Related
Guys im just wondering if anyone tried need for speed on the desire HD? Any hiccups with the GPU?
Ive read that the gpu is the most powerfull right now over the galaxy s?
It's my understanding that the Desire Z / G2 got the more powerful GPU in the deal along with the keyboard, the Desire HD got higher factory clocked CPU, more RAM and a powerful GPU too but not as powerful. That's just how I saw it when reading through specs and reviews.
Dyonas said:
It's my understanding that the Desire Z / G2 got the more powerful GPU in the deal along with the keyboard, the Desire HD got higher factory clocked CPU, more RAM and a powerful GPU too but not as powerful. That's just how I saw it when reading through specs and reviews.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is wrong bro. Both the DZ/G2 and the DHD have the same GPU, which is the Adreno 205.
I've been reading about a lot, and I think the future has to show what GPU is better.
Why? It's also very software depending.
I think when only looking to the GPU, the samsung en de desire Z are at the same level.
But when looking at the overal performance and hardware, the desire HD will outperform the others. The benchmarks show.
I know the galaxy has improved a lot with custom ROM's, but the desire hd will too (maybe not as much).
And I do think the gaming experience on mobile phones isn't just about the GPU. At least not as much as on the desktop computers these days.
The current Desire uses a gen1 1ghz snapdragon QSD8250 with the adreno 200 GPU
The Desire Z will use the gen2 800mhz snapdragon MSM7230 with the adreno 205 GPU
The Desire HD will use the gen 2 1ghz snapdragon MSM8255 with the adreno 205 GPU.
I don't think it should not matter much in your choice of phone.
Sherwood1 said:
Guys im just wondering if anyone tried need for speed on the desire HD? Any hiccups with the GPU?
Ive read that the gpu is the most powerfull right now over the galaxy s?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ello m8, i've got asphalt 5 hd, nova, need for speed, lets play golf, all of the top end games basically and i can tell you now that the desire hd has no problems playing any of them, saying that i just overclocked my desire hd's cpu to 1420 and got a quadrant score of 2495 so i'm probably overkilling a little bit here.
The difference between the DHD, SGSs gpus are quite slight if any. I'm happy with my oc'd DHD tho.
Yeah the GPU is plenty powerful. I don't think there is any game for Android right now that fully utilizes all the Adreno 205's power. Im really happy with it because i plan on doing plenty of gaming on it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GzgNJi3lbww
a nice video of gaming on DHD.
Hi every1.
Was just reading this article :
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=257
It is QUITE interesting to see that the Flyer scores so much higher in GPU compared to the Desire HD...
Could it be there are improved GPU drivers? Could this be the reason HTC Sense 3.0 is coming to the Flyer but NOT the Desire HD?
If this is the case, maybe some developers could get something valuable out of a possible Rom dump?
Any Ideas?
It might not be using the same GPU, that's just speculation according to that site
Due to the much higher res, it would also need a much better GPU to get higher scores, I doubt it's using the 205 looking at those results and that res
Joey93 said:
It might not be using the same GPU, that's just speculation according to that site
Due to the much higher res, it would also need a much better GPU to get higher scores, I doubt it's using the 205 looking at those results and that res
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes but Qualcomm (as far as we know) doesn't have any single cores with the 220.
Which is why I assume it has to be the 205. Or else Qualcomm made an exclusive for HTC?
In that case maybe HTC does have a point saying that parts of Sense 3.0 wont make it onto the Desire HD line because of hardware limitations...
Hm...
From what I've read over the net, the Flyer is running a dual-core clocked at 1.5Ghz? Which leads me to believe it'll be an Adreno 220.
I would be very disappointed the Flyer won't ship with a dual core chip given the competition. At minimum I'd expect the same specs as the recently announced HTC Sensation.
kinnyfaifai said:
From what I've read over the net, the Flyer is running a dual-core clocked at 1.5Ghz? Which leads me to believe it'll be an Adreno 220.
I would be very disappointed the Flyer won't ship with a dual core chip given the competition. At minimum I'd expect the same specs as the recently announced HTC Sensation.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's single core http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/htc-launches-into-tablet-wars-with-1-5ghz-7-inch-flyer/
Hawks556 said:
It's single core http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/htc-launches-into-tablet-wars-with-1-5ghz-7-inch-flyer/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But it could be dual-core with locked secound core... And Ardeno 220. I don't belive they have just build bigger desire HD, OC'ed CPU and thats it.
krogoth said:
But it could be dual-core with locked secound core... And Ardeno 220. I don't belive they have just build bigger desire HD, OC'ed CPU and thats it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It could also be quad-core with three cores locked, but I doubt it I think they would have advertised it as dual-core if it really was that.
Like someone else mentioned, the Flyer is using a single core for sure and most likely the same GPU as the Desire HD.
I would speculate that the score is so much higher because the Flyer is running Gingerbread. Gingerbread was said to improve graphics performance with better driver support, and maybe HTC decided to optimize their Adreno drivers too which probably explains the jump in performance.
To be honest this actually makes me a little more excited for the Gingerbread update coming anytime now because we'll probably get the same improvements
SupremeBeaver said:
Like someone else mentioned, the Flyer is using a single core for sure and most likely the same GPU as the Desire HD.
I would speculate that the score is so much higher because the Flyer is running Gingerbread. Gingerbread was said to improve graphics performance with better driver support, and maybe HTC decided to optimize their Adreno drivers too which probably explains the jump in performance.
To be honest this actually makes me a little more excited for the Gingerbread update coming anytime now because we'll probably get the same improvements
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm... knowing HTC, they probably wont bring any graphical improvements. We will probably have to get some dev to get what ever HTC did to improve the drivers.
Hawks556 said:
It's single core http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/htc-launches-into-tablet-wars-with-1-5ghz-7-inch-flyer/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I stand corrected! I just had a peep on pdadb.net and it's reporting a single core 1.5Ghz chip with Adreno 205 GPU in it. Obviously take that with a pinch of salt, anything can happen from now till release day.
If it is running an Adreno 205, then lets hope they have developed an optimized driver that can be ported.
Has anyone (I say anyone, I mean devs) had a look at the Xperia Play GPU drivers yet? Same chipset, but apparently heavily optimised drivers. I think LeeDrOiD was going to look into it but I'm not sure if he got round to it.
+1
Even an employee in Qualcomm said that the graphic driver in desire hd is somewhat "immature"
But there's another possibility, the flyer may use dual channel ddrs which makes its memory bandwidth doubles the dhd, and we don't have dedicated vram, so.......?
Sent via psychic transmittion.
Attention, smartbench is always leaning towards Samsung.
Sensation in smartbench is even weaker then i9000 in gaming. But GLbenchmark tells differently, it shows 3rd gen snapdragon is faster than tegra2 in graphics(optimus 2x)
Sent via psychic transmittion.
I for one don't trust any(and I mean ANY) synthetic benchmarks.The only benchmarks I trust are the ones dedicated to a certain aspect of the device,e.g Linpack for CPU,Nenamark/GLBenchmark etc for CPU and so on.Synthetic benchmarks can be quite unreliable.
tolis626 said:
I for one don't trust any(and I mean ANY) synthetic benchmarks.The only benchmarks I trust are the ones dedicated to a certain aspect of the device,e.g Linpack for CPU,Nenamark/GLBenchmark etc for CPU and so on.Synthetic benchmarks can be quite unreliable.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True.
Because those dedicated benchmarks are much more professional.
Sent via psychic transmittion.
Which is the better GPU and why ?
I'm not sure of the technical reasons why, maybe people are just going off benchmarks, but the general consensus is that Adreno 220 has better gaming performance.
However, unless you are planning some hardcore gaming; Mali-400 MP or GeForce ULP will be just fine.
MALI-400 MP is imo a faster GPU but it really lacks stuff needed to be a good GPU. Also on the low level some of the major 3d scores are even lower than Adreno 205. So the quality here sucks. It misses many compression texture formats so low compatibility. Most games will come up with a solution for that but with time and that time could really end the life cycle of the gs2. Mali 400 is slower than adreno 205 in Geometric Tests, Common Tests, Exponential Tests. Adreno 220 will be a slightly slower GPU in synthetic tests but with more compatibility, better quality from the lower level, more texture compression formats and will be compatible with all games since start as adreno gpu games are already abundant in the market. So its more like a Samung delivered the fastest GPU with major flaws. Here Adreno 220 is like ATI and Nvidia and Mali-400 is like any other generic GPU from another company. And Galaxy S 2 coming in tegra 2 would really mess up the compatibility of Mali-400 seeing that Mali will be missing the number of devices so Mali - 400 could be a left out here.
Right now the game here is a Faster GPU (by a small margin) vs a more Compatible GPU. Better - if u can wait with no definite future mali and if u want everything now and in future its adreno
With CF working on compat I wouldnt be surprised if we're all playing Tegra Zone next month.
bilboa1 said:
With CF working on compat I wouldnt be surprised if we're all playing Tegra Zone next month.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. (10char)
Samsung's Galaxy S II Preliminary Performance: Mali-400MP Benchmarked 1Ghz Mali 400
Dual Core Snapdragon GPU Performance Explored - 1.5 GHz MSM8660 and Adreno 220 Benchmarks 1.5Ghz Adreno 220
Should give you a rough idea of what to expect.
_dsk_ said:
Samsung's Galaxy S II Preliminary Performance: Mali-400MP Benchmarked 1Ghz Mali 400
Dual Core Snapdragon GPU Performance Explored - 1.5 GHz MSM8660 and Adreno 220 Benchmarks 1.5Ghz Adreno 220
Should give you a rough idea of what to expect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it's not even close.
My Galaxy S II scores 42.2 fps in the same benchmark, Adreno scores an impressive 38 fps but this is with the CPU at 1.5GHz.
_dsk_ said:
Samsung's Galaxy S II Preliminary Performance: Mali-400MP Benchmarked 1Ghz Mali 400
Dual Core Snapdragon GPU Performance Explored - 1.5 GHz MSM8660 and Adreno 220 Benchmarks 1.5Ghz Adreno 220
Should give you a rough idea of what to expect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, this one is not accurate.
Just look at the firmware, SGS2 was running Android2.3.1 at the time, it was not a retail device.
Retail SGS2 outperforms anything currently in GLbench.
"Originally Posted by iwantandroid
I cried when I lerned this phone i got from tmobile didnt have Android. Can sum1 help me get Android on my new G1 and then tel me how to jailbroke it please"
LOL OMG
_dsk_ said:
Samsung's Galaxy S II Preliminary Performance: Mali-400MP Benchmarked 1Ghz Mali 400
Dual Core Snapdragon GPU Performance Explored - 1.5 GHz MSM8660 and Adreno 220 Benchmarks 1.5Ghz Adreno 220
Should give you a rough idea of what to expect.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
these tests are kinda misleading, between non-final device/software and capped framerate
i'm a bit disappointed that it comes from anandtech since they usually try to have stuff all squared out on PCs ;-)
lol, you guys are very defensive about your phones, understandably.
What you should be able to ascertain though is that the 1Ghz Mali benchmarks are decent and you can expect better performance with it clocked at 1.2Ghz.
Conversely you should be able to see that the Adreno at 1.5Ghz, though impressive, will be less so clocked at 1Ghz like in the Sensation, which will also have a higher resolution screen.
I only provided the links so that people could make up their own mind by using the same logic.
Are you sure the Mali-400 is clocked at 1.2Ghz ?
Because when I overclocked my SGS2 to 1.5Ghz I saw a 25% performance increase in computing performance, but almost no increase at all in graphics performance (using GL Benchmark), so I thought the frequencies of the two were totally unrelated.
I dont know what the clock speeds of the GPU are, but CPU speed bumps will also help with 3D performance.
_dsk_ said:
I dont know what the clock speeds of the GOP are, but CPU speed bumps will also help with 3D performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well in my case it did not. I guess a dual core 1.2Ghz CPU is not a bottleneck on a smartphone lol.
Ive heard there are FPS caps on the Galaxy line, not sure how true this is, usually benchmarks should see an increase when handsets are overclocked.
_dsk_ said:
Ive heard there are FPS caps on the Galaxy line, not sure how true this is, usually benchmarks should see an increase when handsets are overclocked.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
its true for the sgs1 and 2 at least, frame rate is capped between 56 and 66 fps depending on kernels/versions etc
many benchmarks hit the cap (like quadrant)
Many people have said that SE should have put a Tegra 2 dual core chip inside the Xperia Play instead of the Snapdragon with Adreno 205.
In the real world the Adreno 205 was a much better choice for complex game effects and battery life.
This is a heavy read but there are plenty of charts & pictures that tell a fairer story from a Game Developers point of view.
http://blogs.unity3d.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/FastMobileShaders_siggraph2011.pdf
Here's hoping Tegra 3 is a much better effort.
First of all Tegra II is not a GPU. It's a CPU. So a more valid comparison would be snapdragon V's tegra II or Adreno V's GEforce.
Adreno 200 really was a poor GPU and qualcomm made a mess when they purchased the Adreno project off ATI. Although i think were all agreed that the jump from adreno 200 to adreno 205 was massive.
Adreno 205 is easly on par with the GPU in any single core CPU. I dont quite think it is a match for the 8 core ULV GPU inside the tegra II.
And imo NVIDA has proven with some of the tegra II games that the mobile version of GEforce inside there CPU is in a league of it's own compared to our GPU. Although i think Adreno 220 is on par with the Tegra II GPU. The soon to be released quad core tegra III CPU comes with such an awesome GPU it will be hard to beat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI-guAGGK3s
AndroHero said:
First of all Tegra II is not a GPU. It's a CPU. So a more valid comparison would be snapdragon V's tegra II or Adreno V's GEforce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think I tried to say that in the post the header could have been a bit clearer.
Adreno 200 really was a poor GPU and qualcomm made a mess when they purchased the Adreno project off ATI. Although i think were all agreed that the jump from adreno 200 to adreno 205 was massive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree I have tried rudimentary GPU benchmarking on all my phones, the Xperia Play would have been severly weakened if it went ahead with using a Adreno 200 based SOC.
Adreno 205 is easly on par with the GPU in any single core CPU. I dont quite think it is a match for the 8 core ULV GPU inside the tegra II.
And imo NVIDA has proven with some of the tegra II games that the mobile version of GEforce inside there CPU is in a league of it's own compared to our GPU. Although i think Adreno 220 is on par with the Tegra II GPU. The soon to be released quad core tegra III CPU comes with such an awesome GPU it will be hard to beat
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I also thought the NVIDA GPU chip would be much better, but after reading the PDF I don't think it is. It looks like to get the best from the NVIDA GPU you have to use the CPU's much more than the Adreno 205 which will hit battery life. Also the Adreno looks like it has some hidden tricks that help in more complex scenes.
Give the PDF a read.
From the (very little, it is a really technical paper) content I can extract, it seems that the Nvidia Tegra devices follow a "classic approach" and load many more things on the CPU, while the Adreno and PowerVR (aka Apple's chip) follow a "smarter" approach, reducing the CPU load and loading the GPU, plus using tricks.
I'd say that, if that is correct, that it comes from the legacy of Nvidia as a desktop pc GPU maker, and that it makes sense that Nvidia is betting on getting multi-core devices out ASAP, for their approach is much more CPU-taxing and multiple cores allow to reduce CPU stress.
Techdread said:
I think I tried to say that in the post the header could have been a bit clearer.
Agree I have tried rudimentary GPU benchmarking on all my phones, the Xperia Play would have been severly weakened if it went ahead with using a Adreno 200 based SOC.
I also thought the NVIDA GPU chip would be much better, but after reading the PDF I don't think it is. It looks like to get the best from the NVIDA GPU you have to use the CPU's much more than the Adreno 205 which will hit battery life. Also the Adreno looks like it has some hidden tricks that help in more complex scenes.
Give the PDF a read.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did look at the .pdf. But to be honest, it's a little over my head lol
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk
Interesting results for the Adreno 205.
Shader Performance
•Normalized to iPad2 resolution
•From single color:
• 1.4ms iPad2
• 3.5ms XperiaPlay
• 3.8ms Tegra2
• 14.3ms iPhone3Gs
•To fully per-pixel bump spec:
• 19.3ms iPad2
• 18.4ms XperiaPlay
• 47.7ms Tegra2
• 122.4ms iPhone3Gs
hairdewx said:
Interesting results for the Adreno 205.
Shader Performance
•Normalized to iPad2 resolution
•From single color:
• 1.4ms iPad2
• 3.5ms XperiaPlay
• 3.8ms Tegra2
• 14.3ms iPhone3Gs
•To fully per-pixel bump spec:
• 19.3ms iPad2
• 18.4ms XperiaPlay
• 47.7ms Tegra2
• 122.4ms
Hmmmmmmm
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Double post......
AndroHero said:
The soon to be released quad core tegra III CPU comes with such an awesome GPU it will be hard to beat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cI-guAGGK3s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy cr*p that looks amazing!
When is the Tegra 3 and Adreno 220 coming out? which will be the best? tablet only or on phones too?
FK1983 said:
Holy cr*p that looks amazing!
When is the Tegra 3 and Adreno 220 coming out? which will be the best? tablet only or on phones too?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 220 is already out with the dual core qualcomm chips
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehfyxvh2W4k&feature=related
Although the game in the demo is desert winds, an xperia play (adreno 205) exclusive
Comparing dual core Qualcomm chips to the Tegra is like comparing our current chip to the Samsung hummingbird.
The former is more widely supported, and better optimized. Whereas the latter is not well supported, and although it's supposed to be better on paper, it's real life performance isn't as good.
Sent from my R800
Logseman said:
From the (very little, it is a really technical paper) content I can extract, it seems that the Nvidia Tegra devices follow a "classic approach" and load many more things on the CPU, while the Adreno and PowerVR (aka Apple's chip) follow a "smarter" approach, reducing the CPU load and loading the GPU, plus using tricks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats the impression I got.
I'd say that, if that is correct, that it comes from the legacy of Nvidia as a desktop pc GPU maker, and that it makes sense that Nvidia is betting on getting multi-core devices out ASAP, for their approach is much more CPU-taxing and multiple cores allow to reduce CPU stress.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Desktop and handheld are vastly different in power & heat requirements, NVidia were probably rushing their dual core SOC's to market the lack of NEON in initial shipments and poor GPU's seems to confirms this.
Hey guys,
Thanks for lending me your time towards my question...
As we know,
Nexus 4 has an Adreno 320 single - core GPU and Snapdragon S4 Pro SoC
My question is..
Is the Adreno 320 capable enough to run future graphics - hungry games?
And tegra 3 possessing a 12+1 core GPU, is Adreno 320 better than this?
Regards....
Adreno 320 is about 250% better in tests than Tegra 3.
Shreyas Iyer said:
Hey guys,
Thanks for lending me your time towards my question...
As we know,
Nexus 4 has an Adreno 320 single - core GPU and Snapdragon S4 Pro SoC
My question is..
Is the Adreno 320 capable enough to run future graphics - hungry games?
And tegra 3 possessing a 12+1 core GPU, is Adreno 320 better than this?
Regards....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha, Tegra 3. The Tegra 3 is by far the worst quad core chipset available in popular devices, my friend's One X lags even when playing Super Hexagon. The N4 has been able to run every game that I've thrown at it so far smoothly so I don't see why it shouldn't be able to in the future. Even the newer One and US GS4 use the 320 so it's clearly a great GPU.