i want to know if the GPU of the OCTA-Core is GOOD or is better the ADRENO 320? cuz im a GAmer and i love to play games is better the OCTACORE GPU or the ADRENO 320?
They're each stronger than the other in different ways, and both should suffice greatly for gaming.
If I helped you out be sure to hit thanks
Swyped from a minimalist S2
The Adreno has gotten slightly better benchmark results but both are pretty darn fast, fast enough to handle anything you can throw at your phone.
Sent from my Xperia Arc S using xda premium
The GPU on the octacore was intentionally set to match the quads as to not beast them to the point where the US market felt dwarfed and cheated. Give this phone a month or two and we will start to see the real power.
still have the same question XD the 2 GPU are good but i want to choose 1 which one?
adreno 320 is more future proof due to open gl 3.0 support. Its also faster in most benchmarks, so it should be also faster in games.
edit: adreno 320 for sure
Adreno 320 is definitely the best one. That's the reason I'm not buying the Octa version. I'm not a big gamer, but PowerVR is 4 years old while Adreno is months old. Adreno have opengl es 3.0 and scores way better than PowerVR.
For those who are still hopping: PowerVR is NOT underclocked. Don't forget it's overclocked at 544 MHz and 3 cores. Adreno is 4 cores at 450MHz. Admit that is old. I talked with somebody from Imagination and they told that it's good for a 4 years old gpu and may will still be 1-2 years. But it's old....if we get OpenGL ES 3.0 games, Octa is f**ked
demlasjr said:
Adreno 320 is definitely the best one. That's the reason I'm not buying the Octa version. I'm not a big gamer, but PowerVR is 4 years old while Adreno is months old. Adreno have opengl es 3.0 and scores way better than PowerVR.
For those who are still hopping: PowerVR is NOT underclocked. Don't forget it's overclocked at 544 MHz and 3 cores. Adreno is 4 cores at 450MHz. Admit that is old. I talked with somebody from Imagination and they told that it's good for a 4 years old gpu and may will still be 1-2 years. But it's old....if we get OpenGL ES 3.0 games, Octa is f**ked
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NICEEEE SO I WILL GET THE QUAD-Core but i still will wait if Nvidia Drops the Tegra 4
which bench results showing advantage to Adreno 320 ?
Adreno 320 is old GPU for me.
darkhelio said:
NICEEEE SO I WILL GET THE QUAD-Core but i still will wait if Nvidia Drops the Tegra 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 4 could be a good choice, but don't be hypnotized by the 72 cores (or whatever Tegra have). Those cores are like the Octa, sounds nice but isn't so powerful. Those cores are very small, those 72 cores doesn't gives more power than a 4-cores gpu. Adreno 330 should be as good as Tegra 4. Adreno 320 is a bit slower, but I don't think will be much difference. We will see. Choose smart, think smart
Cheers.
avetny said:
which bench results showing advantage to Adreno 320 ?
Adreno 320 is old GPU for me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Glbenchmark 2.7 trex
Glbenchmark 2.5 hd
3d mark extrem
3d mark standard
Not by much, but faster and more future proof
darkhelio said:
NICEEEE SO I WILL GET THE QUAD-Core but i still will wait if Nvidia Drops the Tegra 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet we wont see the "real" Tegra 4 in smartphones. Its to power hungry. The Tegra 4i will come to smartphones for sure.
shox22 said:
Glbenchmark 2.7 trex
Glbenchmark 2.5 hd
3d mark extrem
3d mark standard
Not by much, but faster and more future proof
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok can you run 3d mark standard on you 9505 ! (on your phone)
I will do the samething. Let's exchange with screenshots
i9500
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
now show me yours please
avetny said:
Ok can you run 3d mark standard on you 9505 ! (on your phone)
I will do the samething. Let's exchange with screenshots
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, as i dont have a sgs4.
http://www.max-up.ru/news-apple/3dmark-sgs4-exynos-vs-htc-one.html
And the sgs4 s600 is 15% faster then the one...
demlasjr said:
Tegra 4 could be a good choice, but don't be hypnotized by the 72 cores (or whatever Tegra have). Those cores are like the Octa, sounds nice but isn't so powerful. Those cores are very small, those 72 cores doesn't gives more power than a 4-cores gpu. Adreno 330 should be as good as Tegra 4. Adreno 320 is a bit slower, but I don't think will be much difference. We will see. Choose smart, think smart
Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes but when is goign to be the S800 Series and the Adrenos 330 :s and i want a phone XD but i want something powerfull i will still wait for 3 months and lets see whats happens
darkhelio said:
yes but when is goign to be the S800 Series and the Adrenos 330 :s and i want a phone XD but i want something powerfull i will still wait for 3 months and lets see whats happens
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In 3 month you could see the first s800 devices. But then the next gen qualcomm will be announced and you´ll have to wait again for 3-6 month for the new, more powerfull one... and so on
shox22 said:
In 3 month you could see the first s800 devices. But then the next gen qualcomm will be announced and you´ll have to wait again for 3-6 month for the new, more powerfull one... and so on
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PFF :S lets see what happens i dont like the Thorttle :S os the S4
avetny said:
Ok can you run 3d mark standard on you 9505 ! (on your phone)
I will do the samething. Let's exchange with screenshots
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll bring screenshots later but your Graphics score is 10448 while my GS4 gets 11258. Would you mind scrolling down the screenshot so we can see the results for both Test 1 and 2 as well as the demo?
Your quad A15 CPU is obviously faster though with over a thousand higher Physics score.
BTW, since you have the A15 model can you do me a favor and run a few tests using RgbenchMM? https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.codedivine.rgbench
I'd like to see the numbers for 1 core, 2 core and 4 cores.
Related
I just read an article here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/4179/ti-omap4-and-lg-optimus-3d-tested
The LG Optimus 3d uses the same SGX 540 graphics that our SGS uses. BUT it is clocked at 300mhz vs our 200mhz AND it uses an updated driver. With these improvements, early benchmarks show it beats the tegra 2 and the quad-gpu in the SGS II. Of course these benchmarks don't tell the whole story, but I still find it interesting. I hope Samsung can make sure android can take advantage of the gpu in the SGS II.
Most PowerVR SGX 540 designs run the GPU core at up to 200MHz. OMAP 4's implementation is another 50% faster. LG's software build also uses a newer version of Imagination Technologies' driver (1.6 instead of 1.5) which fixes some rendering issues (specifically in the Egypt test) and improves performance considerably (likely between 10 - 30% in GLBenchmark2). You can see that the image quality issues are fixed in the video showing the Egypt demo running on the LG Optimus 3D below:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Taking the performance improvement due to the driver out of the equation, we're still looking at a nearly 20% increase in performance over the SGX 540 in Hummingbird. The 4430 holds a similar advantage over NVIDIA's Tegra 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey, I want this driver! Maybe, devs could be able to port it to SGS somehow.
By the way, GPU in Desire HD and Desire Z (adreno 205) beats SGS one in benchmarks and goes head-to-head with Tegra.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
if it causes the same battery drain, i want that driver too...
Id love to see how the Sony NGP with ARM Cortex-A9 quad-core processor & SGX543MP4+ GPU stacks up....just for fun of course.
The SGX540 is indeed a very good GPU. Still not outdated, even at 200 MHz.
zorxd said:
The SGX540 is indeed a very good GPU. Still not outdated, even at 200 MHz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can change it the kernel also to 300MHz if you have te skils. Our SGS has stil many potentional
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
I hope skilled devs like Supercurio and Hardcore are reading this thread and get some inspiration
F**king apple
I hope everyone is realizing how dumb it was to let apple buy imaginetech.
And how come nvidia (a company i know for gpus) seems to be behind in gpu tech?
SamHaLeKe said:
You can change it the kernel also to 300MHz if you have te skils. Our SGS has stil many potentional
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Unlikely when you mess with the gpu clock there's an increase in instability, as well as putting other devices out of sync. I believe omap4 is using a different nm process to fabricate it probably smaller than the galaxys so they can put the clock higher.
The driver upgrade is the only possibility.
I think Hummingbird (A8) and Omap4 (A9) are based on same 45 nm architecture.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Guys, look at that:
http://glbenchmark.com/subtest_results_of_device.jsp?D=Google+Nexus+S&id=405
There are 12 tests of Nexus S in GLBenchmark, and 11 of them are below 2400 points (more or less like our SGS), but the most recent one (uploaded at 2011.02.11) scored 3025 points, more than Tegra 2. This result's is made by someone from GLBenchmark, and shows at "GLBenchmark team tested" page of the results. How is that possible?
Just commenting to keep this going. I don't want to put my hopes up too much, but you never know
I'm beginning to believe that it was a bad move from Samsung to switch from PowerVR to the Mali-400. I have the money ready to spend on a new device and I hope it's the SGS2 but I will wait first for the final product and drivers and see some benchmarks before I buy. If the SGX540 keeps the lead maybe I'll stick with my SGS.
samsung got tegra 2 also for I9103 phone
but SGX543 was good a option
Samsung pr overhyped their processor capabilities. But I guess there not confident in there own soc. If they decided to make a tegra 2 version.
MarlowXim said:
Samsung pr overhyped their processor capabilities. But I guess there not confident in there own soc. If they decided to make a tegra 2 version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i'm pretty sure they are only making a tegra 2 version because they wont be able to manufacture enough orion cores to meet the demand.
i think that the galaxy tab gpu is clocked at higher speed than galaxy s as it gives same score at neocore on (1024x600) resolution , am i wrong
Give an App for gpu oc please Dev's
And of course DRIVER update please
Interesting. I did see GPU overclock to 247mhz in some kernels, but any driver upgrade or OC is awesome
oswade said:
Interesting. I did see GPU overclock to 247mhz in some kernels, but any driver upgrade or OC is awesome
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you show us where
Sent from my GT-P1000 using XDA App
http://ausdroid.net/2011/04/02/qual...m=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+ausdroid+(Ausdroid)
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my spaceship!
yeah it was mentioned in this thread before
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1015664&highlight=adreno
link by the op has more specs as well
hah, I love how the iPhone 4 is at the very bottom of the list. Even the 3gs beats it out.
xHausx said:
hah, I love how the iPhone 4 is at the very bottom of the list. Even the 3gs beats it out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking the same thing.
xHausx said:
hah, I love how the iPhone 4 is at the very bottom of the list. Even the 3gs beats it out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iphone 4 was a joke
Sent from my spaceship!
kd0axs said:
I was thinking the same thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone 4 pushes multiple times more pixels than the 3GS or even the EVO.
iPhone 4 = 614,400 pixels
iPhone 3GS = 153,600 pixels
WVGA/EVO/this 1.5 GHz Qualcomm = 384,000
The iPhone 4 uses the PowerVR SGX 535 (same as 2010 Droids - about 2x faster than the EVO's Adreno 200 and iPhone 3GS's SGX 530), Nexus S uses the newer twice as powerful PowerVR SGX 540. The newer Apple A5 (which will be in the iPhone 5) uses the newer multi core PowerVR SGX 542 which will also be used in the new PSP and benches about 50+% faster than the Tegra 2. Putting in on par or most likely better than the Adreno 220.
Its because of the screen res its pushing lol.
Eh, you beat me to it award. More detailed too.. haha.
Award Tour said:
The iPhone 4 pushes multiple times more pixels than the 3GS or even the EVO.
iPhone 4 = 614,400 pixels
iPhone 3GS = 153,600 pixels
WVGA/EVO/this 1.5 GHz Qualcomm = 384,000
The iPhone 4 uses the PowerVR SGX 535 (same as 2010 Droids - about 2x faster than the EVO's Adreno 200 and iPhone 3GS's SGX 530), Nexus S uses the newer twice as powerful PowerVR SGX 540. The newer Apple A5 (which will be in the iPhone 5) uses the newer multi core PowerVR SGX 542 which will also be used in the new PSP and benches about 50+% faster than the Tegra 2. Putting in on par or most likely better than the Adreno 220.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sure its the same cpu as the psp2? Highly doubt apple will make a jump from 1 core to 4. Considering it took them 5-6 months to go from an ipad to ipad2.
Last-Chance said:
You sure its the same cpu as the psp2? Highly doubt apple will make a jump from 1 core to 4. Considering it took them 5-6 months to go from an ipad to ipad2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same GPU, have no idea what CPU the NGP uses but the A5 is a dual core Cortex A9.
NGP/PSP 2 = quad core 542
A5 = dual core 542
Based on the ipad 2 benchmarks, the "PSP 2" is going to be beastly.
Btw - the ipad 1 to 2 are nearly a year apart.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Remember when people on here were making fun of Sprint and whining and crying because they hadn't talked about their next premier device?
Everyone was "omgggzzz atrAXXXXX" and all that none sense...
Yeah......worth the wait.
Award Tour said:
Same GPU, have no idea what CPU the NGP uses but the A5 is a dual core Cortex A9.
NGP/PSP 2 = quad core 542
A5 = dual core 542
Based on the ipad 2 benchmarks, the "PSP 2" is going to be beastly.
Btw - the ipad 1 to 2 are nearly a year apart.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea. hoping they make one for both gsm and cdma, the 3g that is. Replace my phone with it, and use voip/skype/google voice to make calls :X
heres an article from androidcommunity.com http://androidcommunity.com/nexus-s...nce-benchmarks-with-trinity-and-cm7-20110530/
the way i see it, the real winner here is Trinity and our own morfic(@morfique on twitter) as Trinity for the g2x and for the nexus s is on top for both phones.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Are there other comparison benchmarks beside Quadrant? I take quadrant scores about as seriously as stories from AboveTopSecret
Also, overclocking to 1.5ghz.. What do the dual cores do when overclocked? Where are those comparisons?
Also.. Really.. Is a 1.5ghz overclock really an "every day use" type of configuration?
I'm not saying this isn't impressive but you're comparing a Mustang with a racing kit in it to it to a stock Camaro.
styckx said:
Are there other comparison benchmarks beside Quadrant? I take quadrant scores about as seriously as stories from AboveTopSecret
Also, overclocking to 1.5ghz.. What do the dual cores do when overclocked?
Also.. Really.. Is a 1.5ghz overclock really an "every day use" type of configuration?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
heres a smartbench benchmark. and no, 1.5ghz isnt a daily. its more to play with or use when gaming. as you can imagine, battery life wouldnt be the greatest. i use the Trinity 1.1ghz UV as my daily. oh, and the top g2x(dual core) quadrant benchmark is 5587, also using trinity but for the g2x. btw, thats morfics g2x with the top g2x score.
Gotcha.. Don't get me wrong.. It is impressive and I'm all about getting the most out of hardware whether it's from a phone or a PC.
Damn. Now that is impressive. I wonder what the 3D score will be like once they o overclock it. It's going to be awesome!!!!
Most of it is coming from I/O due to ext4, quadrant benchmarks are far from accurate. Anything higher then 2000 (maybe less) is SF.
Dual core phones are definitely better, as well as their GPUs. I can run most of the tegra 2 games just fine tho.
look at that I/O score clearly nexus s it king
1.5 on single core is not faster than 1ghz dual core
Sgs2 ATM is best android out...period it doesn't need ext4 exploit to score 4700 on quadrant
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
lvnatic said:
Most of it is coming from I/O due to ext4, quadrant benchmarks are far from accurate. Anything higher then 2000 (maybe less) is SF.
Dual core phones are definitely better, as well as their GPUs. I can run most of the tegra 2 games just fine tho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Sgx540 beats the Geforce ulp gpu in the Tegra 2.
So there is no reason that it wouldn't work.
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
not saying its not impressive...your CPU OC is impressive that's about it
And only seen a handful of nexus S that can handle these speeds so to say nexus s is still king based on this is laughable im sorry thats my opinion
cant believe androidcommunity made an article on this
also removing the FPS cap on the kernel doesn't do anything for games the screen refresh rate cant handle such high FPS so you dont even see these extra frames when gaming all you're doing is killing your battery
tegra 2 dual core has a huge advantage on gaming.
Just becasue you gain a better score on a benchmark the tegra has an extra core to take some of workload in 3d rendering thats why games like Riptide run great on tegra and slow on our sgx540
im not bashing you simms i respect you and everything you do for the community just think you have a misunderstanding how things are working
demo23019 said:
im not bashing you simms i respect you and everything you do for the community just think you have a misunderstanding how things are working
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i hope that you dont think that i think that a quadrant is an accurate snapshot of this situation, because i dont. quadrant is only meant to benchmark a single core, it even makes the field even between single and dual cores because of that. but, since the community likes to use quadrant as a "standard" for benching, ill throw these benchmarks up to look at. kinda like looking at a freak of nature, not being able to take your eyes off. anyways, since people like to use quadrants to compare android penises, the nexus s has the biggest(for now).
I get what you're saying and were you're coming from. I wont but in anymore enjoy you 1.5ghz wish my phone could run that speed
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Quandrant scores are not a good way to judge device performance. This article explains it all:
http://www.androidcentral.com/how-cheat-android-benchmarks
As the article explains, the big give away is the length of the I/O part of the bar in the OP picture, which shows that the phone has manipulated quadrant benchmark into providing a higher score.
It is still pretty neat to see a +5000 quadrant score, even if it doesn't really mean much.
Like I said, anything higher then 1800-2000 is a fake score.
I can run riptide gt just fine with a 1.3ghz overclocked CPU btw
lvnatic said:
Like I said, anything higher then 1800-2000 is a fake score.
I can run riptide gt just fine with a 1.3ghz overclocked CPU btw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
anything higher than 1800-2000 is a fake score??? then you havent ever been oc'ed to 1.3ghz.. never. btw, at stock speeds you should be getting 2300-2600. what phone are you using? my oc'ed original droid gets 1800-2100
lvnatic said:
Like I said, anything higher then 1800-2000 is a fake score.
I can run riptide gt just fine with a 1.3ghz overclocked CPU btw
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those scores are not faked although I do understand that quadrant is not the best barometer for benchmarking. On my Nexus S, stock, I get around 2100. With my G2x, stock, I get about 2700 (and that's mounted on the crappy ext3 filesystem). When using an ext4 kernel my score jumps to 3500.
demo23019 said:
look at that I/O score clearly nexus s it king
1.5 on single core is not faster than 1ghz dual core
Sgs2 ATM is best android out...period it doesn't need ext4 exploit to score 4700 on quadrant
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A point of correction. The SGS2 out of the box is mounted as ext4, which is why it scores great on Quadrant. It's also clocked @ 1.2ghz. 4700 is a bit high for a stock SGS2, its typically around 3700 which is certainly nothing to sneeze out.
Hello people, I'm having a little confusion here. I beg you pardon if this thread looks similar to others, but indeed it doesn't.
I'm planning to buy a Samsung Galaxy S II, I've readed a lot in forums as well as in other sites. Right now I'm stuck between i9100, i989 (T-Mobile) and i727 Skyrocket (AT&T). I'm looking for the best hardware option, I don't care about carrier locked or anything because I'll simunlock it, root it, etc... so basically I just need the best hardware.
In this comparative i727 Skyrocket looks much better than i9000. It have 1.5Ghz dual core micro, the screen is a little bit bigger, better battery, etc. However in this comparative from GSMarena, I found that the i727 Skyrocket have 1.2Ghz dual core micro... just like i9100, then I'm confused in the middle of all this.
HOWEVER in the other hand, in eBay the most expensive is the i9100 and I hope that's not only for being unlocked.
I have doubts, confusions and a hell on my head.
Could you help me to decide the best hardware, the best one for you, and why?
Thank you so much.
Regards.
Galaxy S2 is i9100 series not i9000 series.
i9100 is the best. Although the other two have 1.5ghz processors, its using the Snapdragon cpu instead of Exynos which has been known to be a much better performer than the So3. Bigger screen is good but there have been reports of vertical lines on the 4.5 models, and finally we have developer support and updates which shall be no contest compared to the i9100
Not trying to discourage you from the SR or TMO models, but if u want the overall best, the i9100 is better in most aspects. Now if you can sacrifice some performance for LTE (if u live in a LTE area of course) or more real estate, then the SR is for you
sEnT fRoM mY ExYnOs PoWeReD MoNsTeR
IMHO I would have to say go with the 9100 International, so many better choices as far as ROMS.
I had a Samsung Captivate and always had to wait for a different type of kernel to be made to work with the Cappy where as the developers were always snapping out the updates for the 9000. Swore I would never go with anything besides the original international version of any Sammy. I will be getting the Samsung Galaxy Nexus as soon as I can get one that is not locked or bound to ANY carrier ie. UNLOCKED.
GIR said:
Galaxy S2 is i9100 series not i9000 series.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're right, sorry the typo.
The at&t and tmobile has slightly bigger screen 4"5 inches with 1.5 ghz Qualcomm cpu and adreno 220 gpu.
I9100 has samsung's own 1.2 ghz exynos cpu and mali 400 gpu. The cpu on i9100 performs better.
Thank you so much guys.
I will go with i9100 version, definitely you made a point with the support subject as well as the micro performance.
eBay here I go.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The international version has the best soc. But if you live in the united states it will not work on att's Lte network or tmobios 42mbps hspa+ network... So your speeds will be much slower than the t989 or Sr versions.
Sent from my SGH-T989 using XDA App
Other thing to consider is that T989 has NFC while i9100 does not (at least from what I've read). Might be useful if you are itching to try Google Wallet.
Why not consider the I777? (AT&T GS2) - It has NFC.
The T989 and ****rocket are NOT Galaxy S II phones. They have NO business having the Galaxy S II name applied to them - they are oddball one-off phones cobbled together from Samsung's parts bin, and do NOT represent the refinement that Samsung's flagship I9100 and close relatives (I777 and Sprint SPH-D710) have.
You looked only at clock frequency, but missed that the T989 and ****rocket do not have Samsung's own Exynos chipset, but a Qualcomm chip instead. The Snapdragon is notorious for poor performance for a given clock rate - at 1.5 GHz, they deliver worse performance than the Exynos at 1.2.
In addition, they have NOTHING else in common with the I9100 hardware-wise, so unlike the I777, they can't leverage all of the I9100's development.
The larger battery in the ****rocket is offset by the fact that it's got LTE (battery-hogging fatty - LTE will not be mature for at least another year) and the fact that the Snapdragon is a battery hog due to having to ramp to higher clock rates to achieve the same performance. In reality, the ****rocket gets very poor battery life. I've seen people that considered 17 hours "good" even though a GS2 that has a permanent wakelock held (no deep sleep) will last longer than that!
A lot of interesting things here. Here's a more technical post on the key differences. Samsung is currently using three chipsets in various Galaxy S2 phones; Exynos 4210, Tegra 2, and Snapdragon S3. The phones you're looking at have all but the Tegra.
Exynos 4210
CPU - Dual-Core ARM Cortex A9 @ 1.2ghz (SMP)
GPU - ARM Mali 400MP4
Snapdragon S3
CPU - Dual-Core Scorpion @ 1.5ghz (aSMP)
GPU - Qualcomm Adreno 220
Which is better? In terms of real performance, A9 puts out 2.5 DMIPS per clock cycle, giving the Exynos a rating of 3,000 per core or 6,000 total. The Snapdragon puts out 3,125 per core, or 6,300 total, as Scorpion does 2.1 DMIPS per clock cycle. That's a difference of 5%. So yes, in theory, the Snapdragon is a hair faster due to the much higher clock rate.
In terms of the GPU, the Mali 400MP4 has a sterling reputation due to benchmark results. However, SGS2 fanboys (of which I am one, own a GT-i9100 myself) have been quick to jump on the favorable benchmarks but ignore the bad ones. Let me explain;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
This review is one that is often touted, so I'll use two key examples. in the top image you'll see the fill-rate advantage of the Mali, beating out the Adreno 220 by a factor of nearly 5 to 1. That's huge! Here's the problem with this; The Adreno in a benchmark displays MORE than enough fill-rate to accelerate a game at 800x480 resolution, 32-bit color, at 60 frames per second. Of course, there are other fill-rate intensive things that will tax this aspect of the GPU, and the Mali is equipped to handle this (as is the sGX540) while the Adreno is not. The Adreno is essentially a basic GPU at that resolution (and a horrible one for 720p, I'm looking at you HTC Rezound!). in the second link, we see a near 40$ boost in geometric performance for the Adreno over the Mali. As games become more detailed, this will be an issue (this is why I favor PowerVR over Mali, personal preference). However, Adreno is so limited that the Mali is far superior overall, IMO.
In conclusion, if you don't game, either phone is fine (and the Skyrocket has LTE support). But, if you want to play 3D games, the GT-i9100 or the SGH-i777 (AT&T version with NFC) are your best choices. Go with the i9100 if you want a truly unlocked phone, and only pay $10/mo for unlimited data. Go with the i777 if you want a cheaper upfront cost and NFC.
hi
can someone install droidfish chess app, set on 4 cores and from initial board position will do analysis to see if knps passes 1000...lg g2 failed to pass 600 which is low. interesting to see it that aspect was improved with new chip/memory speed...
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
for example, galaxy note 3 result:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
TheBenzinator said:
hi
can someone install droidfish chess app, set on 4 cores and from initial board position will do analysis to see if knps passes 1000...lg g2 failed to pass 600 which is low. interesting to see it that aspect was improved with new chip/memory speed...
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 602k.
I got 608K, also running HolyAngel's kernel as well, FYI, with CPU at 2.5 and smartassv2 enabled.
thanks to all. I guess need to wait to new Quallcom chip 805 to see if this will be improved..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
TheBenzinator said:
thanks to all. I guess need to wait to new Quallcom chip 805 to see if this will be improved..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem, just don't forget the Thanks button.
I do wonder if it's the QHD display that drags down the nps with the G3, compared the Note 3 with similar specs...
JustLok said:
No problem, just don't forget the Thanks button.
I do wonder if it's the QHD display that drags down the nps with the G3, compared the Note 3 with similar specs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My note 3 is with Exynos cpu so it performs much better in this kind of cpu load.... i dont see any relation to QHD display which is handled by gpu part..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
This is L1 cache that matters to chess... not Ghz
Dear all,
Let me contribute to that topic with some more precision.
If you are looking for more Nodes per second, the decisive criteria is the L1 CACHE of the CPU. It plays much more on the outcome compared to the frequency. I am quite sure about that after trying this test on different Snapdragons.
Snapdragons have 16K data + 16K instruction cache. Therefore, even a Galaxy Note IV can barely reach 700K despite 2.65Ghz speed of the Snapdragon 805, while its Exynos brother boosts no less than 1400K.
You may recall the Exynos is octa-core. and SD805 is only 4 cores. If we are supposed to think that's the reason, come explain 730K made with the Exynos 4412 of Galaxy Note 2 which runs @ 1.6 x 4 cores.
Exynos CPU's have 32K+32K L1 cache! That's why they perform surprisingly better. But be careful with all this big.LITTLE thing which is extremely mind confusing. I did not test a note III or a Galaxy Tab with Exynos 4+4 cpu's. They all have low freq set of cores which, if used, could seriously reduce the speed. But i guess engines like Stockfish will force the hi-freq cores. In Note-III case, that means 1.9 Ghz x 4 cores.
The L1-cache effect is obvious on Apple CPU's which have 1.3Ghz x 4 cores but 64K cache. They perform easily around 1300K.
Finally, stay away from Snapdragons if you use Droidfish and check for octa cores, capable of working together at peak speed and insist on 32K+32K L1 cache minimum per core !!!
Alternatively Mediatek octa core CPU's have 8 cores working in parallel at speeds up to 2.0Ghz. They should give 1200 Knps. MTK6592 for example is a concrete low-cost potential. Give it a try if you can. Mediatek will soon release stronger CPU's but they will be big.LITTLE too, unfortunately...
All i say above applies to chess only. Real life usage, internet, movies, games, social media etc is totally a different world and Snapdragon 805 is a monster there! Qualcomm does not and should not focus on delivering the best chess CPU for mobiles., for us, freaks and they are right in what they are doing for mass users market.