Related
I did a quick search but didn't find anything about the PSP or DS that I could view at work, besides maybe the PSP having a 333Mhz core and a 166Mhz core for graphics. I'm curious as to how PPCs compare to the current handheld gaming systems.
I realize that emulators have to run on top of the operating system, but lets say there was a way around that - perhaps loading a secondary, minimal OS that would allow for more resources to be allocated to the emulator/platform.
Could a PPC device stand with or surpass these current handheld consoles?
I guess an even more direct question would be:
When do you think PPC will advance to the point that it can also serve as a game system in much the way these handhelds do?
dont know much about ds and psp
but if they have special chips to handle
tasts like graphics and sound
their software is spicial written to handle those tasks
and a emulator have much much more overhead then the os they run on
everytime the bins of the software say "mov register0x0f to alu1" or something like that it have to be wrapped to whatever register and value
the emulator's hardware support
IMHO, a massive no.
When I bought my PSP I was horrified as to the massive difference between graphics and presentation on the dedicated device compared to a PDA. The PSP blows all current pocket PCs away in terms of graphics capabilities - the old established standard for pocketpcs didn't require any form of specialist hardware acceleration. Unfortunately, games are increasingly moving over to 3d and high CPU load processing (on PCs and consoles), and "old" PDAs were not designed with that in mind, or to address that.
However, have a look at some of the PDAs that have come out with dedicated high end graphics processors built in, eg the Dells.
http://www.aximsite.com/boards/games/98674-x50v-x51v-2700g-accelerated-game-list.html
http://www.pocketpcmag.com/blogs/index.php?blog=3&p=661&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1
With the dedicated Intel 2700g graphics look good, but still not quite as good as a PSP.
The newer line up of PDAs will probably have better chips, but until Microsoft starts to mandate some kind of hardware benchmark for the platform, it'll still be more of a productivity/enterprise device, that also plays some games well. So it's more of a jack of all trades, quite good at some.
IMHO.
V
The O2 XDA Flame has a NVIDIA® GoForce® 5500 3D Hardware Accelerator I have not seen or tested it but it must be impressive.
http://www.seeo2.com/product/XdaFlame/template/XdaFlameProductInfo.vm
but it only does any good if the software is made to take advantage of it
otherwise it will still be the cpu doing all the work
ms is not really ready with a true dx for wm yet
and any game maker who put alot of work into supporting it only have a rather small market
Rudegar said:
but it only does any good if the software is made to take advantage of it
otherwise it will still be the cpu doing all the work
ms is not really ready with a true dx for wm yet
and any game maker who put alot of work into supporting it only have a rather small market
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What exactly does this mean? I've been looking into code for DirectX in PPC and some of the samples I've seen have had the software check for hardware support.
Still, theoretically, if a high-end PPC with 400-600MHz CPU and a GPU with very little overhead, one would think that a descent game could be created.
I just got done playing Wolfenstien on my 8525 .. which is 400mhz and such .. and it kind of sucked.. lol..
The gap between PSP and PPC is so huge, it can't even be classified in the same device category. The PSP simply put is a real gaming portable, the Pocket PC is a PDA. No ifs and buts about it.
Now the DS, that's a lot closer to the PPC, and I would say many PPC models push out better visuals and audio compared to what a DS can provide. But don't expect any games on the DS to run on the Pocket PC!
Well, we know the under-performing WM devices with qualcomm CPU, especially when coming to graphics. For example the MSM7200(A) & MSM7201A devices, such as: HTC Touch Pro, HTC Diamond, HTC HD, HTC TyTN II, etc
Reading different docs from qualcomm:
QUALCOMM provides wide range of best-in-class integrated
graphics solutions with the MSM7200 comparable to the DS
or PSP
APIs Accelerated: OpenGL ES 1.0 Common + some OpenGL ES 1.1, Direct 3D Mobile, SM2, JSR 184, BREW Render2D, Direct Draw, GDI
“Qualcomm Announces Highly Integrated Dual-CPU Single Chip Solutions for High-Performance Multimedia Wireless Devices”
“The 7xxx series addresses the growing consumer demand for higher-performance wireless devices delivering high-quality audio-visual and 2D/3D gaming”
“Very high performance 2D and 3D graphics, and video encode and decode support”
Peak performance: 3D: 4M TRIS /SEC, 2D: 133M PIXELS /SEC
Source:
http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2003/press1217.html
http://sakajati.com/download/?nav=display&file=70
You can see how pathetic performs such a qualcomm device here: http://www.youtube.com/sergiowmo . You can find many videos where I've tested different games. They say that the graphics is comparable with PSP.. just look at the emulators comparison.
Where is the promised graphics performance?
Can this company be sued because of these notorious lies?
I'm starting to hate this company more & more (qualcomm). I don't care if htc has to pay for drivers, etc. They should provide what they promise. And anyway TP, Diamond comes with openGL HW drivers.. and let's be real, the performance is extremly poor in comparison to other HW-enabled devices (older devices, devices with lower CPU).
What irritates me more is the high graphics performance Qulacomm is advertising and in reality perform so badly. In other words I hate when someone is misleading and lying such way.. Just thinking at PSP (PlayStationPortable) comparison..
I learned my lesson with the HTC Touch Dual, the models of the brand are beatifull, but slow and dumb, like that crazy blond you will always stay away from, in the future.
It's not qualcomms fault, the devices might be capable of this performance, but it's HTCs fault, which refused to pay for drivers.
But the latest htc devices DOES have driver for 3D graphics. They have OpenGL hardware libraries and I'm really not satisfied with the 3D performance.
I've already seen this excuse so many times.. but ALL WM the devices that are using Qualcomm CPU are worse. Other vendors such as LG, TOSHIBA. All those companies haven't payed for the drivers? There's something in the middle..
http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....tege&D2=HTC P4550 TyTN II (Kaiser)&D3=LG KS20
What's with this qualcomm crap policy? Haven't heard anything like this from Marvell, to promise something and in reality to be something else.
The 2D graphics aren't hardware accelerated indeed.. at least this is how it looks..
@twolf Samsung Omnia looks good and it's fast and smart too, thanks to the Marvell CPU. Unfortunately there's no OpenGL support .
Excellent thread. Just a couple of things to bear in mind though:
- There are developers working on graphics here.
- The Mobinnova ICE and LG Incite are both said to have the same processor as the SE X1 Xperia, Touch Diamond, Touch Pro and the HD, i.e. the Qualcomm MSM7201A 528Mhz processor. Hence we should wait for reports from owners of these devices to see if any drivers have come to fruition. The reason I say this is because in the past, it seems some drivers were taken from the LG KS20 (same MSM7200 400Mhz processor as TytN 2, Touch Cruise, Touch Dual and Sprint CDMA Touch) in the past for the aforementioned.
However, this is an important thread, so please keep it going, unless Qualcomm can clearly not be brought to account here.
DSF said:
@twolf Samsung Omnia looks good and it's fast and smart too, thanks to the Marvell CPU. Unfortunately there's no OpenGL support .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was playing around with an Omnia at the local Verizon Wireless store [only US carrier to offer it], and I was really f**kin impressed! The camera was as responsive as a good digital, and the screen/mouse combo is beautiful!
I am not an expert but I am totally agree withthe disapointing qualcomm...
Just let´s hope that HTC has noticed this and take it in mind for the next generation of 09 models just about to launch!
Great thread!
@nuke1 I've read that topic, but no resolution yet. Also, many people are benchmarking using diffrend D3D drivers, which is wrong, because that benchmark tool is using OpenGL not D3D (which is only a wrapper for OpenGL, D3D<=>OpenGL).
So.. we have 3D hardware accelerated drivers.. (unlike previous HTC devices, such as TyTN II) but we got poor performance.. I really would like to trust that porting the drivers from another device (eg: LG Incinte) will improve the (3d/2d) graphics experience on our phones.
@orb3000, actually they will continue the partnership with qualcomm, HTC is very proud of their colaboration, CEO Peter Chou said something like:
"qualcomm is one of our top very important ??? partnership ..
and i believe that this partnership will continue to go the next 10-20 years"
See http://www.qualcomm.com/who_we_are/success/index.htm#/HTC-video/ .
So, HTC seems preety happy with qualcomm solution.. yeah, i know that qualcomm provide a chipset (SoC) implementing various function, such as and not limited to: cpu, gpu, gps, wireless ...
Thanks guy for your support. Now let's spread to a global scale! I had enough of qualcomm lies or whateva.
@NotATreoFan I really hope that Samsung will focus on more powerfull WM devices and get ride of the damn proprietary connectors! Samsung really has potential.
I totally support this thread.
I bought my Diamond with a 528MHz CPU. This means, that this phone has to have a power of 528MHz CPU equipped phone. And I don't care how it will be done, and whether it will be in next models. Tbh I would feel screwed if they used the CPU in a better way in upcoming phones.
Also I wonder why we have 3D acceleration, but no 2D? Anyways, I feel we have some kind of 2D slowdown. My previous smart phone was a Siemens SX1 (S60, Symbian 6.1, 120MHz OMAP CPU, released in 2003 or 2004, 176*208 res). I was able to play fluent Sega Master System (SMS Plus S60, free and excellent) games with sound, nearly-perfectly fluent Picodrive (no sound for S60, some frameskip but no close to Touch Pro vids on youtube) and well, playable GBA (vBagX trial, commercial). Picodrive is not tested, Sega Master System via morphgear (atleast the trial) is less fluent, and GBA via PocketGBA has too much frameskip. And please don't tell it is everything because screen is X times bigger. Architecture of CPU should be better. Come on, we have also a CPU to emulate, sound, input... And I am pretty sure SX1's OMAP had no graphics chip inside.
Just wanted to jump in and make a quick small comment:
I have a vogue, it is terrible (speed, graphic performance etc..)
I also have android on that vogue, and when using android things are SSOOOO much smoother it blows my mind, and makes me realize how much is truly the fault of another MS crap product.
In android I can flick that screen to scroll in the browser and it is so smooth with never a single hiccup or anything of the sort...
My 2 cents,
Jim.
That's one of thereasons why SONY broke up with HTC
I guess SONY will continue to move on over the WinMo platform, maybe with another partnership with another company (ASUS?)
HTC should be worried now that SONY is in town
I bet we will start to see better devices as the second generation Xperia soon
An after having the tytn, diamond, etc, I can confirm the XPERIA performance blows away them all, OMG no comparison here: it's a step further
here is what the Iphone can do on an ARM based CPU running at 400Mhz with hardware accelerated graphics. notice the framerate (smoothness).
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/need-for-speed-iphone
it disgusts me that the 528Mhz Qualcomm chip that has 3D acceleration (but no working drivers) relies on the CPU core to do all the "desktop" windows drawing and even 3D (unless you hacked drivers).
Two things!
1. CPU or GPU overload?
Today I did a small test. I thought that if the CPU is overloaded any more load will slow down the emulator. So I fired up WMP with a MP3 and the emu. I felt no slowdown at all.
Don't forget we don't drivers for CPU. We need them for GPU.
2. HTC/Qualcomm vs math
MSM7201A can render 133000000 pixels a second.
A fluent gameplay is 60 fps.
By dividing 133M by 60 we get 2216666 frames each 1/60th a second.
VGA screen is 640*480 pixels = 307200.
So how much screens we can fill during 1/60 of a second? Let's see... 2216666 / 307200 = 7.215709635 screens to fill.
Where we lose 6 screens?
p3ngwin said:
here is what the Iphone can do on an ARM based CPU running at 400Mhz with hardware accelerated graphics. notice the framerate (smoothness).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the industry favorite 3D powered by PowerVR from Imagination Technologies. If you look at most of the great performing 3D out there right now (N95, etc), it's usually has PowerVR components in it or Nvidia, NOT ATI.
It also helps they optimized the drivers in the system end-to-end (instead of optimizing for TouchFlo), and it's not using HTC nor Qualcomm.
NuShrike said:
That's the industry favorite 3D powered by PowerVR from Imagination Technologies. If you look at most of the great performing 3D out there right now (N95, etc), it's usually has PowerVR components in it or Nvidia, NOT ATI.
It also helps they optimized the drivers in the system end-to-end (instead of optimizing for TouchFlo), and it's not using HTC nor Qualcomm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
they have different graphics hardware, yet we should be getting an experience that is at LEAST recognizable as in the same graphics ballpark as opposed to the pathetic sorry state we have now.
p3ngwin said:
here is what the Iphone can do on an ARM based CPU running at 400Mhz with hardware accelerated graphics. notice the framerate (smoothness).
http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/need-for-speed-iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ah yes... need for speed mobile.. i need an fruit phone now!!
Oh yeah how great it is. I understand graphics are really great but controls are tragic. Playing this using accelerometer must be a pain. I played asphalt gt racing on iphone and I turned it off after 2 minutes (I'm surprised that I lasted this long trying to play it).
If apple want to make iPhone good for mobile gaming give it some psychical button or help guys working on iControlPad with it and release it ASAP.
For now iPhone is nice graphics but lacks at control.
Unluckily all phone manufacturers (including HTC) seem to get rid of d-pads.
What you got in Diamond is barely useful. Up/down is good, left/right is usable only with one hand if you want to be fast (left hand for right, and right hand for left), and the center button is easy to press.
back to topic: thanks to Qualcomm even if we had awesome joysticks we wouldn't be able to play better games with them.
If you know how to use dpad on TD it gets quite nice.
Besides poor dpad is better than no dpad, at least you don't have to twist your arms like madman trying to turn when playing games like need for speed or asphalt racing
Wishmaster89 said:
If you know how to use dpad on TD it gets quite nice.
Besides poor dpad is better than no dpad, at least you don't have to twist your arms like madman trying to turn when playing games like need for speed or asphalt racing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Poor dpad is inexcusable on a $800 device. You also must be a horrible Wipeout player.
Hi! Reading around the web I've found out that Android still lacks of hardware acceleration in the windows' contents (enabled for compositing) and so does, of course, the browser (in the specific)! This is why we have not an as smooth as iPhone scrolling/zooming! Here an interesting article:
http://connect-utb.com/index.php?op...z-cpu-is-enough&catid=36:technology&Itemid=67
And here is a question made to a developer by an AndroidCommunity user:
http://androidcommunity.com/forums/f41/the-hardware-acceleration-question-8963/index2.html
So my question is: Will be possible to have hw acceleration (also on cooked roms, doesn't matter) in the near future? I still can't understand why, for example, my Hero cannot handle games like NOVA altough has a dedicated GPU and its CPU is quite superior to the iPhone 3G's one! While on this one the game runs smoothly! My supposition was that these games are not even developed thinking about Android...They only are miserable portings from iPhone! Please tell me that one day (maybe with 3.0) will be possible to have Flash 10.1, great 3D (or at least comparable to 3G) and COMPLETE acceleration in Android on my Hero and other MSM 7XXX devices (dream, magic ecc.) I'm really thinking of selling my Hero to buy something like a Milestone (Droid in US) or a Liquid (not sure about this one)...Thanks in advance
Surely they did this in an attempt to save battery life?
Maybe that's where OpenCL comes in?
Well I don't know how much hardware acceleration can damage battery life...I'm pretty sure this doesn't happen on other devices with iOS or WinMo where hw acc. is enabled And battery lasts normally!
About OpenCL I'm not sure it has something to do with graphics enhancements! Maybe it's used to accelerate computational stuff like physics...Or, at least, this is what I can read from here (it uses GPU to enhance NON graphical computing):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenCL
What I'm talking about is to enable acceleration in UI and browser (as well as has been done with 3D graphics and videos with SnapDragon and Cortex A8) like iPhone did! And I think this wouldn't decrease so much battery life! I prefer to have a functional and smooth browser more than save 1-2 hours of battery life! IMHO! Thanks to have answered my question
Just a little up! Thanks!
There is no hope for the msm72xx. Qualcomm or Htc or both of them are complete douches to us power users that want the max out of our devices. They do not provide efficient graphics drivers hence the horrible graphics performance. This is highly unlikely to change in the future and it seems to me that in order to compensate for sluggish graphic performance, they are upping the processor speed as seen by the recent slew of snapdragon 1ghz which also underperforms due to lack of proper drivers.
Gosh... This means that not even Google took care of developing proper drivers fot ITS OWN DEVICE! This is pretty bad...And means that Android could be a "poor" OS because of the laziness of some developer...I'm wondering if is convenient to buy an Acer Liquid (very low price here! And I can't afford a N1 or a Desire) or an iPhone 3G at all! Games like NOVA run GREAT on both of them...And I'd really want a smooth browser...But I'm pretty sure on one thing: My Hero needs to be replaced It made me too much disappointment...
Thanks for your answer
Yes your hero is an outdated mid range device that needs to be replaced...i would suggest a samsung galaxy S or any of its variants.
Thanks but...Who's going to give me the money to do that? XD I can't afford a Galaxy S (549€ here!) while an Acer Liquid (with the same performance of a N1 and I know what I'm saying ) is WAY more affordable (299€! Almost half of the Galaxy S price!).
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
MultiLockOn said:
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior. You also have to consider how many more pixels the gpu has to power on the iPad 3's display. While high res is nice, it takes more power to render it.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
speedyink said:
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 gpu is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
MultiLockOn said:
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
speedyink said:
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
lesp4ul said:
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kmow what you mean. Im extremely happy with my galaxy s2, I cant say I ever recall it lagging on me in any way whatsoever. Im not sure what makes the droid razr and galaxy nexus comparable to the s2. From what Ive read Omap processors tend to lag and consume battery, and the mali 400 is better than what either of those phones have. Id say its ICS but the razr still
Runs gingerbread
I was hoping for some more attention in here :/
I agree, omaps are battery hungry beast. Like my previous Optimus Black, man... i only got 12-14 hours with edge (1ghz UV smartass v2, also ****ty LG kernel haha). Same issue as my friend's Galaxy SL. I dunno if newer soc has a better behaviour.
Sent from my Nokia 6510 using PaperPlane™
Hey guys.
Was recently reading up on Apple's new A9 processor and was slightly surprised to see it still used just 2 cores. However, the single-core performance of these bad boys is monstrous! And in my opinion, far more important than the multi-core scores when compared to 8-core processors from Qualcomm and Samsung. It's no secret that iOS generally does a lot of things much quicker (including generally better graphical performance) and also generally uses less power to do so than an Android device. I generally don't like Apple's products anymore, and this won't change anything. But they do things so darn well it's difficult to not give them credit where credit is due. The fact that the iPhone 6S has a battery size of about 1715mAH is insance when you think about Android phones with comparible battery lifes generally have batteries around 2500-2800mAH. That's a big difference. Is it largely down to iOS vs Android rather than the actual SoCs themselves? Or are Apple just amazing chip designers?
It reminds me of an AMD vs Intel debate, where AMD go for octa-core CPUs with super high clock speeds that tick all the boxes on paper, but then in reality are beaten out by even dual core offerings from Intel with lower or comparable clock speeds. Or when an 8MP camera on an iPhone beats out a 21MP camera on an Android phone. Time and time again manufacturers are more interested in the technical specs than the real life performance.
Any ideas?
Apple doesn't have to care about specs to success, and they had Jim Keller(designer of the Athlon 64 and the Apple Cyclone, and back at AMD designing Zen). Their IPC is impressive