Related
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...
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
Seems like I got a pretty quick device I got a best of 1703
fifedogg said:
Seems like I got a pretty quick device I got a best of 1703
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice score man, I would suggest running Smartbench 2010 however. Quadrant is skewed towards Snapdragon processors so its really not a good benchmark.
kenvan19 said:
Nice score man, I would suggest running Smartbench 2010 however. Quadrant is skewed towards Snapdragon processors so its really not a good benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Compared to other types of processors your right. But as far as our phones go I think its a pretty good score.
Smartbench is byast to phones with higher GPU's like the Epic just like quadrant is more byast to CPU speed, with Snapdragon having the upper hand. I'm sure the Epic will do much better on quadrant with a legit 2.2 build and JIT enabled. From what I understand Quadrant uses more CPU when processing the 2d/3d as opposed to Smartbench using mainly the GPU. IMO quadrant gets high scores with fast cpu's and Smartbench gets super high scores with high GPU phones. I have an Epic and my Shift is faster all around except when its something to do with pure GPU.
fifedogg said:
Compared to other types of processors your right. But as far as our phones go I think its a pretty good score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh I wasn't saying you had a bad score, its just that Quadrant scores are meaningless, sure you can compare a Shift to a Shift but it won't give you any scores that are applicable in the real world. If you're just looking for a big number then quadrant is great for that, however if you want something that provides an accurate representation of your phone's power Smartbench is the ticket!
~Edit~
Also, I forgot to mention how easy it is to trick quadrant and fake scores. People have gotten it to give last gen devices 2500+ scores. Quadrant is just a terrible benchmarking tool all around.
~Edit #2~
I know I sound like a **** who is trolling you but what I'm really trying to do is prove to the Evo and Epic fanboys that this device is really great. If you quote a big quadrant score they'll jump all over you and discredit you. If you quote a Smartbench score they will 1) have to go look up what smartbench is (c'mon its really new lol) and 2) make up some other fake reason to claim the other devices are better.
My point is that having owned an Epic since launch day, an Evo for a few days and my wife owning a Shift for a few days I can find only one thing I dislike about the shift whereas I have a myriad of issues with the others (that one issue is the screen size).
Thread cleaned, let's get this back on track
Sorry for taking it down that path Impaler
Sent from my HTC Evo Shift 4G
My bad
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA App
BrandoKC said:
Sorry for taking it down that path Impaler
Sent from my HTC Evo Shift 4G
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the5ifty said:
My bad
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's ok guys, just trying to get stuff back on track
Anyway...i ran a smartbench on the wifes shift and it scored considerably lower than the G2...i get ~1650s in quadrant
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA App
fifedogg said:
Compared to other types of processors your right. But as far as our phones go I think its a pretty good score.
Smartbench is byast to phones with higher GPU's like the Epic just like quadrant is more byast to CPU speed, with Snapdragon having the upper hand. I'm sure the Epic will do much better on quadrant with a legit 2.2 build and JIT enabled. From what I understand Quadrant uses more CPU when processing the 2d/3d as opposed to Smartbench using mainly the GPU. IMO quadrant gets high scores with fast cpu's and Smartbench gets super high scores with high GPU phones. I have an Epic and my Shift is faster all around except when its something to do with pure GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Slight correction - Smartbench simply reports the performance of each phones in comparison to Nexus One. Productivity Index scores aren't supposed to be compared with Games Index scores since the bases for each are different.
I own a G2, Vibrant and N1 (also Optimus One). I am pretty happy with what Smartbench reports vs real experience.
The numbers may change drastically in v2011 if another phone is chosen as the base (I am tempted to do this since it appears that almost every phone in the market today grossly outperforms Snapdragon QSD8x50 in GPU by a big margin...
I scored a little over 1500 on Quadrant. Smart bench gave me 759/1097 and 693/1116
not sure if that is good or not. But my phone does seem a little sluggish.
Heelfan71 said:
I scored a little over 1500 on Quadrant. Smart bench gave me 759/1097 and 693/1116
not sure if that is good or not. But my phone does seem a little sluggish.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For some reason, Evo Shifts (in general) aren't reporting numbers as high as the G2 or Desire Z. Have a look at http://smartphonebenchmarks.com you will see some numbers for G2 and Desire Z, both stock and overclocked.
I also found my Shift scores are considerably lower than the G2, but then again I don't put too much stock into benchmarking programs. I find that out of the box the Shift is buttery smooth and at 800Mhz the quadrant/SB scores soundly beat my EVO clocked at 1Ghz and the EVO is pretty beastly.
Also considering people have been able to overclock the processor in the G2 from 800 to 1.9Ghz, we should be able to boost the Shift considerably once we have root. Hopefully the Shift is embraced by the dev community because overclock plus AOSP will be a beautiful thing.
I'll be adding Evo Shift score to the chart shortly. So far, 759/1097 is the best score I've seen on here. If anyone can beat this score (in a stock form), please let me know here!
Acei said:
I'll be adding Evo Shift score to the chart shortly. So far, 759/1097 is the best score I've seen on here. If anyone can beat this score (in a stock form), please let me know here!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will do, man thanks!
Acei said:
I'll be adding Evo Shift score to the chart shortly. So far, 759/1097 is the best score I've seen on here. If anyone can beat this score (in a stock form), please let me know here!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
832/1240 is what I got 1st try. I'm gonna try a few more times and see what she does. I can post screen shots if need be as well.
fifedogg said:
832/1240 is what I got 1st try. I'm gonna try a few more times and see what she does. I can post screen shots if need be as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great! Thanks.
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
so i guess that begs the question: is your TF's performance lower?
Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I noticed this too... BUT... the system seems a lot faster and more responsive, so i guess scores arent everything.
For sure score isn't everything, even more with quadrant.
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu
Vellamo is a web browser benchmark IIRC, where as Quadrant is a CPU/GPU benchmark. I dont know about the other one you mentioned.
15xx is pretty damn low, I'm getting around 35xx with Quadrant at 1.5 GHz. Check your clockspeed in setcpu to make sure nothing is out of wack.
mrevankyle said:
quadrant came out and has not been updated since the nexus 1 got 2.2. so its kind of flawed and old. current best benchmark is either Vellamo or AnTuTu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Or CF Bench
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA Premium App
Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated
quadrant is a horrible benchmark. there are hacks and tweaks to get you stupid high scores.
Wierd i get2 2600
Tortel1210 said:
Or actually using the tablet. If it seems faster when you use it, its better. Benchmarks are pretty useless, especially since they can be skewed or manipulated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras
My quadrant is 1.7 not rooted or anything. I must say this tab runs extremely fast and I have no problems with it minus apps crashing once in a blue moon. If quadrant ment something my vibrant has 2.2k and it still doesn't run as smooth as my tab
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Dark lord me said:
After updating to 3.1 I ran a few quadrant tests and instead of the 2000-2100 scores i normally get i am not getting 1500-1600 ... Usually updates boost performance not lower it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I too used to be quadrant this or that using it as a gauge...then after I owned a few android devices...I came to the conclusion...its a piece of ****... First its inaccurate...my EVO. 3d is way faster then my color nookut yet I get better scores with the nook...same with the tf...second...it uses testing methods that can be cheated by some settings...hardware stuff..3rd...if you run it 3 times...you will usually get 3 different darn scores that range widely. To me using is the best test...not benchmarks..however if you need to use this as a guage...do it...but be warned...for real life...it don't mean anything
sassafras_ said:
That's dumb. I clearly spent 400 dollars so I can get my electronics to tell me that I am cool. If my number is lower, then I am not cool.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.
life64x said:
It's not dumb when the software is deeply, deeply flawed....quadrant that is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras
sassafras_ said:
I think your sarcasm meter is broken.
...
Quadrant is broken because it doesn't weight different aspects of the benchmark equally. The Nexus One has a terrible GPU but a fast CPU, so it gets decent scores. The BN Nook Color has a mediocre CPU and a decent GPU so it scores better than the N1 even though the N1 is clearly the superior device.
Changing the file system to something journaled can bump your Quadrant score a few hundred points, which is dumb.
The ideal benchmark would somehow score in a way that represented the overall user experience. Unfortunately, no such benchmark exists for Android. Until then, it's just these pieces of crap that only exist so teenagers can show off their e-peen on the internet.
sassafras
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.
life64x said:
I was saying that!!! I figured from your first reply...if you spent 400 it should be off the chain for the score. Quadrant is deeply, deeply flawed. If I mis-read your reply then it is my fault but I was not using sarcasm or being flippant but just stating what we both said.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he wasn't accusing you if being sarcastic, he was being sarcastic.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Thanks, my bad. I am a optimist and thought my pessimist came out... With only a couple hours sleep my mind plays tricks on me. Oh well, go back to watching dune...I would have used my gom jabber( watch dune to know what I mean).
Only thing worst than benchmark nerds are benchmark nerds who are stupid enough to still be using quadrant software that's over a year old and is not optimized for dualcore or honeycomb.
Tegra got smoked
http://androidcommunity.com/galaxy-s-iii-quad-core-benchmarks-blow-us-away-20120503/
Hm.. Tegra 3 seems to win the GPU bench?
Quadrant sucks though. Will be waiting for more benchs.
Here are some other benchmarks (next to quandrant also SunSpider and browsermark)
Quadrant scores -
sgs3
cpu - 12781
memory - 4652
io - 7606
2d - 1000
3d - 2171
total - 5642
S4
cpu - 8505
memory - 7547
io - 6394
2d - 990
3d - 2204
total - 5128
tegra3
cpu - 12493
memory - 3472
io - 4769
2d - 962
3d - 2346
total - 4804
they seem pretty even in cpu/gpu capability. the s4 gets smoked in cpu performance according to those quadrant scores. interesting.. i thought it was faster.
Wow, the S3 doesn't seem to smoke the competition.
im interested about the antutu...can someone bring some more benchmarks?
Even if Tegra got smoked games will look better, so i'm really thinking how the S3 will be better in general use except for benchmarks...
Sent from my Quad Core Monster the HTC One X using Tapatalk v 2
GPU performance gap between Tegra3 and Exynos4 Quad is huge
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5810/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-performance-preview
Faster than iPhone4S' powervr sgx543mp2
LOL quadrant sucks so hard. the new mali 400 is killing tegra 3. according to http://www.anandtech.com/show/5810/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-performance-preview
The benchmarked result http://www.icsforums.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-gets-benchmarked-shows-plenty-promise.html
bocautrang.pt said:
The benchmarked result http://www.icsforums.com/news/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-gets-benchmarked-shows-plenty-promise.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
um no
That's stolen straight out of engadget and they have recorded the lowest performance out of any of these tech blog/news sites
Antutu Benchmark available here:
ph00ny said:
um no
That's stolen straight out of engadget and they have recorded the lowest performance out of any of these tech blog/news sites
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the video above it's got 5324 Quadrant and 11492 Antutu. Not much different from HOX.
Here are some results from the Swedish androidsite "Swedroid". It's in swedish (doh!) but you should be able to look thru the scores anyway
http://www.swedroid.se/hands-on-med-samsung-galaxy-s-iii-forhandsitt/#disqus_thread
In my humble opinion. To say that the exynos "kills" the Tegra 3 is just...plain...wrong.
They seem to be very capable CPUs in both of these beasts!
umd said:
In the video above it's got 5324 Quadrant and 11492 Antutu. Not much different from HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you see the gpu scores. Kills tegra 3.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Imo they are very close to eachother, i would say exynos wins by a little margin could be just the software dragging it down, would love to see a pure ICS build doing the test.
Benchmarks mean squat.. it comes down to user experience.. if u can really feel the difference.. also, apps need to be fine tuned for quad core too.. so I guess u won't feel an actual difference..
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
jits1988 said:
Benchmarks mean squat.. it comes down to user experience.. if u can really feel the difference.. also, apps need to be fine tuned for quad core too.. so I guess u won't feel an actual difference..
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
good benchmark do shows the raw power of the mobile, its never meant to test the user experience.
jits1988 said:
Benchmarks mean squat.. it comes down to user experience.. if u can really feel the difference.. also, apps need to be fine tuned for quad core too.. so I guess u won't feel an actual difference..
Sent from my HTC One X using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the hands-on video clip made it seemed as if s3 is doing great in general ui transitions. It was noticeably quicker when used side by side.
Always astounds me how people are judging by benchmarks. I mean, its a phone, not a server station.
I wont be running virtual machines for rendering movies on it. I wont be playing Crysis 3 on it.
I`ll phone, message, watch clips, pictures, surf and use navigation. Even the single core phones can do that perfectly.