Database Users

The note 10.1 delayed

But delayed for a good reason,
they exchange the original foreseen dual core soc for a quad core.
Yammy.

Good move for samsung but would the 2 additional cores really give that much of a performance boost since 99% of the apps are single threaded.
Also I wonder whats up with the 11.6, it seems to have gone so silent!

Another good reason would be to exchange the screen for an 1080p AMOLED!
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

EarlZ said:
Good move for samsung but would the 2 additional cores really give that much of a performance boost since 99% of the apps are single threaded.
Also I wonder whats up with the 11.6, it seems to have gone so silent!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If they give you a quad core for the same price as a dual core with better performance and better battery life, then why not.
I think they are doing this to make it more competitive in comparison to the new iPad. By giving it a quad core, the average person thinks it would be better than the new iPad since many people have a "4 cores are better than 2" mentality from a marketing standpoint. If they also have data numbers to back that up, such as better benchmark scores, etc, then that would help. It would still be a challenge to convince the average person, however, that Android on a 10.1 Note is a better experience than iOS on an iPad however, but if they can show the advantages of the S-Pen, better performance for gaming, and other such things, they might be able to get a better foothold on the tablet market.
Apple definitely has a dominance in the tablet market, but in a few years time, Android tablets will start to significantly eat at this lead just like it did with the smartphone market. By offering choices and differentiation from the iPad, and in the case of the Note: S-Pen functionality and the better quad core CPU, and with better pricing than an iPad, then I think we can see the Note tab doing well.

The Note 10.1 is great all around, the only two places it lacks (in my opinion) is the low screen resolution and the 16:10 aspect ratio of the screen. I will never buy a tablet around the 8-10 inch size that isn't 4:3 in screen ratio. If Sammy came out with another edition that fixes both issues I would seriously consider picking one up.

Zamboney said:
Another good reason would be to exchange the screen for an 1080p AMOLED!
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With the current quality control on superamoled, that is a nightmare for a lot of users including me. Im pretty ok with the pls screen after using my friend's tab for a day.
---------- Post added at 09:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:05 AM ----------
adelmundo said:
If they give you a quad core for the same price as a dual core with better performance and better battery life, then why not.
I think they are doing this to make it more competitive in comparison to the new iPad. By giving it a quad core, the average person thinks it would be better than the new iPad since many people have a "4 cores are better than 2" mentality from a marketing standpoint. If they also have data numbers to back that up, such as better benchmark scores, etc, then that would help. It would still be a challenge to convince the average person, however, that Android on a 10.1 Note is a better experience than iOS on an iPad however, but if they can show the advantages of the S-Pen, better performance for gaming, and other such things, they might be able to get a better foothold on the tablet market.
Apple definitely has a dominance in the tablet market, but in a few years time, Android tablets will start to significantly eat at this lead just like it did with the smartphone market. By offering choices and differentiation from the iPad, and in the case of the Note: S-Pen functionality and the better quad core CPU, and with better pricing than an iPad, then I think we can see the Note tab doing well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No issues with the price, i wonder if they will also go with a quad gpu.
Ios tablets apps are a bettet experince compared to andriod apps, used a friends ipad2 for a week and found all of its apps significantly better compared to andriod, imho.

LiquidNitrogen said:
The Note 10.1 is great all around, the only two places it lacks (in my opinion) is the low screen resolution and the 16:10 aspect ratio of the screen. I will never buy a tablet around the 8-10 inch size that isn't 4:3 in screen ratio. If Sammy came out with another edition that fixes both issues I would seriously consider picking one up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 on aspect ratio.
I still using my tablet 4:3 1440x1050 because of the aspect ratio.
If I cant get 1920x1200 I dont want then 16:10 in a tiny tablet.

I like 16:10. Its perfect for reading and browsing the web. But i only will upgrade my 10.1 tab if the resolution doubles to 2560*1440

For a tablet with a Pen which will be mostly used in portrait mode to scribble on or for playing board games like chess, 4:3 aspect ratio is much more suitable but not much so for watching movies, so each has its own cons and pros,it comes down to what suits ones need more.

EarlZ said:
Good move for samsung but would the 2 additional cores really give that much of a performance boost since 99% of the apps are single threaded.
Also I wonder whats up with the 11.6, it seems to have gone so silent!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ICS UI runs on a separate thread (read: core) wherever possible where as GB chops it about - hence the lag. As soon as games on ICS start utilising the extra cores, 4 will be better than 2!
To be honest, its only likely to be intensive apps that you'd notice any difference - and that probably means gaming. If, like me you use your tablet for Web browsing, watching videos and only occasionally for games 2 cores is plenty. Having said that, everyone wants new tech for speed and product lifetime.

friedje said:
But delayed for a good reason,
they exchange the original foreseen dual core soc for a quad core.
Yammy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do we really need the 2 extra core?

sega_lou said:
Do we really need the 2 extra core?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No,but this beeing my first Android phone,not counting my HD2,and from what I have seen I would rather go for a two highly clocked and simultaneously running cores,and a big sized battery.

emuX said:
ICS UI runs on a separate thread (read: core) wherever possible where as GB chops it about - hence the lag. As soon as games on ICS start utilising the extra cores, 4 will be better than 2!
To be honest, its only likely to be intensive apps that you'd notice any difference - and that probably means gaming. If, like me you use your tablet for Web browsing, watching videos and only occasionally for games 2 cores is plenty. Having said that, everyone wants new tech for speed and product lifetime.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depsite all that, the preview video on the Tab 2 10.1 and Note 10.1 still shows signs of animation lag.

EarlZ said:
Depsite all that, the preview video on the Tab 2 10.1 and Note 10.1 still shows signs of animation lag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And it will stay that way, since Android applications are based on Java, and Java is laggy even on my Quad Core i7 running PC.

hagba said:
And it will stay that way, since Android applications are based on Java, and Java is laggy even on my Quad Core i7 running PC.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cry Cry QQ More.
Its all games and Android Java apps are Blazing fast.
And yes more cores is better.
Android is a well done multi-core architecture. Its SDK make you use multi core features.
So we need all the cores we can have. Even GB or Froyo can take advantage of a 4 core processor.
Just a quick fact.. my galaxy note right now has... 173 process running.... so.. I guess that multi core isnt bad at all kids.

Which is the better device? Nexus 7 or Nexus 10?

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 .

Acer Iconia W500 vs W510.

Hi Guys,
I am having problem deciding which tablet to buy. Surface Pro is a joke with battery life/weight/performance. You might have i5 cpu but Intel hd4000 is a joke. So you get bad battery life and no gaming performance (online games). Better bet would be Acer w700 lasts much longer on battery, is cheaper but is to big and hate the stand arrangement. Not to mention again Intel hd4000.
Currently I have old Acer W500 and am happy with general performance on my daily tasks including battery life. Have a small gripe with pure cpu performance on it. Win8 makes up a bit using ati integrated gpu chip but as soon as there is 50% or more usage on hdd or sd card or so entire unit gets bugged down. Biggest problem miserable screen resolution.
I know atom in w510 is much, much faster cpu in comparison to amd c-50. However graphics integration in c-50 means that full hd playback uses virtually 0 cpu resources as entire job is done by gpu, same using IE, metro and so.
I use the tablet mainly as internet device, Skype, hd video player, I use office a lot and listen to music lots while doing that.
Which would be better to stick with current W500 that now has about 4.5h battery life (barely enough) or move to W510?

Having some trouble understanding your gripe with HD4000 GPU, given that it is low power and for what you need it for, you don't need anything more?
Screen resolution on W500 vs W510 isn't that much different with the Atom processor model. It's 1280x800 vs 1366x768.
Biggest difference for you would be the battery life. W510 should give you at least 2.5hrs more than what you are getting now.
However, the W500 has a faster storage system than the W510, which uses eMMC flash as storage.

Screen resolution is not that much different but tell it to MS who disabled snap that worked perfectly in beta's.
Regarding graphics on W500 I can play eve online and medium details (high if not in huge space battle), can play bsgo on high.
Tried mates i5 laptop with HD4000 and eve is in essence on low (all special hardware accelerated effects are off) and it was still doing only 30fps.

I'm happy with my W500 in everyway except not able to snap apps... :/ battery is okay, graphics is good and over all performance is great for a tablet.

That is my thinking. If resolution of the screen was like in W510 I would not think about upgrading for another year or longer.
Hm wonder if we could purchase a higher resolution LCD?
Does anyone know if digitizer on W500 is glued to screen like in phones? At the end as it is normal PC digitizer is nothing more then another USB device and it actually shows as HID enabled mouse.

How about the performance of Exynos 5250?

Hi, guys. I am interested in N10,but I am very curious about performance of N10. I know Samsung use an dual core based at ARM15, but its screen has a high resolution 2560x1400. Is its dual core really capable of such a high resolution? How about the performance of multiple tasking? Any lag? My current cellphone is Galaxy Note 2 that has a quad core chip, but it is not as fast as what I thought until I flash 4.4.2 ROM. Tell me your experience of using N10. Your comment would really help me make a good decision. By the way, the main purpose is to internet bowersing and watch movies which store on portable HDD. Thanks
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Free mobile app

I have been running the Nexus 10 since it came out. No complaints here. I watch allot of Youtube video, news and sports videos, etc. Even runs better when I tether it off my 4G. Been testing latest 4.4.3 Roms available here at XDA. Not much difference over 4.4.2, runs good with either.
Good luck.

The cpu doesnt primarily drive the screen so it handles the big resolution screen very well. With browsing and watching movies its just fast. This thing is a beast when it comes to gaming because it has a kick ass gpu..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app

Alexsandra said:
Hi, guys. I am interested in N10,but I am very curious about performance of N10. I know Samsung use an dual core based at ARM15, but its screen has a high resolution 2560x1400. Is its dual core really capable of such a high resolution? How about the performance of multiple tasking? Any lag? My current cellphone is Galaxy Note 2 that has a quad core chip, but it is not as fast as what I thought until I flash 4.4.2 ROM. Tell me your experience of using N10. Your comment would really help me make a good decision. By the way, the main purpose is to internet bowersing and watch movies which store on portable HDD. Thanks
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with the two posts above mine. I've had this tablet for a few months, and never once has it felt slow or sluggish with anything I've thrown at it. This ain't your typical dual core. It's on par with my Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 (2013).

mrgnex said:
The cpu doesnt primarily drive the screen so it handles the big resolution screen very well. With browsing and watching movies its just fast. This thing is a beast when it comes to gaming because it has a kick ass gpu..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great!

Hi,
Not only what the guys said above, to power the screen resolution, the GPU has 1GB allocated to it since 4.3 if I'm not wrong. So it's quite capable, just be careful when using many apps, the RAM is limited to only 1GB due to it. Even though I'm able to play many games and watch full HD videos with ease and comfort .
~Lord

Alexsandra said:
Great!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As usual, the correct answer would be: "It depends!"
The Nexus 10 is the best Samsung could do at the time it came out.
Somehow both Google and Samsung felt compelled at the time to deliver something that would beat Apple at least on paper.
Truth is, it's a somewhat unbalanced device by today's standards.
A typical competitor today would probably have a Qualcom Snapdragon 800 or better and you'd notice the difference!
Generally CPU performance is still quite ok: More than 2 cores rarely make sense and these ARM 15 cores tend to have enough oomph for the sort of things you'd run on a tablet CPU. And the Exynos seems to be a close match to the Snapdragon, core by core.
So there, for all practical purposes, it won't feel much slower than a modern devices.
But the GPU can't quite deal with the resolution and even if it could, DRAM bandwidth would be the next barrier. So when you look for 3D game performance, the Nexus 10 can't quite keep up with what is out there these days.
Depending on your benchmark it may feel like a dog, but good games tailer themselves to what's available and even some 3D ones are actually ok.
Mine's most used for reading books, surfing, perhaps even some video, I'm also doing some writing (with BT keyboard/mouse) on it and that's all more than ok, especially when you want to flip forth and back between lots of web-sites and programs.
I'd say when you can get the Nexus 10 for cheap it's still pretty good, when you're ready to pay prime dollar, you'll find better even from Samsung.

abufrejoval said:
As usual, the correct answer would be: "It depends!"
The Nexus 10 is the best Samsung could do at the time it came out.
Somehow both Google and Samsung felt compelled at the time to deliver something that would beat Apple at least on paper.
Truth is, it's a somewhat unbalanced device by today's standards.
A typical competitor today would probably have a Qualcom Snapdragon 800 or better and you'd notice the difference!
Generally CPU performance is still quite ok: More than 2 cores rarely make sense and these ARM 15 cores tend to have enough oomph for the sort of things you'd run on a tablet CPU. And the Exynos seems to be a close match to the Snapdragon, core by core.
So there, for all practical purposes, it won't feel much slower than a modern devices.
But the GPU can't quite deal with the resolution and even if it could, DRAM bandwidth would be the next barrier. So when you look for 3D game performance, the Nexus 10 can't quite keep up with what is out there these days.
Depending on your benchmark it may feel like a dog, but good games tailer themselves to what's available and even some 3D ones are actually ok.
Mine's most used for reading books, surfing, perhaps even some video, I'm also doing some writing (with BT keyboard/mouse) on it and that's all more than ok, especially when you want to flip forth and back between lots of web-sites and programs.
I'd say when you can get the Nexus 10 for cheap it's still pretty good, when you're ready to pay prime dollar, you'll find better even from Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say this is a pretty fair assessment. GPU struggles with some modern apps such as Google maps, and even now Chrome isn't the best. I still use browser because its much smoother, and I also use the 'performance' CPU governor which locks the tablet to 1.7ghz and really helps responsiveness.
That being said, its still a really really nice tablet generally. If you're getting it for a good price you should be happy enough. I still love using mine nearly 2 years after buying it, and I'm comparing it to my snap 800 powered XZU. Its still a really nice screen, really nice design. Quick enough and battery life is not too bad these days either! (6 hours SOT easy with brightness at 35℅)

Shield k1 (2)? Marshmallow? 199 bucks?

http://m.androidcentral.com/nvidia-announces-shield-tablet-k1-refreshed-model-new-low-price
Smart move I guess. Throw it in a different box and pretend it's new. Sounds like an htc stunt. This makes sense though, considering the battery issue with this model.
http://m.androidcentral.com/nvidia-...pdate-shield-tablet-k1-original-shield-tablet
But as of now we are confirmed for marshmallow probably after the holidays, which is all I really care about. I gotta have that marshmallow!
Sent from my HTC M9 using Tapatalk

Its technically still one of the best android tablets for CPU and GPU. I would of loved to have seen it with the Tegra X1 but with the tablet market not really strong, even apple is having issues with the market, I can understand not updating it.

It's truly seems to be one of the best performing tablets at this price point, i'am very interested in it vs Nexus 9, what would be your opinion? Only thing i'am concerned in is screen ratio, how good it is for e-book reading? And is there enough estate for general browsing? I own some pretty crappy Chinese 10" Onda tablet and looking for an upgrade. Though i don't know if i would use Shields gaming environment to the max.

NoOneLt said:
It's truly seems to be one of the best performing tablets at this price point, i'am very interested in it vs Nexus 9, what would be your opinion? Only thing i'am concerned in is screen ratio, how good it is for e-book reading? And is there enough estate for general browsing? I own some pretty crappy Chinese 10" Onda tablet and looking for an upgrade. Though i don't know if i would use Shields gaming environment to the max.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As long as you know how to change the system DPI to 240 then its great, I personally hate the stock DPI that they put on it, with the stock DPI it literally just feels like an enlarged phone. But as soon as you change it to 240 then its great.

NoOneLt said:
It's truly seems to be one of the best performing tablets at this price point, i'am very interested in it vs Nexus 9, what would be your opinion? Only thing i'am concerned in is screen ratio, how good it is for e-book reading? And is there enough estate for general browsing? I own some pretty crappy Chinese 10" Onda tablet and looking for an upgrade. Though i don't know if i would use Shields gaming environment to the max.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use mine for reading books, specifically pdf books of networking materials, and it works really well for that. The screen is amazing for comics. The tablet is a gaming beast and not much can touch its gpu capabilities. Admittedly, I don't do much gaming but I did do a playthrough of ff9 with ePSXe without a HITCH. It's without a doubt a gaming beast when it comes to android devices.
A small comparison lists of the things that are different between Nexus 9 and Shield Tablet:
Nexus 9 vs Shield Tablet
Screen
Nexus: 8.9in, 2048x1536
Shield Tablet: 8in, 1920x1200
Expandable storage
Nexus: None
Shield Tablet: up to 128gb microsd card
Cpu:
Nexus: 64 bit
Shield tablet: 32 bit
GPU:
Same
Ram:
Same
Speakers:
Shield tablet wins hands down
Android updates:
Nexus still has at least 2 more years of android updates
Shield Tablet is getting marshmallow for sure but the next one after is more than likely but not guaranteed.
Fair warning though:
The custom roms on this device have audio issues that happen randomly and it can be annoying. I haven't found a rom that don't have this issue, some are worst than others. There hasn't been a solution to it either from what I've seen.

miss message

The nexus 9 has a better resolution, 2048x1536 vs the 1920x1200 on the shield. The CPUs are a 64bit 2.3Ghz dual core on the N9 and a 32bit 2.2 Quad on the ST. I haven't used an N9 so I can't really add anymore than that.

The shield has an SD card slot, front facing speakers, and wide screen. I read ebooks all the time on the shield and think it's perfect for that. The nexus might get slightly better battery life, but not much more. I was deciding between the two and picked the shield because with the thinner screen I can type very well with my thumbs. My 10.1 tablet is just too big to type on. I imagine with the wider screen the nexus would have that same problem. I would buy the shield for 300 bucks right now if I didn't own one so at 200 it's a steal.
Sent from my SHIELD Tablet using Tapatalk

And what about x32 vs x64 on Nexus, though dual core? What is the future of it? Is it possible that at some point after a year Nexus will have better performance because of x64?

Probably when all tablet and smartphone are x64...they, maybe, developera start to create app that take advantage of x64 CPU...
But there is the possibility that they start to use gpgpu even on smartphone and this is an advantage for tegra hardware
Nobody knows...

Yeah it's hard to say. But at 200 bucks the shield blows away anything in its price range. And I much prefer the wide screen and front facing speakers. I spent a lot of time debating the nexus and the shield in my head and I just didn't want a 4:3 and I really wanted an SD card slot.
Sent from my HTC M9 using Tapatalk

NoOneLt said:
And what about x32 vs x64 on Nexus, though dual core? What is the future of it? Is it possible that at some point after a year Nexus will have better performance because of x64?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're equal for multicore performance but the single core performance is much stronger with the 64bit variant. In everyday use, you won't notice it.

nbollinger said:
They're equal for multicore performance but the single core performance is much stronger with the 64bit variant. In everyday use, you won't notice it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats the thing, most of the users of this tablet use it for gaming. Its a shame the new tablet doesn't have 64bit, but at least it is worth the price.

According to this benchmarks seems like if i would not care about Shield PC streaming or exclusive game in pure performance Nexus is doing better? As i see single core almost 2x better and this would be utilized most in applications not optimized for multi-core? And multi-core is around the same level...
But maybe Marshmallow on Shield could bring another results.

I wait for Shield Tablet 2

Had both, but sold the N9 some weeks ago. My problem with it was, i play a lot WOT Blitz and on the Nexus with max graphics the fps drops from 60 to between 50 and 35 after some minutes of gaming. But the Shield Tab stays most of the time on 60fps and if it drops its still between 50-60 fps and this with maxed out Graphics!

cyraxx84 said:
Had both, but sold the N9 some weeks ago. My problem with it was, i play a lot WOT Blitz and on the Nexus with max graphics the fps drops from 60 to between 50 and 35 after some minutes of gaming. But the Shield Tab stays most of the time on 60fps and if it drops its still between 50-60 fps and this with maxed out Graphics!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's pretty interesting, nexus and shield tablet have the same gpu.

nbollinger said:
That's pretty interesting, nexus and shield tablet have the same gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus 9 put more pressure on GPU with higher screen resolution and use a dual core CPU

Anyone who has the K1 can you answer some questions for me?
Does your bottom speaker move? i noticed earlier that I can make it click by pressing on it lightly :S also is there only 1 speaker behind each grill? the speaker on the top I can feel the vibration of how loud it is but the bottom one I can't.
Think it's faulty but that's why i'm asking.

faulty