Database Info

Benchmarking scores conflict each other

I bought an Android Tablet running an ARM11 (v6) processor. Not sure what the GPU is. However, I ran the NeoCore benchmark for the GPU and got an average of about 13.2 FPS. I compared this against Droid Incredible (Qualcomm Snapdragon) and Droid X (TI OMAP 3630). Both of which as you know that are Cortex A8 variance. All are running at 1.0Ghz.
I also ran Softweg's Benchmark on those 3 devices.
For my tablet, I got scores of about 98 for the GPU and 936 for the CPU.
For the Droid Incredible I got NeoCore score of 26 FPS and for the X, 42 FPS. However, they only scored 27 & 30 respectively on Softweg's GPU test.
I would believe the NeoCore score as I am sure the GPU is poor on the tablet. Why would Softweg's Benchmark app show higher scores on my GPU versus those more advanced Android phones?
My CPU score is also higher than the phones which is not possible. Thank you.

interesting , but u know what , maybe its that neocore bench renders the same amount of data all the time , and the other bench resizes it to the size of the screen , so if ur tab has resolution lower than 480*800 thats the reason why

Actually the resolution is 1024x600. I could understand why the NeoCore score is low which is what I would expect. However, I do not know why my CPU & GPU scores under Benchmark would be higher than a better Cortex processor.

Dual Core Snapdragon BLOWS NVidia Dual Core tegra 2 OUT OF THE WATER

the new Dual Core Snapdragon makes Nvidia's Tegra 2 look like a single core CPU!
and it's not even out of development yet, so this review is on pre-release hardware (Mobile Development Platform (MDP)) which means it's not even optimized yet!
this is Massively Impressive!
some highlights
Qualcomm Mobile Development Platform (MDP)
SoC 1.5 GHz 45nm MSM8660
CPU Dual Core Snapdragon
GPU Adreno 220
RAM (?) LPDDR2
NAND 8 GB integrated, microSD slot
Cameras 13 MP Rear Facing with Autofocus and LED Flash, Front Facing (? MP)
Display 3.8" WVGA LCD-TFT with Capacitive Touch
Battery 3.3 Whr removable
OS Android 2.3.2 (Gingerbread)
...............................................................................................
the LG 3D
LG Optimus 3D is also a dual core cpu
Dual-core 1GHz ARM Cortex-A9 proccessor, PowerVR SGX540 GPU, TI OMAP4430 chipset
................................................................................................
the LG 2x
LG Optimus 2X is a Dual core cpu
Dual-core 1GHz ARM Cortex-A9 proccessor, ULP GeForce GPU, Tegra 2 chipset
................................................................................................
the Nexus S
Nexus S is a single core cpu
(single core) 1 GHz ARM Cortex-A8 processor, PowerVR SGX540
................................................................................................
GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt
38 Qualcomm MDP
31 LG 3D
25 LG 2x
21 Nexus S
GLBenchmark 2.0 Pro
94 Qualcomm MDP
55 LG 3D
51 LG 2x
42 Nexus S
Quake 3 FPS (Frames per second)
80 Qualcomm MDP
50 LG 2x
52 Nexus S
N/A LG 3D
Quadrant / 3D / 2D
2851 / 1026 / 329 Qualcomm MDP
2670 / 1196 / 306 LG 2x
1636 / 588 / 309 Nexus S
N/A LG 3D
NOTE: take the Quadrant scores with a grain of Salt
heres what Anand has to say about it
"What all Quadrant is putting emphasis on with its 2D and 3D subtests is something of a mystery to me. There isn't a whole lot of documentation, but again it's become something of a standard. The 1.5 GHz MSM8660 leads in overall score and the 2D subtest, but trails Tegra 2 in the 3D subtest. If you notice the difference between Hummingbird (SGX540) from 2.1 to 2.3, you can see how Quadrant's strange 3D behavior on Android 2.3 seems to continually negatively impact performance. I saw the same odd missing texture and erratic performance back when I tested the Nexus S as I did on the MDP. Things like this and lack of updates are precisely why we need even better testing tools to effectively gauge performance"
Source: Anandtech.com
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4243/...ormance-1-5-ghz-msm8660-adreno-220-benchmarks
Hope u enjoyed this
Ric H. (a1yet)
PS: don't rule out Nvidia yet their dual core may have gotten blown out of the water BUT
will their quad (four) cores CPU AND 12 core Gpu be better ?
NVIDIA's Project Kal-El: Quad-Core A9s Coming to Smartphones/Tablets This Year
Link:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4181/...re-a9s-coming-to-smartphonestablets-this-year

a1yet said:
PS: don't rule out Nvidia yet their dual core may have gotten blown out of the water BUT
will their 12 core cpu be better ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you're one of those benchmark nut-riders, at least take some time to understand what it is that you're reading. It's 12-core GPU, big difference from a 12-core CPU, which doesn't even exist on desktop computers yet (unless you're talking about multisocket server-class mobos), let alone on a mobile phone.
And the second point which 99% of the people who tend to lust at the benchmarks don't have a damn clue about, screen size and resolution. But I'm sure you don't care to know much about it, OP.

I don't see the point of benchmarks if they don't tell the real world stories.

not sure about if the information is accurate, however it will be nice to have competition so there is always better cpu coming out.

GREAT cause the ipad is killing tegra 2 already

I think mobile processors are similar to desktop processors. There's just too much going on to accurately benchmark. My OG Droid with a 1.25Ghz overclock doesn't even come close to touching my HTC Thunderbolt on stock, yet technically it's 250Mhz faster, right? The HTC's updated 1Ghz processor is faster than other 1Ghz processors, yet rated at 1Ghz. I don't see logic in all the hype.

lude219 said:
And the second point which 99% of the people who tend to lust at the benchmarks don't have a damn clue about, screen size and resolution. But I'm sure you don't care to know much about it, OP.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WELL my "PS:" was added in hast and I Made a typo. My whole post was about "GRAPHICS" performance so the typo did not impact the heart of my post!
sad day for you
because with your 2 brain cells u obviously have NO CLUE what u are talking about. "Screen SIZE" has no bearing on performance ! none, zero, zip, zilch!
talk to me about screen size next time I'm playing Angry Birds on my 52 inch HDTV!
the only thing that has ANY bearing on performance IS "resolution"
so to explain it in a way that u can understand
the only impact screen size has is it sometimes allows you (Depending on how the manufactures implement it) to have a higher ....
WAIT FOR IT ...........
WAIT FOR IT ...........
"Resolution"
WOW SAD Day for you !
Go bash someones post, who can tolerate your Ignorance! and leave mine alone
Sincerely
Ric H. (a1yet)

ngarcesp said:
GREAT cause the ipad is killing tegra 2 already
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and the ipad 2's processor is made by samsung
Sent from HTC EVO

a1yet said:
WELL my "PS:" was added in hast and I Made a typo. My whole post was about "GRAPHICS" performance so the typo did not impact the heart of my post!
sad day for you
because with your 2 brain cells u obviously have NO CLUE what u are talking about. "Screen SIZE" has no bearing on performance ! none, zero, zip, zilch!
talk to me about screen size next time I'm playing Angry Birds on my 52 inch HDTV!
the only thing that has ANY bearing on performance IS "resolution"
so to explain it in a way that u can understand
the only impact screen size has is it sometimes allows you (Depending on how the manufactures implement it) to have a higher ....
WAIT FOR IT ...........
WAIT FOR IT ...........
"Resolution"
WOW SAD Day for you !
Go bash someones post, who can tolerate your Ignorance! and leave mine alone
Sincerely
Ric H. (a1yet)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I like you pal!That's the spirit!
Forget the haters dude,there are many around!
r916 said:
and the ipad 2's processor is made by samsung
Sent from HTC EVO
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about it being made by Samsung,but the CPU(the CPU itself,not the whole chip)is larger than the other CPUs,thus having more space for more transistors.That significantly boosts performance.

[INFO/Q] HTC Sensetion only 1900 points with

smartbench 2011 Productivity test
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ind...11:Productivity&filter_cpu=all&filter_gpu=all
gpu score i might understand why its low cos the high res but why the Productivity is so low ?
i guess HTC didnt put faster NAND ROM
Evo3D did 2000
someone maybe know what the problem or cause ?

Proz00 said:
smartbench 2011 Productivity test
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/ind...11:Productivity&filter_cpu=all&filter_gpu=all
gpu score i might understand why its low cos the high res but why the Productivity is so low ?
i guess HTC didnt put faster NAND ROM
Evo3D did 2000
someone maybe know what the problem or cause ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason is...
The CPU is cortex 8.
Tegra 2 and the new Samsung processors are Cortex 9.
Coretex 9 is a PRETTY big improvement over cortex.
Once again HTC is going for garbage hardware
What is in the sensation is 2 Desire HD CPUS oC to 1.2 Ghz + better GPU.
What is in the SGS2 is 2 MUCH better Hummingbird CPUs OC to 1.2 + MUCH better GPU

the cpu is neither a cortex a8 nor a cortex a9. it will provide plenty of performance and will be competitive with other dual cores.
the adreno 220 gpu that comes with the sensation is faster than the mali gpu that comes with the sgs2 when looking at preliminary tests done by anandtech.
whether it will be the fastest or slowest dual core soc will have to wait until its released, and benchmarks often only tell part of the story. but certainly it will provide far more performance than any of the single core soc's we have right now and will provide much satisfaction from its owners.

kaiserkannon said:
the cpu is neither a cortex a8 nor a cortex a9. it will provide plenty of performance and will be competitive with other dual cores.
the adreno 220 gpu that comes with the sensation is faster than the mali gpu that comes with the sgs2 when looking at preliminary tests done by anandtech.
whether it will be the fastest or slowest dual core soc will have to wait until its released, and benchmarks often only tell part of the story. but certainly it will provide far more performance than any of the single core soc's we have right now and will provide much satisfaction from its owners.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh? I'm confused.
Is the cpu not based on arms cortex a8? Just a slightly modified version. It is identical to the Single core Snapdragon in the Desire HD.
The benchmarks so far don't make it seem too be as competitive as the Tegra 2 OR orion.
Samsung has said that the Mali 400 is MUCH faster then the current hummingbird GPU. Current benchmarks say that it is infact SLOWER...
I doubt samsung would release the Orion with a GPU SLOWER then its previous gen... that just makes no sense. If that is the case then Tegra might be king. If the Mali 400 IS much better tho, samsung will have the best SoC.
The CPU in the Sensation is ROUGHLY... 2.4 ghz. Compare that to the Desire HD stable OC of 1.8 ghz.
What is left to be seen is how much the CPU can be OC'd.
I would think that it would be less then 1.8 ghz each core. But thats yet tooo bee seen.
Regardless of what you think... the HTC sensation CPU will be slower then the competitions.
EDIT: Forgot to mention that the Sensation CPU should have the same battery life as the current single core Snapdragon... however it is pushing more pixels sooo..

Samsung should have mated its Orion to Hummingbird gpu. Hummingbird was great
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

Maedhros said:
The benchmarks so far don't make it seem too be as competitive as the Tegra 2 OR orion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dunno where you got your information from, but it's very competitive with the Tegra 2. (8660 is the CDMA version of the Sensation's 8260). From these benchmarks, we also know that an overclock of at least 1.5GHz will be perfectly viable--the chip was designed for that anyhow.
Debating A8 vs A9 is a trivial matter, because it's a tiny fraction of the entire picture.

Wondering if cm7 can help the score

First, that Anandtech benchmark is not a good measuring stick. Anandtech benched the MDP that had the 8660 running at 1.5 GHz and 800x480 so the results are higher than what Sensation can achieve because Sensations runs at a lower clock and higher resolution.
Second, Qualcomm 8260/8660 is A8 Cortex. Tegra 2, OMAP4 and Exynos are A9 Cortex based. Claims that Qualcomm doesn't use the ARM architecture is a lie.

Never trust smartbench. Period.
GLbenchmark is more trustworthy.
Sent via psychic transmittion.

t-mizzle said:
First, that Anandtech benchmark is not a good measuring stick. Anandtech benched the MDP that had the 8660 running at 1.5 GHz and 800x480 so the results are higher than what Sensation can achieve because Sensations runs at a lower clock and higher resolution.
Second, Qualcomm 8260/8660 is A8 Cortex. Tegra 2, OMAP4 and Exynos are A9 Cortex based. Claims that Qualcomm doesn't use the ARM architecture is a lie.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The scorpion core in snapdragon socs use the arm v7 instruction set that both the a8 and a9 use, but it is not an a8 or an a9, it is qualcomms own design.
And personally I like comparing the different chips in these phones at the same resolution to see which chip has better performance on a level playing field. But yeah the sensation will have a bit worse performance thanks to higher resolution. Like the atrix vs optimus 2x. But to me the higher resolution is completely worth the hit in performance.

TeroZ said:
Never trust smartbench. Period.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you care to elaborate on this please?
GLbenchmark is more trustworthy.
Sent via psychic transmittion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GLBench is a decent 3D benchmark app, but it is just that - it tests only the GPU. Smartbench was designed to test both CPU (inc. dual-core ones) and GPU, hence reporting two numbers. IMO, you are not comparing apples to apples unless you were only referring to the GPU portion of the test.

kaiserkannon said:
The scorpion core in snapdragon socs use the arm v7 instruction set that both the a8 and a9 use, but it is not an a8 or an a9, it is qualcomms own design.
And personally I like comparing the different chips in these phones at the same resolution to see which chip has better performance on a level playing field. But yeah the sensation will have a bit worse performance thanks to higher resolution. Like the atrix vs optimus 2x. But to me the higher resolution is completely worth the hit in performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stop spreading FUD. MSM 8260/8660 is not capable of out of order execution. Cortex A9 supports this feature, A8 does not.
MSM 8260/8660 Pipeline Depth is 13 stages, therefor it's clearly a A8 Cortex.
A9 was a successor to the A8 and it's a significant improvement over it.

t-mizzle said:
Stop spreading FUD. MSM 8260/8660 is not capable of out of order execution. Cortex A9 supports this feature, A8 does not.
MSM 8260/8660 Pipeline Depth is 13 stages, therefor it's clearly a A8 Cortex.
A9 was a successor to the A8 and it's a significant improvement over it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
qualcomm disagrees with you though. they state that it is not based on the a8 and has partial out of order execution. it also has a 128 bit wide neon data path for neon instructions in comparison to the 64 bit wide path in a8 and a9 designs. while there are some similarities to the a8 as you pointed out, the scorpion is not qualcomm's implementation of an a8. and it has some advantages over both a8 and a9. and some disadvantes to an a9. overall the a9 will probably be a bit faster clock for clock, but the scorpion cores in the snapdragon dual cores are clocked faster.
this is very much the same as amd and intel. they both use the same instruction set (x86), but their processors are not the same. qualcomm simply licenses the instruction set (armv7) and builds its own processor. while other companies like nvidia, TI, and samsung buy the cortex a8 or a9 design from ARM and build a copy of it.

Acei said:
Would you care to elaborate on this please?
GLBench is a decent 3D benchmark app, but it is just that - it tests only the GPU. Smartbench was designed to test both CPU (inc. dual-core ones) and GPU, hence reporting two numbers. IMO, you are not comparing apples to apples unless you were only referring to the GPU portion of the test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are right. But smartbench rank scorpion+adreno205 lower than DX with [email protected] is definitely nonsense.
For gpu, go glbenchmark or nenamark or an3dbench whatever but smartbench.
For cpu, crunching pi or linpack is more reliable.
Smartbench does not reflect any real world performance.
Sent via psychic transmittion.

Thracks said:
Dunno where you got your information from, but it's very competitive with the Tegra 2. (8660 is the CDMA version of the Sensation's 8260). From these benchmarks, we also know that an overclock of at least 1.5GHz will be perfectly viable--the chip was designed for that anyhow.
Debating A8 vs A9 is a trivial matter, because it's a tiny fraction of the entire picture.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on glbenchmark score the anand tests might be suspect. It was score 6% higher than tegra 2 not double like anand's test. Or qcomm might be monkeying with things.If that is the case I am going to have a big problem with qcomm products.

Maybe smartbench is right and the nand quality is poor?

The sense experience on it wasn't done. It would have to score higher than the mytouch and previous devices its dual core. Most likely a crappy engineering build on it.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App

TeroZ said:
You are right. But smartbench rank scorpion+adreno205 lower than DX with [email protected] is definitely nonsense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There are other benchmark apps that rank your combo in the same order as Smartbench in graphical tests. Plus, please do look at the productivity tests for Smartbench 2011 more carefully. Typical Scorpion based phone score slightly higher results on Scorpions than DX. Even games like Dungeon Defender (a graphically heavy game) ranks both as "mid-range", while ranking Galaxy S series as "high-end".
For gpu, go glbenchmark or nenamark or an3dbench whatever but smartbench.
For cpu, crunching pi or linpack is more reliable.
Smartbench does not reflect any real world performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Calculating Pi is a very very simple, narrow, and one-dimensioned test. Linpack is heavy on floating point calculations. If that is what you want to know, then I have no issues with that. But do your day-to-day tasks on your phones translate to pure floating point calculations on your phones? They don't. That's why I've included several tests and will be including more as new versions are updated in the future. Plus, I believe none of them uses more than 1 core.
I'm open to suggestions and criticisms - but please do provide more details.

Latest benchmarks made by a retail GSII which has an ORION Exynos talks by themselves
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=13096662&postcount=383
Exynos at "only" 1.2Ghz is even better than adreno 220 SCORPION 1.5Ghz chip as it score 41 fps whereas the latter is scoring 38 fps in GLBenchmark EGYPT standard test
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4243/36161.png
http://nsa25.casimages.com/img/2011/04/21/110421112944690206.png
So the HTC Sensation which is underclocked to 1.2Ghz and have a bigger resolution will look like shayt, SGSII With Exynos will rule for a long long time...

touness69 said:
Latest benchmarks made by a retail GSII which has an ORION Exynos talks by themselves
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=13096662&postcount=383
Exynos at "only" 1.2Ghz is even better than adreno 220 SCORPION 1.5Ghz chip as it score 41 fps whereas the latter is scoring 38 fps in GLBenchmark EGYPT standard test
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph4243/36161.png
http://nsa25.casimages.com/img/2011/04/21/110421112944690206.png
So the HTC Sensation which is underclocked to 1.2Ghz and have a bigger resolution will look like shayt, SGSII With Exynos will rule for a long long time...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for this.
Looks like this is another HTC phone with a disappointing CPU & GPU

[Quadrant] Google Nexus vs Atrix 2

The result is a mixed bag, on one hand overall score is higher, on the other hand CPU performance of the Google Nexus is ridiculously high. Both phones run Dual Core Cortex A9 CPU. 200mhz difference in clock speed should not make such a big difference. The only explanation is the optimizations in ICS. Also it could be that moto devs purposely cripple down CPU performance via some malicious stuff like motoblur.

Why would you use quadrant. Its dead already.
Try antutu, nenamark, cfbench.

Difference between Snapdragon 600/800 @ CPU Clock?

Hello, I'd like to know if there's any difference between snapdragon 600 and 800, without taking the GPU,
To be more clear, I want to know the difference between the CPU Speeds so, my question is.
Let's say I have a Snapdragon 800 running at 2.1 Ghz and I have a Snapdragon 600 Overclocked with a kernel running at 2.1 Ghz, are they gonna be the same? or Snapdragon 800 is gonna be faster even if it's clocked at the same speed as the 600?
You can't compare the snapdragon 800 @ 2.3 Ghz to a first gen i7 920 Intel running at 2.4 Ghz, of course the i7 is a lot faster.
An Snapdragon 800 running at 2.1 Ghz is as fast as a 600 running at 2.1 Ghz?
My english isn't the best and I hardly can explain what I want to know in my native language so, thanks for taking your time to read this thread and sorry about my broken English/Bad explaination.

Snapdragon 800 is not a CPU. Its a SoC. The CPU within the 800 is a 2.3 krait 400 and within the snapdragon 600 is a 1.9 krait 300
If both CPU run at 1.9, they will be the same speed. The architecture is the same only designed for lower output. That is the only difference.
The reason an i7 and krait 400 cannot be compared us because they are completely different.
Now if you could overclock a krait 300 to match 2.3 on krait 400, theoretically its same speeds but of course overheating and stability will probably mean the real world performance will not be as good
-----------------------
Sent via tapatalk.
I do NOT reply to support queries over PM. Please keep support queries to the Q&A section, so that others may benefit

Hi,
Both clocked at 2.26 Ghz (so with a S600 overclocked) the S800 will always be faster, or both at 2.1 Ghz if you want... In short and for raw performance. This is not only the CPU frequency that is important...
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/800
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/600
You can search also for Krait 300/400 for the difference, etc...

also don't forget that the GPU is not the same, the S800 GPU (Adreno 330) is a lot better than the S600 (Adreno 320)

rootSU said:
Snapdragon 800 is not a CPU. Its a SoC. The CPU within the 800 is a 2.3 krait 400 and within the snapdragon 600 is a 1.9 krait 300
If both CPU run at 1.9, they will be the same speed. The architecture is the same only designed for lower output. That is the only difference.
The reason an i7 and krait 400 cannot be compared us because they are completely different.
Now if you could overclock a krait 300 to match 2.3 on krait 400, theoretically its same speeds but of course overheating and stability will probably mean the real world performance will not be as good
-----------------------
Sent via tapatalk.
I do NOT reply to support queries over PM. Please keep support queries to the Q&A section, so that others may benefit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I just wanted to know if the S800 is faster only because it's clocked higher or there's more (besides the GPU)
viking37 said:
Hi,
Both clocked at 2.26 Ghz (so with a S600 overclocked) the S800 will always be faster, or both at 2.1 Ghz if you want... In short and for raw performance. This is not only the CPU frequency that is important...
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/800
http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/600
You can search also for Krait 300/400 for the difference, etc...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
DarknessWarrior said:
also don't forget that the GPU is not the same, the S800 GPU (Adreno 330) is a lot better than the S600 (Adreno 320)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ye, I know the GPU on the S800 is better but I was curious about the CPU
Sooooooo if both run at the same clock speed they're the same? (ignoring the heat)
So, the S800 is faster because it can be clocked higher due to krait400, so it only is faster than S600 at clock speed (ignoring the GPU)
Nice to know, I thought there were more differences besides the clock that made the S800 faster than S600 in CPU wise.
Thanks for the replies

PunkOz said:
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Re,
Nope they are not exactly the same, it's not only an history of CPU freq, look closely

PunkOz said:
Yeah, I just wanted to know if the S800 is faster only because it's clocked higher or there's more (besides the GPU)
I looked at s600/s800 at qualcomm's website but I found they have the same CPU, just the s800 clocked higher, I thought s800 would be faster than the S600 if both run at the same clock due to better architecture
Ye, I know the GPU on the S800 is better but I was curious about the CPU
Sooooooo if both run at the same clock speed they're the same? (ignoring the heat)
So, the S800 is faster because it can be clocked higher due to krait400, so it only is faster than S600 at clock speed (ignoring the GPU)
Nice to know, I thought there were more differences besides the clock that made the S800 faster than S600 in CPU wise.
Thanks for the replies
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well not just heat. The Krait 300 CPU is designed to be run at 1.9 whereas the krait 400 is designed to be run at 2.3. Running both at 2.3, they obviously run the same amount of cycles, but the quality of the materials / construction and the design will mean that the krait 300 will not be able to maintain that amount of cycles for long, may drop some cycles etc. Theoretically a cycle is a cycle, in practice getting all those cycles to work properly is different

Plus the difference about memory, L2 cache, etc... For all the differences Google should be your friend, after it's too technical

viking37 said:
Plus the difference about memory, L2 cache, etc... For all the differences Google should be your friend, after it's too technical
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually googled and the CPU is about the same, same L2 cache accordign to Qualcomm's website, 28 nm, just the S800 is clocked higher, I always Google before making a thread but I couldn't find an answer to my question or maybe I didn't ask Google properly.
I know the S800 supports USB 3.0, has a faster charging etc etc, I just wanted to know if it would be running as fast as a S600 if they have the same clock speed.
in conclussion, S800 is faster because it runs cooler than S600 so it lets the S800 reach a higher frequency + better materials used on S800 architecture etc makes it run cooler and cooler means more stable under high load + reaching higher clock.
Thanks for the help guys correct me If I'm wrong but I think I got this

Hi,
Qualcomm will not reveal all on their site
The L2 cache is faster than the S600, memory access (Memory controller?) too it's on a bunch of sites... 28mm, right, but one is LP and the other is HPm...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6568/qualcomm-krait-400-krait-300-snapdragon-800
The thing we need is the internal hardware stuff, source and documentation from Qualcomm, for sure there is another things . Maybe some kernel devs could have good information too?
Maybe if you did not find anything more is that there is nothing else to find...
But if you got it, it's fine and I think that all is said :good: