Related
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)
I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!
SamsungVibrant said:
I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure there will be plenty of scores on the 16th
slowz3r said:
Pretty sure there will be plenty of scores on the 16th
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya but some people get their hands on it early, like some of the tech sites do, i.e. phonedog. Maybe someone had found a review video showing Quadrant Advanced being run, and could post it Thats all.
SamsungVibrant said:
Ya but some people get their hands on it early, like some of the tech sites do, i.e. phonedog. Maybe someone had found a review video showing Quadrant Advanced being run, and could post it Thats all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that if androidandme get ahold of one early theyll bench it
SamsungVibrant said:
I'm really curious to see the "Quadrant Advanced" or "Quadrant Professional" scores. In particular, the cpu score. Wondering how 2.3 runs on the Hummingbird, since the Dalvik JIT Compiler in 2.2 didn't really offer the Hummingbird the same amount of cpu performance gain as the Scorpians did.
Can't find it anywhere on the internet, if you get your hands on a Nexus S, please run Quadrant Advanced, and post the screen shot. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is obsolete. It was designed for Snapdragon architecture.
Engadget just ran the dual core LG Star running 2.2 through quadrant and it only scored 2100. I know Galaxy s phones with the file system fix has beat this easily, which makes me wonder, will the Nexus S have the same file issue problem?
If the dual core lg star was coming out next Thursday as well, I would still get the Nexus S.
the nexus s will have ext4 on the system, data, cache etc. and vfat on the sdcard. so there won't be any file system problem like the SGS already has.
Can't wait for futuremark to release their mobile benchmark and not have to rely on this quadrant bs
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM_3QG4U63I&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Also its been said million times galaxy s lag fix trick quadrant I/O scores not actual performance gain.
I don't see nexus s getting any higher than 16K at moment vibrant around 12-13 with Eugene new non lag fix that's base off new leaked firmware for i9000
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
I'm fully sure that the Nexus S will have a wonderfully smooth experience.
And I think that this is all that matters.
someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread
bananenlarry said:
someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ya I don't know why he made a whole new thread instead of posting it in here. Anyway, I think he referenced phonedog, but I can't find it anywhere on phonedogs site.
SamsungVibrant said:
Ya I don't know why he made a whole new thread instead of posting it in here. Anyway, I think he referenced phonedog, but I can't find it anywhere on phonedogs site.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He did it because he was at work at the time, found the info and was excited to share it.
bananenlarry said:
someone talked about 1631 quadrant score in another thread
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ummm..... 1631 is not a very compelling score for my N1, so the NS had better exceed 1631 by a mile, or else what's the point???
makelegs said:
Ummm..... 1631 is not a very compelling score for my N1, so the NS had better exceed 1631 by a mile, or else what's the point???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.
Anderdroid said:
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How is quadrant obsolete? Mind stating some factual evidence that shows quadrant is obsolete, or were you just stating your opinion as fact?
irishrally said:
If the dual core lg star was coming out next Thursday as well, I would still get the Nexus S.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
U LIE!!!!!!!
I don't I will still buy NS instead of that LG Star with dual core!
Reasons:
1. I am so tired waiting manufacturer or mobile operator to provide software update. So, pure Google experience is my biggest reason. I want to get the first update, always
Oh yeah, I don't have much time for rooting and ROM flashing.
2. The LG Star dual core benchmark are not that impressive. It is faster, but not by far, not fast enough to be significant. Hummingbird CPU + sgx 540 gpu platform is still not fully utilized.
I think, the dual core is more towards tablet. Good single core platform is more than enough to handle Android mobile phone, at least right now
andyandrwew said:
U LIE!!!!!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Check it out
YoutubeDotcomSlashwatch?v=wcOMLbIRmoQ
It's only the standard version and doesn't work at all...
Anderdroid said:
Quadrant score is obselete. You will see drastic actual UI improvements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant, used as a benchmark standard, clearly isn't obsolete, because here we are talking about and comparing quadrant scores.
I think what you mean is that the score itself is pretty much useless as a predictor of user experience. In that sense, I couldn't agree more!!! I've seen ROMs that get higher scores run like total crap, and ROMs with lower scores run like a dream. I've also seen ROMs with high scores run super-fantastic, too!
My point is...that the Nexus S had better outperform my Nexus 1 on Quadrant, otherwise it's just not that impressive of a statement for the Nexus S hardware OR the Gingerbread software, when compared to my N1 (on CM).
I really hope this phone kicks ass, b/c I hope to upgrade my wife's bb to the Nexus S. But, I know that I'm gonna play with a lot, too.... so I want the goods!
Just my .02
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.
Now that's better mm? What do you think
http://www.inspiredgeek.com/2011/03...4210-vs-tegra-2-which-version-will-be-better/
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/for...xy-s2-featuring-samsung-exynos-4210-revealed/
Feel free to comment, interpret and discuss. This is the latest I could find.
Links to benchmark of a tablet using same CPU/GPU and same clock frequency
as SGS2. Exynos seems capable to do much better than in the benchmarks you included.
It could be a indication that the SGS2 SW is pretty old.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=12361281&postcount=377
The tablet benchmark is pretty impressive. Even with its higher resolution, it beats tegra. Hopefully the performance will reflect on the Galaxy S 2.
Impressive benchmark. I didn't know about GPU Exynos is good.
But battery draining is less maybe!
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
These benchmarks are not new at all, they are here for weeks, get up...
LG Optimus Speed kicks SGS2's Ass?
Check this out!
http://translate.google.com/transla...est-lg-optimus-speed-schneller-als-galaxy-s2/
HTC_Spree said:
Check this out!
http://translate.google.com/transla...est-lg-optimus-speed-schneller-als-galaxy-s2/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice to see a tuned LG getting hi bench.
Real question is, what will the SGS2 get when it;s tuned.
Or what will the 2 devices straight out the box score (as most consumers will use it that way).
These benchmarks are for the e-penis , what counts how fast it feels , how it feels in the hand , how the ui is , how the sound is , how the camera is and what it can run smoothly and countless other things.
Still a good result for the sgs2 though , big quadrant scores and all stock. We all how Quadrant can drastically change with lil changes.
HTC_Spree said:
Check this out!
http://translate.google.com/transla...est-lg-optimus-speed-schneller-als-galaxy-s2/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It looks like it s not even an O2X ! I bet it s a Nexus S looking at the top bar, an overclocked Nexus S
Btw everyone know that quadrant is flawed
Well our snapdragon s4 is now considered "old" which is a bummer! Had to happen at some point tho I suppose. So how does this new chip compare? Does anyone know what's been improved?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
fredcorp6 said:
Well our snapdragon s4 is now considered "old" which is a bummer! Had to happen at some point tho I suppose. So how does this new chip compare? Does anyone know what's been improved?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S4 Pro and the Snapdragon 600 are basically the same chip. The model number is almost identical (APQ8064 vs APQ8064T; the Plus, Prime, and 800 all have very different model numbers), same fab process at 28 nm, same L0, L1, and L2 caches, same GPU. The difference is higher clock speed (max 1.7 vs max 1.9 GHz), and potentially a faster/bigger memory channel.
By no means does the S4 Pro instantly become antiquated. Between it and the 600, they're more similar than they are different. The 800 is a different story...
everythingsablur said:
The S4 Pro and the Snapdragon 600 are basically the same chip. The model number is almost identical (APQ8064 vs APQ8064T; the Plus, Prime, and 800 all have very different model numbers), same fab process at 28 nm, same L0, L1, and L2 caches, same GPU. The difference is higher clock speed (max 1.7 vs max 1.9 GHz), and potentially a faster/bigger memory channel.
By no means does the S4 Pro instantly become antiquated. Between it and the 600, they're more similar than they are different. The 800 is a different story...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't think there was a big difference either between the 2, however the HTC one with the S600 is getting like 12000 on quadrant compared to the 5000 we get?
How do u explain that? I guess it could just be that quadrant isn't really optimised for our phones and is not giving accurate results.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
fredcorp6 said:
Well our snapdragon s4 is now considered "old" which is a bummer! Had to happen at some point tho I suppose. So how does this new chip compare? Does anyone know what's been improved?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From anandtech:
[snapdragon 600] "This is quad core Krait 300 (as opposed to 200 in MSM8960 or APQ8064) which brings a 15 percent increase in IPC as well as higher clocks (from 1.5 to 1.7 GHz), for about 20–30 percent higher overall CPU performance"
20 - 30% So significant but not huge.
fredcorp6 said:
I didn't think there was a big difference either between the 2, however the HTC one with the S600 is getting like 12000 on quadrant compared to the 5000 we get?
How do u explain that? I guess it could just be that quadrant isn't really optimised for our phones and is not giving accurate results.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I read on snapdragon s4 pro and compare it with spec of snapdragon 600 "the only" difference i got is memory technology, s4pro uses 533MHz LPDDR2 and 600 uses LPDDR3
Edit: our phone not made for benchmark, i read somewhere on google+ someone wrote about it.
Btw nexus is always behind in terms of benchmarking, but if you compare the smoothness even galaxy nexus is still so smooth.
Here is the link https://plus.google.com/u/0/101093310520661581786/posts/Q1yVmqtubG9 its exynos4 saga by one of exynos cm maintainer, but he give a reason why our benchmark not as good as optimus G.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Why do people care so much about benchmark scores? Does it really matter? The only test that should matter is your eyeball.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Exodian said:
Why do people care so much about benchmark scores? Does it really matter? The only test that should matter is your eyeball.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 Please
Exodian said:
Why do people care so much about benchmark scores? Does it really matter? The only test that should matter is your eyeball.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well because sometimes its a good way of comparing the performance of 2 phones - unfortunately not the case with a nexus I've just learned. Eyeball is very subjective, benchmarks are not (well they shouldn't be!).
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda app-developers app
lol @ benchmarks please welcome to technology soon as you bought the phone it was considered OLD !
But it is great to have both real smooth and high score benchmark
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
S4 Pro is still quick and i can see it being developed in devices for another 2+ years. i would safely assume low end tablets would also start using it when the price of these chips are reduced
Never cared about benchmarks, Even with the PCs I build. I over clock my pcs as much as possible for REAL WORLD usage and as long as they allow me to do everything I want and more and visually everything looks and feels fine and is stable, I'm good to go. Same applies with these phones. The nexus has top of the line internals and stock android allows this phone to be the way it was meant to. Now I have flashed asylum which is awesome, and I have used just about every kernel. I do notice differences in kernels “cough, matrix is the best, cough", but the differences are “seat of the pants" which is a curse in my opinion. Benchmarking stresses components, and at the price of these things why take a chance of shortening its life.
Sent from my Nexus 4
tuilalnvinh said:
But it is great to have both real smooth and high score benchmark
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
benchmarks = just numbers if your phone feels right looks right this is all you need
CheesyNutz said:
benchmarks = just numbers if your phone feels right looks right this is all you need
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is my point right there.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
CheesyNutz said:
benchmarks = just numbers if your phone feels right looks right this is all you need
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My G2x used to get pretty high benchmarks... I hated that phone.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Benchmarks do tell a part of the story. You can't say that a phone that scores barely 1000 on benchmarks is as fast as a phone that scores 5000. The numbers might fluctuate a little but you get the idea. Nexus4 scores pretty good on optimised benchmarks like antutu but doesn't score good on benchmark apps that haven't been updated for two years like quadrant.
Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk 2
ksubedi said:
Benchmarks do tell a part of the story. You can't say that a phone that scores barely 1000 on benchmarks is as fast as a phone that scores 5000. The numbers might fluctuate a little but you get the idea. Nexus4 scores pretty good on optimised benchmarks like antutu but doesn't score good on benchmark apps that haven't been updated for two years like quadrant.
Sent from my HTC One S using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah its my understanding that quadrant is also really easy to spoof
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
AW: Snapdragon 600 vs Snapdragon S4 Pro
So far I can see only devices with Android 4.1, or less, score pretty high with Krait cores. We havn't any other phone with 4.2 and snapdragon CPU to compare fairly.
The dual core S3 in my Xperia S doesn't feel any difference to the quad core S4 Pro in my Nexus 4 in every day use so i aint going to lose any sleep.
The number I heard thrown around was 40% faster on paper, or theoretically. Real world applications that may translate to less but still somewhat significant depending on your use case.
The kicker is it seems to still be the Adreno 320, is that higher clocked than the S4 Pro? If not it's pushing more pixels in the HTC One.