Gpixels.
Though i extremely doubt samsung has the SGX540 clocked at 600mhz in ths SGS...
A pratical and good exaple that shows of the power of the Galaxy S is Gameloft's Real Football 2010 game. The game hasn't got a framelock so it's playable on the Desire and Nexus One. Since pictures tell a thousand words and videos even moreso, I'll provide you this YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0DxP0sk5s0
Pika007 said:
All the given numbers for "official" specs about PowerVR GPU's are for a frequenct of 200mhz.
Those chips can do well above 400mhz, so for example, if an SGX530 does 14M polygons and 500Mpixels per second @200mhz, if you clock it up to 400, it'll do 28Mpolys/1Gpixels.
Though i extremely doubt samsung has the SGX540 clocked at 600mhz in ths SGS...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true however overclocking the GPU to those numbers is silly because the memory & memory bus can't support that much data throughput anyway. I don't even think there is enough to support the amount of the standard clock rate. There is a lot more to consider than just the GPU when it comes to graphics here
You're taking that article you read way too seriously.
Plus, we have no idea what is the bandwidth limit of the galaxy S, we don't know what kind of memory is used, how much of it, at what frequency, etc.
WiseDuck said:
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
Re: lag, I want doing bad until I installed one of the fixes. Now I've officially entered crazy-town.
If I would have to guess it has to do with S5PC110 optimizations. When rendering polygons there are many things that contribute aside from the GPU. Think of it maybe similar to hybrid-sli...(but this is just a guess)
but if you want to look at it in more detail, someone posted the official documentation and spec sheet for the S5PC110 a while back..I ddint get a chance to look at it but my guess the clock speeds and other stuff would be there :/
WiseDuck said:
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well i dont have any lags, what so ever after lag fix. Something else must be troubleing your phone. Auto memory manager is a need tho if you want to keep it real snappy.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I cannot understand why everyone is saying that hummingbird processor is better than snapdragon and that's why I started this thread.
I own an HD2 (snapdragon) and SGS (hummingbird).
I've run linpack and quadrant in both phones and here are the results showing that snapdragon is 4 to 5 times faster.
Hummingbird: linpack 13,864 quadrant CPU 1456
Snapdragon: linpack 63,122 quadrant CPU 4122
I'm only talking for the CPU cause if you go to 3D I'll agree that hummingbird is better (but I don't care about 3D cause I don't use my device for games)
Both phones have android 2,2 installed and I have voodoo lagfix installed in SGS
johcos said:
I cannot understand why everyone is saying that hummingbird processor is better than snapdragon and that's why I started this thread.
I own an HD2 (snapdragon) and SGS (hummingbird).
I've run linpack and quadrant in both phones and here are the results showing that snapdragon is 4 to 5 times faster.
Hummingbird: linpack 13,864 quadrant CPU 1456
Snapdragon: linpack 63,122 quadrant CPU 4122
I'm only talking for the CPU cause if you go to 3D I'll agree that hummingbird is better (but I don't care about 3D cause I don't use my device for games)
Both phones have android 2,2 installed and I have voodoo lagfix installed in SGS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After looking into it for a while, I was focusing on what makes the Nexus One so much better than the other phones. On the chip level, I didn’t see it. Then it dawned on me to look at what Google had to say on the matter. Well, it was there in black and white. In their 20 May 2010 Developer’s Blog entry (http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/05/android-22-and-developers-goodies.html) they say that people could see a 2-5x speed increase. I think it is pointed out in an entry later in the blog dealing with NDK, which I initially missed: “ARM Advanced SIMD (a.k.a. NEON) instruction support The NEON instruction set extension can be used to perform scalar computations on integers and floating points. However, it is an optional CPU feature and will not be supported by all Android ARMv7-A based devices. The NDK includes a tiny library named “cpufeatures” that can be used by native code to test at runtime the features supported by the device’s target CPU.”
So, I guess this means that NEON is the difference. If your phone’s CPU has it and it’s enabled for JIT, you can expect higher Linpack numbers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.greenecomputing.com/2010...ack-scores-so-mucher-higher-than-on-my-phone/
Now stop making topics like this.
the difference you notice is software related
If you want a real test, run a hd video on both phones, or a psx emulator and see if the nexus one is 5x faster... it is the same if not slower then the sgs
Well, SGS got hardware h264 decoding acceleration. Also, maybe you forget, but:
he Hummingbird comes with 32KB each of data and instruction caches, an L2 cache, the size of which can be customized, and an ARM® NEON™ multi-media extension.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SAMSUNG and Intrinsity Jointly Develop the World's Fastest ARM® Cortex™-A8 Processor Based Mobile Core in 45 Nanometer Low Power Process
Advanced SIMD (NEON)
The Advanced SIMD extension, marketed as NEON technology, is a combined 64- and 128-bit single instruction multiple data (SIMD) instruction set that provides standardized acceleration for media and signal processing applications. NEON can execute MP3 audio decoding on CPUs running at 10 MHz and can run the GSM AMR (Adaptive Multi-Rate) speech codec at no more than 13 MHz. It features a comprehensive instruction set, separate register files and independent execution hardware. NEON supports 8-, 16-, 32- and 64-bit integer and single-precision (32-bit) floating-point data and operates in SIMD operations for handling audio and video processing as well as graphics and gaming processing. In NEON, the SIMD supports up to 16 operations at the same time. The NEON hardware shares the same floating-point registers as used in VFP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
source: wiki
This means Hummingbirds are equipped with NEON. Why its not so effective/used in Quadrant/Linpack? My guess they (these benchmarks) are not compiled/optimised for Hummingbirds, just for Snapdragons.
I came from owning an iPhone and playing lots of games on it. I bought the SGS purely for the gaming performance of the Hummingbird processor.
Having seen the difference in game quality between the HTC Desire and the SGS, I know I made the right decision. Benchmarks don't mean anything.
As long as the device can run apps, games, multimedia smoothly, I dont care much about those benchmarkers, maybe they were designed and/or optimized for snapdragon prior to hummingbird.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
i bet you anything he actually doesn't have a sgs...lol
jealousy maybe just a troll, ignore
In terms of overall smoothness (everything, not just games) the SGS is vastly superior to any other android phone I've seen (Desire included).
Darkimmortal said:
everything
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? You have to go all out and use the word "everything" when the phone can get major lockups?
"most things" sounds like a more reasonable and believable choice of words...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
johcos said:
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
man. if you are not happy, then i think you should sell it. no one here will give you a satisfying answer that warm your heart. look for desire hd or something.
to answer ur questions. i get a 2100+ on quadrant. using voodoo fix and oclf on my eclaire. lag free and smooth as butter.
but either way, these test scores mean nothing. they were not designed for samusng hardware. it was designed based on htc and the snapdragon processor.
even people who use neocore for gpu are wrong. if you wana test the gpu performance, use nenamark1. the sgs gives u 49+ fps while the desire HD struggle to give u 35. while if you use neocore. the sgs gives u 56 while desire hd 58
my point is most of those software were designed with htc hardware in mind. so you cant really compare them.
just test your device for your self. apply whatever best roms you find here. if it doesnt lag and smooth for you. then ^^^^ everyone else.
the display alone is worth keepin the sgs for me. sure people might like i phone 4 display more. but nothing in my eyes come close to the contrast and colors of the super amoled. watching a movie or playing a game is a joy in this device.
hell yesterday evening a local htc store had a demo of desire hd. and the guy was nice enough to me play with it for like 1 hour.
device as a hardware look. its friggin sexy as hell. screen ? beauitful large 4.3 screen. quality colors compared to sgs ? fail. a lil slow and laggy " i am sure its because of the firmware. once roms are out, it will be faster "
i was thinking to change to desire hd honestly. but i wake away from the store kissing my sgs.
i love the desire hf look and feel. but as of now its not as smooth as my sgs. and the screen isnt as vibrant.
Psx emulator does not use the gpu...yet
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
android53 said:
Psx emulator does not use the gpu...yet
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this. i played king of fighters on my hd2 and it was laggy as hell
smooth as butter on my galaxy s
to be honest. the day psx4droid use gpu. galaxy owners are in heaven.
Its unlikely it ever will though, even modern pc emulators barely use the gpu, only for anti aliasing
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
johcos said:
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why in hell woul you want to incodea video using a smartPHONE...?
It's like trying to fit your family and grocery in a sport car... not made for this bro!
stop trying to find reason to "not like" the SGS, if you don't like it, sell it and be done...
Snapdragon/Hummingbird scores in glbenchmark (nexus one/galaxy s):
integer: 20661/27624
float: 11173/7968
I guess glbenchmark uses native C code (hopefully with armv7 optimization), so the JIT compiler has no effect. From the scores it seems that the floating point unit in Snapdragon is faster - but most of the time it is not used (except video & games).
Anyway, a benchmark to measure the same algorithm in both native & java code with scalar & vector instructions would be great...
t1mman said:
Why in hell woul you want to incodea video using a smartPHONE...?
It's like trying to fit your family and grocery in a sport car... not made for this bro!
stop trying to find reason to "not like" the SGS, if you don't like it, sell it and be done...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he's not whining, well, not in the first place and i don't see any harm on that i think he's trying to UNDERSTAND reasons behind numbers and daily use with help of other people, so am i. if i had to sell phones for every problem i encounter i will problaby be without (smart)phone at this time
i don't care about benchmarks, but if you think that sgs is smoother than hd2 xda optimized (with wm 6.5 or android 2.2) you obviously never owned an hd2 i'm not talking about games, like johcos says galaxy s performance is not questionable. but android is not all about game. anyway, i don't think hardware is the problem here, sure sgs is superior in many aspects, we know that, regardless benchmarks (even if it seems here that only benchmarks where sgs win are trustworthy, others are not good, not optimized, not realistic, meaningless for real life performance etc.). with a little help from samsung and this community sgs will soon outperform (in real usage) all snapdragon phones. i hope
...when average men talk about the high tech w/o knowledge, boo
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
man. if you are not happy, then i think you should sell it. no one here will give you a satisfying answer that warm your heart. look for desire hd or something.
to answer ur questions. i get a 2100+ on quadrant. using voodoo fix and oclf on my eclaire. lag free and smooth as butter.
but either way, these test scores mean nothing. they were not designed for samusng hardware. it was designed based on htc and the snapdragon processor.
even people who use neocore for gpu are wrong. if you wana test the gpu performance, use nenamark1. the sgs gives u 49+ fps while the desire HD struggle to give u 35. while if you use neocore. the sgs gives u 56 while desire hd 58
my point is most of those software were designed with htc hardware in mind. so you cant really compare them.
just test your device for your self. apply whatever best roms you find here. if it doesnt lag and smooth for you. then ^^^^ everyone else.
the display alone is worth keepin the sgs for me. sure people might like i phone 4 display more. but nothing in my eyes come close to the contrast and colors of the super amoled. watching a movie or playing a game is a joy in this device.
hell yesterday evening a local htc store had a demo of desire hd. and the guy was nice enough to me play with it for like 1 hour.
device as a hardware look. its friggin sexy as hell. screen ? beauitful large 4.3 screen. quality colors compared to sgs ? fail. a lil slow and laggy " i am sure its because of the firmware. once roms are out, it will be faster "
i was thinking to change to desire hd honestly. but i wake away from the store kissing my sgs.
i love the desire hf look and feel. but as of now its not as smooth as my sgs. and the screen isnt as vibrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly couldn't agree anymore, even with all the problems the SGS has. The screen+hardware combination is just too overwhelming for me to swap the phone for something else.
Obviously is does to an extent, but I thought Gingerbread/Honeycomb are the first official OS's to support it?
Anyone know the details around this? When the Atrix gets Gingerbread, will there be processing improvements?
2.3 does... which makes you wonder wtf moto was thinking.
I use SeePU as a CPU monitor and when I swipe the screen and other basic things, the CPU maxes briefly. No lag at all for the most part. However, I'm wondering if Froyo isn't completely optimized for the dual-cores.
As a funny note, I'm wondering if we're all going to see some nice improvements once we get Gingerbread as we did with the 2.1 to 2.2 improvements.
kenyu73 said:
Obviously is does to an extent, but I thought Gingerbread/Honeycomb are the first official OS's to support it?
Anyone know the details around this? When the Atrix gets Gingerbread, will there be processing improvements?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't believe Froyo was made with dual core in mind. Biggest thing is that apps haven't been optimized for dualcore yet.
kenyu73 said:
Obviously is does to an extent, but I thought Gingerbread/Honeycomb are the first official OS's to support it?
Anyone know the details around this? When the Atrix gets Gingerbread, will there be processing improvements?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems there is already multi core support on the OS level, but probably not a strong support on the API level. Read, for example, androidnexus [dot] com/android-news/nvidia-tegra-2-review-and-multi-core-support-in-android . That means that the OS will already distribute threads between cores, which for example should eliminate any lag that I sometimes experience in single core when I am playing a game and Android is synching mail in the background. *edit* And generally improve performance while multitasking. *end edit*
I think only Android 3.x will really take advantage of multi core processors (they explicitly stated that as a feature for Honeycomb); I doubt there would be a big difference between Froyo and Gingerbread as far as performance is concerned.
how long do u think Moto will let us update to 2.3? maybe 1 year?
bl0wf1sh said:
It seems there is already multi core support on the OS level, but probably not a strong support on the API level. Read, for example, androidnexus [dot] com/android-news/nvidia-tegra-2-review-and-multi-core-support-in-android . That means that the OS will already distribute threads between cores, which for example should eliminate any lag that I sometimes experience in single core when I am playing a game and Android is synching mail in the background. *edit* And generally improve performance while multitasking. *end edit*
I think only Android 3.x will really take advantage of multi core processors (they explicitly stated that as a feature for Honeycomb); I doubt there would be a big difference between Froyo and Gingerbread as far as performance is concerned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the information! However, I believe Gingerbread 2.3 was "canned" and reversioned to 2.4 which includes dual-core support. I've read this in more then a few tech blogs recently.
Hi guys,
Not sure if any of you are aware but I am the one who developed Smartbench 2010 which is a benchmarking app for Android phones. I've been working on it for the past couple of months and so far, I've been happy with the reception.
But just as it is the case with 99.9% of all apps, it is not capable of utilizing multi-cores.
I am currently developing the version 2011 which IS capable of using multi-cores (as long as Android used is SMP enabled).
This is a BETA version. When it is final, as it was the case with Smartbench 2010, it will be available for free in the Android Market. I am curious to see how well the CPU tests in Smartbench 2011 works with multi-core phones. I am using 4 threads that work in parallel so it should be able to handle up to quad-core processors.
For those who are interested, please download the following and try running it. The results will be automatically submitted to the server and you will see your results in the result chart as well, which is fetched from the server in real-time.
https://market.android.com/details?i...rtbench.eleven
Thanks much!
EDIT: Smartbench 2011 v0.7 has been released. It will now allow you to sort results by either Average, Productivity or Games scores. Please re-install this version.
EDIT2: Smartbench 2011 v0.8 has been released. It now offers a filtering option - you can see all results or just stock clock speed results. Mandelbrot test also has been extended for better precision. Again, please re-install this version.
EDIT3: I have just published Smartbench v1.0 in the Android Market - please install this version moving forward. Results submitted by the BETA version will no longer be stored in the server DB. Your support during the BETA period has been very helpful!
Looks good, my scores went up quite a bit after I closed all the open apps.
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
I think the "multi-core support" code is working pretty good. I can also see that for some scores, they could be more consistent. I think I know why - it is the way I capture the run-time. Instead of getting the average of all runs within the test, I am taking the slowest which might be a bad idea since one thread might have had a bad luck with the scheduling. But other than this, it looks pretty good.
If anyone has any other feedback, please let me know!
Very cool. Nicely done app and there's a big difference from 2010 and 2011 scores.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
waltah! said:
Very cool. Nicely done app and there's a big difference from 2010 and 2011 scores.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, and you shouldn't compare 2010 and 2011 scores together. The reason I treat them as a separate app altogether is because the apps are tuned differently and the baselines are also different. In 2010, N1 was the baseline, obtaining 1000 across the board. For 2011, G2 was used as the baseline, so N1 will no longer get 1000/1000 scores.
The idea here is to keep up with the technology as it evolves so that the benchmark app doesn't become useless over time. Dual-core was the main focus in 2011 version.
It appears that on Atrix, the "String" test is returning very inconsistent results - probably due to triggering garbage collection as I am using very large strings and creating a lot of them. I am currently working on a fix for this.
EDIT: A new version has been placed in the above location. Please use this version moving forward. Hopefully, this one will report more consistent results for the "String Test". Other tests look pretty good now.
Smartbench 2011 v0.7 has been released. It will now allow you to sort results by either Average, Productivity or Games scores. Please re-install this version.
Holy...my score shot up like no tomorrow.
Well, not the gaming score. It's slightly below the stock one at 2368.
But the productivity score...3040. :O
Heh I hope you don't mind... I ran this on my Nexus S. Only got 800 something productivity and about 2900 gaming, which is to be expected if the baseline is a G2 which is known to do better floating point than the hummingbird but much worse at GPU tasks.
The iPad2 was just announced and it'll most likely have a dual core PowerVR SGX543 which probably means the iPhone 5 will have this same processor/GPU setup. How do you think Tegra 2 will compare to it?
Awesome..getting some great results
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
i love how they have score of different phone with custom roms
NoNameAtAll said:
Holy...my score shot up like no tomorrow.
Well, not the gaming score. It's slightly below the stock one at 2368.
But the productivity score...3040. :O
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can see, it's a bit harder to get stable results in multi-core environment. I think it was a good call to go with average scores.
dinan said:
Heh I hope you don't mind... I ran this on my Nexus S. Only got 800 something productivity and about 2900 gaming, which is to be expected if the baseline is a G2 which is known to do better floating point than the hummingbird but much worse at GPU tasks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually its helpful to see other results. I just didn't want to have 3000 people bombarding the server at the same time, especially when I am expecting bugs to show up. And yes, I agree with your analysis as well. From what I can tell, Hummingbird based phones are producing results in line with my expectations.
The iPad2 was just announced and it'll most likely have a dual core PowerVR SGX543 which probably means the iPhone 5 will have this same processor/GPU setup. How do you think Tegra 2 will compare to it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do we know if iPad2 is going to use a single-core SGX543 or multi-core setup? This is feasible with SGX543. Also, I believe SGX543 is supposed to perform better than SGX540 even in a single-core configuration. So I do expect it to outperform Hummingbird in its current generation form, and probably Tegra 2 as well, especially if they go with multi-core GPU config.
lsxrx7 said:
i love how they have score of different phone with custom roms
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. My intention was to display all custom ROM configurations. Unfortunately, I don't think there's a single standardized way to read those ROM names... So I am still stuck with this.... Most of the results are still reading "Stock ROM" because it couldn't determine which ROM was used.
Smartbench 2011 v0.8 has been released. It now offers a filtering option - you can see all results or just stock clock speed results. Mandelbrot test also has been extended for better precision. Again, please re-install this version.
Someone here is still running a very old version (v0.2). Please re-download the APK file from the first post and install it.
Thanks.
EDIT3: I have just published Smartbench v1.0 in the Android Market - please install this version moving forward. Results submitted by the BETA version will no longer be stored in the server DB. Your support during the BETA period has been very helpful!
I got 2038 Productivity and 1759 Games. About 600-700 pts less than the Optimus 2x which might have something to do with pushing more pixels.
crea78 said:
I got 2038 Productivity and 1759 Games. About 600-700 pts less than the Optimus 2x which might have something to do with pushing more pixels.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's also a lot going on in your phone. Depending on what was running when all that threads were working, you may end up with some variances. The best indication is to look at the scores displayed by the app, especially those bars that are represented by many test runs.
Hope you don't mind, I'm gonna post a link to this that you can use on your first post to link people to the program:
https://market.android.com/details?id=com.smartbench.eleven
Easier than a QR code on the computer!
After looking through engadgets live blog there was no mention of hardware acceleration being added to android 4.0. With that being said that was my hopes of 4.0 bringing true smoothness that both ios and WP7 have been having all along. Now i know there is 3d animation ( i may be wrong ) but i know that isn't the full acceleration. Question asked does it have it?
Yes, Android 4.0 features 2D Hardware Acceleration (as originally added in Honeycomb), with some improvements.
Additionally, applications can take advantage of the GPU (Photos, Video & Gallery, for example) for on-the-fly transform effects. For example, if you perform edits in Gallery to a photo, it's actually loaded as a texture in OpenGL, and the "effects", or transforms, are applied leveraging the GPU to vastly improve performance.
Likewise, the panoramic "stitching" is GPU accelerated, and video capture (compression) and streaming (transformations, such as silly faces) are GPU accelerated.
It remains to be seen if the GPU is being used for other aspects of the OS, for example, being leveraged by the browser to assist in webpage rendering, etc. However, even as it is right now, it's a massive step up in quality and performance, and should facilitate wonderful UI/UX experiences for ICS even on older devices, like the Evo, Nexus One, Droid X, etc.
Shidell said:
It remains to be seen if the GPU is being used for other aspects of the OS, for example, being leveraged by the browser to assist in webpage rendering, etc. However, even as it is right now, it's a massive step up in quality and performance, and should facilitate wonderful UI/UX experiences for ICS even on older devices, like the Evo, Nexus One, Droid X, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh really! Are we to believe that somehow the Evo's GPU will be ICS supported for hardware acceleration? Will that require a HTC-specific ICS update, or is it workable for AOSP before HTC codes in their hardware acceleration?
thegregbradley said:
Oh really! Are we to believe that somehow the Evo's GPU will be ICS supported for hardware acceleration? Will that require a HTC-specific ICS update, or is it workable for AOSP before HTC codes in their hardware acceleration?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it isn't really a device-specific feature.
Hardware acceleration in the UI is akin to playing a 2D game, like Angry Birds. The system is actually leveraging OpenGL to handle 'displaying', or 'rendering', the game. Likewise, the UI is 'displayed', or 'rendered', the same way.
The way this relates to Android 4.0 is like this: Hardware acceleration was added to Android in Honeycomb (3.0), and in order to take advantage of it, requires a GPU that is capable of supporting OpenGL 2.0 with drivers that are compatible with OpenGL 2.0. If you have a capable GPU with capable drivers, the OS will use the GPU to render the UI, and voila, hardware acceleration.
If any of those components are not available (or perhaps not working correctly), Android defaults to "software acceleration", which is what has always been present in Android for phones. 1.0 all the way through 2.3.7 all use software acceleration. That is, all of the UI elements are rendered by the CPU.
You've probably experienced lag thanks to this--scroll through your contacts list quickly, flip between full home screens, or load up an intensive Live Wallpaper and open your Launcher and try scrolling--you'll probably find slowdown, if not stuttering in places. This is because the CPU is doing the heavy lifting not only for the OS, but also to render the display.
By alleviating this pressure on the CPU, we free up the phone to do work it's better at handling--running the OS. Additionally, because GPUs are actually designed for rendering, they are far, far more efficient at doing so than the CPU. The result? A massive overhead reduction overall on Android on devices, that means improved performance across the board as well as a much more pleasing user experience.
This is fantastic news for devices new and old; but a real treat for those of us with older phones, as the reduced CPU overhead coupled with GPU acceleration should mean noticeable performance improvements, as well as a drastic reduction in stuttering, lag, jittery-ness in the UI, etc.
Best of all, it should be very simple to implement. Most hardware supports OpenGL 2.0 (our Evos do, for example), and most drivers for that hardware also support OpenGL 2.0 (as our Evos do), so it should really be as easy as building Android 4.0 with the appropriate drivers, and then experience the bliss of a hardware-accelerated Android for the first time.
(Note that this explanation doesn't touch on using the GPU for additional benefit, like editting photos, videos, offloading work from the CPU as I touched on above, etc.)
man that was a bunch of good info i needed +1 will be glad when our evos have that much needed acceleration
Dude Shidell thank you so much for that in depth explanation! You covered everything I could have possibly wondered about, haha. A king amongst men, and a god amongst kings, you are.
Thanks alot shidell that really helps me out alot. I just have one question, did anyone here about usb host, on 4.0?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
BmW13294 said:
Thanks alot shidell that really helps me out alot. I just have one question, did anyone here about usb host, on 4.0?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah i read that the galaxy nexus was having a usb 2.0? i will check some images to see if its true
Naturally, Ice Cream Sandwich is onboard, with Google finally revealing the version number as 4.0. Other specs include an HD Super AMOLED display (1,280 x 720), a 1.2GHz dual-core processor, 5 megapixel rear camera (with LED flash), a 1.3 megapixel front-facing cam, 1080p video recording and playback, a newfangled panorama mode, a 3.5mm headphone jack and Bluetooth 3.0. You'll also find USB 2.0(right there), 802.11a/b/g/n WiFi, an embedded NFC module, accelerometer, compass, gyro, proximity sensor and even a barometer -- yeah, a barometer. Finishing things out, there's 1GB of RAM, 16 or 32GB of internal storage space and a 1,750mAh battery. info gathered from Engadget listing all the galaxy nexus specs
Happy to share information.
BmW13294 said:
Thanks alot shidell that really helps me out alot. I just have one question, did anyone here about usb host, on 4.0?
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, Android 4.0 builds upon the USB Host support that was integrated in Honeycomb, which means it has native support for a variety of USB devices. Granted, I don't know the depth of devices or support, but it is present.
Nice explanation shi.