Database Users

Just to fuel the fire

http://www.engadget.com/lg-star/preview/
Definitely an impressive piece of hardware, the Nexus S will have to do for now I guess.

A key question:
Does it have any US 3G (850/AWS/1900) band?
If not, it lost a leg.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cULT5ZeI44s&feature=player_embedded
^ video
Yes, such a beautiful phone, is it SLCD? I guess I can bypass SAMOLED if it is.
I am still waiting to see, the first orion-based phones, as they will be without a doubt the fastest phones. I just hope Samsung up the looks of the phones, maybe not so plasticy, more glass is nice though.

Impressive but not a fan of LG phones. Samsung galaxy 2 will be the talk bigining of next year
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

irishrally said:
Engadget just put the LG Start dual core tegra2 running on 2.2 through Quadrant and it only scored 2100. Galaxy S phones have scored much higher than this which makes me feel good about Google's choice. I just hope the file system issues are gone in the Nexus S.
If the dual core LG star was going on sale next Thursday, I would still go for the Nexus S, without a doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly

Those high 20k plus quadrant scores are due to lagfix that tricks quadrant I/O score not actual performance increase
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

also keep in mind that that phone will probably come to the US 5-10 months from now and probably only be on one provider, and it won't be t-mobile, so if your a t-mobile fan, nexus s is still for you.

You can get a better real world estimate of galaxy s series without using ext2 loop. ie all ext4. Which gives 1400 - 1700 depending on setup. I saw where nexus s did quadrant with ext4 plus some other fs and was comparable: 1400–1500. I'm with above poster, can't wait to see Orion vs tegra2.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !

Also for those who don't know...galaxy s phones gpu is capped at 56 fps seems to be same with NS..not that you really need more that 60fps but score could be much higher.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh...my MT4 got 56FPS.
Not bad.

gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.

Tegra2 ~ Hummingbird. About the same power.

Rawat said:
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore

demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.

demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not trying to talk over you. It is capped to 55.555*. There's a parameter that can be changed when compiling the kenrel, and it'll be capped at 65fps. Neocore scores 65fps with a kernel that's compiled with the parameter
Anderdroid said:
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
55.5 rounded up is 56. And 55.55 rounded up is 55.6, which is what my Galaxy S has scored since they day I got it.
EDIT: you can check build.prop, and it mentions (a rounded down) 55fps: windowsmgr.max_events_per_sec=55

this phne may be fast but it's ugly and it also has a skined version of android
The Nexus S does

My nenamark score, am I crazy?

Yesterday I installed nenamark on my nexus one and ran my first benchmark, and I swear I got 30.1 fps. I specifically noted that it was spot on with movie frame rates.
Every subsequent test I've run I only get around 16fps. Perhaps 30 is way too high for the nexus one's hardware. But did I just imagine my original score or did I actually get that high? What's the highest score we've seen on the nexus one?

Why not just open it again and on the main screen it says what the highest recorded score it...
That'll tell you what your best score it. Also i maxed out on 16.2FPS :-/

Yeah my best run says 17 so I guess I imagined it. But I could have sworn I saw it. Oh well...

It was allllll just a dream ;p

Share your drugs
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App

42.8 fps nenamark
Galaxy S Captivate

Couldn't using one of these newer kernels with updated GPU drivers be helping?

I got 17.5 fps. Not bad for a year old 1 GHz superphone
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App

I just got a 22f p s yesterday if you believe it. Same exact kernel and all and it shows up in my high score at least.

My one is 22.3fps, without any tweaks, cleans e.t.c
Miui + wildmonks kernel.

16.4 on the N1 (CM 6.1.1), 36.5 on the galaxy tab
Edit: Remembered I'd underclocked my CPU, ramped it up to 1113Mhz and got 22.9fps. (Which I can't duplicate, can only hit 22.3fps now)

Tell you what, 22 isn't too bad considering this hardware.
My question is how does windows phone 7 devices, that all use the same CPU combo as the nexus one, get silky smooth scrolling thru the entire OS, including very large web pages etc. Do they just use that much better drivers? It definitely shows its possible and the potential.

I played with the Arc today and...

First off, I don't want any fanboy reactions from SGS2 users or what kind of other phone. I'm just wondering why we don't have got it?
Today I played with the Arc of my nephew. And what must I say? We updated to the newest firmware before starting.
I must say that our x10 has received a very very very crappy 2.3.3 update. The Arc has ALMOST NO lags. Everything runs smoother then on our x10. They both got 1Ghz processor, how did this happen?
Also battery life is MUCH better. x10 was on lowest brightness, Arc FULL brightness both connected with wifi. X10 had a simcard, and the Arc not. But damn? Our x10 lost so many % battery in constant use while the Arc just lost 1%!!! X10 has even custom rom...
Both phones similair processor, only newer generation on Arc. Both running same clockspeed. How the heck can our x10 then perform much and much worse?
Just a few things I'm wondering, and NO I'm not going to buy a Arc. I got better things to buy
By chance any developer then can fully uncap all FPS to 60 FPS on our x10. Including 3D. I'm not expecting 3D games to run 60FPs but atleast that they will be able to reach the max FPS our GPU can handle if uncapped... The only thing we've got uncapped is 2D graphics, nothing more... And 2D graphics on Arc are still smoother...
Who will be able to make us x10 perform better? Is it kernel related? Arc has newer kernel?
I know thread is a bit messy, but how the heck can a phone with almost similair hardware (just newer generation processor and some new things) perform so much much much better? You can't make me believe that the processor in the Arc is 100% faster... Both same clockspeed just some little improvements for energy and stronger GPU, and the UI has no heavy graphics... Arc = butter smooth in scrolling and all UI related stuff.
I believe SE is capping more then only the FPS?

Did you know that the Are processor higher than X10, RAM is higher than X10 and GPU performance is higher than X10? What are you talking about? Compare a new phone appears almost 2 years later with the first Android phone from SE?
EDIT: I'm scared of this one
Both phones similair processor
--------------------------------------
almost similair hardware
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Better processor would also mean better gpu...
It is the processor completely. Try any phone with that gen, its the same reason those phones can overclock to 1.8 ghz comfortably

Hey guys...
My Dell with a 2.4 ghz Pentium IV running win7 runs like crap compared to my Dell with a 2.4 ghz intel core and nvidia gtx 460. Why did Dell give us such an inferior Win7?
I mean, both laptops have the same speed but the core one lasts 4x as long as the old one! They're so similar but it's so *convenient* that the newer one is running win7 better.
Doesn't anyone else think that Dell is crapping our Win7 on purpose? It's a conspiracy folks!

I guess there are several clarifications needed.
1. X10's brightness is controlled by fluorescent illuminators as compared to Arc's LED backlit. have you ever wondered why sometimes the backlight doesn't dim smoothly? fluorescent illuminated display consumes hell lot more battery as compared to LED. this is rather self explanatory.
2. the process in x10's and arc's processor are different. x10 uses 65nm while arc uses 45nm. power consumption and efficiency in both are obviously different. performance wise, different too.
3. adreno 200 and adreno 205 are of major difference. adreno 205 enables hardware accelerated flash and rendering while 200 does not. adreno 200 is ancient FYI.
4. FPS on the x10 is uncapped to 55. i suppose that doesn't make much difference with 60?

There is no "3d fps cap". This is the actual performance of Adreno200 (compare it with N1)
Cheers,
z

zdzihu said:
There is no "3d fps cap". This is the actual performance of Adreno200 (compare it with N1)
Cheers,
z
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't we overclock our gpu sir ?
And why does it show 280mb ram instead of 384mb ram ?
Sorry if my question is out of topic ..

Oodie said:
Can't we overclock our gpu sir ?
And why does it show 280mb ram instead of 384mb ram ?
Sorry if my question is out of topic ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think there is a way to directly overclock GPU on SoC. it's not like in PC we have a separate graphics card to run graphic rendering.
100MB RAM is dedicated to vRAM.

silveraero said:
Did you know that the Are processor higher than X10, RAM is higher than X10 and GPU performance is higher than X10? What are you talking about? Compare a new phone appears almost 2 years later with the first Android phone from SE?
EDIT: I'm scared of this one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but ram doesnt render the ui? both 1ghz processor why is the x10 so laggy then...

Oodie said:
Can't we overclock our gpu sir ?
And why does it show 280mb ram instead of 384mb ram ?
Sorry if my question is out of topic ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you can overclock gpu by overclocking the whole processor. only gpu is not possible

KeizBaby said:
but ram doesnt render the ui? both 1ghz processor why is the x10 so laggy then...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you read any of the thread?

Oodie said:
Can't we overclock our gpu sir ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, but as mentioned before, you can overclock the whole chip.
Oodie said:
And why does it show 280mb ram instead of 384mb ram ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "missing memory" is used by Linux kernel (dsp, camera, encoder and) and is not accessible by user. This is common
Cheers,
z

Old technology vs New technology...
go figure.

Thanks ToonXW , keizbaby and Z for repling. Got it now

So is there any way to overclock rhe whole chip on stock 2.3.3

Why is battery life better on Arc:
X10 65nm CPU vs 45nm on Arc
X10 998MHz @ 1300mV vs 1024MHz @ 1200mV on Arc
Alone these things make it better.
And you forgot to mention that Arc's screen reacts faster/better.
Couldn't type really fast on my X10, it didn't register some touches then. On my Arc I can type really, really fast.
All these things make it better, BUT the Arc is 1 year newer than the X10!
In 1 year hardware makes huge steps forward.
Sent from my LT15i using XDA Premium App

Flo95 said:
Why is battery life better on Arc:
X10 65nm CPU vs 45nm on Arc
X10 998MHz @ 1300mV vs 1024MHz @ 1200mV on Arc
Alone these things make it better.
And you forgot to mention that Arc's screen reacts faster/better.
Couldn't type really fast on my X10, it didn't register some touches then. On my Arc I can type really, really fast.
All these things make it better, BUT the Arc is 1 year newer than the X10!
In 1 year hardware makes huge steps forward.
Sent from my LT15i using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It reacts better because it has better fps and multi touch...
Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk

adham3322 said:
So is there any way to overclock rhe whole chip on stock 2.3.3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Custom kernels... We wait for semc sources...
Sent from my X10i using Tapatalk

Already overclock CPU speed to 1.3GHz, install custom ROM if you want it.
The differences between the X10 and Arc are CPU, RAM, GPU. Same CPU name with different code 200-205, RAM: 384/512, GPU is included on CPU so new CPU technology mean better GPU. That why everything on ARC is smoother than X10. You must know exactly what you are talking about, not only the value of processor.

The x10 is pretty damn smooth now, I get all day usage from it, constantly on WiFi. The people complaining must have forgotten what 1.6 was like, it's night and day now.
Sent from my X10i using XDA Premium App

SG3 vs SG5

I made some test with my wifes phone - a galaxy 5 - and I was impressed with the performance. My wifes phone is totally stock (froyo), no root or deodex or other stuff but it has a Quadrant score of 520. My stock SG3 has a score of 321 and 607 with G3Mod and Kyrillos 8. So I did another test (Antutu) and checked the 2D and 3D performance. The stock SG5 has a 3D score of 450 while my SG3 only has 250. The RAM and CPU scores of the SG5 are lower than my scores. So I guess the reason for the high SG5 scores is the 3D grafics. But why is that? Is it because of the lower screen resolution, or the lower density, or the fewer colors, or ...? Maybe somebody can enlighten me.
Another issue. I put my old SD card in the SG5 and it has a reading speed of 9MB/s. When the card was in my phone I only had a reading speed of 4 MB/sec? Why is that?

The G3 has a CPU speed advantage (667MHz vs. 600Mhz) but the G5 has a lower-res screen (QVGA, vs. WQVGA) as an advantage....thats one of the main reason

To fix the reading speed of sdcard apply sdcardreadingspeedfix script
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App

@raja no that doesn't affect much
@op
G3 got a damn good processor (Samsung s5p6442) while g5 has a qualcomm
But g3 has a fimg gpu compared to the adreno200 in g5
And yea these scores are just scores, if we want we can even get 1000+, real life performance matters

ronnie735 said:
To fix the reading speed of sdcard apply sdcardreadingspeedfix script
Sent from my GT-I5800 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tryed - doesn't do a thing for me
@cedeai: thanx

this sdcardreadingspeedfix script did'nt work for me too

my sister has a sg5, compared to our phone is really fast, and also plays games better, like angry birds, without overclocking, and their port of cm7 is amazing

Arc VS Arc S "Details"

Hey Ppl
I have received an Arc S, then the other broke (Arc).
One of my friends has an Arc, so we tried and test them individually, and see what the difference was, at the Arc and Arc S.
Here is what came out. (We tested they both with antutu Benchmark, 5 times each)
The difference is small:
CPU: Arc S 1400Mhz, Arc 1000MHz (400MHz difference)
Ram: Arc S 335Mb, Arc 333MB (2MB RAM difference)
Memory internal: Arc S 420mb, Arc 380mb (40mb difference)
Graphics: Arc S has 5-8 more fps
Arc S 14.4 Mbps, Arc 7.2 Mbps
//dong

dong2007 said:
Ram: Arc S 335Mb, Arc 333MB (2MB RAM difference)
Memory internal: Arc S 420mb, Arc 380mb (40mb difference)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Arc and Arc S have the same amount of physical memory, so there is no difference in that situation.
The main improvement in the Arc S is in the chipset:
Arc S - HSDPA, 14.4 Mbps;
Arc - HSDPA, 7.2 Mbps;
The reason why the processor hardly brings much of an improvement is because it's just a clock speed bump, and from what I've seen with current ARM CPUs, architecture of the CPU makes more of a difference than it's clock speed.

Thelolinator said:
The Arc and Arc S have the same amount of physical memory, so there is no difference in that situation.
.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check my pictures....

I'd like to have 40MB more, strange they made it free on Arc S and not on Arc.
But how much is available to the user without any apps installed?
That's alaways lower than displayed. I think it are 280-300MB on Arc
Sent from my iPad 2 using Tapatalk

With link2sd, arc s kernel & the supercharger script.
sinkster©

on arc s screenshot it have 460mb ram it is faulty?

My ARC shows 335Mb, not 333Mb:
About the internal memory size, it seems it's just some space optimization looking at sinkster's screenshot.

Thelolinator said:
The reason why the processor hardly brings much of an improvement is because it's just a clock speed bump, and from what I've seen with current ARM CPUs, architecture of the CPU makes more of a difference than it's clock speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
both frequency and architecture are significant and even so, it all boils down to the work you need to do. In this case the overall performance increase is less than the expected 40% increase is because not everything in the phone is running at a 40% higher frequency (RAM, SD, etc)

tsiros said:
both frequency and architecture are significant and even so, it all boils down to the work you need to do. In this case the overall performance increase is less than the expected 40% increase is because not everything in the phone is running at a 40% higher frequency (RAM, SD, etc)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that both frequency and architecture are significant, but there are cases where frequency brings almost no improvement at all, the perfect example being Intel's Pentium 4 processors.

By GSM Arena (http://www.gsmarena.com/sony_ericsson_xperia_arc_s-4134.php) Arc S has 512 MB of RAM

But only 335MB are available to the user. Rest is reserved for system...
Sent from my LT15i using XDA Premium App

The ARC S is now on pre-order on SonyStyle.com USA.
http://store.sony.com/webapp/wcs/st...10151&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666394997