Related
Hi everyone
For quite a long time i've been thinking about the whole "galaxy s can do 90mpolys per second" thing.
It sounds like total bull****.
So, after many, many hours of googling, and some unanswered mails to imgtec, i'd like to know-
Can ANYONE provide any concrete info about the SGX540?
From one side i see declerations that the SGX540 can do 90 million polygons per second, and from the other side i see stuff like "Twice the performance of SGX530".
...but twice the performance of SGX530 is EXACTLY what the SGX535 has.
So is the 540 a rebrand of the 535? that can't be, so WHAT THE HELL is going on?
I'm seriously confused, and would be glad if anyone could pour light on the matter.
I asked a Samsung rep what the difference was and this is what I got:
Q: The Samsung Galaxy S uses the SGX540 vs the iPhone using the SGx535. The only data I can find seems like these two GPU's are very similar. Could you please highlight some of the differences between the SGX535 and the SGX540?
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
I also tried getting in contact with ImgTec to find out an answer, but I haven't received a reply back. It's been two weeks now.
Also, the chip is obviously faster than snapdragon with the adreno 200 gpu. I don't know if Adreno supports TBDR, I just know it's a modified Xenon core. Also, Galaxy S uses LPDDR2 ram. So throughput is quite a bit faster, even though it's not *as* necessary with all the memory efficiencies between the Cortex A8 and TBDR on the SGX540.
thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think that is the cue, for cost saving for Samsung
besides who will need a 2D Accelerator, with a CPU as fast as it's already.
The HTC Athena (HTC Advantage) failed miserably at adding the ATI 2D Accelerator which no programmers were able to take advantage of, in the end the CPU did all the work.
I'd imagine its a 535 at 45nm. Just a guess, the cpu is also 45nm
Having tried a few phones the speed in games is far better, much better fps though there is a problem that we might have to wait for any games to really test its power as most are made to run on all phones.
This was the same problem with the xbox and ps2, the xbox had more power but the ps2 was king and so games were made with its hardware in mind which held back the xbox, only now and then did a xbox only game come out that really made use of its power....years later xbox changed places which saw 360 hold the ps3 back (dont start on which is better lol) and the ps3 has to make do with 360 ports but when it has a game made just for it you really get to see what it can do...anywayits nice to know galaxy is future proof game wise and cannot wait to see what it can do in future or what someone can port on to it.
On a side note I did read that the videos run through the graphics chip which is causing blocking in dark movies (not hd...lower rips) something about it not reading the difference between shades of black, one guy found a way to turn the chip off and movies were all good, guess rest of us have to wait for firmware to sort this.
thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
smart move sammy
voodoochild2008-
I wouldn't say we'd have to wait so much.
Even today, snapdragon devices don't do very well in games, since their fillrate is so low (133Mpixels)
Even the motorola droid (SGX530 at 110mhz, about 9~ Mpoly's and 280~ Mpixels with that freq) fares MUCH better in games, and actually, runs pretty much everything.
So i guess the best hardware is not yet at stake, but weaker devices should be hitting the limit soon.
bl4ckdr4g00n- Why the hell should we care? I don't see any problem with 2D content and/or videos, everything flies at lightspeed.
well I can live in hope, and I guess apples mess (aka the iphone4) will help now as firms are heading more towards android, I did read about one big firm in usa dropping marketing for apple and heading to android, and well thats what you get when you try to sell old ideas...always made me laugh when the first iphone did like 1meg photo when others were on 3meg, then it had no video when most others did, then they hype it when it moves to a 3meg cam and it does video.....omg, ok I am going to stop as it makes my blood boil that people buy into apple, yes they started the ball rolling and good on them for that but then they just sat back and started to count the money as others moved on.................oh and when I bought my galaxy the website did say "able to run games as powerfull as the xbox (old one) so is HALO too much to ask for lol
wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??
The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby
he 535 is a downgrade from the 540. 540 is the latest and greatest from the PowerVR line.
Samsung did not cost cut, they've in fact spent MORE to get this chip on their Galaxy S line. No one else has the 540 besides Samsung.
Like i said, its probably just a process shrink which means our gpu uses less power and is possibly higher clocked.
p.s. desktop gfx haven't had 2d acceleration for years removing it saves transistors for more 3d / power!
This worries me as well... Seems like it might not be as great as what we thought. HOWEVER again, this is a new device that might be fixed in firmware updates. Because obviously the hardware is stellar, there's something holding it back
Pika007 said:
The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.slashgear.com/droid-x-review-0793011/
"We benchmarked the DROID X using Quadrant, which measures processor, memory, I/O and 2D/3D graphics and combines them into a single numerical score. In Battery Saver mode, the DROID X scored 819, in Performance mode it scored 1,204, and in Smart mode it scored 963. In contrast, the Samsung Galaxy S running Android 2.1 – using Samsung’s own 1GHz Hummingbird CPU – scored 874, while a Google Nexus One running Android 2.2 – using Qualcomm’s 1GHz Snapdragon – scored 1,434. "
The N1's performance can be explained by the fact it's 2.2...
But the Droid X, even with the "inferior" GPU, outscored the Galaxy S? Why?
gdfnr123 said:
wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. I want to know which one is has the better performance as well.
Besides that. Does anyone know which CPU is better between Dorid X and Galaxy S?
I knew that OMAP chip on the original Droid can overclock to 1.2Ghz from what, 550Mhz?
How about the CPU on Droid X and Galaxy S? Did anyone do the comparison between those chips? Which can overclock to a higher clock and which one is better overall?
Sorry about the poor English. Hope you guys can understand.
The CPU in the DroidX is a stock Cortex A8 running at 1GHz. The Samsung Hummingbird is a specialized version of the Cortex A8 designed by Intrinsity running at 1Ghz.
Even Qualcomm does a complete redesign of the Cortex A8 in the snapdragon cpu at 1GHz. But while the original A8 could only be clocked at 600Mhz with a reasonable power drain, the striped down versions of the A8 could be clocked higher while maintaining better power.
An untouched Cortex A8 can do more at the same frequencies compared to a specialized stripped down A8.
If anything the Samsung Galaxy S is better balanced, leveraging the SGX 540 as a video decoder as well. However, the Droid X should be quite snappy in most uses.
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.
TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.
Pika007 said:
TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SGS might be falling behind in I/O speeds... It is well known that all the app data is stored in a slower internal SD-card partition... Has anyone tried the benchmarks with the lag fix?
Also, if only android made use of the GPU's to help render the UI's... It's such a shame that the GPU only goes to use in games...
Using the GPU to render the UI would take tons of battery power.
I preffer it being a bit less snappy, but a whole lot easier on the battery.
thephawx said:
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.
TexUs said:
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think so. The battery will be the biggest issue for the smart phone in the future if it just remain 1500mAh or even less.
The dual-core CPU could be fast but power aggressive as well.
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
rex-tc said:
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
****ty deal... I wonder how much software it will take to make it speedy gonzales
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App
dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ouch well put??? lol
dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.
Nado85 said:
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both the Ipad2 and the Odroid run at higher resolutions than the Atrix, that should make them worse, not better off.
The Xoom is ~30% larger than the ipad2, but that is not enough to explain why the ipad2 is 4 times better
The Odroid is again larger than the Xoom, and that performes 3 times better than the Xoom.
dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you know what this points out? That people are VERY stupid and care too much about upcoming technology! Everything people buy ends up being obsolete in about a week or two. Its REALLY sad to see this because these software developers put a lot of time for something that will only be hot for a few weeks and then its yesterdays news. That's why software is getting choppier, and there is no quality backing anymore.
Aside from my *****ing...i do like how that Samsung platform works..quite impressive, i'd like to see what Nvidia will do next. These new technologies have been pushed mad crazy this last year. I think quality and reliability will take a hit quite hard due to the silicon being pushed to the limit of its threshold...we're not too far from that.
Mafisometal said:
... I think quality and reliability will take a hit quite hard due to the silicon being pushed to the limit of its threshold...we're not too far from that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Silicone has a long way to go before it max'es out. The good news is Nvidia has years of quality GPU fabbing and they've got loads of tricks up their sleeves yet.
What Samsung and Qualcomm dont have right now is games & software optimised for their chipsets. This is where the Tegra II is a step a head of the rest..
So don't stress peoples!
tadjiik said:
Both the Ipad2 and the Odroid run at higher resolutions than the Atrix, that should make them worse, not better off..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, the Atrix is also running Android 2.2, where as the Odroid is on 2.3 which is optimised for dual core CPU's.....
We will all see a big difference when Moto release 2.3 / 2.4 for the Atrix.
I can confirm the SGX540 (iphone 4 graphics processor) beast tegra 2. i know the resolution is lower, however the smoothness and especially quick scrolling on jam packed websites like non moble youtube for example show its smoother.
i have not done a bench yet. i am more than happy with my atrix. actaully i just got an amd zacate fusion e350 and its on part with my atrix dual core yet eats 18watts. actaully, the atrix plays less choppy than the zacate.
however, its not as fast 'yet' as the sxg540 and OMG i bet the SGX543 is awesome.
The iPhone 5 had a higher resolution then the atrix, yet scored 15-16 fps in tests where the atrix gets 48-50. The tegra 2 I'd very future proof for s few.months especially considering that man manufacturers are still making single core phones.
To see what optimization can do. Download fruit slice, and compare it to fruit ninja tegra HD.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Techcruncher said:
The iPhone 5 had a higher resolution then the atrix, yet scored 15-16 fps in tests where the atrix gets 48-50. The tegra 2 I'd very future proof for s few.months especially considering that man manufacturers are still making single core phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you refering to the iphone4 here? That has a SGX535, which is worse than Tegra2, that is correct. But it is still not beating SGX540 (Samsung galaxy s), they seem to be about on par, according to glbenchmark.com. If you were refering to the ipad2, that beats tegra2 in just about anything.
To see what optimization can do. Download fruit slice, and compare it to fruit ninja tegra HD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what proof do you have that those games are not able to play on non-tegra phones or (more likely) could be optimized just as well or better for non-tegra phones? Throwing up a game that has not really been tested on non-tegra phones does not prove anything.
To throw the ball back, if you want to see what optimizations can do for Exynos do a search for "engadget exynos gdc", which has a 1080p 3D demo @60 fps (I am unable to post links...)
lol nice try.
oh and "your devices"? I like how you assume I'm an apple fanboy when I'm actually a die-hard android user... i HAVE an atrix, a nexus S, a nexus one. What phones do you have? and the benchmark scores I posted were all between android devices so I'm not sure where you're seeing these "awesome scores" for the ipad?
come back when you actually have something to contribute.
Nado85 said:
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rex-tc said:
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You really need to wait for benchmarks on the EVO 3D to come out.
And you really need to see a finalized and optimized (Driver wise) S2.
To make a fair comparison.
dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best. The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2. Which means higher res textures and with the better CPU better physics with PhysX. SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces. When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail. Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.
in the paper,,tegra 2 should be the weakest among them..
in fact, on the test, tegra 2 is not fall behind.
i still think exynos, a5, c2 snapdragon's performance will be better than tegra2, just the matter of time.
well, tegra2 is good enough. but tegra3 and tegra4 are the ones that take the lead.
Well until those "CPU centric" games you're talking about actually come out, the only thing we can compare it to is what's out there right now. If you want to see the Tegra 2 get shamed by the iPad 2's SGX543... http://www.anandtech.com/show/4216/...rmance-explored-powervr-sgx543mp2-benchmarked
rex-tc said:
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best. The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2. Which means higher res textures and with the better CPU better physics with PhysX. SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces. When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail. Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rex-tc said:
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tests are comprehensive and test different parts of the chip/driver. There is a few "real-life" tests, as well as a bunch of synthetic tests.
The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, so the "productivity" tests do prove something Well, I belive the ipad is clocked somewhat lower than T2, so no real surprise there. Trying to differentiate between different Dual-A9 cores might be hard, though, since they are all based on the same design. The only thing I could see Tegra2 had donewas the inclusion of a hardware JPEG decoder on the Tegra2, that might skew the productivity tests a little. On the other hand, they are not including NEON, so for tests that include that, they might be at a loss.
SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you even know what a tile renderer is? It is not "faking" what a true "T&L engine" produces, it is about not doing rasterization and fragment processing until frames are swapped, thus enabling the use of only a small render buffer (a tile). The only thing it "fakes" is that overdrawn pixels are not fragment processed - but this is also done on non-tilebased to a lesser degree (with early-Z).
By the way, "T&L engine"? There is no hardware "T&L engine" anymore - all is done through shaders nowadays.
When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If we are talking CPU centric, then Tegra2 will be at a loss because of its lack of NEON (which I belive Exynos supports). I am not sure if the Apple has it, but that is still comparing apples and oranges (different OS) when it comes to benchmarks.
Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you point me to the toolset? When I googled "tegra2 toolset", this post was the first...
Are we seeing PC ports? Could you mention some names/examples? Any reason why they will not run on non-tegra2?
SlimJ87D said:
You really need to wait for benchmarks on the EVO 3D to come out.
And you really need to see a finalized and optimized (Driver wise) S2.
To make a fair comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no no it's important to cherry-pick and declare victory as soon as possible.
I think people need to wait for release of the actual phones before comparing, I mean htc havnt even announced the pyramid an people think its crap because of its in development benchmark, of course scores are going to be crap if its still in development?
Sent from my thumbs
The hummingbird chipset always use to beat the snapdragon S2 chipset in 3D graphics performance. In short the powerVR SGX 540 was considered significantly better than the adreno 205.
But I have seen phones with the S2 chipset which just run games better than nexus S. Even the sony phones with 512MB ram manage to run GTA3 and temple run totally smooth without any mods or hacks just all stock. Whereas nexus S cant without doing all sorts of tweaking.
I suppose game devs dont support the hummingbird chipset well which is really surprising given how well the galaxy S performed in the market. Maybe samsung should actively work with devs? What is the point of creating the fastest GPU's if they dont get the support? There are some very graphically intensive games that run smoothly like asphalt 6 and 9mm HD so obviously the hardware is there.
I am disappoint with nexus S gaming support.
Gambler_3 said:
The hummingbird chipset always use to beat the snapdragon S2 chipset in 3D graphics performance. In short the powerVR SGX 540 was considered significantly better than the adreno 205.
But I have seen phones with the S2 chipset which just run games better than nexus S. Even the sony phones with 512MB ram manage to run GTA3 and temple run totally smooth without any mods or hacks just all stock. Whereas nexus S cant without doing all sorts of tweaking.
I suppose game devs dont support the hummingbird chipset well which is really surprising given how well the galaxy S performed in the market. Maybe samsung should actively work with devs? What is the point of creating the fastest GPU's if they dont get the support? There are some very graphically intensive games that run smoothly like asphalt 6 and 9mm HD so obviously the hardware is there.
I am disappoint with nexus S gaming support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I most certainly agree with you. however, you must realise, the Nexus S is considered to be a developer's device, not a consumer device, designed for coding and easy hacking, not UX. if you want a consumer device, go look somewhere else.
Gambler_3 said:
The hummingbird chipset always use to beat the snapdragon S2 chipset in 3D graphics performance. In short the powerVR SGX 540 was considered significantly better than the adreno 205.
But I have seen phones with the S2 chipset which just run games better than nexus S. Even the sony phones with 512MB ram manage to run GTA3 and temple run totally smooth without any mods or hacks just all stock. Whereas nexus S cant without doing all sorts of tweaking.
I suppose game devs dont support the hummingbird chipset well which is really surprising given how well the galaxy S performed in the market. Maybe samsung should actively work with devs? What is the point of creating the fastest GPU's if they dont get the support? There are some very graphically intensive games that run smoothly like asphalt 6 and 9mm HD so obviously the hardware is there.
I am disappoint with nexus S gaming support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
International s2 have exynoss processor that's even better on gnex cpu.. exynoss processor for me is the best.
Sent from my Nexus S®
mixtapes08 said:
International s2 have exynoss processor that's even better on gnex cpu.. exynoss processor for me is the best.
Sent from my Nexus S®
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gnex have TI OMAP 4460 CPU processor...
how it is compare to exynos SGSII???
For GPU many said that Mali-400MP SGSII is better than PowerVR SGX540 Gnex..
they said..I just have I9100T but dont have Gnex..So I cant compare..not a single of my friend use Gnex also..
Saw youtube videos where galaxy nexus was lagging in GTA 3 lol. Galaxy nexus isnt a weak phone, it's just not adequately armed for the massive 720p resolution. The galaxy S2 has WVGA resolution which is why it can still match pretty much any of the newer phones in 3D benchmarks. Having a lower resolution is a serious advantage for gaming smoothness. And that makes the case of the nexus S a bit more disappointing as it doesnt exactly have very high resolution even for its time.
For a real comparison I would suppose it would be better to compare S2 with sensation. The S2 beats it handily in benchmarks so it would be interesting to see if it translates to real world performance advantage.
As far as UI smoothness is concerned the nexus S is right among the smoothest single core phones I have used. The hardware is clearly very capable just that game support from devs seem to be lacking maybe because the snapdragon S2 is used in so many phones whereas the hummingbird is only used in 2 phones.
I think the OP is talking about the Quallcomm Snapdragon S2 chipset but not about the Galaxy S2 (Adreno 205 vs PowerVR 540SGX NOT Mali-400MP vs PowerVR 540SGX).
You took the discussion to the wrong side, i think...
RisinT96 said:
I think the OP is talking about the Quallcomm Snapdragon S2 chipset but not about the Galaxy S2 (Adreno 205 vs PowerVR 540SGX NOT Mali-400MP vs PowerVR 540SGX).
You took the discussion to the wrong side, i think...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha well I just figured why the S2 and galaxy nexus were brought in the equation.
I wish we had real gaming benchmarks instead of synthetic. Yes I was comparing nexus S GPU with adreno 205.
Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
gino_76ph said:
Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Its either dual or quad I think clocked at 450 or something(can be over clocked)
2. Underclocked I think(prime has same CPU but at 1.5)
3. Don't know
4. There's a few apps that do this
5. No you have to sideload
6. Stereo and don't know about surround sound
Sent from my Jelly Nexus S
Would it matter if a tablet has dual or single channel GPU? Does it matter if the wifi is dual or single band? WIll it actually help make the graphics "better" and surfing the net faster?
Would you trust Acer when it comes to build quality of its tablets compared to say samsung or Motorola?
1. Not sure(I think I heard about it being overclocked somewhere)
2. Default is 1.2ghz, can be overclocked up to 1.5ghz.
3. For example: File transfer. If you root you can also use it as a PlayStation controller with BluePutDroid.
4. There are a number of ways to do this, I would recommend AirDroid.
5. To get flash(no root required):
A. Go to settings->security and enable unknown sources.
B. Download and install the flash apk on your device from here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1763805
C. Get a browser that supports flash like boat browser(from play store).
6. Stereo, probably not surround sound.
(Second post)
Not sure what dual channel GPU means to tell you the truth.
I believe the nexus 7 has dual channel WiFi, using speed test app the speed reaches or goes above my maximum speed from the other end of the house.
gino_76ph said:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no such thing as a single or dual channel GPU. Channels refers to the RAM. It is a 12 core GPU.
1.3ghz is the maximum clock speed of the specific CPU used, the T30L. It is not underclocked.
this is the truth after reading some ****.no single or dual gpu.12 core has.channel intended only for the ram.this is the minor tegra3 out there,less freq. clock but high clocked ram and not the same as t30 packed.begginnning with the fact the clock cpu freq. is overcloccable without problems,the ram packed on n7 is IMHO better than ad example tf201 or htconex one's
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
gino_76ph said:
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no you are wrong man.the CPU(4cores) is clocked at 1.3 ghz (4 cores running) and 1.5 (or 1.4 i don't remeber)in single mode (1 core running)
the GPU (12cores)is clocked at 416 mhz by default
apart them,if you flash a custom kernel,this Soc can reach (depending on tab,they aren't exactly the same chips)1.8\2.0 ghz for the CPU,and 484\520\600\650\700\750 with the GPU (here depending on tab as well)
I see. So, it is fast?
As a side question would it be practical to buy a new or latest tablet like the Nexus 7 than an older (and equally good in its own) say Galaxy Tab 7.7 or the Xoom 2 Media Edition? What i'm trying to ask here is the "problem" of compatibility with apps and games if a tab has an older GPU in them.
Would that be an issue or not?
yes,sure it's fast!a little bit faster than others with same chip.i do you an example regards the last question.
there are peoples with old gpus,that continue playing hd games with these old gpu without problems (not all games working,but many of them!).an example is the galaxy nexus that i own,it 's packed with a good cpu and a old gpu,that we found also on galaxy s,nexus s ecc,but honestly i never found a game that doesn't work for the odl gpu.i have also tegra2 devices,no prob with games,surely a tegra3 is more powerfull and you can play games with full effect enabled without problems.all apps works,not depending to gpu,but only the version of OS at least.
The Tegra 3 SoC only has a single channel memory. Specs are 1GB RAM of DDR3L -1333 MHz (Low Voltage) giving a total memory bandwidth of 5.3 GB/s, is this super fast, no, but it is more than than sufficient for the Nexus 7 display resolution.
To the OP, don't get stressed about specs, especially if you're 100% sure what they actually mean. The important part is user experience of the Nexus 7, due in part to Android Jelly Bean, it is smooth and enjoyable, it can play all the latest games well, I also run Playstation & N64 emulators on it without issue.
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
If you can manage to find a Nexus 7 used on Craigs or Ebay, I would do it. I got my perfect condition barely used 16gb for $160 from a buyer's remorse user on Craigslist. For this price I find the tablet to be very good. I would have a harder time paying the $250 plus tax in store for the same unit. Not that it's not worth the $250 but already owning a Galaxy S3 phone, it's too much of the same at the end of the day, much like I experienced when I had a iPhone and iPad together.
The Nexus7 for me is a great grab and go device for quick browsing, game playing, weather checking, etc.
If you've got to have the latest and fastest specs, the Tegra3 is getting dated already and you'd want to find something with a Qualcomm S4 chip (even this isn't really faster than Tegra3). Supposedly the OMAP 4470 in the bigger Fire HD and the Nook HD+ might be a little faster for more money.
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
sert00 said:
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Turbotab said:
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
sert00 said:
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An area the 4470 does hold a significant advantage over Tegra 3 is memory bandwidth, as it utilises dual-channel memory, hopefully Tegra 4 will sort out that deficiency. Ultimately the OMAP's GPU is not powerful enough to be bandwidth limited anyway, overall I like the Tegra 3 from a UX perspective, looking forward to a Tegra 4 in the next Nexus 7 v2:good:
Using a nexus 7 now. Very happy with the money I paid for it. In terms of spec? This beast will last you for awhile. Even if they are pushing specs already to the next level, it'll be a long time until a quad core 1 gb ram machine will be considered slow.
Simply put, at this price and quality, anyone can buy it and everyone should.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Turbotab said:
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
phillip1953 said:
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a link confirming that, or is that inside knowledge
It's the logic step for Google. The 32 gig is already being sold and nobody really wants the 8 gig model. To compete with the "other" tablets and to make up for the lack of an SD card slot, it only makes sense.
IOW.....my speculation from 40 years of computer use....starting with the Heathkit H8.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?
Hmm...
Brad387 said:
Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kind of an odd question really. Clearly the 10 has better specs, including screen.
But I'm pretty sure many of us bought a Nexus 7 because it was 7 inches portable. So, I'm pretty confident saying that the Nexus 7 is a better 7 inch tab than the 10 is.
PMOttawa said:
Kind of an odd question really. Clearly the 10 has better specs, including screen.
But I'm pretty sure many of us bought a Nexus 7 because it was 7 inches portable. So, I'm pretty confident saying that the Nexus 7 is a better 7 inch tab than the 10 is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, it is obvious that the Nexus 7 (which is a 7" tab) is better at being a 7" tablet than a Nexus 10 (which isn't a 7" tab, but a 10" one). However, isn't the Nexus 10 only a dual-core processor? I know the screen resolution is quite amazing, but besides that isn't it actually worse?
CPU: http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
GPU: http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.
espionage724 said:
CPU: http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/cortex-a15.php
GPU: http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This ^.
You cant really justify which is better becuase the size difference. Like the first poster said we all bought this for the form factor. So to us the N7 is better regardless of the specs. However spec wise... i would go with the N10.
Two completely different forms factors and uses. They are both great devices.
CPU in the N10 is about twice as fast as the best A9 (S4 Pro) out now. It is more than likely about 3-4 times faster than the T3.
Two different devices for different purposes, its like comparing a motor bike to a car
Brad387 said:
Quite a simple question really, which was already mentioned in the title of the thread. What do you believe to be the best tablet? A 16 GB Nexus 7 WiFi model or a 16 GB Nexus 10 WiFi model?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is like asking: 'What is the best: a semi or a van?'
Those 2 tablets are just in a different market, ergo not comparable.
If you don't take the size in the comparison, the Nexus 10 would win: more efficient/faster processor, way better grafics, almost quadripple resolution, ..etc.
By specs, N10 destroys the N7.
In terms of pure performance, which one is better?
The Nexus 10 is a dual core vs Tegra 3 Quad core.
2gb ram vs 1gb ram.
Also take in consideration Tegra Zone support, although not really related to performance. The Tegra 3 gets larger list of premium games.
killer8297 said:
In terms of pure performance, which one is better?
The Nexus 10 is a dual core vs Tegra 3 Quad core.
2gb ram vs 1gb ram.
Also take in consideration Tegra Zone support, although not really related to performance. The Tegra 3 gets larger list of premium games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It isn't even a comparison. The N10 slaughters the N7. Pros vs joes if you will.
I'd still keep my 7". It performs just fine for what I need it for. 10" is too big. I'm more comfortable with my laptop at that point.
Sent from my SGH-T999 using xda app-developers app
Tegra has CPUs and GPU on a single chip, and other details
espionage724 said:
CPU core count isn't all that matters. I don't have any real-world benchmarks, but I'm pretty sure that CPU alone can execute tasks faster and better than the Tegra 3. And since the GPU and CPU aren't on the same chip (that I know of), that also comes with it's share of better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are confused.
The Tegra is a System-on-Chip ("SoC") that has both CPU and GPU cores on the same die. The CPU complex has four A9 ARM cores, plus a fifth "ninja" A7 core. The GPU has 12 cores, plus a number of special functional units. All cores access the shared RAM through a single memory controller.
The CPU complex spends most of its time running only the power-optimized "ninja" core, with the other cores powered off. The ninja CPU has a simpler A7 core and is implemented with power-optimized low-leakage transistors. (The A7 core does less speculative work, and thus is more power efficient than the A9 cores even taking into account the extra clock cycles needed.) If the workload increases, the main cores are powered up and execution is switched over, with the ninja core left idle in a low power mode.
The GPU complex has 12 general execution units, but these aren't directly comparable to CPU cores. You can't even compare them to the "cores" in other types of GPUs. In addition, there are other special units such as video and audio decoders in the GPU complex. These operations could be done on the main CPU or, sometimes, the GPU. But they are common and power-hungry enough to get hard-wired logic.
All of this complexity makes it really difficult to benchmark and compare. Or really easy, if your goal is to make one product look faster than another.
The Tegra is carefully tuned to do HD video decode with only the ninja core and GPU turned on, thus consuming little power. There is just enough CPU time left over to supervise the cellular modem for housekeeping operations, or do other trivial tasks. But if you add in just a little application work, the main four cores are activated and power usage goes way up.
Another way to skew the test result is to pick specific micro benchmarks. The Apple A5 (which is unrelated to the ARM numbers e.g. A7 and A9) was designed for a high resolution screen, and knowing that many early apps would be iPhone apps with pixel doubling. They put extra gates to increase the pixel fill rate and smoothing performance. This resulted in a bigger chip, but better performance with modest power use for these functions.
My estimation: The Nexus 7 with Tegra 3 is faster, has the potential to be more power efficient, and will have better long-term support and improvements. The N10 has the big advantage of 2GB of memory, which may become important with future versions of Android.
becker. said:
You are confused.
The Tegra is a System-on-Chip ("SoC") that has both CPU and GPU cores on the same die. The CPU complex has four A9 ARM cores, plus a fifth "ninja" A7 core. The GPU has 12 cores, plus a number of special functional units. All cores access the shared RAM through a single memory controller.
The CPU complex spends most of its time running only the power-optimized "ninja" core, with the other cores powered off. The ninja CPU has a simpler A7 core and is implemented with power-optimized low-leakage transistors. (The A7 core does less speculative work, and thus is more power efficient than the A9 cores even taking into account the extra clock cycles needed.) If the workload increases, the main cores are powered up and execution is switched over, with the ninja core left idle in a low power mode.
The GPU complex has 12 general execution units, but these aren't directly comparable to CPU cores. You can't even compare them to the "cores" in other types of GPUs. In addition, there are other special units such as video and audio decoders in the GPU complex. These operations could be done on the main CPU or, sometimes, the GPU. But they are common and power-hungry enough to get hard-wired logic.
All of this complexity makes it really difficult to benchmark and compare. Or really easy, if your goal is to make one product look faster than another.
The Tegra is carefully tuned to do HD video decode with only the ninja core and GPU turned on, thus consuming little power. There is just enough CPU time left over to supervise the cellular modem for housekeeping operations, or do other trivial tasks. But if you add in just a little application work, the main four cores are activated and power usage goes way up.
Another way to skew the test result is to pick specific micro benchmarks. The Apple A5 (which is unrelated to the ARM numbers e.g. A7 and A9) was designed for a high resolution screen, and knowing that many early apps would be iPhone apps with pixel doubling. They put extra gates to increase the pixel fill rate and smoothing performance. This resulted in a bigger chip, but better performance with modest power use for these functions.
My estimation: The Nexus 7 with Tegra 3 is faster, has the potential to be more power efficient, and will have better long-term support and improvements. The N10 has the big advantage of 2GB of memory, which may become important with future versions of Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Best answer I've seen.
And has been said before, surely, in the end it comes down to what do you want to do with it. I prefer my n7 because 10" tablets are simply too big and uncomfortable
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Real world experience will require the device in hand. The resolution being pushed will need a lot more backbone to provide the same smooth experience as the lower resolution device. Just look at the iPad 2 vs 3. The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Premium HD app
I say wait another 3 months before committed to buying 10 inch. Google might upgrade its 10 inch with 3G, who knows, having experiencing what they did with 7 inch.
player911 said:
Real world experience will require the device in hand. The resolution being pushed will need a lot more backbone to provide the same smooth experience as the lower resolution device. Just look at the iPad 2 vs 3. The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Premium HD app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree.A super display is great if everything is built to look good on it but not if it comes at too big of cost in performance.That is what happened to the ipad 3.They made a good device pretty, but slow.On a small screen most can't tell the difference in dvd quality and full hd.Both would look good but one would smoke the other with the same hardware doing other things. jmo
player911 said:
The iPad 2 felt like a better experience because of the lower resolution. Most people couldn't even tell the two apart or correctly identify which was one or the other.
Resolution that high is retarded on a 10" screen. Waste of battery and resources.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Keep in mind why the iPad has pointlessly high resolution. It wasn't that Apple wanted to provide an exceptional experience. It was that the underlying software wasn't designed for different screen sizes and proportions. They had a choice between redesigning the API combined with converting apps, or making the screen exactly double the number of pixels in each direction. Apple's big market advantage was the higher app count, and many apps wouldn't be converted to a new interface ("walking dead" / will never be updated). So they went with a hardware solution, and marketed the "retina display" as a plus rather than a work-around for a primitive API. (A replay of the Mac ROM holding back OS improvements.)
Ofcourse specs wise N10 wins..But N10 lacks some features like its only WIFI no 3G/2G !!! it will be tough for my country .