Database Users

browser speed- n1 vs evo

Ok so I checked out the Evo at sprint. It had full bars of 4g and luckily I had full bars 3g/hsdpa on My n1. I tested/raced to about a dozen sites. Results are a tie. One would beat the other by about .5 seconds. Now download speed may be better on 4g but as far as browser goes for now until Evo gets froyo. There a tie on 4g vs 3g/hsdpa so actually 3.5g.
I wanna see them both race on the same wifi network...
All I gotta say is " long live the n1"....

On a wifi network...they'd be exactly the same, plus or minus a meaningless margin. It's the exact same core hardware. Same CPU, same memory, same graphics hardware running the same resolution screen.

But not same OS, 2.2 is faster then 2.1 that's for sure, beats the crap out of the iApple products! 2.1 was about the same

@jaapschaap : did you compare yourself, or do you say that because you read that 2.2 is faster ?
What you have to understand is that 2.2 speed up java execution. The browser is mainly C++ (Webkit) so it gains nothing from 2.2.
And for the new Javascript engine, it is indeed faster, it's visible on benchmarks (sunspider, etc) but on "normal" pages there isn't much difference.
I made some browser tests with my 2.2 Nexus and a 2.1 Desire side by side, and the speed was almost identical

Wait wait
I thought all the sensui phones didn't use the stock browser. so this means that the browser aren't identical. The HTC browser was always fast, faster than stock browser (i think till 2.2). so you can't really say the browser will be faster on 2.2 even if the evo gets update to 2.2 it will still use the HTC browser.
To be sure there have to be some testing to do and show it on video, till than ......

Because i know, i have a milestone, nexus one, desire and an ipod touch to compare! Milestone and nexus 2.1 are as fast as the ipod, nexus one with 2.2 (unofficial so could even be better on final ) is sick fast! Because the browser itself is became better, they worked on it...
And finally i overclocked my milestone to 1.2ghz (550Mhz stock) and then it's about same speed as nexus in browsing and the milestone @ those speeds is faster (in raw power) then the nexus
Both 2.1 to make fair comparrison:
Nexus: 1Ghz (6.5/7 MFLOPS)
Milestone: 1.2Ghz (9.5/10 MFLOPS)
So to make up that missing power of nexus vs OCed milestone Android 2.2 did a good job, almost no difference in browsing site without flash (nexus is slightly faster)...
Both @ 2.1 the milestone wins!

jaapschaap said:
Because i know, i have a milestone, nexus one, desire and an ipod touch to compare! Milestone and nexus 2.1 are as fast as the ipod, nexus one with 2.2 (unofficial so could even be better on final ) is sick fast! Because the browser itself is became better, they worked on it...
And finally i overclocked my milestone to 1.2ghz (550Mhz stock) and then it's about same speed as nexus in browsing and the milestone @ those speeds is faster (in raw power) then the nexus
Both 2.1 to make fair comparrison:
Nexus: 1Ghz (6.5/7 MFLOPS)
Milestone: 1.2Ghz (9.5/10 MFLOPS)
So to make up that missing power of nexus vs OCed milestone Android 2.2 did a good job, almost no difference in browsing site without flash (nexus is slightly faster)...
Both @ 2.1 the milestone wins!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your comparisons do not make sense though. You need to compare apples to apples. Overclock your Milestone to 1GHz as well or overclock your Nexus One to 1.2 GHz for the benchmarks. Otherwise they don't match up and it invalidates the results.

Doesn't matter... nexus is faster now and on 1. 2ghz even faster ofcourse... that was the whole point
Btw compare @ same speed don't count either cause cpu in milestone is faster clock per clock... milestone @ +-800mhz would be as fast as nexus @ 1ghz.

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...

galaxy tab vs galaxy s

So I just bought my girl a G2, and I am waiting for the tab. I was very impressed with teh speed of the g2 and its perfomance in all games. I was really wondering since the galaxy s scored even below the nexus one with 2.2 on it in a benchmarking review. how do you think the tab will do?
Everything seems to be the same from the galaxy s to the tab... so does anyone expect the tablet to perform slower than say the g2? Or what about aleast better than the Galaxy s?
Also is the chipset in the tab the same as the one in the galaxy s? Or are their minor differences?

I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

laxwillsch said:
I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant scores dont count for everything, and its hardly biased, snapdragon does better at the I/O tests more than anything. My Desire on a myTouch 4G port is quicker than stock Android roms according to quadrant.
Make sense of that
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA App

laxwillsch said:
I can assure you that the galaxy tab will be plenty fast on 2.2 I have a samsung galaxy s (captivate) running 2.2 and I never have lag you cannot compare the galaxy s series though quadrant scores as that benchmark is biased to the snap dragon processor which the galaxy s does not run on.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol, No it's not.
Stock vs Stock The G2 beat the Galaxy S at every bench mark I've put on them
(5 total) except CPU benchmark and those scores were 812 for the G2 vs 799 on the Galaxy S ( lower the better )

The g2 has the latest snapdragon, it will be a little faster than the galaxy s in cpu benchmarks once overclocked. This is what happens when google coded froyo optimization's for only one cpu type, before that we kicked snapdragon ass
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

siberslug said:
lol, No it's not.
Stock vs Stock The G2 beat the Galaxy S at every bench mark I've put on them
(5 total) except CPU benchmark and those scores were 812 for the G2 vs 799 on the Galaxy S ( lower the better )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
JIT.
RFS.
go read up on those before you go around correcting people on what's better than what. Benchmarks don't mean a thing. There's a reason why people like Cyanogen don't trust them.

It's kinda hard or weird (or pointless) to compare SGS and Tab CPU and GPU wise, since they both have THE EXACT SAME HARDWARE as long as those are concerned... They both run on the Samsung-built 1GHz Hummingbird chip (that includes the PowerVR GPU). So as long as only CPU/GPU are benchmarked, hardware-wise the SGS and Tab are identical.
Now, comparing those two on a general level makes more sense as they are bound to have small software differences. (At least my Tab does not have the 'SGS-lag' present at all and generally feels smoother to operate)
tl;dr: Basically Galaxy Tab = SGS with different screen, no real point comparing these two extensively

But they must have done a lot of tweaking on the tab that has yet to be ported to the S(if it ever does....).
Seriously, the Tab is smooth as silk, runs like you'd want and as we all know, essentially the same hardware, 2.2 and even RFS.
Also, benchmarks are worthless. My Galaxy S, with Docs JPO 7.5 ROM, ULF ext4 lagfix (no overkill here, not a score whore) gets around 1500 on quadthingy. My Tab, stock, gets around 900-1000. Yet the Tab is sooo much smoother, even with all my tweaks on the S. linpack is pretty much the same (as you'd expect) and I can't be bothered after that.
The only test that matters, usability, favours the Tab.
If I could get the stock Tab rom/fw/whatever onto my S, I'd be a happy camper.
That and a decent browser (dolphin doesn't do it for me either, just don't like it, gotta try the firefox alpha/beta/whatever)

I think the galaxy tab gpu is clocked at higher speed than the s,using neocore it gives same fbs as. Galaxy s although tab has higher resolution and also tab is announced with 1080p playback while galaxy s is anounced with 720 p correct if im wrong

Both equally good. If size does matter, big and small screen, your choice. For me, tab is best.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App

tab performs significantly worse as it has a bigger screen to power + more pixels.
But the tab 8.9 and sgs 2 (dual cores) will be a good match!

spekesel said:
But they must have done a lot of tweaking on the tab that has yet to be ported to the S(if it ever does....).
Seriously, the Tab is smooth as silk, runs like you'd want and as we all know, essentially the same hardware, 2.2 and even RFS.
Also, benchmarks are worthless. My Galaxy S, with Docs JPO 7.5 ROM, ULF ext4 lagfix (no overkill here, not a score whore) gets around 1500 on quadthingy. My Tab, stock, gets around 900-1000. Yet the Tab is sooo much smoother, even with all my tweaks on the S. linpack is pretty much the same (as you'd expect) and I can't be bothered after that.
The only test that matters, usability, favours the Tab.
If I could get the stock Tab rom/fw/whatever onto my S, I'd be a happy camper.
That and a decent browser (dolphin doesn't do it for me either, just don't like it, gotta try the firefox alpha/beta/whatever)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
my tab isnt smooth at all!

I preffer sgs.

Atrix 4g faster than Acer Iconia A500

So I ran some benchmarks today between my Acer Iconia a500 and my brothers motorola atrix 4g.
Quadrent.
Acer Iconia 2130
Atrix 4g 2586
How is it the atrix scores higher they both have tegra 2 chip and a gig of ram and he had a crapload of background task open also. In line pack i get bout 43 flops his around 55-70
Just found this interesting.
Sent from my A500 using XDA Premium App

l3giticonia said:
So I ran some benchmarks today between my Acer Iconia a500 and my brothers motorola atrix 4g.
Quadrent.
Acer Iconia 2130
Atrix 4g 2586
How is it the atrix scores higher they both have tegra 2 chip and a gig of ram and he had a crapload of background task open also. In line pack i get bout 43 flops his around 55-70
Just found this interesting.
Sent from my A500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A couple reasons. Quadrant is synthetic first of all, and only looking at one core. Synthetic means it's testing real world performance and not the actual hardware performance - this is great when you're testing 2 phones with the same resolution and similar guts but not 2 products that are this different.
The resolution of the Atrix is less than the A500 and Quadrant is testing at full screen so this weighs down the A500s results vs. the Atrix in synthetic benchmarks. Honeycomb is also significantly heavier than Gingerbread is. This means that for all intents and purposes, no Honeycomb device (tablet) will beat Gingerbread devices (phones) in these apps because Honeycomb right now is just too slow compared to GB. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's slow as in laggy I just mean it needs more optimizations and streamlining on tablets to catch up to how lean Gingerbread is on phones, especially in a case where we're talking about just 1 core.
Honeycomb is the Cupcake of Android for phones, so this is not a bad score at all.
You want to use something like Smartbench 2011 to test dual core stuff. It's synthetic as well, but it tests everything at the same resolution and will see both cores. Linpack also doesn't support multi-cores yet. Granted, the Atrix may still beat the A500 in Smartbench 2011, but it should be a much closer number like a matter of 100 or 200 or so. If the A500 beats the Atrix it's more than likely getting an unfair (but realistic) boost from not utilizing the full screen size for gfx tests.
Dont pay too much attention to those scores anyway.

Neoprimal said:
This means that for all intents and purposes, no Honeycomb device (tablet) will beat Gingerbread devices (phones) in these apps because Honeycomb right now is just too slow compared to GB.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant is a total waste of time as a benchmark as it doesn't give you any real indication of the difference in speed between two different devices. However, it should be said that my Transformer does pull 3000+ on Quadrant running MoDaCo's custom ROM, and given that the hardware is almost identical between the A500 and Transformer, I would expect them to be broadly similar in terms of real world performance.
Regards,
Dave

When shall we get custom from?
Sent from my A500 using XDA Premium App

l3giticonia said:
When shall we get custom from?
Sent from my A500 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As soon as we get unlazy and make one? I need to upgrade my hard drives to have any more space otherwise I'd at least **** around recompiling kernels etc. Also, have they even released the source for ours?

I get 2800+ everytime I do quadrant on my A500.. no complaints, but I am running CM7 on my touch4G and get 2600+ on that too. so I hate quadrant... it sucks..

Not sure how you get 2800 without custom kernel\rom. That is around a 30% increase from stock. My galaxy tab and sgs don't get the same benchmarks and they have the same cpu\gpu but different screen resolutions. The cpu\gpu work a lot harder with the higher resolution screens.

960х540 in Atrix
1280x800 in A500

Samsung Galaxy Z unveiled: Tegra 2, 4.2-inch SC-LCD

I think this is the Tegra version known as i9101 or i9103?
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_z_appears_in_sweden_tegra_2_42inch_sclcd-news-2838.php

Wow, that's an Iphone replica Just kidding. Still voting for my lovely yellow tinted SII

You can see a quick preview here :
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_i9103_galaxy_z-review-614.php
I wanted to buy a galaxy s but now i'm hesitating

This is going to smother the LG O2X. Samsung plans on controlling the market for high end androids and it looks like its going to succeed by having a galaxy at every possible pricepoint.

Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.

Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL

KingKuba13 said:
Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, take that with a grain of salt, why is Galaxy Z 50% faster in quadrant than LG O2X using the same platform?

It looks more like a face-lifted Galaxy S than a SGS2 variant.

tjtj4444 said:
well, take that with a grain of salt, why is Galaxy Z 50% faster in quadrant than LG O2X using the same platform?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Twice the RAM than O2X for one and probably clocked to 1.2ghz (1ghz O2X).

This is the baby version of s2.

was this the rumoured sgs3 ?

AvRS said:
Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 2 clocks higher (faster clock vs clock), more optimized applications, other Tegra 2 devices are recording in 1080p (so that would come in later update/mod), Super LCD is just as good if not better than Super AMOLED+ w/ no yellowing/uneven colors with better color accuracy (also it is a 24-bit screen vs 16).

AvRS said:
Why would you hesitate as its not as good as the s2, dual 1ghz, 720p recording, no s-amoled screen and 8gb storage seems to be a more entry level version than anything else.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If Tegra2 is entry level then damn we've come a long way in the past few months I know what you mean though. I'm a geek so it's no choice in my mind either, I'd still have bought the S2 if these two devices were released together. But if this is priced nicely it could reach a whole other group of consumers that the S2 was too rich for.

Hollow.Droid said:
1 I'd still have bought the S2 if these two devices were released together.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
The SGSZ also doesn't appear to have HDMI, Wi-Fi Direct, USB2G, and Bluetooth 3.0. Let's hope it doesn't have the SGS1 GPS chip.

KingKuba13 said:
Tegra 2 beats Exynos once all the variables are similar.
~4000 quadrant stock and still clocked lower.
LOL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This means absolutely nothing. SGS2 can't go higher than 60fps, after all that's the screen refresh rate so anything higher is just a waste of battery. Now you might want to ask yourself why Tegra 2's fps limit is higher. Nvidia have been in the game a long time, they know how to cheat in benchmarks.
Besides you should compare benchmarks that pushes these phones, Quadrant is very flawed and afaik not even multithreaded. I managed to score 1700 with my old Legend with a 600 MHz ARMv11 CPU clocked to 786 and data2ext hack.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App

quadrant standard isnt the best way to decide on the speed. Even some of our own rom devs for the s2 can cook a hack into the rom. I have already benched in the 4000's on the old lite'ning rom. Its not hard. BTW, tegra is nice and all because im an nvidia fan, but it is not better if you ask me-maybe once properly optimized it will be better for gaming, but i couldnt care less about ps1 graphics on a phone.
Rex-tc! im surprised to see you here! You tried your best to defend the atrix yet you post here!!! Coming over to the darkside i c

Wrong naming schema. Should be Galaxy S2 - Lite

rd_nest said:
Wrong naming schema. Should be Galaxy S2 - Lite
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or HiPhone 5

Sp1tfire said:
Or HiPhone 5
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry to break the myth, it already exists

It's no GS2.