Related
A comparison Nexus One with Galaxy S, both of them running Android 2.2 Froyo:
Hummingbird vs Snapdragon: Rumble in the processor jungle
Linpack test
Galaxy S (Hummingbird): 14
Nexus One (Snapdragon): 30
Benchmark by Softweg CPU test
Galaxy S (Hummingbird): 1,700
Nexus One (Snapdragon): 2,200
Benchmark by Softweg 2D graphics test
Galaxy S (Hummingbird): 31
Nexus One (Snapdragon): 28
Neocore 3D graphics test
Galaxy S (Hummingbird): 55.7
Nexus One (Snapdragon): 28.4
So basically if you don't play 3D games, the Nexus One is faster. And the Snapdragon is much faster than Hummingbird...
Nexus S with FroYo? oO
Nexus One with stock 2.2 or custom ROM(CM\etc)?
Those are benchmarks between a Galaxy S with a customized Android vs a Nexus One with vanilla Android, not a Nexus S.
If you want a comparison between N1 and NS, here you go:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4059/nexus-s-and-android-23-review-gingerbread-for-the-holidays/8
You'll see that some things ran better on the N1, but in general the Hummingbird is noticeably faster than the early gen Snapdragon used in the N1.
The 3D performance difference is massive as well. It's hard to ignore that.
i think what that anandtech article shows more than anything is how the tmobile mytouch4g's hardware's potential is being wasted on terrible software
Ya, the title of the post is a little misleading....
I said ages ago when I swapped from my extremely buggy SGS to the N1 that in the real world, the N1 was actually the faster phone in day to day use (3D games excepted).
I for one don't play that many games, but that doesn't mean I wouldn't use psx emulator if I had a pimped gpu. Nexus one is not slow by any means...
Sent from my Google phone
I had a Vibrant and of course now own a Nexus One. The Vibrant definitely has the faster processor despite what you guys may think. The Nexus One software is very smooth so that's why it is faster. If the Vibrant/Galaxy S software was a pure google/vanilla based rom then you'd see. When playing games on Nexus vs Vibrant you'd notice that the Nexus has less fps while the Vibrant/Galaxy S appears to not lose any fps. That doesn't mean that the Nexus One isn't a good phone. It just depends on what you want in a phone. Both have its share of pros and cons.
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Depends on your needs...For me, the N1 continues to rock against all others!
OuncE718 said:
{............}When playing games on Nexus vs Vibrant you'd notice that the Nexus has less fps while the Vibrant/Galaxy S appears to not lose any fps. {.......}
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that has to do with gpu...not cpu
tameracingdriver said:
I said ages ago when I swapped from my extremely buggy SGS to the N1 that in the real world, the N1 was actually the faster phone in day to day use (3D games excepted).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe because SGS had buggy software? I own both N1 and NS and the NS feels faster. Things open faster an there isnt any lag or hitching except in the browser. NS speed is especially noticeable in maps
There's no doubt that the nexus one snapdragon performs better for certain types of computational tasks over the hummingbird CPU. Benchmarks show this. And It's been said that android has been better tweakdd to use snapdragon CPU to make things like menu scrolling and browser performance better on the nexus one.
But Samsung has a patch to fix this and use its much more powerful graphics chip, but that only released for galaxy s phones, not yet for the nexus s. It's only a matter of time before they give this patch to the nexus s and then it may crush the nexus one.
I've noticed my nexus one was actually smoother scrolling the settings menu over the nexus s, In a few other areas too.
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 .
we've see in the news the South Korea only GS4 with the Snapdragon 800 beast
I hope Samsung release a 800 powered Samsung Galaxy Note III LTE in September :good:
Who else :highfive:
It's surely gonna be in the note 3.
unless there's a better one at that time
Sent from my GT-N7100
Has Note series ever used SDragon?
tuxonhtc said:
Has Note series ever used SDragon?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
nope, but samsungs own 8 core (4x A15 4 4x A7) as used in the S4 i9500 does not have LTE, but the snapdragon S4 I9505 version does
tuxonhtc said:
Has Note series ever used SDragon?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
cirian75 said:
nope, but samsungs own 8 core (4x A15 4 4x A7) as used in the S4 i9500 does not have LTE, but the snapdragon S4 I9505 version does
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not entirely true, AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717 (not Internationa N7000) used a SnapDragon as described here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1493
jeffs99 said:
That's not entirely true, AT&T Samsung Galaxy Note I717 (not Internationa N7000) used a SnapDragon as described here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/forumdisplay.php?f=1493
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ok, there has been a snapdragon dual core note.
The 3 kings of CPU the hill right now are
the LTE quad core Snapdragon's
600 as used in the LTE S4 i9505 and HTC one
800 beast as used in the South Korea only S4
and the
Non LTE Exynos 5 Octa 5410 8 core
I hope Samsung will put the 800 in the Note 3
what's wrong with Octo core?
FinancialWar said:
what's wrong with Octo core?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
big.LITTLE architecture failure, too much over heating! the s4 i9500 comes with a lot of issues & problems related to the exynos hardware! I used to own one, came back to note 2
tbb1mb said:
big.LITTLE architecture failure, too much over heating! the s4 i9500 comes with a lot of issues & problems related to the exynos hardware! I used to own one, came back to note 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My wife own a S4 (i9500) and never had a heating problem or any problem at all. Yes it's a little bit hot when the A15 kicks in for a long time but summer in Shanghai is really hot and nothing to freak out. I also sold a couple of them to people I know and none of them have issues. They all love it. I think you highly exaggerate when you say "lot of issues".
Note II/III LTE with Snapdragon 800
I am purchasing the note III that will have the Snapdragon 800!!! I Want it!
I for one would love to see a note II ( a 720p screen) & the snapdragon 800 paired together. Add a custom kernel to U.C. (& U.V. [ but not necessarily along with other performance tweaks]) to around 1.5-1.8Ghz from 2.2-2.3GHz and I believe we would have a device with a great balance of performance and even better battery life that the current Note II.
The Adreno 330 matched up with 2-3GB of ram would definitely handle the 720p resolution with amazing grace, completing task and powering down quicker than the Adreno 320 even in Multi-view. For game play and performance, I will let you use your imagination but I am not referring to Words with Friends or Angry Birds.
I do not use S-Voice. Google Now is my preferred software of choice. I like to have a snappy UI (with great graphics, it is eye pleasing) and wish for even longer battery life when undergoing long periods of heavier use ie: 2.5hr of phone calls then; watching Netflix or a 720p film/tv episode from my sd card while responding to 20-30 mssgs/emails; an hour of HD game play and then video chat before going to bed. I travel often, can you tell? Let us not forget about constantly web browsing to search for the latest updates on S800’s/platforms power draw.
Look, we cannot have everything that we want, trade-offs are inevitable. A Beast of a phone/phablet that can handle the next 2 OS upgrades is what we all are praying for. I’m saying I would love that balance and think others would too. A Snapdragon 800 clocked up to 1.72-1.78Ghz in a note II with S-Voice wake commands disabled should have a comparable UI experience, if not slightly better, compared to the current NII’s and hopefully improved battery life.
Once again, I know this is about the Note III - please no flaming I am purchasing the note III that will have the Snapdragon 800!!! I Want it!
I an thinking of (min/max increase to) 1.5-2.5days of battery life on moderate to heavy use... am i the only one thinking that could be possible using a 720p screen? ... because i do also want the Adreno 320 GPU higher off-screen capabilities for presentations & gameplay
I know,... i do want it all but who doesn't... but what do you think about the 720p idea?
New octa would be better than S800 imo.
86Dragons said:
I am purchasing the note III that will have the Snapdragon 800!!! I Want it!
I for one would love to see a note II ( a 720p screen) & the snapdragon 800 paired together. Add a custom kernel to U.C. (& U.V. [ but not necessarily along with other performance tweaks]) to around 1.5-1.8Ghz from 2.2-2.3GHz and I believe we would have a device with a great balance of performance and even better battery life that the current Note II.
The Adreno 330 matched up with 2-3GB of ram would definitely handle the 720p resolution with amazing grace, completing task and powering down quicker than the Adreno 320 even in Multi-view. For game play and performance, I will let you use your imagination but I am not referring to Words with Friends or Angry Birds.
I do not use S-Voice. Google Now is my preferred software of choice. I like to have a snappy UI (with great graphics, it is eye pleasing) and wish for even longer battery life when undergoing long periods of heavier use ie: 2.5hr of phone calls then; watching Netflix or a 720p film/tv episode from my sd card while responding to 20-30 mssgs/emails; an hour of HD game play and then video chat before going to bed. I travel often, can you tell? Let us not forget about constantly web browsing to search for the latest updates on S800’s/platforms power draw.
Look, we cannot have everything that we want, trade-offs are inevitable. A Beast of a phone/phablet that can handle the next 2 OS upgrades is what we all are praying for. I’m saying I would love that balance and think others would too. A Snapdragon 800 clocked up to 1.72-1.78Ghz in a note II with S-Voice wake commands disabled should have a comparable UI experience, if not slightly better, compared to the current NII’s and hopefully improved battery life.
Once again, I know this is about the Note III - please no flaming I am purchasing the note III that will have the Snapdragon 800!!! I Want it!
I an thinking of (min/max increase to) 1.5-2.5days of battery life on moderate to heavy use... am i the only one thinking that could be possible using a 720p screen? ... because i do also want the Adreno 320 GPU higher off-screen capabilities for presentations & gameplay
I know,... i do want it all but who doesn't... but what do you think about the 720p idea?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No way! We need 1080p now! Now that the s4 and HTC one are out.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
jetbruceli said:
No way! We need 1080p now! Now that the s4 and HTC one are out.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anything above 300ppi is wasted on normal eye from more than 10cm, from more normal 25cm, 240ppi is more than enough. I have note 2 and lenovo k900, side by side from normal distance I can see no difference in black text on white screen quality (white on black is better on Lenovo, that is true). So it would be nice, but by no means a dealbraker for me
mat9v said:
Anything above 300ppi is wasted on normal eye from more than 10cm, from more normal 25cm, 240ppi is more than enough. I have note 2 and lenovo k900, side by side from normal distance I can see no difference in black text on white screen quality (white on black is better on Lenovo, that is true). So it would be nice, but by no means a dealbraker for me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who says 300 is perfect? I was at the local o2 shop and played with a s4 and was amazed at the screen. Ever since Apple started this retina display I always wanted that in our devices. With a 1080p on 5.7 inch it's gonna be just awesome to read and play on the note 3.
Seriously try out the s4 and see how well the text looks.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
jetbruceli said:
Who says 300 is perfect? I was at the local o2 shop and played with a s4 and was amazed at the screen. Ever since Apple started this retina display I always wanted that in our devices. With a 1080p on 5.7 inch it's gonna be just awesome to read and play on the note 3.
Seriously try out the s4 and see how well the text looks.
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I say it's perfect. I have both to compare as I wrote @5.5 inch 720p and 1080p are almost indistinguishable from normal use distance. You say it's not, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Unless you put your nose almost to the screen you won't see any difference. Of course, given chance I would take FHD but to pay premium for it? No way Reading books - I do it every day on Note 2, playing games - with current GPU it would be suicide to try FHD gaming @ full details. Note 3, whatever they put in it will have to be much faster to handle FHD, the only reason I'm happy about that is because I will use MHL to play on my TV and then it will finally use full resolution. Other than that FHD on screen this size is useless, companies have limited numbers to compete with, so they up the display resolution (putting further strain on battery because higher res requires faster GPU and CPU to drive it well) or camera megapixels.
It drives my all the closer to switching to Chinese phones - 1/2 the price, almost the same hardware - you can get Note 2 lookalike (although with MTK CPU, but almost equal in speed) for about 300$, of course, no SPen, but that was only an example.
Oh, and you get FHD display that you like so much
OK, i've been looking phones for days and 3 days ago i ordered a Galaxy s4 on Bestbuy for 500 $ ( tax included ).
I was going to buy a factory international unlocked verison on amazon for 350 $ ish , but i saw some bad reviews ( some say it's fake, some say it's refurbished ) and i decided rather just buy from bestbuy but it's been THREE days !!! they havent ship my phone yet.
Do you guys think i should just cancel the order and buy one from amazon or ebay for 350$, but i think those factory unlocked version doesn't have warranty at all !!
I need help !!
s4 its good phone u will enjoy:thumbup: and I always buy international version cos u get updates direct from samsung not from crappie networks
Sent from my GT-I9505 using XDA Free mobile app
If possible I would say buy a Nexus 5. The S4 is on a slower cpu, and I doubt we will get anything past Android L. The Nexus 5 is a strong device for the price, plus you do get months faster updates. You will probably get a few more updates over the S4. Both have comparable on-screen times despite a slight advantage for the S4. But you can swap out the battery for say a Zerolemon which would give a clear advantage over the Nexus 5. The Nexus 5 should have android L before December. All in all, I'd say go for the newer Nexus 5 for the Snapdragon 800's advantage in raw horsepower for games and general use.
When it comes down to it though go with your gut feeling and what is more important to you.
noremac258 said:
If possible I would say buy a Nexus 5. The S4 is on a slower cpu, and I doubt we will get anything past Android L. The Nexus 5 is a strong device for the price, plus you do get months faster updates. You will probably get a few more updates over the S4. Both have comparable on-screen times despite a slight advantage for the S4. But you can swap out the battery for say a Zerolemon which would give a clear advantage over the Nexus 5. The Nexus 5 should have android L before December. All in all, I'd say go for the newer Nexus 5 for the Snapdragon 800's advantage in raw horsepower for games and general use.
When it comes down to it though go with your gut feeling and what is more important to you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does 300mhz fast help.
"If someone helps, never forget to hit thanks ? "
Actually it's an extra 1600mhz total plus an upgraded gpu for better graphical performance, for a lower price. Plus in white it's sexy. I wish I would have gotten a Nexus 5 over the S4, but I was in need of a new phone.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using XDA Free mobile app
noremac258 said:
Actually it's an extra 1600mhz total plus an upgraded gpu for better graphical performance, for a lower price. Plus in white it's sexy. I wish I would have gotten a Nexus 5 over the S4, but I was in need of a new phone.
Sent from my SGH-I337M using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Show me..all i can see is 2.3 vs 1.9 quad core.
Are you saying 400 for each core? :/ and thus 1600 difference?
21% times faster it is. Just that. I cant see how 1.9*121% make a difference.
And then what about the i9500? It has Octacore processor? Will you say it has 1.6*8? Lol.
And please dont forget the camera.
"If someone helps, never forget to hit thanks ? "
DeepankarS said:
Show me..all i can see is 2.3 vs 1.9 quad core.
Are you saying 400 for each core? :/ and thus 1600 difference?
21% times faster it is. Just that. I cant see how 1.9*121% make a difference.
And then what about the i9500? It has Octacore processor? Will you say it has 1.6*8? Lol.
And please dont forget the camera.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's 4 cores that means 400mhz per core. Therefore it's an increase of 1600mhz.
Also since the chips are both 28nm and on the same architecture, you can compare the mhz. You can't compare the Exynos soc to a Snapdragon based chip because it's on a different architecture. It's like Amd vs Intel if you know those two.
Both cameras take good pictures. Not a huge difference between the two.
noremac258 said:
There's 4 cores that means 400mhz per core. Therefore it's an increase of 1600mhz.
Also since the chips are both 28nm and on the same architecture, you can compare the mhz. You can't compare the Exynos soc to a Snapdragon pased chip because it's on a different architecture. It's like Amd vs Intel if you know those two.
Both cameras take good pictures. Not a huge difference between the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But still the aggregate increase remains 21%.
Maths aint that tough brother. we are talking the same thing.
21% faster with no ext mem support, no IR blaster and tons of other features go missing. And still the wide acceptance and reputation of the S4 stands strong.
Plus here in India the S5 is almost the same price of a nexus 32gb. Why would one go for a "nexus" in that case too.
Plus Why not buy the google play edition Galaxy S4?
Where is the difference now mate? Just a processor. Camera, build quality, vendor reputation.??
Plus a S4 is A S4. Comparing processing speeds of different processors is no harm. Why do people then compare apple with samsung? Apple is still a dual core with a 1gb ram. So why are they bashed for hardware. I havent seen an iphone lag. (exclude i4 i4s)
"If someone helps, never forget to hit thanks ? "
Stop guys, everyone comes here thinks "Damn, I came in a battlefield?" [emoji14]
Tastes are tastes, everyone of us has different tastes among all other... First, Nexus 5 is faster for CPU frequency and GPU is more powerful than S4 (talking about I9505 that beats i9500), S5 is faster than Nexus 5.
How many guys among you may use Nexus 5 at its higher CPU frequency? How many hours battery lasts?
In my opinion, I used a Nexus 5 (with CM11 as my S4) and found that I can't notice any speed difference in normal and heavy use between its 2.3GHz CPU and my S4 with this frequencies: 1 core 1.67GHz, 2/3/4 core 1.45GHz. Even in games, S4 can run any game for Android without problems.
What about Cameras? What about S4's AMOLED vs N5's LCD? What about display density? And IR blaster?
Nexus 5 is more brute force and developer-like, not the best for multimediality.
S4's cameras shoot definitely better, display is superior, has IR led built-in if you want to command your IR devices like televisions, air conditioners, set top boxes, xbox etc. And it's not all [emoji6]
I was almost selling my device to buy Oneplus One, but I can't because I love my S4 guys, it's too perfect in my opinion.
Don't do always and only the "run for GHz", think about everything else too
There are also tons of other things to say, but it's late here and I'm sleepy [emoji42]
Inviato dal mio GT-I9505
@AntaresOne wasnt expecting you here
Thanks!
"If someone helps, never forget to hit thanks ? "
Hello my Nephew received a Tab 4 7.0 as a gift and I'm just curious if there's any tricks for squeezing more performance out of it, Most of the games he plays run decent but a few run pretty choppy, in comparison these games run noticeably smoother on my 1st gen Moto G phone (Plants vs Zombies 2 & Minecraft).
I ran the 3dmark benchmark on both devices to get some numbers for comparison: http://i.imgur.com/QWRnclj.jpg & http://i.imgur.com/LZUGmn8.jpg
I know the Moto G isn't a "top performer" anymore these days either so I was surprised with the mediocre performance of this Samsung tablet.
Personally I would've went with a Nexus 7 just trying to get the most performance out of this Tab 4, If possible.
Thanks.
turn on developer options then turn off window animations. Also, check your power saving options.
Thanks we ended up ordering a 32GB Nexus 7 2013 and will be selling the Samsung, the Tab 4 7.0 is just to weak for today's games, at least the Tab 4 8.0 and 10.0 models use a more respectable Adreno GPU. (vs. the no name Vivante GPU in the 7.0).
mathesar said:
Thanks we ended up ordering a 32GB Nexus 7 2013 and will be selling the Samsung, the Tab 4 7.0 is just to weak for today's games, at least the Tab 4 8.0 and 10.0 models use a more respectable Adreno GPU. (vs. the no name Vivante GPU in the 7.0).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Going with Nexus. Always a Good Idea. The Marvell SoC with the Vivante GPU dishes out mediocre performance at best - Utterly useless for gaming but decent enough for web browsing and media consumption.
Best of Luck.
Received the Nexus 7 yesterday and Wow what a difference, everything not only runs much better but it loads all apps noticeably faster, especially the larger games such as Real Racing 3.
Overall just a very snappy / responsive device.
Ran 3dmark on both: http://i.imgur.com/rhUaf9J.jpg