Database Users

Nexus one vs Droid gpu

Which one is better? Some sites say droid some sites say nexus one..i dont know what to believe :/

how about me vs both of them, I'll take 'em both on!

resinous said:
how about me vs both of them, I'll take 'em both on!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im talking about "graphics processing unit"
not "greatest penis usage"

The GPU in the Droid is the same as the one in the iPhone 3GS and the iPod touch third-gen (PowerVR SGX 535), and it is marginally faster and more capable than the one in the Nexus, from what I gather. The Nexus makes up for it by crushing the TI OMAP CPU with its Snapdragon.
There are a few graphics benchmarking sites and apps around. The Qualcomm-specific app that lots of people use will give you 35FPS on a Nexus and around 23 on a Droid / Milestone, all at stock clocks, with no JIT. however, that app is NOT written for the OMAP architecture, and, for example, a ROM'd Hero will also apparently beat a Droid / Milestone, scoring about 25, from what I've heard.
That last point is important - any app written / compiled specifically for a certain architecture, and then ported or forced onto another will typically show much better performance on one or the other, regardless of which processor is "faster". Just look at console gaming. Some games are better on the XBox 360, some are better on the PS3 (more and more, they are better on PS3 as devs are exploiting the BluRay advantage and the 6/7 core CPU, but I digress...).
From what I've read, the new Samsung architecture is meant to be much better than both, however, you are stuck with Sammy's dev and support history. Ugh.

Nexus One processes 22 million triangles/sec.
Droid processes 7 millions triangles/sec.
iPhone 3gs processes 28 million triangles/sec.
Samsung Galaxy S processes 90 million triangles/sec.
This is what I read somewhere....

Asphalt 5 runs smooth on the droid, and laggy on the nexus.
For games (opengl) i'd say droid is better. For general use it's the nexus. Maybe if theres gonna be an update for asphalt it runs smooth on the nexus, but untill that it doesn't

cypher21 said:
Asphalt 5 runs smooth on the droid, and laggy on the nexus.
For games (opengl) i'd say droid is better. For general use it's the nexus. Maybe if theres gonna be an update for asphalt it runs smooth on the nexus, but untill that it doesn't
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone

bobdude5 said:
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but afaik asphalt 5 is the first OpenGL 2.0 ES game for android.

bobdude5 said:
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The nexus has very poor fillrate. Just displaying a 2D image of it's screen size uses 75% of graphics processing power hence lagging in most 3D games. Raging thunder 2 and exzeus does not have better graphics and perhaps "sh1t" graphics compared to asphalt 5. PowerVR on the droid can do 14million/polyi but underclocked so it does 7million/poly and 250m/fill rate. The fill rate is already 2 times more than Adreno 200 on paper hence Asphalt 5 running much smoother on Adreno 205, PowerVR 530/535 and 540.
My galaxy s has PowerVR SGX 540 with 40million/poly with 1000m/fill rate. I underclocked the CPU to 400mhz and game still ran smoothly. This proves nexus one was lagging in asphalt 5 because fill rate was poor on the GPU

It's known that the GPU on Nexus is sub-par, as it is a weak point of 8x50 Snapdragon. All the newer device families, based on 8x55 and above, don't suffer from that weakness. You didn't have to revive almost 2 year old thread to say that

Jack_R1 said:
It's known that the GPU on Nexus is sub-par, as it is a weak point of 8x50 Snapdragon. All the newer device families, based on 8x55 and above, don't suffer from that weakness. You didn't have to revive almost 2 year old thread to say that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A weakness in it's package , 8*55 has twice the fill rate

MrAndroid12 said:
A weakness in it's package , 8*55 has twice the fill rate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And 4 times the polygons rendered per frame.

Vibrant is a best when it comes to graphics!!

KI my vibrant beats my g1 when it's running on 100mhz in the an3d benchmark app. Thats beasty. Also out also plays asphalt 5hd on 400mhz smoothly. I'd like to see if any snapdragon books do that!! Haha. Even when our phones software suck, they still write on top.

ha OLD news
helikido said:
KI my vibrant beats my g1 when it's running on 100mhz in the an3d benchmark app. Thats beasty. Also out also plays asphalt 5hd on 400mhz smoothly. I'd like to see if any snapdragon books do that!! Haha. Even when our phones software suck, they still write on top.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am shocked because you just knew that and btw it is not fair comparing with G1.

Did you really just compare a Vibrant to a G1...?

helikido said:
KI my vibrant beats my g1 when it's running on 100mhz in the an3d benchmark app. Thats beasty. Also out also plays asphalt 5hd on 400mhz smoothly. I'd like to see if any snapdragon books do that!! Haha. Even when our phones software suck, they still write on top.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, the GPU is.
So it's not surprising you can play a game smoothly on it with the CPU ambitiously underclocked.
The CPU isn't doing most of the work, the GPU is, so the fact that the CPU is underclocked so low doesn't have as much of an impact on performance.
Second gen iPhones didn't have 1GHz CPUs with last gen GPUs in them, and games performed quite well on them, for example...

N8ter said:
For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, the GPU is.
So it's not surprising you can play a game smoothly on it with the CPU ambitiously underclocked.
The CPU isn't doing most of the work, the GPU is, so the fact that the CPU is underclocked so low doesn't have as much of an impact on performance.
Second gen iPhones didn't have 1GHz CPUs with last gen GPUs in them, and games performed quite well on them, for example...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I know.reason why the 3gs can achieve iphone 4 graphics cuz they both have the same sgx535

anthonys2r said:
Did you really just compare a Vibrant to a G1...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THis made me lol.

Paging Dr B said:
THis made me lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was just bored.

N8ter said:
For most games, the CPU isn't the bottleneck, the GPU is.
So it's not surprising you can play a game smoothly on it with the CPU ambitiously underclocked.
The CPU isn't doing most of the work, the GPU is, so the fact that the CPU is underclocked so low doesn't have as much of an impact on performance.
Second gen iPhones didn't have 1GHz CPUs with last gen GPUs in them, and games performed quite well on them, for example...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
games for iphone are optimized for the device.. look at the droid X that has the same GPU as the 3GS, but dungeon defenders does not run as smooth on droid X.. why is that?
hardware acceleration?
ram allocation?

Ms_Vibrant said:
games for iphone are optimized for the device.. look at the droid X that has the same GPU as the 3GS, but dungeon defenders does not run as smooth on droid X.. why is that?
hardware acceleration?
ram allocation?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android has too many different devices with different hardware, so that means the games codes are not optimized to run and take full advantage of the hardware. Thats why the ps3 has 5 year old hardware and it still had better graphics than some off the high end gaming pcs.

Ms_Vibrant said:
games for iphone are optimized for the device.. look at the droid X that has the same GPU as the 3GS, but dungeon defenders does not run as smooth on droid X.. why is that?
hardware acceleration?
ram allocation?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stable Hardware platform, and stabe device specs.
Also, iOS is just better for game development than Android, though the latter is getting better.

I loled anyways no dude not a fair comparison the first android phone with a gpu not even the first iphone loses
I miss my g1 though
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Alanrocks15 said:
I loled anyways no dude not a fair comparison the first android phone with a gpu not even the first iphone loses
I miss my g1 though
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you ever finish that hero rom?
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Ms_Vibrant said:
games for iphone are optimized for the device.. look at the droid X that has the same GPU as the 3GS, but dungeon defenders does not run as smooth on droid X.. why is that?
hardware acceleration?
ram allocation?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The OS. Apple has engineers and devs working on 3 devices. iPhone, iPod Touch, and the iPad. They have one huge team working on 3 devices that for the most part are nearly identical. Motorola alone has a crap load of phones all on different versions of the same OS that are all spec'ed differently. Assuming that motorola has the same amount of dev's as apple (unlikely), they now have to divide their time between all of their devices. Then we have to look at the devs of the game and find out what they're using as their test device, and then also see if this is just a port or if they built it from the ground up for android. If it's anything like a port from the 360 to a PS3 or vice versa then it makes sense why it runs better on one platform than the other. But I don't really know, i'm just talking out of my arse.

Paging Dr B said:
The OS. Apple has engineers and devs working on 3 devices. iPhone, iPod Touch, and the iPad. They have one huge team working on 3 devices that for the most part are nearly identical. Motorola alone has a crap load of phones all on different versions of the same OS that are all spec'ed differently. Assuming that motorola has the same amount of dev's as apple (unlikely), they now have to divide their time between all of their devices. Then we have to look at the devs of the game and find out what they're using as their test device, and then also see if this is just a port or if they built it from the ground up for android. If it's anything like a port from the 360 to a PS3 or vice versa then it makes sense why it runs better on one platform than the other. But I don't really know, i'm just talking out of my arse.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or because of 'fragmentation'? Adroid doesn't have hardware acceleration yet, so high end 3d games will only work well with powerful gpu like that of galaxy s..

Ms_Vibrant said:
Look at the droid X that has the same GPU as the 3GS, but dungeon defenders does not run as smooth on droid X.. why is that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's most likely because the Galaxy S line has the PowerVR 540 and the Droid 2 / Droid X / iPhone all have a lesser / earlier PowerVR GPU (535). Hence why the Dungeon Defenders description itself list them mid-range and not high-end like the other devices listed.

epakrat75 said:
That's most likely because the Galaxy S line has the PowerVR 540 and the Droid 2 / Droid X / iPhone all have a lesser / earlier PowerVR GPU (535). Hence why the Dungeon Defenders description itself list them mid-range and not high-end like the other devices listed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even with what we have, nothing looks comparable to infinity blade.

Galaxy S 2 and FPSE (9th June)

hey all
i thought id share with you for those who would be interested in my first hands on experience with the samsung galaxy s2
well i went round my friends house after work, as he was waiting for one to be delivered as an upgrade, anyway he rang me to say that it was here,
so i thought id go up and have alook.
the first thing i did when he gave it me was.... drop it lol
he passed it me and it slipped right through my fingers it was so thin
it bounced on his hard laminated floor a few times but he just laughed.
it is a nice device, very slim altho abit wider than the play
the brightness on the screen was great
and it was very very snappy scrolling across homescreens and loading up apps,
exploring the memory with astro. i was impressed
and alot lighter than the play aswell
the quadrant scores were off the chart getting something like 3k+
linpack he was getting 48
i did notice that when running quadrant some of the textures were just plain solid shapes no actual textures. i thought maybe thats got something to do with that mali chipset that i heard didnt support certain texture compression but anyway.
i told him to fire up fpse to see what that ran like with the new fpse.
mines runs great hovering around at around 45-50fps
on most games. until i put on screen filtering
and that has a massive impact on fps it drops to around
27-30fps and games become unplayable even with frame skip on max
enhanced 3d rendering has little effect on fps so i keep that on
anyway i thought that the galaxy s 2 with the 1.2 dualcore and the mali 400mp
would power along when putting screen filtering on.
so i tried tekken 3 loaded it up. ran it but without screen filtering on
and it was buttery smooth stuck at 60fps.
then i turned on screen filtering and it dropped to 30/35fps
and was the same unplayable state mine was.
i was gob smacked surely a dualcore would best this???
my mate said, so looks like your not missing much gaming wise then compared to mine. i just smiled ,he hasnt got his for gaming mind.
i dont know if there was summat goin on, or a imcompatability with fpse
but it was an interesting discovery. i tried afew other games and they all were the same.
so as far as emulation and fpse goes were not getting left behind because we have no dualcore cpu.

Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.

I have both, well sort off, play dead gone for repairing with sony, so bought S2 in the mean time, to tell you, S2 with 1gb RAM and Dual core Processor which can be overclocked to stable 1.66 ghz is way fast as compared to play, trust me, graphic wise both have 16m colors, but s2 with super amoled does it somehow better...i miss playing games the play way...thats all...I guess S2 is the world's fastest stable phone for now.....atleast I have both so know it...

shotgunfool said:
Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu

crispyduckling said:
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.

I tried tekken on it, could see puches coming at me my thumbb was always in the way. I told the owner to uninstall as gaming on something like that was a joke. He didnt agree until he tried my play.
Sent from my R800a using XDA Premium App

RacecarBMW said:
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2

crispyduckling said:
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reason I switched too.
Sent from my R800i using XDA App

Touchscreens suck for gaming.
No amount of processing power in the World will overcome this fact.

PSP games on the Xperia Play.

I was wondering if it wil be possible to run PSP games on this device.
I should be getting it next week. The other games sound great but I'm really looking into playing MHP3rd (great game if you don't know it)
I understand there is no current way to play PSP games but, is anyone working on it?
Thanks in advance!

If you bought this phone thinking of playing PSP games, you better return it. There is no way that this hardware, or the next couple of generations, can emulate PSP.
From N64 below though... It's fair game

What he said. If your talking about emulating psp on the xperia play then thats impossible, even on the most powerful smartphones it would be impossible. (well maybe not impossible but definitely very very very slow, just look at the DS emulator)

A PSP emulator would be very slow, yet the Dreamcast emulator still in development ran the entire Shenmue introduction at 102% speed on the Galaxy S II? Is the PSP really that much more powerful than the Dreamcast?

Selim873 said:
A PSP emulator would be very slow, yet the Dreamcast emulator still in development ran the entire Shenmue introduction at 102% speed on the Galaxy S II? Is the PSP really that much more powerful than the Dreamcast?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The psp is so powerful that if I were to post it's specs, there is a 3.14% chance this entire site can implode.
Sent from my R800x using Tapatalk

You're talking about a dual core device with 333 mhz which takes a nice 2.5 GHz with 4 GB Ram to run its most well known emulator properly. It's true that Java programs like Jpcsp need more oomph than programs in other languages like C, but emulating PSP is a daunting task, unfeasible by today's state of the art mobile hardware.
Contrast the single core, 200 mhz processor in Sega's console. its emulators run with less specs than PSP emulators, and it is very plausible that the Xplay won't boot but the simplest of games, not unlike today when slower phones can only run Mario 64 without sound.

Wait, there's a DreamCast Emulator on the way??? Holy moly that is going to be amazing, will the Xperia run it alright?

PSP games won't be emulated on the Xperia Play - HOWEVER
I believe the phone's specs are actually better than the PSP's specs - so in theory at least, PSP games could be ported to the Xperia Play. Not emulated, but properly ported.
That's if Sony can be bothered.

Erikwithafro said:
Wait, there's a DreamCast Emulator on the way??? Holy moly that is going to be amazing, will the Xperia run it alright?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It works and it runs full speed on a galaxy s 2, the developer hasn't released it though. Then again he made a dreamcast emulator for the psp years ago and never released that either. :/

bubblegumballoon said:
It works and it runs full speed on a galaxy s 2, the developer hasn't released it though. Then again he made a dreamcast emulator for the psp years ago and never released that either. :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder if it's actually using both cores though, if it isn't I'm sure a OCed XP has a shot at emulating it.
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk

Just one thing about the title of the thread...
"PSP games on the Xperia Play." ----> Statement.
"PSP games on the Xperia Play?" ----> Question.
If you are gonna ask something, use a question, ok? Thanks.

Clienterror said:
I wonder if it's actually using both cores though, if it isn't I'm sure a OCed XP has a shot at emulating it.
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a port of the pc emulator NullDC which only uses one core, Its very unlikely that the emulator uses both cores. (no emulators use both yet).

White_Pointer said:
PSP games won't be emulated on the Xperia Play - HOWEVER
I believe the phone's specs are actually better than the PSP's specs - so in theory at least, PSP games could be ported to the Xperia Play. Not emulated, but properly ported.
That's if Sony can be bothered.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The XPlay is FAR more powerful than the PSP, the PSP had 64mb ram and a 333 mhz processor. So while that may not be enough of an exponential increase to do an emulator, ports would be very possible.
Just have to wait for the Suite to come out to see whats available. Too bad it feels like that won't happen anytime soon.

I'd say they are probably timing the launch of the PS Suite to coincide with the launch of the Vita. Just a hunch I have.

Ignorance is... bliss.

White_Pointer said:
PSP games won't be emulated on the Xperia Play - HOWEVER
I believe the phone's specs are actually better than the PSP's specs - so in theory at least, PSP games could be ported to the Xperia Play. Not emulated, but properly ported.
That's if Sony can be bothered.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have alot to learn my friend

bubblegumballoon said:
It works and it runs full speed on a galaxy s 2, the developer hasn't released it though. Then again he made a dreamcast emulator for the psp years ago and never released that either. :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen videos of progress on the PSP, and there's only one video of his Wii port. They both run severely slow, he probably couldn't even optimize them specifically for those systems as easily as he could for the Android. Android on the other hand, have been getting more and more powerful as time goes by.
Even compared to the Wii...
Wii: 88MB Ram, CPU clocked at 729MHz.
Xperia Play: 512MB Ram, CPU clocked at 1.00GHz.

Selim873 said:
I've seen videos of progress on the PSP, and there's only one video of his Wii port. They both run severely slow, he probably couldn't even optimize them specifically for those systems as easily as he could for the Android. Android on the other hand, have been getting more and more powerful as time goes by.
Even compared to the Wii...
Wii: 88MB Ram, CPU clocked at 729MHz.
Xperia Play: 512MB Ram, CPU clocked at 1.00GHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think it will and power of our hardware with Android yesterday after almost 2 years, I turned on again the psp fat to give to my son and curiosity I put the N64 emulator super mario64 and are appalled by slow and he was without sound emulation, with which even if it was activated was unplayable ....... I mean that today's technology and the very top and specifically to emulate the PSP on and Android difficult but not impossible;-)

Selim873 said:
I've seen videos of progress on the PSP, and there's only one video of his Wii port. They both run severely slow, he probably couldn't even optimize them specifically for those systems as easily as he could for the Android. Android on the other hand, have been getting more and more powerful as time goes by.
Even compared to the Wii...
Wii: 88MB Ram, CPU clocked at 729MHz.
Xperia Play: 512MB Ram, CPU clocked at 1.00GHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats fair enough but the wii has a much much much more powerfull gpu than the play meaning it only needs a percentage of the memory/processing power to display much more complex graphics. Plus consoles have dedicated graphics, the play dosent.
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk

I see a lot of people mentioning clock speed in emulation arguments. What you have to remember is that clock speed is only relevant when your comparing two CPU of similar architecture. A dual core Pentium IIII clocked at 3.9 Ghz is not even AS fast as a core 2 duo clocked at say 3.0. A better architecture means better performance, and while gaming consoles don't always have a high clock speed, they usually have tightly integrated designs with efficient architectures.
Sent from my R800x using xda premium

S4Pro Adreno 320 vs 360/PS3

I assume that the S4 Pro is MUCH faster than anything used in the xbox and ps2. I assume its faster than the 360 and ps3. Is that really the case though? The games look like crap on the current gen consoles and many mobile games are catching up. From a purely specs perspective is the Adreno 320/S4 Pro superior?

I would seriously doubt that but i don't know enough to say that for sure. Sure mobile CPUs are pretty good but they are limited by their thermal envelopes.

Compared to the PS3? NO. the cell processor is very advanced even if it's partly locked down. (there are 2-3 cells that aren't used)
Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2

Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.

Eric-1987 said:
Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't be more wrong. It hasn't got more CPU and GPU cores. It has more RAM but the PS3 doesn't have to run Android. Also, very few PS3 games run at qHD res. One game is Black Ops, but it does this because it runs 60 FPS. Most games nowadays render at 720p or near it.
Also, I have yet to see a mobile game that comes even close to PS3 games nowadays. Maybe some mobile games look better than some PS3 release titles, but that's it.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app

Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.

Does it really even matter? If you bought your phone as an alternative to a gaming console or handheld gaming device you bought it for the wrong reason.
Also if you want to compare specs, compare a PS3 or XBox 360 to a phone that came out 7 years ago.

Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a single PPE and 8 SPE-s. One SPE is used by the OS and one is locked.
Yes, it does run a form of Linux, but what I originally meant was that its footprint is very small, it only consumes 20-30 MB of RAM compared to Android which needs several hundred MB-s and also CPU power to run background services.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app

Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.

shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly all this.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app

shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.

Eric-1987 said:
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct

The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.

Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure it's more powerful than either the PS2 or Xbox, but there's no way it would ever emulate them if that's what you're getting at there
Not to mention, the Android OS uses a lot of resources, unlike a simpler console such as those

No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.

Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Give it up already. On paper the N4 is great and all for what it is, but it can't compete with a gaming console. Try hooking up your phone to a big screen hdtv and see how it compares graphics wise to a gaming console if you have one. After all, the SGS4G doesn't have a disc drive on it so I don't know how you could play a PS1 game one it. You must only be playing pirated games via a 3 or 4 inch screen to come to the assumption that a cell phone comes close to any of the current gaming consoles graphics wise. Afterall, there is a reason they make cell phones, dvd/bluray players, video game consoles, tvs, etc... They each have their own benefits.

Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.

Venekor said:
No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/

biffsmash said:
Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually PS3 has v-sync enabled for lots of games which means no screen tear.
And no, the Xbox doesn't have better graphics. If Uncharted wasn't enough, take a look at Heavy Rain or The Last of Us.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
---------- Post added at 03:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 PM ----------
noname81 said:
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got to agree with this. Mobile games often have just a lot of pointless effects which make them look beautiful.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app