Database Users

"FAIL"-phone slower than other phones? Despite Snapdragon?

Looks like HTC has done it again and delivered a phone that should run crazy fast on paper BUT the actual performance is sub-par compared to other phones:
HTC Nexus One (FAILphone):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvzxZ8tOBcQ
HTC Magic and HTC Liquid Benchmark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O36LA6EhZg4

I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.

Do you work for Apple?

How does it do on PiBenchmark? That would provide more relevant results with its Snapdragon processor.

andythefan said:
I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doesn't the liquid come with an underclocked snapdragon?

I have a Magic that is rooted and tweaked to all hell and have played with the nexus. There is no doubt that the Google phone out performs any other phone that HTC has released. Ive seen it first hand. Its very fast and can handle so many things going on at the same time it makes my tummy tickle.

You are an idiot. Get your panties out of a bunch because you are pissed at the price and that it has no AT&T 3G. Should we all be pissed that the Droid only works on Verizon? Should we all be pissed that the iPhone only has AT&T 3G? The Nexus One is designed to be on T-Mobile. Sure, it will technically work on any GSM provider, but that isn't what it was intended to do. Google must have some deal with T-Mobile since they offers the most android phones.
And about the performance, that only shows video performance, and we dont know for sure what the N1 and A1 have in terms of a GPU

staulkor said:
And about the performance, that only shows video performance, and we dont know for sure what the N1 and A1 have in terms of a GPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought neocore tested the graphics chip with 3d benchamarking?

andythefan said:
I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's called system on a chip.
and the telling comparison is the Acer Liquid with its ~750MHz Snapdragon CPU (underclocked) vs. the Nexus One with its 1GHz Snapdragon CPU.
Looks like HTC screwed up again.
Ohhh. The other posters are pissed because their Messiah phone is a big FAIL?

What are you, 15 years old? Get off of mommy's computer and stop *****ing because you can't use the N1 on your network and get 3G.

Im guessing the benchmark isnt accurate. It goes beyond common senese that the fps are the same as the magic.

Maedhros said:
Im guessing the benchmark isnt accurate. It goes beyond common senese that the fps are the same as the magic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually ... it goes nicely with HTC's track record of under-performing hardware.

We have too many variables that makes comparing these results difficult. The HTC Magic and Liquid are running 1.6, while the Nexus is running 2.1. There are dramatically different levels of overhead on different Android system versions. There could be way more overhead on Android 2.1 than on 1.6. Additionally, you forgot to mention that the Nexus One is running at a resolution 2.5 times that of the HTC Magic.
Just because you're not going to buy the Nexus (because you recently purchased another handset and are trying to justify your purchase, or because it doesn't support your carrier's 3G frequencies, or otherwise) doesn't mean you are obliged to spam these forums with "OMG THIS PHONE IS FAIL"

the resolution used on the n1 is far higher than on the older devices remember

coolVariable said:
It's called system on a chip.
and the telling comparison is the Acer Liquid with its ~750MHz Snapdragon CPU (underclocked) vs. the Nexus One with its 1GHz Snapdragon CPU.
Looks like HTC screwed up again.
Ohhh. The other posters are pissed because their Messiah phone is a big FAIL?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only FAIL here are your posts. You sound like a Droid owner, pissed that your phone is about to lose top dog status. Just crawl back into your parents basement, fire up your xbox, and shoot some 12 year olds. It will help you get over the fact that you are a huge FAIL.

lol @semantics now thats funny man

I have had this phone for three weeks now and one thing its not is SLOW. Its way faster than my 3GS and my Mytouch.

I got 27.4 FPS on my G1.
I'm pretty sure the N1 isn't slower then the G1. That would be stupid.

I don't give a damn, I'm buying this joint day 1!! LOL

my theory:
1. Neocore is designed to work with android 1.6 and Open GL ES 1.1
2. The Liquid A1 has the same processor (albeit underclocked) and the same screen resolution as the N1 so you would expect them to perform similarliy. They dont perfrom the same so you must look at the differences between the phones. The biggest to me is the fact that the Liquid A1 has Android 1.6 and Open GL ES 1.1, the sweet spot for Neocore.
3. The N1 had Android 2.1 and Open GL ES 2.0, specs that are not supported by Neocore. How can Neocore accurately test the N1 when it does not support its specifications? The slowness is not due to poor hardware, rather it is due to old software trying to run on the latest hardware.

open gl es2.0( better games ) support on N1 ? when ?

I don't really play a lot of games on my phone but I have tried a number of games such as Abduction, Robo defense, wave blazer, speed forge and It's getting visually boring .. I wonder if android will ever get a real open gl es2.0 and be able to come out with games like what iPhone has; examples, need for speed and street fighter 4..
don't get me wrong, I love my phone very much but from time to time everyone craves for more.. I mean its not really a hardware issue since the N1 has better hardware specs than our friendly Apple counterparts .. come on we want Neon Floating Point support on our n1.... don't u agree ?

I cant wait to see the games improve

hopefully after the google io conference on may 19th..i read somewhere that google is going to be making gaming much more friendlier on android..until then try raging thunder 2 and asphalt 5
i really do miss my iphone games though :/

I made a post similer to this a wile back. Im also seeking better games. Theres a couple iphone games I hope that gets ported to android.

I hope they have games better than the iPhone...especially considering the hardware on this thing -man, it has better specs than some of the first computers I had!! haha

erebusting said:
I hope they have games better than the iPhone...especially considering the hardware on this thing -man, it has better specs than some of the first computers I had!! haha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unfortunately this specifically won't happen....we may have the far superior CPU, but we have no GPU....graphical rendering is all done CPU-side; whereas the iphone has a GPU chip in it. Our CPU is pretty ridiculously powerful, such that it performs graphically about 80% of what the iphone is capable of, but we are limited by the lack of a GPU onboard.

MaximReapage said:
Unfortunately this specifically won't happen....we may have the far superior CPU, but we have no GPU....graphical rendering is all done CPU-side; whereas the iphone has a GPU chip in it. Our CPU is pretty ridiculously powerful, such that it performs graphically about 80% of what the iphone is capable of, but we are limited by the lack of a GPU onboard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are you talking about? Of course the Nexus One does have a GPU, capable of OpenGL ES 1.1 and 2.0.

MaximReapage said:
Unfortunately this specifically won't happen....we may have the far superior CPU, but we have no GPU....graphical rendering is all done CPU-side; whereas the iphone has a GPU chip in it. Our CPU is pretty ridiculously powerful, such that it performs graphically about 80% of what the iphone is capable of, but we are limited by the lack of a GPU onboard.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, u're completely wrong. N1 has a separate chip for 3D rendering, a separate HARDWARE chip.
It's NOT CPU-based.

The snapdragon processor has a dedicated GPU called Adreno 200. A dedicated GPU is a requirement of Flash 10.1 and the reason why some older Android devices will not be able have it. The reason why some games on the iPhone look better than the N1 is because the N1 has a lot more pixels to push. The N1 can processes more Polys/second then iPhone but because there are less pixels the iPhone can render some games better than the N1.
Would be nice to see a software update the optimizes the GPU or perhaps on a new Cyanogen Rom

jlevy73 said:
The snapdragon processor has a dedicated GPU called Adreno 200. A dedicated GPU is a requirement of Flash 10.1 and the reason why some older Android devices will not be able have it. The reason why some games on the iPhone look better than the N1 is because the N1 has a lot more pixels to push. The N1 can processes more Polys/second then iPhone but because there are less pixels the iPhone can render some games better than the N1.
Would be nice to see a software update the optimizes the GPU or perhaps on a new Cyanogen Rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awww I thought we had the Hummingbird GPU.. I must have incorrectly read something somewhere. Oh no wait, that was the Samsung Galaxy S. It's much better than the Snapdragon, don't know about much, but it is better. 3 times better..
Why did Google render a Hummingbird in the video demonstrating the graphics processing of the Nexus -.-

Don't forget that any games designed for the Marketplace need to run on older versions of Android as well as older devices (such as the Dream). Because of that developers need to choose between making apps backwards compatible for maximum customers or writing apps better on only specific high-end devices (N1).

Eclair~ said:
Awww I thought we had the Hummingbird GPU.. I must have incorrectly read something somewhere. Oh no wait, that was the Samsung Galaxy S. It's much better than the Snapdragon, don't know about much, but it is better. 3 times better..
Why did Google render a Hummingbird in the video demonstrating the graphics processing of the Nexus -.-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep the Samsung S has a PowerVR SGX540 = 90 million triangles/sec versus Nexus One = 22 million triangles/sec
Not sure why Google did what they did but Samsung is using their new S5PC110 application processor. This processor contains an ARM Cortex-A8 core paired with a PowerVR SGX540 GPU.

andythefan said:
Don't forget that any games designed for the Marketplace need to run on older versions of Android as well as older devices (such as the Dream). Because of that developers need to choose between making apps backwards compatible for maximum customers or writing apps better on only specific high-end devices (N1).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In some respects that is true but look at Asphalt 5 for example. The game was designed with the iPhone in mind but when run on a stock N1, it lags real bad. I think a lot of these game developers make one version instead of platform specific ones.

Quadrant benchmark for Android on HD2 compared to SGS (What's in a score)

Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.

appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.

Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

appelflap said:
Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can tell, the HD2 got a decent score 'cos it was running Froyo. When we get bumped up to an official froyo build with JIT fully optimized, We should be top of the pile.

don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.

woops dbl post

alovell83 said:
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even then though, it's possible to write a benchmark which wins constantly for any phone.
In regards to "terrible I/O", that might even be due to a bug in the FAT32 drivers. Yes you can benchmark it, but it wont mean much. The best way is to actually TEST the applications you need, rather than select a phone based on benchmarks. However, you are possibly best off looking at the component specs, because they ignore software bugs.

scrizz said:
don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.

You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score

appelflap said:
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read in a post that the Galaxy S gets a 0 on the 2D score:
"JIT isn't fully enabled in the current froyo versions, and quadrant, frankly, is bull**** (for exmple, 2d acceleration gets the same weight in the final result as 3D. Due to the fact that the SGS doesn't have a dedicated 2D accelerator, quadrant doesn't try to use the cpu- it just gives a round zero in that part)"
I can't confirm this, but that definitely seems like a terrible set-up, seeing as how I'm pretty sure I have games run in 2D, so to say that it can't do it just seems wrong regardless of if the SGS has a dedicated 2D accelerator or not (so if you aren't testing the way it performs in real-world, why are you testing?)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=737787&page=3

Qazz~ said:
You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device

RyanZA said:
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want to speak for the other poster, and I agree with your premise, however, it isn't actually solving the issue at hand. Better FPS wouldn't be noticed, however, it would give a better score and, more importantly, indicate it's potential. So, getting 56FPS isn't doing the phone any justice within the score, which is what reviews are using, giving it an artificially low score, and putting it more in line with units that can't compete on higher end games. So, when a site like anand pushes 150FPS on a game, I know that means that their rig is entirely too powerful for the game in question, but it still means something when you compare it to the lower end graphics card that only gets 90...then when they run Crisis you see these results play out more with differences that we can notice with the eye.

I think the HD2 gets that score because, as I can see in the video, the CPU tests run faster compared to my SGS, probably because of Froyo, and I know, from the time I had the Diamond and the HD2, that the internal memory and RAM are very fast. Sadly SGS has a slow internal memory, atleast when used by the phone`s software, when copying from PC is faster than my class 6 microSD. Luckily, we have mimocan`s fix. Hope this will be fixed in future FW`s.

NexusHD2 with-FRG83D V1.7 with hastarin r8.5.1 On my HD2 got 1920 in quadrant,31.5 on neocore, and 37 on linmark.

The lag might be because you are using launcher pro, I use launcher pro and sometimes it makes the the lock lag on my phone but it doesn't happen when I use the default lock also if you have alot of Widgets on your screen it will cause lag also

appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same galaxy s scores 6000+ in quadrant with custem roms

The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not. Comparing apples to orenges in an apple juice contest doesn't really prove much. Use real life feel. If you care about the scores a rom can be made to get you over 3000 quad score but is laggy as hell. Don't believe me? Look at my sig

interesting... I was using quadrant to see how a stock xxjvo and gingerreal compared. Surely that would indicate a real speed difference and not just be some kind of "hack" ?

zelendel said:
The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right.
HD2 uses two android OS :
- Cyanogenmod, that is faster than our samsung os..
- Nexus one's port to HD2, greatly optimized by google...
It's really fast. I upgraded my father's HD2 last month, replacing windows in the NAND with CM7. It really makes a big change, the phone is like brand new ^^

http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1012556
Quadrant is pretty flawed. And I say that being someone who had a phone (before modifications) that was mid-range in Quadrant (Galaxy S), and having a phone that's right top of the heap (Galaxy S II)

Is galaxy s Gpu really that power

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

If froyo is optimized for snapdragon processors then why why samsung used humingbird

If froyo is optimized for snapdragon processors then why samsung used humingbird processor

Why do you assume this? The two cpu's share much in common.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

jaysins said:
Why do you assume this? The two cpu's share much in common.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
benchmarks and system speed

dadyal said:
benchmarks and system speed
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why would Samsung make their own chip? Put simply, because they can. Samsung has the facilities and expertise needed to make their own chip, and by so doing they avoid the need of purchasing chips from another vendor (in this case, their competition: Qualcomm).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://pocketnow.com/hardware-1/snapdragon-versus-hummingbird

dadyal said:
If froyo is optimized for snapdragon processors then why samsung used humingbird processor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
because they didn't want to use the ****ty gpu that comes with the original snapdragon (the newer snapdragon like in the dhd has a good gpu).

Because hummingbird is vastly superior in real world scenarios

Quadrant and linpack as well as most CPU benchmarks that rely on math being done by FPU run much quicker on the snapdragon because of its 128 bit register vs hummingbirds 64. I believe the snapdragons can turn half of it off to save power too. This explains part of the benchmarks but the hummingbird has optimizations snapdragon doesn't, and vise versa,but is suppose to be faster in most real world scenarios as Samsung claims and judging by browser load time comparisons I've seen and how well it runs android 2.1 I'd be inclined to agree. It keeps up with a nexus running 2.2 which is very reassuring so I'd worry less on benchmarks if I were you unless you really feel the need to show your friends how fast your phone can calculate pi to nth degree.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

@ darkimmortal, Is it really? Then why does my n1 with its "crap" snapdragon CPU run everything faster?
On paper yes hummingbird is better, but in the real world as you put it, its only as good as the software that runs on it, and I've not found anything yet that runs faster thanks to having a hummingbird than it would on say an n1 or desire.

The sgs is crippled by rfs, no processor can make up for that. In 3d games the sgs out performs any snapdragon based phones
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

jaysins said:
It keeps up with a nexus running 2.2 which is very reassuring so I'd worry less on benchmarks if I were you unless you really feel the need to show your friends how fast your phone can calculate pi to nth degree.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No disrespect but a well setup nexus on 2.2 is noticeably faster than even the most streamlined lag fixed sgs. The sgs wins the quadrant benchmark but in actual use the nexus is a fair bit faster.

tameracingdriver said:
@ darkimmortal, Is it really? Then why does my n1 with its "crap" snapdragon CPU run everything faster?
On paper yes hummingbird is better, but in the real world as you put it, its only as good as the software that runs on it, and I've not found anything yet that runs faster thanks to having a hummingbird than it would on say an n1 or desire.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You take into consideration just the CPU, N1 and SGS's file systems are different resulting in SGS to be bottlenecked; SGS's main plus is the GPU power, try running those types of GPU heavy items on N1 and they will not run as well. That's the main benefit of Hummingbird compared to Snap but don't just rely on comparing CPU's, there are more things at work here.
tameracingdriver said:
No disrespect but a well setup nexus on 2.2 is noticeably faster than even the most streamlined lag fixed sgs. The sgs wins the quadrant benchmark but in actual use the nexus is a fair bit faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant doesn't mean much, placebo effect at work here. Just a benchmark and doesn't translate (much) into real-world performance. Remember that Google also developed 2.2 almost specifically with Nexus One in mind resulting in more benefits on a N1 than a lot of phones.

lokhor said:
In 3d games the sgs out performs any snapdragon based phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Admittedly I've not tried them all, and I admit the sgs runs the graphics benchmarks in quadrant noticeably faster, but the games I've tried all run about the same, so what good is that super powerful gpu if nothing takes advantage of it?

Try some gameloft games like asphalt 5, the sgs is a lot smoother
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Ill give it a try. Games are nice but not my main use, the ones I've tried so far including some 3d ones have been fine on the n1 so far.

Hummingbird is the processor of choice for the two most famous smartphones in the world at the moment. Our best among the rest Galaxy and the Iphone 4. So it's the winners choice.

tameracingdriver said:
Ill give it a try. Games are nice but not my main use, the ones I've tried so far including some 3d ones have been fine on the n1 so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You could try using a GPU benchmark rather than a system wide benchmark to determine GPU power. Neocore for example is strictly GPU and SGS outperforms N1 almost two-fold.
Again, that is a benchmark and you just have to try out different apps and games to test out GPU's for yourself.

Well for what its worth I've just tried asphalt 5, on the n1 and honestly its just as smooth as on the sgs, so in the end I still say there seems no real advantage in the real world.

dnsp said:
Hummingbird is the processor of choice for the two most famous smartphones in the world at the moment. Our best among the rest Galaxy and the Iphone 4. So it's the winners choice.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
makes me wonder, if only Samsung could put iOS4 into Galaxy. we would have the fastest phone for sure,
unfortunately they builded Apple hardware and loaded crapy Android,

tameracingdriver said:
Well for what its worth I've just tried asphalt 5, on the n1 and honestly its just as smooth as on the sgs, so in the end I still say there seems no real advantage in the real world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry mate but I have to disagree. Having owned a Nexus One, a HTC Desire and a SGS, I can tell you that the Nexus One was the fastest for opening apps, market, etc. The SGS fell between the nexus and the desire. I think each processor has been optimised for different things.
There is a HUGE difference in the graphics department. Asphalt, especially the old hardware accelerated versions (the new ones are dumbed down so they work on the snapdragon phones) were extremely laggy on the nexus and desire. on the SGS theyre very smooth and dont have the annoying multitouch bug.
Try the other gameloft games (sandstorm), polarbit (toon warz), pretty much all of the (few) 3d intensive apps. Very noticeable.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WNt1EQYheQ
the difference in performance was the reason I switched, esp the annoying multi touch, and welcomed my way into a world of sgs lag issues and a non working gps
Im not a big gamer but I do occasionally pull out a title. The differences in the processors is also apparent if you use rockplayer to watch videos.
imho, I preferred the hardware and AOSP feel of the nexus but wish the hummingbird processor+gpu had been used instead of the snaprdragon (or alternatively the snapdragon with a better gpu).

sonci said:
makes me wonder, if only Samsung could put iOS4 into Galaxy. we would have the fastest phone for sure,
unfortunately they builded Apple hardware and loaded crapy Android,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hope you're kidding on this one!
iOS is a closed system with a closed mind. Apps have to go trough intensive aprouval for the AllMighty and AllKnowing apple before hitting the market and, for small idiotic mistake, like a logo to close to the one of the AllMighty, it won't be aprouved.
And not to talk about all the iTune that you have to install just to get it to sync/update... you think Kies is crappy, try iTune on windows...you'll get a couple of services in the background in bonus with the resource hog app!
And, on another note, you should all take in consideration all the GPU intessive task in android, Gaming is only part of it... don't forget browsing, gallery, video playback (you can record a 720p video and watch it back full fluid).
Frankly, I don't realy get all the fuss about the so called "lag" on SGS... I don't realy get any at all and I'm still on the original (no lag fix) rom...