Related
http://www.nexusoneblog.com/blog/2010/2/15/3d-frame-rate-test-nexus-one-vs-iphone-3gs.html
The video shows a 3D test running on both devices. Anyone care to comment; try to be as unbiased as possible.
Also, I want these apps for myself. I own both devices and would therefore like to do the test myself. Anyone know where I can get some tests? The more the better.
Edit: Probably best if you read this first. (Video included anyway)
Direct Link: http://distinctivegame.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/dd-tech-talk-1-nexus-versus-iphone-3gs/
I know that the 3GS is a very capable 3D gaming device... but N1 is working with half the RAM, so I only see this as a test of the device in their current state and it'll change substantially with the expected kernel update.
Well, the first thing that comes to mind is this guy does not specify what he did with the resolution on the N1.
Higher resolution = more workload = not an accurate test.
Also, the colors on the iphone looked washed out to me.
EDIT: Sorry, I missed the article.
Looks like Google needs to fix the Kernel memory issue and possibly update the android dev environment.
The tester does mention that they reduced the viewport on the n1 to match the 3gs.
I'd be deeply interested in seeing how their test changed ig ther used the same compilation option as cyanogen does for his AOSP build including the Arm Neom optimisations.
Additionally I believe that the NDK can't currently use the OGLES2.0 library only the 1.1 version. I wonder id the code paths are more optimised there.
uansari1 said:
I know that the 3GS is a very capable 3D gaming device... but N1 is working with half the RAM, so I only see this as a test of the device in their current state and it'll change substantially with the expected kernel update.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a noob question, what is ram got to do with framerates?
If they were using the Same Resolution the would get the same FPS. But our Res is ALOT higher
In the video it says that Nexus has OpenGL ES 2.0 support. I thought Google did not include the 2.0 libraries in the code, so I wonder if this benchmark software actually using the full specs of the Nexus GPU.
Anyone know if the developers even take full advantage of the GPU in the Nexus one yet?
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.
Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
appelflap said:
Totally agree. In addition, it would be really nice to know which benchmarked factors are responsible for which functions. For example it is really interesting to see how the hd2 performs before the user is running the tests. When the user is scrolling through the setting menu there is a very noticible lag. Given the fact that the total score is nearly the same as the scrore for the SGS, and thar the graphic score of the hd2 is bad in comparisson to the SGS, I would conclude that graphic performance is very important for the way the ui responds.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I can tell, the HD2 got a decent score 'cos it was running Froyo. When we get bumped up to an official froyo build with JIT fully optimized, We should be top of the pile.
don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.
woops dbl post
alovell83 said:
Quadrant scores have been criticized for their non-descript breakdowns, at least on their free suite. Also, the fact that they chose the weighting of the scores, so should they chose 2D is equal to 3D weight, I don't know their formula (and for all I know, they give equal weighting to all or they give equal weighting to all test where the CPU has 12 tests and the 3D graphics has 4), but the fact that we, as users don't have access to their formula on their website is a bit unnerving.
Add to that the fact that many reviews and videos rely on it so heavily leaves users a bit misinformed. In reality, and thorough review should definitely run a custom test suite to give individual scores to:
CPU
Memory
I/O
2D graphics
3D graphics
That way users can compare what's important to them. The Galaxy S suffers from terrible I/O and the hacks that have given the fixes typically boost Galaxy scores to nearly double their rates, and it's majorly attributed to improving a bunk I/O score.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even then though, it's possible to write a benchmark which wins constantly for any phone.
In regards to "terrible I/O", that might even be due to a bug in the FAT32 drivers. Yes you can benchmark it, but it wont mean much. The best way is to actually TEST the applications you need, rather than select a phone based on benchmarks. However, you are possibly best off looking at the component specs, because they ignore software bugs.
scrizz said:
don't forget, android isn't working 100% on the HD2.
I personally think it's pointless comparing to a not complete port.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.
You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score
appelflap said:
But the topic is about "what's in a score". Maybe one can generally say that is pointless to compare devices this way. I think that such benchmark scores are only (a bit) relevant at the two poles of the benchmark score spectrum. Everything in between can be neglected due to the uninformed way sub-scores are evaluated.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just read in a post that the Galaxy S gets a 0 on the 2D score:
"JIT isn't fully enabled in the current froyo versions, and quadrant, frankly, is bull**** (for exmple, 2d acceleration gets the same weight in the final result as 3D. Due to the fact that the SGS doesn't have a dedicated 2D accelerator, quadrant doesn't try to use the cpu- it just gives a round zero in that part)"
I can't confirm this, but that definitely seems like a terrible set-up, seeing as how I'm pretty sure I have games run in 2D, so to say that it can't do it just seems wrong regardless of if the SGS has a dedicated 2D accelerator or not (so if you aren't testing the way it performs in real-world, why are you testing?)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=737787&page=3
Qazz~ said:
You got 55.7 FPS on Neocore as the sgs has vertical sync enabled, the refresh rate on the sgs'es screen is 56 fps and thus you can only go up to 56 fps as the v-sync is on. This proves that the sgs is indeed a much more powerful device that is actually being held back. If you can disable the v-sync then you can get a higher fps score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device
RyanZA said:
It isn't really being held back - the screen can't display more than 56 fps as you say, and it wouldn't really be visible even if it could. Disabling v-sync isn't really that important, we need a benchmark that can actually use the advanced features in the SGS GPU (Neocore just pushes a fairly small amount of polygons with no real extras.) Using current 3D benchmarks to benchmark the SGS is like using quake 1 to benchmark the brand new ATI/nVidia cards.
The benchmark is what is at fault here, not the device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't want to speak for the other poster, and I agree with your premise, however, it isn't actually solving the issue at hand. Better FPS wouldn't be noticed, however, it would give a better score and, more importantly, indicate it's potential. So, getting 56FPS isn't doing the phone any justice within the score, which is what reviews are using, giving it an artificially low score, and putting it more in line with units that can't compete on higher end games. So, when a site like anand pushes 150FPS on a game, I know that means that their rig is entirely too powerful for the game in question, but it still means something when you compare it to the lower end graphics card that only gets 90...then when they run Crisis you see these results play out more with differences that we can notice with the eye.
I think the HD2 gets that score because, as I can see in the video, the CPU tests run faster compared to my SGS, probably because of Froyo, and I know, from the time I had the Diamond and the HD2, that the internal memory and RAM are very fast. Sadly SGS has a slow internal memory, atleast when used by the phone`s software, when copying from PC is faster than my class 6 microSD. Luckily, we have mimocan`s fix. Hope this will be fixed in future FW`s.
NexusHD2 with-FRG83D V1.7 with hastarin r8.5.1 On my HD2 got 1920 in quadrant,31.5 on neocore, and 37 on linmark.
The lag might be because you are using launcher pro, I use launcher pro and sometimes it makes the the lock lag on my phone but it doesn't happen when I use the default lock also if you have alot of Widgets on your screen it will cause lag also
appelflap said:
Look at this (from 1:44 on):
It's a quadrant benchmark run on a android port on the HD2. Graphics are really bad, but in the end it has approximately the same score as the benchmarking score of the Galaxy with the original firmware. I mean what is in a score? If I look at the beginning of the movie, the UI is very slow and not as responsive as the Galaxy
(BTW i got 55.7 FPS with the neocore benchmark on JM2)
This is not to say that I don't have deep respect for what the HD2-android development team is doing. Really amazing job. I just can't wait to get my HD2 back from repair.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
same galaxy s scores 6000+ in quadrant with custem roms
The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not. Comparing apples to orenges in an apple juice contest doesn't really prove much. Use real life feel. If you care about the scores a rom can be made to get you over 3000 quad score but is laggy as hell. Don't believe me? Look at my sig
interesting... I was using quadrant to see how a stock xxjvo and gingerreal compared. Surely that would indicate a real speed difference and not just be some kind of "hack" ?
zelendel said:
The HD 2 is a better fit for quadrent then the sgs as quadrent was made for the snapdragon processor which the hd2 has and the sgs does not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's right.
HD2 uses two android OS :
- Cyanogenmod, that is faster than our samsung os..
- Nexus one's port to HD2, greatly optimized by google...
It's really fast. I upgraded my father's HD2 last month, replacing windows in the NAND with CM7. It really makes a big change, the phone is like brand new ^^
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1012556
Quadrant is pretty flawed. And I say that being someone who had a phone (before modifications) that was mid-range in Quadrant (Galaxy S), and having a phone that's right top of the heap (Galaxy S II)
i have heared that galaxy s Gpu can give 90M triangles/sec is that true as some sources claming that it only gives 28M tri/sec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR , and the higher one sgx 545 gives 40 m so how the sgx 540 gives 90M
hoss_n2 said:
i have heared that galaxy s Gpu can give 90M triangles/sec is that true as some sources claming that it only gives 28M tri/sec http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR , and the higher one sgx 545 gives 40 m so how the sgx 540 gives 90M
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think the number listed on wikipedia is 'triangles' per second... It just says polys... So it could be a different shape thats harder to render?
Just my guess.
Besides if the 90M claimed is actually the 28 million then don't worry because the same thing for the iPhone's GPU (the 535) claims around 22m and wiki is listing it as 14.
Aaannnnddd if you're worried about the GPU feel comforted that no 3D benchmarks I've seen have even slowed it down so far and you can see tons of videos on youtube of Galaxy S series phones face rolling every single other Android device in gaming FPS benchmarks. Even if it isn't as amazing as the numbers they claimed there is no doubt that it's the best in the market at the moment, and by quite a lot too!
I'm not going to pretend that I read the comment thoroughly, but I've read a similar question. The person who seemed to know what they were talking about, said that essentially the 90m is a "theoretical number" and that about half of that number is what the phone should? can? will? potentially? do...(skimming, memory and probably comprehension make that a very difficult word to fill in accurately)....but this is how all manufacturers report their graphics capabilities (at least in smartphones, but I'll assume the same holds true for the desktop/laptop graphics cards).
So, while the number is definitely overstated, it's within the standard reporting convention...and relative to other numbers, still accurate (2x as many triangles is 2x as many whether everything gets cut in half of cut by a factor of 3).
*I'll remove my fuzzy language when someone better informed than me responds*
I also read a good article (don't know where it is now sorry) all about how the GPU relies heavily on the memory and bus between them etc and for example there could be a phone running the same GPU as another and have much less performance because they don't use much memory, or use slow memory. Apparently our SGS have done pretty well in all departments.
To untangle the confusion-
Triangles= "polys" (polygons)
The SGS does nothing bear 90M, but on the other side, none of the other phones are doing what the manufacturers are claiming them to do.
Plus, the wikipedia article is FAR from being reliable, it's been edited more than 5 times over the past 2 months, with ever changing results. No official specs are available from imgtec.
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Pika007 said:
...
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, one important fact is the pixelcount in the glbenchmark link you sent. iPhone4 and iPad share the same GPU. The difference in pixels is about 20%, and hence the difference between those two.
Let me make one ugly calculation to map SGS's score to iPhone4's. Pixelcount difference between i4 and SGS is a factor 0.625. That we would make the SGS score 1146 on the iPhone resolution. (or 1723 for i4 on 800*480 resolution). Offcourse there are more factors involved but this the best estimate i can make at the moment.
Difference turns out not te be that great after all.
I knew this argument was going to pop up soon enough, so i'll add one VERY important factor-
Score doesn't decrease proportionally to an increase in resolution.
For example, doubling the resolution won't give half the score. More like 70%~
Try running 3Dmark on your PC in different resolutions, you'll see some interesting results.
Personally, GLmark 1.1 for me is just a very crude example, for general demontstrations. It's not really close to be very accurate.
I'm waiting for GLmark 2.0 that should be a great tool to effectively compare the devices.
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Pika007 said:
To untangle the confusion-
Triangles= "polys" (polygons)
The SGS does nothing bear 90M, but on the other side, none of the other phones are doing what the manufacturers are claiming them to do.
Plus, the wikipedia article is FAR from being reliable, it's been edited more than 5 times over the past 2 months, with ever changing results. No official specs are available from imgtec.
One thing i CAN tell you is that the GPU on the SGS is nothing less than a monster.
http://glbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=glpro11&certified_only=2
I'd like you to take as a refrence the Compal NAZ10 that uses the ever-glorified Nvidia TEGRA 2, and the iPhone 4 (SGX535)
I don't know what trick Samsung used, but there shouldn't be such a massive difference between the 535 and the 540.
Appearently someone over at Sammy did something right.
Extremely right.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes it is edited more than 5 times but there is an offcial sources says that sgx 454 gives only 40M polygons so hw sgx450 gives 90M i know numbers are not important if there is nothing to use it but i only wanted to know
I think its due to fact that older chip has 2d acceleration too, while 450 is pure 3d and we use cpu for 2d. Thats why its faster.
It is important to note that PowerVR does not do 3D rendering using the traditional 3D polygon based pipeline, like those used in nVidia and ATi cards. It uses the unique tile based rendering engine. This approach is more efficient and uses less memory bandwidth as well as RAW horse power. IIRC, the original PowerVR 3D PC card is a PCI card that can compete head to head with AGP based cards from 3dfx and ATi at that time. Unfortunately, its unique rendering engine does not fit well with Direct3D and OpenGL which favor traditional polygon-based rendering pipelines.
So, the 90M figure could well be the equivelent performance number when using traditional 3D rendering pipeline as compared to Tile-based PowerVR setup.
Power VR does indeed use the traditional 3D polygon based pipeline.
Tile based rendering is in addition, not instead.
Do note that not all games (and actually, far from it) are using TBR properly (if at all).
Read the release notes and press release, it has enough details.
hoss_n2 said:
yes it is edited more than 5 times but there is an offcial sources says that sgx 454 gives only 40M polygons so hw sgx450 gives 90M i know numbers are not important if there is nothing to use it but i only wanted to know
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
All the given numbers for "official" specs about PowerVR GPU's are for a frequenct of 200mhz.
Those chips can do well above 400mhz, so for example, if an SGX530 does 14M polygons and 500Mpixels per second @200mhz, if you clock it up to 400, it'll do 28Mpolys/1Gpixels.
Though i extremely doubt samsung has the SGX540 clocked at 600mhz in ths SGS...
A pratical and good exaple that shows of the power of the Galaxy S is Gameloft's Real Football 2010 game. The game hasn't got a framelock so it's playable on the Desire and Nexus One. Since pictures tell a thousand words and videos even moreso, I'll provide you this YouTube link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0DxP0sk5s0
Pika007 said:
All the given numbers for "official" specs about PowerVR GPU's are for a frequenct of 200mhz.
Those chips can do well above 400mhz, so for example, if an SGX530 does 14M polygons and 500Mpixels per second @200mhz, if you clock it up to 400, it'll do 28Mpolys/1Gpixels.
Though i extremely doubt samsung has the SGX540 clocked at 600mhz in ths SGS...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true however overclocking the GPU to those numbers is silly because the memory & memory bus can't support that much data throughput anyway. I don't even think there is enough to support the amount of the standard clock rate. There is a lot more to consider than just the GPU when it comes to graphics here
You're taking that article you read way too seriously.
Plus, we have no idea what is the bandwidth limit of the galaxy S, we don't know what kind of memory is used, how much of it, at what frequency, etc.
WiseDuck said:
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
Re: lag, I want doing bad until I installed one of the fixes. Now I've officially entered crazy-town.
If I would have to guess it has to do with S5PC110 optimizations. When rendering polygons there are many things that contribute aside from the GPU. Think of it maybe similar to hybrid-sli...(but this is just a guess)
but if you want to look at it in more detail, someone posted the official documentation and spec sheet for the S5PC110 a while back..I ddint get a chance to look at it but my guess the clock speeds and other stuff would be there :/
WiseDuck said:
Who cares if the phone is powerful when there are no great games that take advantage of the power and when you have an OS that lags all the damn time despite the fact that Quadrant gives me 2100+. Even opening the PHONE app can take up to 10 seconds. This thing can drive me crazy at times.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well i dont have any lags, what so ever after lag fix. Something else must be troubleing your phone. Auto memory manager is a need tho if you want to keep it real snappy.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I cannot understand why everyone is saying that hummingbird processor is better than snapdragon and that's why I started this thread.
I own an HD2 (snapdragon) and SGS (hummingbird).
I've run linpack and quadrant in both phones and here are the results showing that snapdragon is 4 to 5 times faster.
Hummingbird: linpack 13,864 quadrant CPU 1456
Snapdragon: linpack 63,122 quadrant CPU 4122
I'm only talking for the CPU cause if you go to 3D I'll agree that hummingbird is better (but I don't care about 3D cause I don't use my device for games)
Both phones have android 2,2 installed and I have voodoo lagfix installed in SGS
johcos said:
I cannot understand why everyone is saying that hummingbird processor is better than snapdragon and that's why I started this thread.
I own an HD2 (snapdragon) and SGS (hummingbird).
I've run linpack and quadrant in both phones and here are the results showing that snapdragon is 4 to 5 times faster.
Hummingbird: linpack 13,864 quadrant CPU 1456
Snapdragon: linpack 63,122 quadrant CPU 4122
I'm only talking for the CPU cause if you go to 3D I'll agree that hummingbird is better (but I don't care about 3D cause I don't use my device for games)
Both phones have android 2,2 installed and I have voodoo lagfix installed in SGS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
After looking into it for a while, I was focusing on what makes the Nexus One so much better than the other phones. On the chip level, I didn’t see it. Then it dawned on me to look at what Google had to say on the matter. Well, it was there in black and white. In their 20 May 2010 Developer’s Blog entry (http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/05/android-22-and-developers-goodies.html) they say that people could see a 2-5x speed increase. I think it is pointed out in an entry later in the blog dealing with NDK, which I initially missed: “ARM Advanced SIMD (a.k.a. NEON) instruction support The NEON instruction set extension can be used to perform scalar computations on integers and floating points. However, it is an optional CPU feature and will not be supported by all Android ARMv7-A based devices. The NDK includes a tiny library named “cpufeatures” that can be used by native code to test at runtime the features supported by the device’s target CPU.”
So, I guess this means that NEON is the difference. If your phone’s CPU has it and it’s enabled for JIT, you can expect higher Linpack numbers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.greenecomputing.com/2010...ack-scores-so-mucher-higher-than-on-my-phone/
Now stop making topics like this.
the difference you notice is software related
If you want a real test, run a hd video on both phones, or a psx emulator and see if the nexus one is 5x faster... it is the same if not slower then the sgs
Well, SGS got hardware h264 decoding acceleration. Also, maybe you forget, but:
he Hummingbird comes with 32KB each of data and instruction caches, an L2 cache, the size of which can be customized, and an ARM® NEON™ multi-media extension.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SAMSUNG and Intrinsity Jointly Develop the World's Fastest ARM® Cortex™-A8 Processor Based Mobile Core in 45 Nanometer Low Power Process
Advanced SIMD (NEON)
The Advanced SIMD extension, marketed as NEON technology, is a combined 64- and 128-bit single instruction multiple data (SIMD) instruction set that provides standardized acceleration for media and signal processing applications. NEON can execute MP3 audio decoding on CPUs running at 10 MHz and can run the GSM AMR (Adaptive Multi-Rate) speech codec at no more than 13 MHz. It features a comprehensive instruction set, separate register files and independent execution hardware. NEON supports 8-, 16-, 32- and 64-bit integer and single-precision (32-bit) floating-point data and operates in SIMD operations for handling audio and video processing as well as graphics and gaming processing. In NEON, the SIMD supports up to 16 operations at the same time. The NEON hardware shares the same floating-point registers as used in VFP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
source: wiki
This means Hummingbirds are equipped with NEON. Why its not so effective/used in Quadrant/Linpack? My guess they (these benchmarks) are not compiled/optimised for Hummingbirds, just for Snapdragons.
I came from owning an iPhone and playing lots of games on it. I bought the SGS purely for the gaming performance of the Hummingbird processor.
Having seen the difference in game quality between the HTC Desire and the SGS, I know I made the right decision. Benchmarks don't mean anything.
As long as the device can run apps, games, multimedia smoothly, I dont care much about those benchmarkers, maybe they were designed and/or optimized for snapdragon prior to hummingbird.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
i bet you anything he actually doesn't have a sgs...lol
jealousy maybe just a troll, ignore
In terms of overall smoothness (everything, not just games) the SGS is vastly superior to any other android phone I've seen (Desire included).
Darkimmortal said:
everything
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? You have to go all out and use the word "everything" when the phone can get major lockups?
"most things" sounds like a more reasonable and believable choice of words...
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
johcos said:
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
man. if you are not happy, then i think you should sell it. no one here will give you a satisfying answer that warm your heart. look for desire hd or something.
to answer ur questions. i get a 2100+ on quadrant. using voodoo fix and oclf on my eclaire. lag free and smooth as butter.
but either way, these test scores mean nothing. they were not designed for samusng hardware. it was designed based on htc and the snapdragon processor.
even people who use neocore for gpu are wrong. if you wana test the gpu performance, use nenamark1. the sgs gives u 49+ fps while the desire HD struggle to give u 35. while if you use neocore. the sgs gives u 56 while desire hd 58
my point is most of those software were designed with htc hardware in mind. so you cant really compare them.
just test your device for your self. apply whatever best roms you find here. if it doesnt lag and smooth for you. then ^^^^ everyone else.
the display alone is worth keepin the sgs for me. sure people might like i phone 4 display more. but nothing in my eyes come close to the contrast and colors of the super amoled. watching a movie or playing a game is a joy in this device.
hell yesterday evening a local htc store had a demo of desire hd. and the guy was nice enough to me play with it for like 1 hour.
device as a hardware look. its friggin sexy as hell. screen ? beauitful large 4.3 screen. quality colors compared to sgs ? fail. a lil slow and laggy " i am sure its because of the firmware. once roms are out, it will be faster "
i was thinking to change to desire hd honestly. but i wake away from the store kissing my sgs.
i love the desire hf look and feel. but as of now its not as smooth as my sgs. and the screen isnt as vibrant.
Psx emulator does not use the gpu...yet
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
android53 said:
Psx emulator does not use the gpu...yet
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this. i played king of fighters on my hd2 and it was laggy as hell
smooth as butter on my galaxy s
to be honest. the day psx4droid use gpu. galaxy owners are in heaven.
Its unlikely it ever will though, even modern pc emulators barely use the gpu, only for anti aliasing
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
johcos said:
My friends I do own an SGS (not happy with it thought) and the tests that I posted were run from me.
I wasn't talking about the gaming performance (I know that SGS is the best out there)
This thread was started so that we can find an answer why is this happening?
I see some answers that cover it but I believe not completely because in everyday use of the phones I see that HD2 is snappier (not much but it is) than SGS (with lagfix).
The best test I believe would be to put the phones to encode something (like a video) but I don't know any software that could do that. (If anyone knows some please point them to me and I'll be happy to post the results here)
The tests you mention with psx and multimedia won't show as what we're looking because the SGS will clearly win because of the GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why in hell woul you want to incodea video using a smartPHONE...?
It's like trying to fit your family and grocery in a sport car... not made for this bro!
stop trying to find reason to "not like" the SGS, if you don't like it, sell it and be done...
Snapdragon/Hummingbird scores in glbenchmark (nexus one/galaxy s):
integer: 20661/27624
float: 11173/7968
I guess glbenchmark uses native C code (hopefully with armv7 optimization), so the JIT compiler has no effect. From the scores it seems that the floating point unit in Snapdragon is faster - but most of the time it is not used (except video & games).
Anyway, a benchmark to measure the same algorithm in both native & java code with scalar & vector instructions would be great...
t1mman said:
Why in hell woul you want to incodea video using a smartPHONE...?
It's like trying to fit your family and grocery in a sport car... not made for this bro!
stop trying to find reason to "not like" the SGS, if you don't like it, sell it and be done...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he's not whining, well, not in the first place and i don't see any harm on that i think he's trying to UNDERSTAND reasons behind numbers and daily use with help of other people, so am i. if i had to sell phones for every problem i encounter i will problaby be without (smart)phone at this time
i don't care about benchmarks, but if you think that sgs is smoother than hd2 xda optimized (with wm 6.5 or android 2.2) you obviously never owned an hd2 i'm not talking about games, like johcos says galaxy s performance is not questionable. but android is not all about game. anyway, i don't think hardware is the problem here, sure sgs is superior in many aspects, we know that, regardless benchmarks (even if it seems here that only benchmarks where sgs win are trustworthy, others are not good, not optimized, not realistic, meaningless for real life performance etc.). with a little help from samsung and this community sgs will soon outperform (in real usage) all snapdragon phones. i hope
...when average men talk about the high tech w/o knowledge, boo
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
man. if you are not happy, then i think you should sell it. no one here will give you a satisfying answer that warm your heart. look for desire hd or something.
to answer ur questions. i get a 2100+ on quadrant. using voodoo fix and oclf on my eclaire. lag free and smooth as butter.
but either way, these test scores mean nothing. they were not designed for samusng hardware. it was designed based on htc and the snapdragon processor.
even people who use neocore for gpu are wrong. if you wana test the gpu performance, use nenamark1. the sgs gives u 49+ fps while the desire HD struggle to give u 35. while if you use neocore. the sgs gives u 56 while desire hd 58
my point is most of those software were designed with htc hardware in mind. so you cant really compare them.
just test your device for your self. apply whatever best roms you find here. if it doesnt lag and smooth for you. then ^^^^ everyone else.
the display alone is worth keepin the sgs for me. sure people might like i phone 4 display more. but nothing in my eyes come close to the contrast and colors of the super amoled. watching a movie or playing a game is a joy in this device.
hell yesterday evening a local htc store had a demo of desire hd. and the guy was nice enough to me play with it for like 1 hour.
device as a hardware look. its friggin sexy as hell. screen ? beauitful large 4.3 screen. quality colors compared to sgs ? fail. a lil slow and laggy " i am sure its because of the firmware. once roms are out, it will be faster "
i was thinking to change to desire hd honestly. but i wake away from the store kissing my sgs.
i love the desire hf look and feel. but as of now its not as smooth as my sgs. and the screen isnt as vibrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly couldn't agree anymore, even with all the problems the SGS has. The screen+hardware combination is just too overwhelming for me to swap the phone for something else.
Video Preview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIeFxDfShmY
So ICS on Hero is a reality, despite naysayers. Are there any new features / technical limitations introduced in Jelly Bean that completely rule it out?
The inclusion of Project Butter certainly makes it sound attractive:
Project Butter lets the CPU and graphics run in parallel, rather than crash into each other, and has a big impact on both real and perceived speed: the entire interface runs at 60 frames per second on sufficiently fast hardware. Graphics are now triple-buffered to keep scrolling and transitions humming along, and the processor will swing into full gear the moment you touch the screen to keep input lag to a minimum. - Engadget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First up you have improvements across the OS to make sure that the GPU, CPU and display can all work in sync and all at 60fps, which will make everything look just that little bit smoother.
In Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, Google has worked on addressing issues relating to the touch response, improving the way that touches are interpreted, as well as the way in which the power of the device is managed.
When we say power, we mean the CPU rather than battery management. In previous iterations of Android there was the possibility of some lag when the CPU scaled up to perform the tasks requested. In Jelly Bean this response is much faster, reducing possible lag. - Pocket-lint
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Project Butter Demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krrLfZjirv8
lost101 said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIeFxDfShmY
So ICS on Hero is a reality, despite naysayers. Are there any new features / technical limitations introduced in Jelly Bean that completely rule it out?
The inclusion of Project Butter certainly makes it sound attractive:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krrLfZjirv8
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even so, the Project butter is relying on both CPU and GPU. And hero runs CPU as a GPU. Rendering on Hero using GPU is not possible. So project butter will not be applicable on our phone.
Galaxy Nexus has OTA update just today given the fact that the presentation of the Jellybean was made yesterday. I have a One V, and it is possible to run Jellybean on it after someone will port it ofc.