I have a question regarding the Processor in the HD2, we all know that its a 1GHz Snapdragon but in real terms how does this compare to something like the 600Mhz OMAP processor in the N900?
I read that the N900 also has a GPU to go with the 600MHz processor, how is this different to what the HD2 does?
hmmm
im not sure but the diffrents is in the graphic chip,battary consomption,speed and thats it,iwill wait for the genius friends in the forum
chrism_scotland said:
I have a question regarding the Processor in the HD2, we all know that its a 1GHz Snapdragon but in real terms how does this compare to something like the 600Mhz OMAP processor in the N900?
I read that the N900 also has a GPU to go with the 600MHz processor, how is this different to what the HD2 does?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looking at the specs of the GPU which is a PowerVR SGX.
It is an opengl 2.0 compatible GPU and supports many other standards, it basically means it would run a larger array of programs with graphical attributes compared to other devices with just a CPU.
Now the HD2's snapdragon processor also supports OpenGl 2.0 so in theory the additional GPU in the N900 would be redundant if it were put into the HD2's circuitry.
On the other hand due to the fact that the 600MHz OMAP in the N900 doesn’t have support for things like opengl and other it makes a large improvement in performance just like a GPU does in a PC compared with integrated graphics. Personally without any tests I would say the snapdragon would still be faster as long as you were running something like FPU enabler to make sure all the instructions are there and supported by the OS which the N900 wouldn’t be able to support them instructions and would use much slower less efficient instructions.
Also the n900 is running a diffrent OS so it makes it very hard to compare.
for more info on snapdragon opengl support go here
Hope that helps
chrism_scotland said:
I have a question regarding the Processor in the HD2, we all know that its a 1GHz Snapdragon but in real terms how does this compare to something like the 600Mhz OMAP processor in the N900?
I read that the N900 also has a GPU to go with the 600MHz processor, how is this different to what the HD2 does?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon is not just a CPU, it's an entire chipset, including a GPU, wifi, GPS, etc.
The CPU component of Snapdragon is roughly the same speed as the OMAP CPU clock-for-clock, but obviously clocked a lot higher. The GPU is significantly less powerful than the PowerVR chip that is usually paired with OMAP processors (though I haven't actually checked if it's the one included in the N900).
Shasarak said:
The GPU is significantly less powerful than the PowerVR chip that is usually paired with OMAP processors (though I haven't actually checked if it's the one included in the N900).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The N900 has a SGX 530 GPU which is slower than the 535 in the iPhone 3gs and also slower than the snapdragon's Z430 (It probably has drivers with functional vsync though)
christonabike said:
The N900 has a SGX 530 GPU which is slower than the 535 in the iPhone 3gs and also slower than the snapdragon's Z430 (It probably has drivers with functional vsync though)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My apologies, should have looked it up.
don't know which z430 you've been using, but I am finding it utter crap.
Nintendo DS: 120,000 triangles/s, 30 M pixels/s
PowerVR MBX-Lite (iPhone 3G): 1 M triangles/s, 100 M pixels/s
Samsung S3C6410 (Omnia II): 4 M triangles/s, 125.6 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon (Qualcomm MSM72xx): 4 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 530 (Palm Pre): 14 M triangles/s, ___ M pixels/s
ATI Imageon Z430 (Toshiba TG01): 22 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 535 (iPhone 3GS): 28 M triangles/s, 400 M pixels/s
Sony PSP: 33 M triangles/s, 664 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 540 (TI OMAP4): 35 M triangles/s, 1000 M pixels/s
Nvidia Tegra APX2500 (Zune HD): 40 M triangles/s, 600 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon _ (Qualcomm QSD8672): 80 M triangles/s, >500 M pixels/s
I think it's safe to say that the Snapdragon performs admirably, but the SGX blows it out of the water.
aethelbert said:
Nintendo DS: 120,000 triangles/s, 30 M pixels/s
PowerVR MBX-Lite (iPhone 3G): 1 M triangles/s, 100 M pixels/s
Samsung S3C6410 (Omnia II): 4 M triangles/s, 125.6 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon (Qualcomm MSM72xx): 4 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 530 (Palm Pre): 14 M triangles/s, ___ M pixels/s
ATI Imageon Z430 (Toshiba TG01): 22 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 535 (iPhone 3GS): 28 M triangles/s, 400 M pixels/s
Sony PSP: 33 M triangles/s, 664 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 540 (TI OMAP4): 35 M triangles/s, 1000 M pixels/s
Nvidia Tegra APX2500 (Zune HD): 40 M triangles/s, 600 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon _ (Qualcomm QSD8672): 80 M triangles/s, >500 M pixels/s
I think it's safe to say that the Snapdragon performs admirably, but the SGX blows it out of the water.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
most of informations listed here are not true iphone 3gs tests shows only (7million triangles ) samsung omnia 2 (has 9 million triangles not 4 )
hoss_n2 said:
most of informations listed here are not true iphone 3gs tests shows only (7million triangles ) samsung omnia 2 (has 9 million triangles not 4 )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 7 million triangles/sec number was based on AnandTech's incorrect guess that the 3GS used a lower-end SGX instead of the SGX 535. Samsung initially specced the Omnia 2's GPU (an in-house project by Samsung) at 9 million triangles/sec but then revised it down to 4 million at launch.
Much more info here (see tables at the bottom in particular):
http://www.techautos.com/2010/03/14/smartphone-processor-guide/
Is it scorpion or snapdragon? How is it compare to hummingbird processor?
Sent from my SE_X10i using Tapatalk
Snapdragon is the SOC, and Scorpion is the name of the CPU core. It's arm based like the hummingbird, and as far as I know, the performance is very similar (some +&- between the two)
Both are same, except the GPU part, Snapdragon MSM8255 which uses Adreno 205 GPU ( Adreno is a rebranded AMD Z430 originally developed by ATi as Imageon then AMD sold it to Qualcomm )... Hummingbird in the other hand uses the PowerVR SGX 540 GPU from Imagination Technologies...
from performance POV, PowerVR SGX 540 is a little bit faster than Adreno 205 ( over all performance, in some benchmarks the SGX 540 is notable faster like in GLBenchmark 2.0 ), but the CPU part of the hummingbird limit it's power, the same GPU when used in a dual core SOC like OMAP 4430 ( used in LG Optimus 3D ) performs better... just to note, Samsung used another SOC in Galaxy S2 that SOC uses a different GPU named Mali-400MP which is slower than SGX 540... but being a dual-core helps the Mali-400MP to be faster than SGX 540...
Who do you think will win in better speed performance?
SGS4's Exynos 5 octa VS Snapdragon 800(rumored)? and
PowerVR SGX 544MP3 vs ADreno 330(rumored)?
That is a question for Dr Emmett Brown and Marty Mcfly.
Can some body tell me what is the Note 8 - Mali 400 MP GPU speed/Frequency?
Is it same as Note 2 or Galaxy S 3?
+1 for this request.
Have the same question
+1 too
SGX531 is a old gpu (create in Oct 2006) but recently a new version of SGX531 come : SGX531 Ultra. Same numbers of units but a big overclock. His frequency is estimated between 400 and 522 Mhz. Compared at the SGX540(Nexus S, Galaxy S base frequency, 200 mhz for memory) it's a huge difference. I know overclocked version of SGX 540 exist.(Galaxy Nexus, Optimus 3D, etc). But the architecture of SGX 531 is exactly the half of architecture of SGX 540. So in theory, if we set the frequency at the exact double of SGX 540, we should get the same results but... the reality is quite different. In fact after many tests, I've comparables results of SGX531 and SGX540. Unfortunately I do not know the exact frequency used by the SGX531. Many news phones(a lot of chineses phones apparently) use this "new" gpu on low cost smartphones. The tests were performed on models with similar configurations. (mono core processor 1 Ghz, 512 mb ram, same resolution 800*480)
Results :
GL Benchmark 2.7 : (Theorical Benchmark)
Triangle throughput Textured C24Z16 Offscreen : SGX531 Ultra 7,866,918 Triangles/sec | SGX540 4,490,935 Triangles/sec 17% Better
Triangle throughput Textured C24Z16 Onscreen : SGX531 Ultra 14,021,563 Triangles/sec | SGX540 11,053,386 Triangles/sec 27% Better
Fillrate C24Z16 Offscreen : SGX531 Ultra 267,150,928 Texels/sec | SGX540 219,676,416 Texels/sec 22% Better
Fillrate C24Z16 Onscreen : SGX531 Ultra 197,397,584 Texels/sec | SGX540 128,086,480 Texels/sec 54% Better
Taiji 3D Benchmark : (Geometry Benchmark)
SGX531 Ultra : 9,21 fps / SGX540 : 11,15 fps 21 % Lesser
Nenamark 2 :
SGX531 Ultra : 23,5 fps / SGX540 26,3 fps 12 % Lesser
We notice the overwhelming superiority of SGX531 Ultra on theoric tests but SGX540 is better in real conditions
With this results i can estimated the frequency of SGX531 Ultra, 522 Mhz is possible. (the fillrate is very dependent of processor, the processor used for the tests of SGX540 is slightly recessed relative to that of SGX531 but is not limited mostly)