Database Users

moto xoom vs fascinate

Thought i would drop in and let you know the results of my testing, as I have a lot of downtime.
I used antutu benchmark as it would give me values for each category.
Moto xoom - 1.5 oc kernel, stock 3.0
Fascinate - voodoo eb16 kernel, superclean 2.7
Processor - as you all have heard the new dual core tegra 2 is fast, through same benchmark tests I have found that it twice as fast as the hummingbird w/ no over clock, the tegra was oc to 1.2ghz
Xoom 1034 and 766
Fascinate 596 and 142
Graphics - this is where some eyebrows will be raised! Everyone says the tegra is supposed to be the best at 3d but I found quite to opposite. There are a lot of variables out there too though, multi threadding and is 3.0 as mature as 2.2 and last the screen resolution is higher on the xoom.
Xoom 2d 148 3d 205
Fascinate 2d 158 3d 364
These results can be seen by the naked eye as things just seem slower on the xoom in 3d.
I did not include linpack as its obvious the xoom will out perform the hummingbird no questions. I am just thrown off by the gpu scores, anything out for the tegra the fascinae should be able to run, extra help will come from the faster processor but i am not seeing an incredible difference that was advertised. After these findings I am more excited for the dual core snapdragon. Things my improve as honeycomb matures and they iron out the details, from first use right now it seems like its a beta 2.2 that we had on the fascinates, its just not smooth. Over all if you want a good tablet w/ verizon 3g/4g the xoom is a good chipoice, those wanting a finished product, I would hold out a few mnths. Thunderbolt vs fascinae coming soon, as soon as the phone hits the streets. I will compare stock TB to modded fascinate, for those considering the upgrade.
Final on the xoom, it is a good tablet, maybe expensive

forgot to include wifi, another big dissapoitment, xoom being 4g upgradeable, I thought would kill it, it did not.
Netgear wireless n router, 12mbps line
Xoom - 2mbps
Fascinate - 6.5mbps
Hopefully an update will fix that

Well, the fact that most benchmark applications, besides Smartbenchmark, are not optimized correctly for Tegra2 puts these benchmarks to shame. Nenamark caps at 30fps, Quadrant caps at 60 or 30fps, and 2D benchmarks cap at similar fps as well. Real world speed is faster, as well as games optimized for the Tegra2. Though, movie compatibility with the Fascinate is better because of the extra codecs courtesy of Samsung. Not sure whats wrong with your Wifi..

Hitting fps caps is not in the cards right now quadrant hits 6fps 2d and about 20 3d, maybe when its optimized it will reflect capability better but now it just looks like its close. Everyday useability, my only compplain is the keyboard is sometimes laggy in the browser, most likely will be patched in an update.

I have both. And its too early to do a fair comparison. Apps haven't been optimized for the xoom.
I'm just bummed out that i can't use my fascinate to tether the xoom. I'm stuck paying for verizon monthly bill until the fascinate offers wifi infrastructure not ad-hoc. or switch to a phone that actually offers it.

You can get 3g mobile hotspot free google it
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App

I think partially the difference comes from the higher resolution on the Xoom. But we do have a great GPU indeed.

Low Benchmarks scores

I know about the differences in benchmarks and how they arent set up for dual core, but I just ran smartbench 2011 and my gaming score is off by 1000 points on a stock xoom, I am rooted and running stock kernel. I am not sure why, maybe something is wrong with it.

My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App

Off from what? A phone? Synthetic benchmarks say almost nothing about real world performance, and they will always be different with devices at different resolutions.
A 1280x800 tablet will always score unusually low on a graphics benchmark that scales to resolution compared to a phone.

Usmc7356 said:
My quadrant scores are lower than my dx but my linpack score is 64mflops! Don't know why our quadrant scores are so low but I'm having the same problem.
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant also places a lot of weight on the filesystem, and my Xoom always hangs quite a while during database writes.
Also I think that getting ~6 FPS on their first 2D animation test can't help.
The Xoom is really zippy, take the benchmarks with many, many grains of salt.

I was just talking about smart bench, everything else is working fine, but the smartbench 2011 shows a galaxy s as being more powerful than my xoom, and the half the speed of a stock xoom. I am just wondering if other people were showing that they are below what a stock xoom should be too.

you have to make sure that these benchmarks are compatible with dual core processors. otherwise the results are moot.

I know that, but it is shows below the average xoom, thats the problem I am seeing, average xoom gets like 2k I get 1k

I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.

joepfalzgraf said:
I was having the same issue, I believe it is because of spare parts for gaming full screen. I factory restored my xoom and scored higher than average. The benchmark ran on a much smaller screen when I ran it on a fresh xoom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Confirmed that is it, thanks for this I guess I was overlooking it and thinking my xoom wasnt up to par.

3.1 Quadrant drop

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.

Performance Concerns

Why is everyone saying this tablet has lower performance than the likes of other Tegra 2 tablets? Shouldn't it be pretty much the same? For example, Engadget said it only got a 1500 in quadrant and that it wasn't too nice with games whereas other tablets did just fine. I'm concerned about this because my primary use for a tablet would be gaming and web browsing.

Regarding the Quadrant score.
The Transformer shipped with 3.0.1 and had a Quadrant score of around 2000. After updating to 3.1 the score dropped to 1500.
I'm hearing the same thing with the Galaxy Tab now, with 3.0.1 it had scores of around 2000 and post 3.1 they dropped to 1500.
Yet at the same time Transformer owners felt that despite the Quadrant score drop, the tablet did feel slightly more responsive and quicker. Not sure what is causing the Quadrant scores to drop, but it might be an example of why we shouldn't put too much stock in just benchmarks.
I haven't heard anything negative about the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and gaming performance.
Sadly the Android 3.1 update did make the stock browser keyboard really laggy with the Transformer. Don't know how much this has affected the browser with the Galaxy Tab, though I created a thread about it and it doesn't sounds like it's as big of an issue as it has been for the Transformer.

I got around 1500 as well. Its funny because my Droid x is getting almost 1700. The tablet feels much snappier then the X. I wouldn't worry about the numbers. Maybe Quadrant needs an update.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using Tapatalk

Just like computer video cards... Don't put a lot of faith into synthetic benchmarks... It's all about the real world frame rates and speed...
Reminds me of an ancient editorial at HardOCP as to why synthetic benchmarks are generally bad.

Disappointing benchmarks

anybody else getting results like this? What can I do to improve on this. The tablet is not rooted.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app

Third one down is my result.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app

I didn't benchmark but my tf300 feels faster than my hox, a fair bit actually....

I'm not at all disappointed (and it will only get better)
Edit: I've only done the build.prop modifications in the thread mentioned below.

I have never been one to hover over benchmark scores. But for not running optimized custom roms, the only really thing you can try is this http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1641219

dilfatx said:
anybody else getting results like this? What can I do to improve on this. The tablet is not rooted.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You. No.

Here are some benches after rooting and clocking to 1.5.

I also watched a video from Richie's closet on YouTube the Asus infinity tf700 vs ipad 3. So I tried 2 of the benchmark tests they used.
First one mine beat the ipad 3 by 15 to 20,000 but the tf700 got like 40,000 more.
Second one beat both ipad 3 by triple the score and beat the tf700 by 200.
So I am happy with the tf300 performance.
http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=/&gl=US#/watch?v=4jdbtiNnZzE

Quadrant is a bad benchmark, can be influenced easily an score is heavily dependand on IO performance.
Hence the relatively bad scores for the transformers.... internal memory performance is very bad!

I tried overclocking with antutu cpu but I wasn't getting any performance gains when I benchmarked.

I respecfully suggest the quadrant scores do correlate. Over the past year I have had the following tabs and here is the rank in actual performance, using MAME Reloaded, FPse and N64 to test ram speed and cpu power (GPU as well for FPSe and N64). The HTC View is an apparent exception to the ranking from a single and dual core standard.
Thrive
View (Thrive benches better for some benchmarks, but actual View usage seems smoother- 1ghz vs 1.5ghz).
A510/TF300 Basically a tie (within 100 points).
Prime
Excite
Excite benchmarks about 13% faster than the A510/TF300 and the FPS of the emulators (on average) correlate. That said, ignorance is bliss, so if you do not actually sit with them and nitpick, they are all functionally the same for performance- IMO.
One thing I did notice is in spite of the View being a single core S4, it's 1.5ghz speed and memory channel appears better when downloading apps at the same time than the Tegra 2 and 3. All three SoCs have single channel memory, so none will win multi task battles. BTW, the memory channel (edit) a constraint/bottleneck most users experience when trying to download from the market or other sources while trying to run certain apps that are also using it.
Added: The 28nm S4 dual that is in the newer phones actually blows our Tegra 3 away for performance. In part due to the dual channel memory. I would prefer that SoC in the TF300 since also even better battery life and runs cooler (both due to the 28nm).
Sadly, it will be a while before we see many tablets with it since demand for then new phones from HTC and especially Samsung are killing supply until first quarter next year.

rushless said:
I respecfully suggest the quadrant scores do correlate. Over the past year I have had the following tabs and here is the rank in actual performance, using MAME Reloaded, FPse and N64 to test ram speed and cpu power (GPU as well for FPSe and N64). The HTC View is an apparent exception to the ranking from a single and dual core standard.
Thrive
View (Thrive benches better for some benchmarks, but actual View usage seems smoother- 1ghz vs 1.5ghz).
A510/TF300 Basically a tie (within 100 points).
Prime
Excite
Excite benchmarks about 13% faster than the A510/TF300 and the FPS of the emulators (on average) correlate. That said, ignorance is bliss, so if you do not actually sit with them and nitpick, they are all functionally the same for performance- IMO.
One thing I did notice is in spite of the View being a single core S4, it's 1.5ghz speed and memory channel appears better when downloading apps at the same time than the Tegra 2 and 3. All three SoCs have single channel memory, so none will win multi task battles. BTW, the memory channel is the constraint/bottleneck most users experience when trying to download from the market or other sources while trying to run certain apps that are also using it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No its not the memory channel that's the bottleneck, it's not RAM that performs bad it's the internal storage.
I dont know what tegra2 device you tested but the Transformer1 performs aprox the same as the tf201\tf300 IO-wise (bad).
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk 2

Tempie007 said:
No its not the memory channel that's the bottleneck, it's not RAM that performs bad it's the internal storage.
I dont know what tegra2 device you tested but the Transformer1 performs aprox the same as the tf201\tf300 IO-wise (bad).
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very true on the flash being a part of the factor! Since a series process (especially with single channel) you are only as good as your weakest link. The only Tegra 2 tabs I have had are the A500 (only a few days) and the Thrive.
I find all the tablets noted above to have some issues with downloading from market and using other apps at same time to be near as bad. Again, the HTC View seems better and probably due to your point.

yep
My score was around 10k... but I'm waiting for some Genius to OC the kernel to blow those scores out of the water... i read in the Dev thread someone is using Faux kernel... (or asked him for help) either way I'm waiting for a Legit ROM with an even more legit OC Kernel

I think 10k is not bad at all for me considering that im using stock ROM. Plus, it really feels fast.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app

omidz said:
I think 10k is not bad at all for me considering that im using stock ROM. Plus, it really feels fast.
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you get to 10k using the stock rom? Anything else than the build.prop?

I always match transformer prime or a bit more on antutu benchnark.. also this is not 1.5ghz on performance mode. Every single app atm missreads the tablet for 1.5 when it is 1.2. I have tried overclocking and when set to 1.5 it will score same as set to 1.2.
Dont forget to set performance mode before benchmarking and be on a fresh boot
Sent from my ASUS Transformer Pad TF300T using XDA Premium HD app