How many of you know that the MSM8960Pro found in the Moto X uses most of the silicon found in the Snapdragon 600? There's a lot of confusion concerning this.
The only thing we're missing is LPDDR3 support, which probably would've cost too much to change (no room in the dual-core die); 200MHz increase in clock speed was also passed up. So, it's not a binned S600. It's a custom SoC for Motorola.
So, Qualcomm updated the CPU cores from Krait 200 to 300 (IPC increases), and also threw in the latest Adreno 320 for good measure (higher performance, fill rate, GFLOPS). It's a win for us.
The Nexus 4 and 2013 Nexus 7 use the older Adreno 320 and Krait 200 cores (the Nexus 7 uses a similar higher performing Adreno 320 though). It shows, sometimes.
I didn't think it was a secret that the dual core on the Moto X is based on the Snapdragon 600 and not the S4...
Source?
DroidOnRoids said:
Source?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapdragon_(system_on_chip)
Excluding the "new/old" Adreno 320.
Yep, known this all along. X8 is more like a dual-core S600 (as compared to the quad-core S600 found in the GS4 and HTC One) than a dual-core S4 Pro (as compared to the quad-core S4 Pro found in the Nexus 4). Motorola really did a disservice to themselves by calling it an S4 Pro, but since their chip was customized and somewhere in between the standard S4 Pro and standard S600, I suspect the Qualcomm marketing department forced them to round down instead of up in regards to naming.
I mentioned this once and was told I was wrong. Nice to see confirmation.
Sent from my XT1056 using Tapatalk
It's unfortunate that qualcom's naming scheme is so confusing/misleading. I honestly think the "s4" branding of the cpu has cost Motorola a lot of sales. Even though as you pointed out, it really is undeserved.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
T-Keith said:
It's unfortunate that qualcom's naming scheme is so confusing/misleading. I honestly think the "s4" branding of the cpu has cost Motorola a lot of sales. Even though as you pointed out, it really is undeserved.
Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really think it is a progress. I believe Google is trying to change the understanding of the Android world. For example in my country (Turkey) nowadays, people are using the word of "trash" a lot in the biggest mobile tech forums. The main reason to that is the mark the hardware and then mark the device like an OS-less PC. The biggest and the most up-to-date example is Nexus 5. Everyone says it has no change in front of G2 because of its lower camera and 2300mAh battery. Only rare of them are taking software, design, direct updates etc. into account. An nearly all Samsung users make the same calculation. They believe the greater and newer the hardware (I mean SoC) the longer the phone will live.. We all know that is wrong with Samsung's closed-sourced mentality but many does not. So they count the cores
I believe Google will change that in the future with more low end devices and ligher software and more compatetive prices..
I'm a bit of a Samsung fan. I guess we have a bit of favoritism toward the first smartphone we really get in to, and also I really like the Galaxy series. I have owned/own HTC's, LG's, and Moto's too. But the Moto X has made me appreciate the overall performance of the device and to not focus so much on the specs of the hardware. If the device performs as it should, I don't care if it has a single core and 1 gig of ram. Just my 2 cents.
jspradling7 said:
I'm a bit of a Samsung fan. I guess we have a bit of favoritism toward the first smartphone we really get in to, and also I really like the Galaxy series. I have owned/own HTC's, LG's, and Moto's too. But the Moto X has made me appreciate the overall performance of the device and to not focus so much on the specs of the hardware. If the device performs as it should, I don't care if it has a single core and 1 gig of ram. Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This ^
I've played with most the "top" phones and the Moto x stands up to all of them....or better in some cases. Throw in the battery life I'm getting....and it pulls even further ahead of most the flagships.
That's to my eye anyway. And no, I didn't play games on them, cause I don't personally play "big" games on my phone.
That's made me extremely happy with the phone I picked.
Sent from my Moto X cellular telephone...
Jason.DROID said:
The Nexus 4 and 2013 Nexus 7 use the older Adreno 320 and Krait 200 cores (the Nexus 7 uses a similar higher performing Adreno 320 though). It shows, sometimes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Incorrect. The 2013 Nexus 7 uses Krait 300 cores.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapdragon_(system_on_chip)
The chip for the Nexus 7 is: APQ8064–1AA (Advertised as S4 Pro)
ShensMobile said:
Incorrect. The 2013 Nexus 7 uses Krait 300 cores.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapdragon_(system_on_chip)
The chip for the Nexus 7 is: APQ8064–1AA (Advertised as S4 Pro)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's good to know, since I have a 2013 Nexus 7 LTE. It wouldn't make sense to use an older Adreno 320 at 1920x1200. Still, it's not quite as smooth as the Moto X, which is interesting. Software clearly has a role to play.
Anandtech showed how the Moto X gets its performance. The dual cores are tasked higher than the quads, which gives a nice boost.
Jason.DROID said:
That's good to know, since I have a 2013 Nexus 7 LTE. It wouldn't make sense to use an older Adreno 320 at 1920x1200. Still, it's not quite as smooth as the Moto X, which is interesting. Software clearly has a role to play.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait what? No, the GPU is still the same. An Adreno 320 is an Adreno 320 (as far as I know). It's the CPU that uses the Krait 300 cores. That's why the Nexus 7 is less smooth than the Moto X, due to the resolution difference. However, in raw computational speed, the Nexus 7 should beat the Moto X due to the increased number of Krait 300 cores (4 vs 2).
ShensMobile said:
Wait what? No, the GPU is still the same. An Adreno 320 is an Adreno 320 (as far as I know). It's the CPU that uses the Krait 300 cores. That's why the Nexus 7 is less smooth than the Moto X, due to the resolution difference. However, in raw computational speed, the Nexus 7 should beat the Moto X due to the increased number of Krait 300 cores (4 vs 2).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, there are different Adreno 320s. The one from the S600 isn't the same as the S4 Pro in the Nexus 4.
Jason.DROID said:
No, there are different Adreno 320s. The one from the S600 isn't the same as the S4 Pro in the Nexus 4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have a source for how the Adreno 320's are different? The Wikipedia page for Adreno only specifies one 320 chip, which is used in the S4 Pro, S4 Prime, and Snapdraon 600 series.
ShensMobile said:
Do you have a source for how the Adreno 320's are different? The Wikipedia page for Adreno only specifies one 320 chip, which is used in the S4 Pro, S4 Prime, and Snapdraon 600 series.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This should prove it is not the same:
{
"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"
}
Offscreen is 1080p. The results are inline with the Snapdragon 600 Adreno 320s, NOT the original APQ8064 in the Nexus 4.
You can compare this to the HTC One w/ an S600 (not OC'd AFAIK): http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/13
Also, look at the GFLOPS increases in the Adreno Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adreno
51.2 (1gen-S4 pro)/86,4(2gen-S600)/97.2 (S600 AB)
GFLOPS increased on the order of about 1.6x
Jason.DROID said:
This should prove it is not the same:
Offscreen is 1080p. The results are inline with the Snapdragon 600 Adreno 320s, NOT the original APQ8064 in the Nexus 4.
You can compare this to the HTC One w/ an S600 (not OC'd AFAIK): http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/13
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's very interesting. I did some more digging and can't find any conclusive evidence on the differences in the Adreno 320's seen on different dies. One source did quote Qualcomm saying that the 320 on the S600 should be able to clock in at higher speeds than the 320 in the S4 Pro in the Nexus 4 though.
Cool, thanks for the heads up!
The S600 AB is used in the Galaxy S4, so the Adreno 320 in that isn't equal to ours as the clock increases to 450MHz over the 400MHz found in the Moto X and HTC One. Plus, Samsung pushes it to 480MHz in certain scenarios.
So, we have a given GFLOPS rating of 86.4, while the GS4 has 97.2. Most high-end discrete graphics chips in PCs are over 1.0 TFLOPS (or 1000 GFLOPS). So, I'm not sure why manufacturers keep pushing resolutions higher.
And we're still on LPDDR2, but the great thing is that we have lower CAS and other latencies than LPDDR3; DDR3 gets around that with pure speed. We're just down on ultimate bandwidth, so bandwidth limited scenrios will show a hit.
ShensMobile said:
That's very interesting. I did some more digging and can't find any conclusive evidence on the differences in the Adreno 320's seen on different dies. One source did quote Qualcomm saying that the 320 on the S600 should be able to clock in at higher speeds than the 320 in the S4 Pro in the Nexus 4 though.
Cool, thanks for the heads up!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The difference is due to GPU clock speed. The S4Pro GPU is clocked slower than the S600 GPU.
Everything else about the GPU hardware is the same.
Sent from my LG-E971 using Tapatalk
Jason.DROID said:
The S600 AB is used in the Galaxy S4, so the Adreno 320 in that isn't equal to ours as the clock increases to 450MHz over the 400MHz found in the Moto X and HTC One. Plus, Samsung pushes it to 480MHz in certain scenarios.
So, we have a given GFLOPS rating of 86.4, while the GS4 has 97.2. Most high-end discrete graphics chips in PCs are over 1.0 TFLOPS (or 1000 GFLOPS). So, I'm not sure why manufacturers keep pushing resolutions higher.
And we're still on LPDDR2, but the great thing is that we have lower CAS and other latencies than LPDDR3; DDR3 gets around that with pure speed. We're just down on ultimate bandwidth, so bandwidth limited scenrios will show a hit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
phoenix_rizzen said:
The difference is due to GPU clock speed. The S4Pro GPU is clocked slower than the S600 GPU.
Everything else about the GPU hardware is the same.
Sent from my LG-E971 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, you two are correct. My bad, I guess I've just been looking at too many numbers this morning.
Related
I constantly see references to the G2 beating the Nexus One in benchmark tests but the benchmarks always include GPU performance as part of the score. It was established before the phone came out that the GPU performance would beat just about everything else (save the Galaxy S), however that is somehow conflated with CPU performance.
Yes, the G2 can and probably will be overclocked once root is achieved but for now, apples to apples comparison:
{
"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"
}
Overall score is higher than Nexus One but CPU score is lower
I don't know that this is all that significant and I'd still take my G2 over a Nexus One, but please stop spreading misinformation by saying how the "Scorpion CPU pwnz the Snapdragon LOLZWTF!!!!1!!"
And I'm sure once the G2 get clocked At its native speed then its gonna put your point to rest...G2 still runs faster than my nexus .. I don't care about numbers what I care about is real world performance
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Both are Snapdragon SoC (G2 and N1), and both have Scorpion CPU's.. newer one is on a 45nm die while older is on a 65nm (lesser heat emission, lower consumption of power as a result longer battery life on the G2 thanks to the 45nm die).
CPU architecture wise there is not much difference.. the application processing however has been tweaked to perform better overall(thanks to the 45nm die I believe) and obviously as you can see the GPU, Adreno 205 thrashes the older Adreno 200..
Also the newer SoC supports more video codecs(mainly DivX actually) as well. ((MPEG-4, H.264, H.263, VC-1, DivX, DivX 3.11, Sorenson Spark, VP6) vs (MPEG-4, H.264, H.263, VC-1, Sorenson Spark, VP6).
msmith1991 said:
And I'm sure once the G2 get clocked At its native speed then its gonna put your point to rest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I constantly see references to the G2 beating the Nexus One in benchmark tests
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, the G2 can and probably will be overclocked once root is achieved but for now, apples to apples comparison
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know if I came across as bashing the phone. Maybe it was when I said I still prefer it over a Nexus one?
Regardless, my point wouldn't be "put to rest." For now, the CPU on the Nexus One outperforms the G2 on a benchmark. That is what I was addressing, nothing more.
Superfrag said:
Both are Snapdragon SoC (G2 and N1), and both have Scorpion CPU's.. newer one is on a 45nm die while older is on a 65nm (lesser heat emission, lower consumption of power as a result longer battery life on the G2 thanks to the 45nm die).
CPU architecture wise there is not much difference.. the application processing however has been tweaked to perform better overall(thanks to the 45nm die I believe) and obviously as you can see the GPU, Adreno 205 thrashes the older Adreno 200..
Also the newer SoC supports more video codecs(mainly DivX actually) as well. ((MPEG-4, H.264, H.263, VC-1, DivX, DivX 3.11, Sorenson Spark, VP6) vs (MPEG-4, H.264, H.263, VC-1, Sorenson Spark, VP6).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My personal experience matches what you've said exactly. Barely a hiccup running the phone and excellent battery life (relatively speaking at least). Like I said, the only thing I'm addressing is people using benchmarks which include the GPU in the score to say that the G2 processor is faster at 800mhz than the N1 at 1ghz.
Is there anything like Adobe Flash benchmark or test page? G2 is supposed to hardware accelerate Flash.
G2 is pure sex compared to my last phone, motorola cliq hahah
Is there anything like Adobe Flash benchmark or test page? G2 is supposed to hardware accelerate Flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is particularly interesting, as the phone seems to load and scroll webpages faster than my Nexus One did with Enom's ROM. Well, the G2 is faster in everything, basically. Not by a lot, but enough to be noticeable.
What is interesting is the obnoxiously higher IO score in the G2 compared to the N1.
I wonder what is entailed in an IO test on a phone...
here is some light reading, and chart lookin....
http://androidandme.com/2010/10/news/3dmarkmobile-gpu-showdown-adreno-205-vs-powervr-sgx540/
But jsut remember that the Galaxy class is still stuck on 2.1 so we are missing some updated drivers and JIT and yes that does make a difference.
Oh I forgot.
Better IO scores I believe is thanks to the fact that HTC decided to to with ext3 partition for its OS, thus having faster read/writes(I'm not sure about this.. I think its thanks to the ext3 partition)
Also yeah, like I said, the CPU architecture is similar, (very similar actually), just the overall application processing is better due to tweaks, and one guy mentioned hardware flash acceleration which I forgot to mention, and obviously the GPU. Basically its a very well refined package of the Snapdragons that were on the N1/Desire.
Next year's 3rd Gen Snapdragons will be dual core Scorpion CPU's, even better tweaking and optimization, and HUGE gpu improvement.
Qualcomm says that Adreno 220 is 4-5 times faster than Adreno 205.
carlitozway57 said:
My personal experience matches what you've said exactly. Barely a hiccup running the phone and excellent battery life (relatively speaking at least). Like I said, the only thing I'm addressing is people using benchmarks which include the GPU in the score to say that the G2 processor is faster at 800mhz than the N1 at 1ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, at stock speeds the Nexus One's CPU is faster simply due to clock speed(since they have similar architecture). BUT, thanks to the overall package, tweaking and optimization, and a better GPU, the new 2nd gen Snapdragons are extremely well refined and thus the phone runs MUCH smoother. That's why you see Linpack scores of the G2 and N1 are very similar.
Superfrag said:
Yup, at stock speeds the Nexus One's CPU is faster simply due to clock speed(since they have similar architecture). BUT, thanks to the overall package, tweaking and optimization, and a better GPU, the new 2nd gen Snapdragons are extremely well refined and thus the phone runs MUCH smoother. That's why you see Linpack scores of the G2 and N1 are very similar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed
my G2 scores 1675 in quadrant
smoothness comparable to iphone, but just running at 245mhz!
many people got scared of for the 800mhz mark
but I would proudly say they have underestimated that babe
running at 800mhz brings satisfactory battery stamina as well
o>c said:
agreed
my G2 scores 1675 in quadrant
smoothness comparable to iphone, but just running at 245mhz!
many people got scared of for the 800mhz mark
but I would proudly say they have underestimated that babe
running at 800mhz brings satisfactory battery stamina as well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell me about it, it's the smoothest Android phone out there and fastest too I might add.
Once we root and O/C this baby it'll fly!
Think of the difference between the N1 QSD8250 vs the G2 MSM7230 as a Core 2 Duo E6700 vs Core 2 Duo E7200 for the most part. One is older, supports slightly less instructions, but the overall architecture is the same. They just refined it a bit when they made the switch to 45nm is all.
I think the G2 cpu after using almost every snapdragon phone over the few months including my old nexus 1 this 800mhz cpu reminds me of the intel centrino cpus although they lower clock rates the where fast cpus from what I see and read the G2 as a package is the fastest phone on the martket. The cpu has been optimise and after going through many androids phones this one is by far the smoothest and fastest of them all in my opinion.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
This is the highest I've been able to get it to
carlitozway57 said:
I don't know that this is all that significant and I'd still take my G2 over a Nexus One, but please stop spreading misinformation by saying how the "Scorpion CPU pwnz the Snapdragon LOLZWTF!!!!1!!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I haven't done any benchmarking but I can definitively say the G2 is far and away snappier and seems to run much smoother than the N1. It's the first time an android phone has seemed to just flow and not get in the way of itself. Granted I stopped using cooked roms when I ditched winmo, so I can't speak for CM6.
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using Tapatalk
Of course the absolute correct statement would be chipset vs chipset, not processor vs processor, but thats all semantics. You cannot compare processors vs processors when it comes to mobile devices. These are all SOCs. You cannot seperate them.
And the fact is, the G2 as a whole has better performance than the N1 as a whole. The reason why people at the first place keep harping on the fact that G2 is faster than N1 is just to make a point that being 800mhz does not mean that the phone as a whole is slower than the N1, and thus less qualified for a Gingerbread upgrade than the N1 (which in turn proves that the so called rumour of a 1Ghz requirement for Gingerbread is not logical). How can one say that just because N1 has 1Ghz proc, and the G2 has 800mhz proc, the G2 is not as qualified as the N1 to get Gingerbread (again, assuming the 1Ghz requirement) when as a whole phone its faster than the N1. So we can conclude that the 1Ghz requirement is just bull****, and that the G2 is not handicapped for having a 800mhz proc.
Sorry did i confused you? I think i confused myself
I was able to get it 1 point higher lmao
Sent from my T-Mobile G2 using XDA App
Some of you keep thinking the G2 has a snapdragon processor in it. It's a scorpion processor not a 2nd gen snapdragon.
Even though I have followed dev/porting for 8 months starting with HTC Touch, I have little knowledge of how it is actually done. So here's my question to the developers.
We all know that Nexus S (2?) will have Gingerbread 2.3. Looking at the rumored specs and model number, it seems that Nexus S is a slight upgrade from Galaxy S.
Assuming most of the hardware is identical to Galaxy S, how easy is it to port 2.3 to Epic 4G, once Galaxy S becomes available?
Specifically, what is needed to bake a new 2.3 rom? Do you need to reverse engineer like what devs did on HTC WM devices? Or is it a straight port? I suspect it's somewhere in between but want to hear from you.
(If necessary, please move this to android development forum.)
The simple answer to this (which has been answered in other threads already if you looked) is no its won't be easy.
Also, the Nexus S is rumored and pretty much guaranteed to launch with a dual core processor. The rumor is that they delayed the device and gingerbread to implement this, since it will be google's new flagship device and has to be cutting edge. Everyone knows that dual core processors are set to hit the market within the first couple months of 2011 anyway, so releasing an old generation processor in a flagship google phone just makes no sense.
So no, it will not be easy to port from the Nexus S. It will not only have a completely different processor, but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
muyoso said:
but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree and think this is the bigger problem (for the Epic at least).
Sure would be nice if the folks at Google would release at one clean Google device for each carrier. I'd be on it in a heart beat.
vansmack said:
I agree and think this is the bigger problem (for the Epic at least).
Sure would be nice if the folks at Google would release at one clean Google device for each carrier. I'd be on it in a heart beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes that would be nice if they did that.I am surprised they are even doing another google phone by the way it sounded when they stopped marketing the nexus 1 that had no interest in doing another google branded phone.
muyoso said:
Also, the Nexus S is rumored and pretty much guaranteed to launch with a dual core processor. The rumor is that they delayed the device and gingerbread to implement this, since it will be google's new flagship device and has to be cutting edge. Everyone knows that dual core processors are set to hit the market within the first couple months of 2011 anyway, so releasing an old generation processor in a flagship google phone just makes no sense.
So no, it will not be easy to port from the Nexus S. It will not only have a completely different processor, but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are just rumors, all of the official specs that have come out say it will be a 1.2ghz hummingbird. The dual core 1ghz orion chip is definitely on the horizon but I highly doubt they will be able to get it in at the last minute, and there's a good chance we won't see it in phones until late next year. All rumors of a dual core Nexus S have had no credibility with their sources.
That said, if this turns out to be a dual core phone and gingerbread turns out to be optimized for dual cores, a port will probably be very difficult. But if it's just a 1.2ghz hummingbird then it would just be a matter of getting the CDMA radio working.
LucJoe said:
Those are just rumors, all of the official specs that have come out say it will be a 1.2ghz hummingbird. The dual core 1ghz orion chip is definitely on the horizon but I highly doubt they will be able to get it in at the last minute, and there's a good chance we won't see it in phones until late next year. All rumors of a dual core Nexus S have had no credibility with their sources.
That said, if this turns out to be a dual core phone and gingerbread turns out to be optimized for dual cores, a port will probably be very difficult. But if it's just a 1.2ghz hummingbird then it would just be a matter of getting the CDMA radio working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason that I think he has to have a dual core in it is as follows:
If it has a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, BFD. It immediately launches and is mediocre. Nothing exciting at all about it.
If it launches as the first dual core phone, it is the top of the line phone worthy of being branded as a Google flagship device.
Also, if it just had a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, what is the holdup? It is no different from phones released months ago. Also, if its a 1.2 Ghz processor, it will be eclipsed within a matter of a month or two performance wise by Tegra 2 and dual core snapdragon processors. Basically, it would be an embarassing flagship device. The original Nexus is still to this day a damn good phone that is near the top of the pack of android phones performance wise, and it is a year old.
muyoso said:
The reason that I think he has to have a dual core in it is as follows:
If it has a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, BFD. It immediately launches and is mediocre. Nothing exciting at all about it.
If it launches as the first dual core phone, it is the top of the line phone worthy of being branded as a Google flagship device.
Also, if it just had a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, what is the holdup? It is no different from phones released months ago. Also, if its a 1.2 Ghz processor, it will be eclipsed within a matter of a month or two performance wise by Tegra 2 and dual core snapdragon processors. Basically, it would be an embarassing flagship device. The original Nexus is still to this day a damn good phone that is near the top of the pack of android phones performance wise, and it is a year old.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are fully aware the the Tegra 2 do not even exceed the hummingbird in gpu or cpu performance right? Im just saying cause it would suck if you didn't know what you're talking about.
Plus gingerbread will have HW acceleration, putting gpu performance on a step for the overall fluidity of the gui. So again... what's faster?
Really? I assumed it would greatly ourperform. Where did u get your facts.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
InfDaMarvel said:
Really? I assumed it would greatly ourperform. Where did u get your facts.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm trying to find the article again, but i know they were close but Tegra 2 did not outperform the hummingbird. Apparently now they optimized the platform more.
Don't get me wrong i love nvidia, that's all i've purchased and stayed with them even thou they still dont have a decent dx11 card that doesnt need 2 power supplies. But they really need to step up and their CEO needs to wattch what he says and deliver more.
Here's a quote "On the 3D side, Nvidia says it has doubled the performance of the initial Tegra, resulting in a peak speed of 90 million triangles per second. This level is well beyond the performance of any mobile processor shipping or even sampling today." Hummingbird has the same exact performance. And CPU performance is a very interesting area. Anyway the GPU performance is almost par with the Hummingbird leading maybe by 3-5%
apatcas said:
I'm trying to find the article again, but i know they were close but Tegra 2 did not outperform the hummingbird. Apparently now they optimized the platform more.
Don't get me wrong i love nvidia, that's all i've purchased and stayed with them even thou they still dont have a decent dx11 card that doesnt need 2 power supplies. But they really need to step up and their CEO needs to wattch what he says and deliver more.
Here's a quote "On the 3D side, Nvidia says it has doubled the performance of the initial Tegra, resulting in a peak speed of 90 million triangles per second. This level is well beyond the performance of any mobile processor shipping or even sampling today." Hummingbird has the same exact performance. And CPU performance is a very interesting area. Anyway the GPU performance is almost par with the Hummingbird leading maybe by 3-5%
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since Tegra 2 is dual core and android does not have 2 core support till Gingerbread (Actually I don't think it even supports cortex A9 till gingerbread)..so if they ran 1 core vs 1 core I'd see a hummingbird win against a Tegra 2..but if Tegra 2 is running dual core (and optimized for it) it should win...but by that analogy Orion would then be superior.
gTen said:
Since Tegra 2 is dual core and android does not have 2 core support till Gingerbread (Actually I don't think it even supports cortex A9 till gingerbread)..so if they ran 1 core vs 1 core I'd see a hummingbird win against a Tegra 2..but if Tegra 2 is running dual core (and optimized for it) it should win...but by that analogy Orion would then be superior.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to mention that Tegra 2 does 1080P video recording. So yes, releasing a google flagship phone that within one month is eclipsed by LG with the first Tegra 2 phone, would be embarrassing. The Nexus 1 set the standard for almost a year, before the Galaxy S line came out. If the Nexus 2 can only set the standard for under a month, that would be stupid. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that the rumors of the Nexus S having a dual core are most likely true. Doesn't mean it has to be the Orion, but it would be awesome if it was.
Tegra 2 is a Cortex A9 CPU... as is the Samsung Orion and the TI OMAP4xxx chips. They accomplish 2.5 instructions per MHz as opposed to the 2 instructions per MHz in the Cortex A8 Hummingbird, and that's not counting improvements to instruction efficiency (getting more done with less instructions.) Add to that improvements such as out of order instruction handling and dual-channel memory support and Cortex A9 chips are head and shoulders above Cortex A8.
The only reason Tegra 2 wouldn't outperform Hummingbird significantly is, as mentioned, lack of dual-core support in current builds of Android, and the nVidia GPU which is, surprisingly, only just about on par with Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Electrofreak said:
Tegra 2 is a Cortex A9 CPU... as is the Samsung Orion and the TI OMAP4xxx chips. They accomplish 2.5 instructions per MHz as opposed to the 2 instructions per MHz in the Cortex A8 Hummingbird, and that's not counting improvements to instruction efficiency (getting more done with less instructions.) Add to that improvements such as out of order instruction handling and dual-channel memory support and Cortex A9 chips are head and shoulders above Cortex A8.
The only reason Tegra 2 wouldn't outperform Hummingbird significantly is, as mentioned, lack of dual-core support in current builds of Android, and the nVidia GPU which is, surprisingly, only just about on par with Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
apatcas said:
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
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"
}
I'm not sure that triangles per second is accurate to describe performance.
Still, if you want an article:
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
The Hummingbird has memory bandwidth limitations that I don't think the Tegra 250 will. Lets wait and see.
apatcas said:
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the facts dude, and try to get this; Tegra2 does not, in fact, suck. You just posted a video of it being benchmarked on a netbook running Android 2.1 which cannot make full use of Tegra2's dual-core CPU. Secondly, neocore is a GPU test, not a CPU test. We already discussed the fact that the Tegra2 GPU is only just about on par with the SGX540. Thirdly, that test is being run at a signifcantly higher resolution than a mobile device would run, and frankly, considering this, the score isn't bad.
Fail, man, fail.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
sauron0101 said:
I'm not sure that triangles per second is accurate to describe performance.
Still, if you want an article:
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
The Hummingbird has memory bandwidth limitations that I don't think the Tegra 250 will. Lets wait and see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would also like to point out that I wrote the article that sauron0101 just linked. It's also posted on my blog (linked in my signature) posted back in March. Tegra2 does feature dual-channel memory support as part of the Cortex A9 architecture, which is a significant advantage.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Electrofreak said:
I would also like to point out that I wrote the article that sauron0101 just linked. It's also posted on my blog (linked in my signature) posted back in March. Tegra2 does feature dual-channel memory support as part of the Cortex A9 architecture, which is a significant advantage.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any idea how fast the other Arm Cortex A9s are compared to the 250?
- We know that the SGX540 will be in the TI OMAP 4 series; probably not bandwidth limited - I am surprised that they did not opt for the SGX545
- The Samsung Orion series has Mail 400 (unknown performance)
- The Snapdragon (A8 unless Qualcomm opts to keep the name "Snapdragon for its A9 CPUs) will have a new generation of Adreno 300 graphics
Unknown if we will see this on mobile
- Marvell also has a new SOC
Also interesting is Samsung's Netbook roadmap, which uses the same SOCs on a phone:
Sorry if all of this is a bit off topic, but it is worth looking at what everyone has.
Edit: Qualcomm is keeping the Snapdragon name for the A9 processors.
Does no one see i was talking about Gpu perfomance? That's what's gonna matter in Gingerbread. And that's running 1024x600 on that res Galaxy tab is around 53 fps. It's the same thing that Vista started doing with HW accel so u understand.
This post is not to start a flaming war against any of the devices using any of these chips.
I just wanted to start this post for information.
Im a bit concerned with the geforce ULP which shows only around 20-30% increase over the previous PowerVR 540 chip.
The PowerVR 543 is supposed to be a multicore version that is much faster than the PowerVR 540 (Also, the PowerVR543 dual core is rumored to be in the ipad 2)
Additionally, the new adreno 220 has been showing off its tech and is rumored to be in the new dual core qualcomm chips.
The problem i see is, that while the dual core CPUs seem to be equally matched in terms of A5 vs tegra 2 vs dual core qualcomm, the geforce ULP seems to be heavily outclassed by the powerVR 543 (perhaps even the single core) and the adreno 220.
Does this worry anyone?
I know that the games coming out for the tegra 2 are looking quite amazing, but at the same time people are saying no low framerates, and when I looked at dungeon defenders HD in the store, the framerates, while playable, where not that high..
If the ipad 2 is going to have a dual core PowerVR SGx543 then it is going to crush the geforce ULP. And the adreno 220 looks to be a high performer as well.
I feel apprehensive jumping into a technology (the tegra 2 with geforce ULP) that is already heavily outclassed by its competition (ipad 2's A5 with power VR 543)
I dont want to get into a competition between iOS and honeycomb - and I agree that it depends fully on how the developers utilize the chip - but with such a huge performance difference, I can see developers making more amazing games with the faster chips.
The Tegra 2 is fine for gaming. It can handle its own. Media playback is an entirely other issue and the Tegra 2 is a failure in that regard.
We haven't seen either the Adreno or the SGX543 benchmarked yet at all, so its too early to say they are better than the Tegra 2. Also, I feel as though Nvidia is going to be pushing for a lot of games to be made specifically for the Tegra 2. If that is the case its going to fragment the Android market even further.
Its not fair to look at the Xoom's benchmark due to the much higher resolution skewing results downwards, so lets look at current generation 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"
}
You can see the best performer right now is the old SGX540 clocked at 300mhz. I would bet that the SGX543 is a monster.
muyoso said:
The Tegra 2 is fine for gaming. It can handle its own. Media playback is an entirely other issue and the Tegra 2 is a failure in that regard.
We haven't seen either the Adreno or the SGX543 benchmarked yet at all, so its too early to say they are better than the Tegra 2. Also, I feel as though Nvidia is going to be pushing for a lot of games to be made specifically for the Tegra 2. If that is the case its going to fragment the Android market even further.
Its not fair to look at the Xoom's benchmark due to the much higher resolution skewing results downwards, so lets look at current generation phones:
You can see the best performer right now is the old SGX540 clocked at 300mhz. I would bet that the SGX543 is a monster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra 2 was rebenched after that using the viewsonic G-tablet and it did better than the SGX 540.
Refer to:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/8
and
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview/2
(on the last link - look to the bottom of the page with the "updated" benchmarks
Those are the exact same numbers. 25.2 for the Optimus 2x. 18.9 for the G-Tablet.
Flaunt77 said:
The tegra 2 was rebenched after that using the viewsonic G-tablet and it did better than the SGX 540.
Refer to:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/8
and
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview/2
(on the last link - look to the bottom of the page with the "updated" benchmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Judging by these articles - Tegra 2 is doing great.
Besides, nVidia is excellent when it comes to updating drivers on their GPUs and working with game devs to help them use the GPU's potential.
So, if they do the same for their ULPs, we should expect frequent Tegra 2 updates and great games coming.
Actually, even now, a mere week from release - check Tegra zone and see the amazing games that will be released this/next month. Mindblowing.
DarkDvr said:
Judging by these articles - Tegra 2 is doing great.
Besides, nVidia is excellent when it comes to updating drivers on their GPUs and working with game devs to help them use the GPU's potential.
So, if they do the same for their ULPs, we should expect frequent Tegra 2 updates and great games coming.
Actually, even now, a mere week from release - check Tegra zone and see the amazing games that will be released this/next month. Mindblowing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree NOW that it may be the fastest - but in one week when the ipad 2 comes out - it will supposedly do LESS THAN HALF of the ipad 2 graphics capability - thats a huge hit in performance.
THis means that the ipad 2 can handle a class of games far above what the tegra can. Its just unsettling is all.
Flaunt77 said:
I agree NOW that it may be the fastest - but in one week when the ipad 2 comes out - it will supposedly do LESS THAN HALF of the ipad 2 graphics capability - thats a huge hit in performance.
THis means that the ipad 2 can handle a class of games far above what the tegra can. Its just unsettling is all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
muyoso said:
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't forget the Tegra 2 has EIGHT cores in the GPU. Can't wait to see the anandtech review on the iPad2. Gonna be interesting.
well ipad 2 was released and although an apple hater i do have to admit..we gentlemen have been obliterated..its a dual 543..everything android devices had to offer so far has been surpassed by double the ammount..was considering the atrix,but certainly not gonna buy a device incinerated already, as it is...xoom is still a great tablet and honeycomb an amazing os...but i think its time price is lowered..we have been outclassed twofold.
chris2busy said:
well ipad 2 was released and although an apple hater i do have to admit..we gentlemen have been obliterated..its a dual 543..everything android devices had to offer so far has been surpassed by double the ammount..was considering the atrix,but certainly not gonna buy a device incinerated already, as it is...xoom is still a great tablet and honeycomb an amazing os...but i think its time price is lowered..we have been outclassed twofold.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not released yet. We will see the benchmarks when anandtech releases their review. Anandtech released their Xoom review the day before launch. If they do something similar for the iPad2, we will know in 2 days.
muyoso said:
Its not released yet. We will see the benchmarks when anandtech releases their review. Anandtech released their Xoom review the day before launch. If they do something similar for the iPad2, we will know in 2 days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well you kinda know the ooutcome without waiting...each sgx543 core outperforms a tegra2 by roughly 50% ..with 75% more fillrate,huge shaders e.t.c ..and since they went dual core on gpu, well..they should be around double in performance terms against xoom,maybe more,given xoom is running on higher res..what IS surprising is that samsung made the chips for them but still on their own products chose the lesser exynos/t2..
Wasn't it pa semi and intrinsity that made the chips for apple? Samsung also works with intrinsity to design their soc.
I've read a rumor on I want to say anandtech, that the CPU cores of the ipad 2 may only be 1Ghz cortex A8 vs our dual A9s. That gives us a heafty lead in the computing department. Also just because a mobile gpu has the potential to be rediculously fast, doesn't meant it actually will be when used in the soc. It it depends on frequencies and bandwidths as well. For instance the TI omap4 uses the same gpu as galaxy s, vr540, but handily wins benchmarking due to its dual A9s and dual memory channels. And if you guys are worried about cores, we basically have 4 split into eight, so eat your heart out, dual core gpus!
The fight definitely ain't over yet fellas! Have some faith in nVidia!
I'm not very sure about the architecture of mobile GPUs, but if it is in any way similar to those of desktop GPUs then the number of cores and the core speeds matter only upto to a certain extent. If you look at AMD GPUs, they are filled with a lot of cores (~ 800 is common) running at pretty good speeds, while the equivalent NVidia GPUs have about quarter or even less cores (~200 is common with the newer fermi cards having more cores) at usually lower speeds . But NVidia makes up the performance with its memory bandwidth. The end result -- both GPUs have a similar performance. My guess is it would be the same with these mobile GPUs. Just my 2c.
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually they have and it blew XOOM out the water I mean earth. PowerVR 543 is much better and that is why I am suprised that Nvidia didn't do enough for their GPU. I was also suprised that Samsung went with them instead of their accomplishment with the PowerVr
i sstill dont ththink those benchmarks are right because I don't thing the software was optimized for tergra2
Flaunt77 said:
This post is not to start a flaming war against any of the devices using any of these chips.
I just wanted to start this post for information.
Im a bit concerned with the geforce ULP which shows only around 20-30% increase over the previous PowerVR 540 chip.
The PowerVR 543 is supposed to be a multicore version that is much faster than the PowerVR 540 (Also, the PowerVR543 dual core is rumored to be in the ipad 2)
Additionally, the new adreno 220 has been showing off its tech and is rumored to be in the new dual core qualcomm chips.
The problem i see is, that while the dual core CPUs seem to be equally matched in terms of A5 vs tegra 2 vs dual core qualcomm, the geforce ULP seems to be heavily outclassed by the powerVR 543 (perhaps even the single core) and the adreno 220.
Does this worry anyone?
I know that the games coming out for the tegra 2 are looking quite amazing, but at the same time people are saying no low framerates, and when I looked at dungeon defenders HD in the store, the framerates, while playable, where not that high..
If the ipad 2 is going to have a dual core PowerVR SGx543 then it is going to crush the geforce ULP. And the adreno 220 looks to be a high performer as well.
I feel apprehensive jumping into a technology (the tegra 2 with geforce ULP) that is already heavily outclassed by its competition (ipad 2's A5 with power VR 543)
I dont want to get into a competition between iOS and honeycomb - and I agree that it depends fully on how the developers utilize the chip - but with such a huge performance difference, I can see developers making more amazing games with the faster chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
muyoso said:
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
muyoso said:
Don't forget the Tegra 2 has EIGHT cores in the GPU. Can't wait to see the anandtech review on the iPad2. Gonna be interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know this thread is ancient, but I just have to call all of you morons, especially you muyoso.
Not only is all of that wrong, but the benchmark used has glitches with the SGX 540, putting it at a disadvantage, also the galaxy s phones are framecapped.
So I have been doing a lot of research looking for what will be better and I am guessing that the Mali 400 is going to out perform the Adreno 225. I wish android had a solid GPU test that would give something close to real world results. But if you take a look at these articles you will see on paper the Adreno is the same as the Apple 4S's Power VR543MP2
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5559/...mance-preview-msm8960-adreno-225-benchmarks/3
Now the International version will have the new Exynos 4 Quad (4412) Quad Core Cortex A9 but the US version is rumored to have a Dual Core Qualcomm Snapdragon MSM8960 with the Adreno 225.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5811/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-preview
and here are some other benchmarks just to sum up the difference in performance.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5810/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-performance-preview
The main thing I am worried about is GPU performance the CPUs in just about every phone out right not seem over kill. I want to make sure the phone I buy will be able to run FPSE(Playstation Emulator) and N64oid(N64 Emulator) smooth. FPSE now has an Open GL plugin that needs a hard core GPU to run well. My Galaxy nexus is just not cutting it anymore.
So............... get the international version.
cmd512 said:
So............... get the international version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LTE Speed vs 3G Speed = not worth it.
Don't get me wrong I want a phone with a power house GPU but if the mobile connection is slow its just not worth it. I'm on Verizon and I don't want to move away from their LTE.
Zzim said:
LTE Speed vs 3G Speed = not worth it.
Don't get me wrong I want a phone with a power house GPU but if the mobile connection is slow its just not worth it. I'm on Verizon and I don't want to move away from their LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear ya, LTE is blazing fast. But on my unbranded SGS2, I get downloads of up to 7.5Mbps, pay $10 a month for unlimited HSPA+ data w/ tethering, and everything is plenty fast for what I do on my phone. So, while LTE is tempting for sure, still doesn't outweigh the other benefits.
Now, if I ever need my phone to seed torrents or something, I'll have to look at LTE then... hah.
cmd512 said:
I hear ya, LTE is blazing fast. But on my unbranded SGS2, I get downloads of up to 7.5Mbps, pay $10 a month for unlimited HSPA+ data w/ tethering, and everything is plenty fast for what I do on my phone. So, while LTE is tempting for sure, still doesn't outweigh the other benefits.
Now, if I ever need my phone to seed torrents or something, I'll have to look at LTE then... hah.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you with ATT because I can get a line through my work for 20 a month unlimited everything. 7.5 would be enough speed to make me switch and how consistent are these speeds?
How could the just give the us version a dual core? That makes the phone a very slight upgrade to the s2
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA
@ Op
did you see the date of the article regarding "Mobile SoC GPU Comparison" ? its dated february and they are comparing with the sgs2 mali 400 gpu not the one in sgs3. the new mali gpu is already beating all the current lineup of many gpus in many becnhmarks
bala_gamer said:
@ Op
did you see the date of the article regarding "Mobile SoC GPU Comparison" ? its dated february and they are comparing with the sgs2 mali 400 gpu not the one in sgs3. the new mali gpu is already beating all the current lineup of many gpus in many becnhmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The other articles were just to show the performance of the 225 this article shows how the new Mali will run http://www.anandtech.com/show/5811/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-preview
That article also show that the GS2(Mali400) and the GS3(Mali400MP4) are different in some way.
Zzim said:
Are you with ATT because I can get a line through my work for 20 a month unlimited everything. 7.5 would be enough speed to make me switch and how consistent are these speeds?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At work (average congestion), it's consistently 7Mbps+. In areas of great congestion (the mall, etc), it does slow down, but again, for work E-mails, surfing the web, youtube, etc, I've never had issues. Of course, I'm in Austin, TX as well, and I've heard HSPA+ speeds are very much region specific.
If you can get a line through from work with unlimited everything, they may be able to get you onto the smartphone data plan tier, which some folks have gotten up to 10-11+Mpbs. I'm on the $10 a month unlimited non-smartphone plan, so I think AT&T caps it at around 7.5-8Mpbs. Still though, plenty fast for what I do with my phone.
(And, the unlimited tethering is a blessing when you're in airports and stuff. Our US airports blow as there is almost never free WIFI.)
Zzim said:
The other articles were just to show the performance of the 225 this article shows how the new Mali will run http://www.anandtech.com/show/5811/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-preview
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the scorecharts does shows the new mali400 topping the chart with good margin. what else do you need from a gpu ?
The SGS3's Mali-400 is just overclocked.
Anyways, if the US SGS3 comes with the S4 Pro (which has the new Adreno 320) then the difference in GPU will probably be minor.
dude have you seen those scores ? it beats the 4s graphics which we cant deny has a great gpu...
this is more than just an overclocked mali400 ... it may still be a mali400/mp4 but its not just overclocked its remade and has much higher clocks by the look of it
also im not sure about it coming with the s4 pro with adreno 320... i heard its not ready till end of year at earliest.. the mali-400 was the best android gpu and now its the best mobile gpu out atm
^^
u are right its not only just overclocked,there are some changes in the hardware part which we will know eventually in the upcoming days. i can easily OC my sgs2 mali400 to 400mhz, but you people know it wont give the same result as sgs3 which has much more pixels than s2
urmothersluvr said:
How could the just give the us version a dual core? That makes the phone a very slight upgrade to the s2
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More cores doesn't = faster...
Look at AMD's bulldozer CPU with 8 cores vs Intel's core i5 with 4 cores...the i5 is faster in basically almost everything except for very specalized applications.
Faster cores > more cores.
The LTE dual core version of the SGS3 will use Krait S4 cores which are faster than A9 Exynos cores.
I wished Samsung did dual core A15s instead of Quad Core A9s.
Daemos said:
More cores doesn't = faster...
Look at AMD's bulldozer CPU with 8 cores vs Intel's core i5 with 4 cores...the i5 is faster in basically almost everything except for very specalized applications.
Faster cores > more cores.
The LTE dual core version of the SGS3 will use Krait S4 cores which are faster than A9 Exynos cores.
I wished Samsung did dual core A15s instead of Quad Core A9s.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let's be clear on this
CPU vs CPU
Dual core S4 is not quicker than Quad Core Exynos
ph00ny said:
Let's be clear on this
CPU vs CPU
Dual core S4 is not quicker than Quad Core Exynos
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmmm I don't know about that...
Zzim said:
Hmmm I don't know about that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I for one certainly do. The Exynos 4412 uses a 32nm fab process as opposed to nearly every other A9 architecture based processor (like the 4+1 T3) and High K metal gate tech which basically means twice the processing power of the Exynos 4410 dual core with about 20% less power consumption and that's on a core against core basis. The 4410 was used in the Galaxy S II. So even if the Exynos 4412 was dual core, it's already natively 20% more battery efficient and twice as powerful than last year's model. Clearly we're talking about a lot more than just quad vs dual and 28nm vs 32 or 40. There is a LOT that has gone into the design of the Exynos. For instance keeping it the same size physically as the dual core model, or accepting 128 bit instructions rather than the paltry 64 bit instructions most other mobile processors are limited to.
Trust me, do your research, a Google search of Exynos 4412 brought up instant results that detail what a beast this chip set is.
Like these:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Exyn...re-processor-in-the-Samsung-Galaxy-S3_id29615
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...nos-to-appear-in-Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id29494
And of course the official press release. Read through this and then the benchmarks you pointed out in the OP (I'm linking em anyway) Anandtech's benchmark tests were performed on demo units on display to handled and groped by hundreds of people. There's no telling how many people had used it before they bench marked it and no telling if they were able to do it clean (reboot device, no other apps running). If not than they tested it after some fairly heavy use and it still proved itself a beast.
http://phandroid.com/2012/04/25/sam...ynos-4-quad-for-their-next-generation-galaxy/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5810/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-performance-preview
Research is your best friend. If you're looking for the most powerful CPU and GPU on a phone right now, this is it. And when the devs get a hold of it, it will become even better and will really be utilized to its full.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
Gene_Bailey said:
I for one certainly do. The Exynos 4412 uses a 32nm fab process as opposed to nearly every other A9 architecture based processor (like the 4+1 T3) and High K metal gate tech which basically means twice the processing power of the Exynos 4410 dual core with about 20% less power consumption and that's on a core against core basis. The 4410 was used in the Galaxy S II. So even if the Exynos was dual core, it's already natively 20% more battery efficient and twice as powerful. Clearly we're talking about a lot more than just quad vs dual and 28nm vs 32 or 40. There is a LOT that has gone into the design of the Exynos. For instance keeping it the same size physically as the dual core model, or accepting 128 bit instructions rather than the paltry 64 bit instructions most other mobile processors are limited to.
Trust me, do your research, a Google search of Exynos 4412 brought up instant results that detail what a beast this chip set is.
Like these:
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Exyn...re-processor-in-the-Samsung-Galaxy-S3_id29615
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...nos-to-appear-in-Samsung-Galaxy-S-III_id29494
And of course the official press release. Read through this and then the benchmarks you pointed out in the OP (I'm linking em anyway) Anandtech's benchmark tests were performed on demo units on display to handled and groped by hundreds of people. There's no telling how many people had used it before they bench marked it and no telling if they were able to do it clean (reboot device, no other apps running). If not than they tested it after some fairly heavy use and it still proved itself a beast.
http://phandroid.com/2012/04/25/sam...ynos-4-quad-for-their-next-generation-galaxy/
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5810/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-performance-preview
Research is your best friend. If you're looking for the most powerful CPU and GPU on a phone right now, this is it. And when the devs get a hold of it, it will become even better and will really be utilized to its full.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
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"
}
Zzim said:
Hmmm I don't know about that...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Outside of floating point tests such as linpack, CPU benches will even have quad core tegra3 well ahead of the dual core S4
Quadrant, Antutu, etc will all show the same exact same performance gap and it's a big one
Let's get this straight
Main selling points for Dual Core S4 setup = battery life from 28nm die size and integrated LTE
Spartoi said:
The SGS3's Mali-400 is just overclocked.
Anyways, if the US SGS3 comes with the S4 Pro (which has the new Adreno 320) then the difference in GPU will probably be minor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are wrong,mali 400mp4 is a quad core gpu while mali 400 is a dual core gpu.
I want to see mali 400mp4 against sgs543mp4
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/12
Most cpu tests favor the nexus 10 over the HTC.
Gpu tests appear evenly matched slightly favoring the htc. (easily overclocking the gpu with custom kernels should fix that.)
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
freshlysqueezed said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/12
Most cpu tests favor the nexus 10 over the HTC.
Gpu tests appear evenly matched slightly favoring the htc. (easily overclocking the gpu with custom kernels should fix that.)
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These are mostly browser tests unless there is something I don't understand. But I know benchmarks aren't everything. But quadrant HTC one stock 12000. Nexus 10 4300. Antutu nexus 10 14000. HTC one 24000. Am I missing something? Same with geekbench. HTC score Is quite a but more.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
treIII said:
These are mostly browser tests unless there is something I don't understand. But I know benchmarks aren't everything. But quadrant HTC one stock 12000. Nexus 10 4300. Antutu nexus 10 14000. HTC one 24000. Am I missing something? Same with geekbench. HTC score Is quite a but more.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/1837522/1834810
It depends on how the benchmarks are weighted for single core vs multi-core processes.I believe Antutu heavily tests multi-core processes.
Other benchmarks take a balanced approach such as geekbench. If you look at the link above, the Geekbench total scores of the nexus 10 and htc one are actually really close with a slight favor for the snapdragon 600.
If you look at the single core process subscores, the nexus 10 wins.
If you look at the multi-core process subscores, the snapdragon wins. (makes sense: 2 core processor vs 4 core processor).
Because in the real world, a majority of apps are still designed as single core processes, Geekbench will test and weight single and multicore processes fairly equally in calculating total scores.
treIII said:
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Exynos 5 Dual in your Nexus 10 is a Cortex A15, the most powerful type of ARM chip, which is in only a handful of mobile devices so far. The HTC One, by comparison, has a Krait, a souped-up version of the Cortex A9, the older ARM chip that is in most mobile devices. For raw power, they're probably comparable, even though one is dual-core and the other is quad-core, with the Exynos edging out the Snapdragon in those web browsing benchmarks that freshlysqueezed linked to, while the Adreno in the Snapdragon edges out the Mali in many of the GPU tests.
The big difference is probably battery life, as the Nexus 10 can suck 5-10 W max (though 3-4 W of that is probably the huge display), while the HTC One pulls 4 W max. That's why everybody is going with Snapdragon for the current lineup of phones, the combination of high speed and minimal power can't be beat. Even Samsung, who wanted to put its Exynos 5 Octa, with a quad-core Cortex A15, in the Galaxy S4, has admitted to putting Snapdragon in most of the S4s, though that might be related to fabrication problems they're having with the Octa.
One reason the HTC One might seem "blazing fast" when compared to the Nexus 10 is that the Nexus 10 screen has twice as many pixels as the HTC One's display, though I doubt you'd notice any lag. I don't think the Nexus 10 will have any problems getting updates, as it's the first Android device with Cortex A15 and all high-end Android devices will be getting Cortex A15 over the next couple years. So the Nexus 10 is already ahead of the game.
The one big miss with the Exynos 5 Dual in the Nexus 10 is that it doesn't have a low-power core for light usage, what ARM calls big.LITTLE. That's what the Exynos 5 Octa uses, a quad-core Cortex A15 is the big component and a quad-core Cortex A7 is the little. That way, you can switch back and forth depending on how heavily you are using the device, saving power when you're not using it much. ARM is pushing this in a big way and even though not many chips have it yet, if it becomes common, the Exynos 5 Dual will be behind. Of course, Android will still always support non-big.LITTLE chips, you just won't get the benefits of big.LITTLE. A little chip would have been particularly useful given the high power draw of the big chips in the Nexus 10.
treIII said:
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Rirere said:
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a better tablet or there than the N7? Right now. The screen resolution should be superior to all other tablets but next to an iPad with the same game playing this isn't as good. My girlfriend proved that. She likes i anything. I'm an android guy. Is the gpu not so good in this device? I like it don't get me wrong. But I just bought it and if there's ifs something better I would rather have the latest and greatest. I really do not understand why this isn't powered by a quad-core. I feel like my son's nexus 7 had better graphics. At least when I look at his screen it just looks better to my eye.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
treIII said:
Is there a better tablet or there than the N7? Right now. The screen resolution should be superior to all other tablets but next to an iPad with the same game playing this isn't as good. My girlfriend proved that. She likes i anything. I'm an android guy. Is the gpu not so good in this device? I like it don't get me wrong. But I just bought it and if there's ifs something better I would rather have the latest and greatest. I really do not understand why this isn't powered by a quad-core. I feel like my son's nexus 7 had better graphics. At least when I look at his screen it just looks better to my eye.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This dual core/quad core thing is a red herring, sorry. The Nexus 10 went with a dual core A15 because the performance boost provided by an A15 was such that Samsung could afford to use a dual core chipset (meaning reduced power consumption, both due to reduced core count and improved architecture) while still blowing out all comparable chipsets at time of launch. The Tegra 4s (if they're not hobbled by memory bandwith issues like the Tegra 3s) will be a half/full generation ahead of the Exynus 5250 when they launch, so you could sit and wait for those (they also have pretty good GPUs).
The Nexus 10 has a powerful GPU, but some of it gets sapped by driving the enormous screen resolution. As far as the screen goes, it's an amazing 10" IPS panel without too much else to say. The Nexus 7 has a WVGA 1280x800 IPS panel with significantly lower PPI, and you generally hold a 7" tablet a bit closer, which can compound the density drop. However, on a 7" device, it's hardly bad.
The Nexus 10 is going to beat the crap out of the Nexus 7, but if you want to switch, I'd wait for the next Nexus 7 (which is rumored to have an upgraded screen and proc in a similar price envelope as the original), or for the first Tegra 4s. There's not really much else on the market that'll beat a Nexus 10 right now in tablet-land.
joakim_one said:
The Exynos 5 Dual in your Nexus 10 is a Cortex A15, the most powerful type of ARM chip, which is in only a handful of mobile devices so far. The HTC One, by comparison, has a Krait, a souped-up version of the Cortex A9, the older ARM chip that is in most mobile devices. For raw power, they're probably comparable, even though one is dual-core and the other is quad-core, with the Exynos edging out the Snapdragon in those web browsing benchmarks that freshlysqueezed linked to, while the Adreno in the Snapdragon edges out the Mali in many of the GPU tests.
The big difference is probably battery life, as the Nexus 10 can suck 5-10 W max (though 3-4 W of that is probably the huge display), while the HTC One pulls 4 W max. That's why everybody is going with Snapdragon for the current lineup of phones, the combination of high speed and minimal power can't be beat. Even Samsung, who wanted to put its Exynos 5 Octa, with a quad-core Cortex A15, in the Galaxy S4, has admitted to putting Snapdragon in most of the S4s, though that might be related to fabrication problems they're having with the Octa.
One reason the HTC One might seem "blazing fast" when compared to the Nexus 10 is that the Nexus 10 screen has twice as many pixels as the HTC One's display, though I doubt you'd notice any lag. I don't think the Nexus 10 will have any problems getting updates, as it's the first Android device with Cortex A15 and all high-end Android devices will be getting Cortex A15 over the next couple years. So the Nexus 10 is already ahead of the game.
The one big miss with the Exynos 5 Dual in the Nexus 10 is that it doesn't have a low-power core for light usage, what ARM calls big.LITTLE. That's what the Exynos 5 Octa uses, a quad-core Cortex A15 is the big component and a quad-core Cortex A7 is the little. That way, you can switch back and forth depending on how heavily you are using the device, saving power when you're not using it much. ARM is pushing this in a big way and even though not many chips have it yet, if it becomes common, the Exynos 5 Dual will be behind. Of course, Android will still always support non-big.LITTLE chips, you just won't get the benefits of big.LITTLE. A little chip would have been particularly useful given the high power draw of the big chips in the Nexus 10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a quick reply to point some things out. The Snapdragon 600 in the One is a quad-core A15 with Krait 300 architecture. The 600 is about as powerful as the 5250 with better multi-threading. Also most chipsets currently use A15. It is the current standard, not something that will "happen over time". The CPU has nothing to do with the screen res, the image processing is done through the GPU. And finally, I expect the 5250 to be eclipsed relatively soon, as chipsets supporting higher clock frequencies(like the 800, or even the rumored Tegra5/6 with a possible 3.0Ghz clock) start to enter manufacturing. Sorry for the brevity, I'll edit this a bit later when I get more time.
Koopa777 said:
Just a quick reply to point some things out. The Snapdragon 600 in the One is a quad-core A15 with Krait 300 architecture. The 600 is about as powerful as the 5250 with better multi-threading. Also most chipsets currently use A15. It is the current standard, not something that will "happen over time". The CPU has nothing to do with the screen res, the image processing is done through the GPU. And finally, I expect the 5250 to be eclipsed relatively soon, as chipsets supporting higher clock frequencies(like the 800, or even the rumored Tegra5/6 with a possible 3.0Ghz clock) start to enter manufacturing. Sorry for the brevity, I'll edit this a bit later when I get more time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 5/6 is purely theoretical at this point. It's also best for clarity to note that most new chipsets are switching to A15 (or customized variants thereof). Most chipsets in the market right now are A9 or lower, and there are still phones being released running high-end A9 kit. The CPU also does have some role to play in screen drawing, especially for handling elements that are not using GPU rendering for one reason or another. This interaction isn't as significant as some would believe, but it cannot be discounted entirely either.
The Snapdragon 600 is probably on par with the Exynos 5250, that much is definitely true. They're pretty neck and neck and will outclass one another on different aspects of CPU performance, but both are quite good.
Rirere said:
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plus the rumor is that Android 5.0 is being heavily optimized so it can run even on older phones, even with 512 MBs of RAM. If true, they may keep current devices updated for a while, as it may take a while for Android to bloat up again. :highfive:
joakim_one said:
Plus the rumor is that Android 5.0 is being heavily optimized so it can run even on older phones, even with 512 MBs of RAM. If true, they may keep current devices updated for a while, as it may take a while for Android to bloat up again. :highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol @ the "up again." Hopefully they keep moving in this direction, towards leaner, sleeker software. And one of the nice kicks about modern, flat, industrial design is that it doesn't hit system resources quite as hard.
Rirere said:
Tegra 5/6 is purely theoretical at this point. It's also best for clarity to note that most new chipsets are switching to A15 (or customized variants thereof). Most chipsets in the market right now are A9 or lower, and there are still phones being released running high-end A9 kit. The CPU also does have some role to play in screen drawing, especially for handling elements that are not using GPU rendering for one reason or another. This interaction isn't as significant as some would believe, but it cannot be discounted entirely either.
The Snapdragon 600 is probably on par with the Exynos 5250, that much is definitely true. They're pretty neck and neck and will outclass one another on different aspects of CPU performance, but both are quite good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As Rirere says, Koopa777's post is pretty much all wrong. Krait is not Cortex A15, it is a unique design from Qualcomm that is somewhere between Cortex A9 and A15, which are off-the-shelf designs from ARM. Most current chipsets are Cortex A9, not A15. The Exynos 5250 Dual will of course be eclipsed with time, for example, the Tegra 4 will be coming out later this year with a quad-core Cortex A15, but right now the 5250 is basically the only Cortex A15 chip, other than the aforementioned Octa, which just came out.
As for Tegra 5/6, those won't come out till next year, I don't think anyone is planning on waiting till then.
{
"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"
}
Snapdragon 800
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
freshlysqueezed said:
Snapdragon 800
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I agree. Even the older quad cores once a device has root.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using XDA Premium HD app
More snapdragon 800 benchmarks
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
Got to say, I'm looking forward to the next generation. I upgraded from a Galaxy Nexus (TI OMAP 4430) to the Snapdragon 600, and it was like night and day (the Nexus was my first smartphone, although I'd played around with many Android devices before). Amazing what processor tech is like these days.
freshlysqueezed said:
More snapdragon 800 benchmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
joakim_one said:
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hot can be a sign of bad heat flow though, more than power consumption. A15s are better than A9s in some efficiency regards, but pumping them up to a higher clock speed will eat through that saving.
joakim_one said:
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I underclock/undervolt when I play my mkv movies.
Thanks to the awesome DEVS here at xda for the great flexibility in our kernels. Great battery life when you need it and speed at other times.
Agreed, thermal regulation and throttling is an issue, but Qualcomm seems to be doing pretty well with these issues as well as battery life in my HTC evo 4g lte and my sisters galaxy s4.
We will have to see for the new 800 and tegra 4.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app