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
Related
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon
I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.
QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S5PC11x (Hummingbird) has 2x the memory bandwidth of the MSM8250.
The MSM8250 gets about 2x the floating point performance of the S5PC11x.
I believe the SGX540 GPU in S5PC11x is on the whole a bit faster than the GPU in the 8250, but I don't have hard numbers on that in front of me. They're architecturally different GPUs and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
It's really hard to do a good apples to apples comparison of different SoCs -- memory interconnect, cache sizes, ARM architecture version, GPU, etc, etc all play into overall system performance.
Gingerbread, overall, tends to be faster than Froyo on the same hardware.
Not really too familiar with this stuff, but will the JIT compiler being optimized for snapdragon instruction set make a huge difference still? My Vibrant plays games way better than the MT4G (imo) but scores terribly on Linpack and is terribly slow at opening applications and things vs. the MT4G.
Read the post above you. Linpack is mainly a benchmark for numerical performance(floating point etc), where the Snapdragon chips are MUCH better.
But the Hummingbird(PowerVR) GPU is better than the Adreno GPU found in the Snapdragon line. That's why the gaming performance of your Vibrant is better than the MT4G.
Ronaldo_9 said:
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PhoenixFx said:
I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, just anecdotally, hummingbird is MUCH faster than snapdragon IMHO
galaxyS/NS SGX540= 90 million triangles/sec
HTC G2 Adreno 205 =44 million triangles/sec
Nexus one = Adreno 200 = 22 million triangles/sec
nexus S is running on the fastest GPU out now. And another good thing about running on power VR GPU is that iphone runs on one also so when lazy iphone porting happens you will have optimal performance running on that GPU than you would on Adreno
Ive noticed this especially on gameloft games
Trust me im on a vibrant and came from nexus one with out a doubt the nexus S GPU smokes nexus one GPU even out performance 2nd gen snapdragon
Hummingbird > all atm.
Orion will be the same.
Don't make pre-assumptions about the dual core chips.. Orion has good competition from the TI OMAPS line.. Qualcomm looks like they'll stay behind GPU wise though.
Plus the Sound Quality of the Hummingbird chip is awesome. MUCH better than the Snapdragon chips.
Also, you have to be cautious of manufacturer specs for GPU pixels/sec and triangles/sec -- the "box numbers" are always under optimal conditions and often not representative of real workloads.
For modern non-fixed-pipe GPUs (gl ES 2.x, etc) compute capabilities (how many shader ops / pixel/ etc you can get away with) factor in as well.
Depending on what your workload is like (geometry heavy? fill heavy? texture heavy? shader heavy?) you will see different strengths and weaknesses when comparing GPUs.
All that said, the SGX540 is indeed quite snappy.
chip
I agree the sound chip is good in the NS, as is the GPU
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Something to remember, Tegra may be the fastest, but........ Just like a computer in your house the slowest component is the driver or the memory storage is usually the one that slows it down or the motherboard. So having the fastest cpu makes your bench look good but in practical use it is not better performance.
If the sole purpose is to game then, yeah ok that may be a winner, but get real, using the phone for gaming is such a waste of technology
Mind you synthetic benchmarks aren't the best way to show performance, quadrant and linpack are both easy to inflate scores just by changing a single value. As for ram, it's hard to compare ram seeing that Ios and Android handles memory differently.
vbetts said:
Mind you synthetic benchmarks aren't the best way to show performance, quadrant and linpack are both easy to inflate scores just by changing a single value. As for ram, it's hard to compare ram seeing that Ios and Android handles memory differently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. Synthetic benchmarks are not a good indicator of real world performance.
Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Read the thread "Those of your who are waiting too compare GSIII to HTC One X" in this forum. It only has about 6 pages but has a ton of information. Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
shaboobla said:
Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes and no, the tegra 3 does have a better gpu so in theory, better games. however, game makers cater to the mass. most androids that are active are mid-range, android 2.2 or 2.3, have a resolution of 480x800, and last years (or older) processors. although most will be made to work on the t3 and s4, it will be compatibility issues, not optimization. nvidia will have a couple games "t3 only" but even those will be made to work on other phones. now that ics is cleaning up some of the splintering of apps, we'll see some better options on both fields.
in short, yes the t3 is a better gaming chip. but for the battery life, games available, and current bugs i would suggest the s4. i may change my mind when the refreshs come out q3-4, we'll see.
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct. However, most games are not optimized to utilize the Tegra to its fullest potential. That should change by the end of the year. The other point is that the S4 is just as good as the Tegra un terms of gaming performance. IMO, you should decide between these 2 processors by looking at the main area where the S4 truly has the advantage thus far, and that is battery life. So far, the battery life advantage goes to the S4. Just read the battery life threads in this forum and for the international X. It took a few updates to the Transformer Prime to start having pretty good battery life. The One X, will get better in that department with a couple more updates for battery optimization. The S4 starts with great battery life and will get even better in that department.
Sent from my HTC Vivid using XDA app
I say the snapdragon S4 is a better chip right now. The tegra 3 gpu is great and with the tegra zone games it really looks great. But he 4 cores CPU is really for heavy multitasking so you candivise the work between all four cores. They are A9 cores vs the custom qualcomm which is close to A15. It mans that for single threaded task and multi threaded task the snapdragon will whoop tegra 3' ass. Opening an app, scrolling through that app sect... also browser performance is slightly better on the qualcomm chip. Basically tegra 3 can do lots of things at the same time with decent speed vs the S4 chip which can do 1 or few more things at lighting speed.
The S4 is almost 2x faster than any other dual core out there. Anandtech did a few nice articles on the S4, including benchmarks vs tegra 3.
In real use, the S4 should be much better, because not all apps are multithreaded for 4 cores. The S4 completely kicks the Tegra 3's ass in singlethreaded benchmarks. I also expect the S4 to be better at power management, because it is made on 28nm node, instead of 40 nm, so its more compact and efficient.
About 23 I'd say
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
tehdef said:
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to add to that and to be fair, S4 is at around 7000 at antutu benchmark while tegra 3 is at around 10000. I still prefer the S4
Eh...
It wins in 1 benchmark specifically enabled to take advantage of more than 2 cores. So if you want to play tegrazone games and have some basic lag, the T3 is for you. If you want to have a near flawless phone experience, and have decreased graphical performance in some wanna be console games, then the S4 is the way to go.
Actually you wont really notice the lack of graphics performance on the snapdragon s4. Its about 10% slower in most benchmarks but outperforms the tegra3 in a few as well. However i have a sensation xl with the adreno 205 which is only a quarter as fast as the adreno 225 and all games including deadspace, frontline, blood glory runs smoothly on it. To say the snapdragon s4 is inferior because of the slower Adreno 225 is really nit picking to me. For me bigger reason to choose one graphics chip over another is flash performance and this is where the exynos mali 400 kicks the adreno 225 in the balls. It handles 1080p youtube videos in browser without a hiccup while the 225 chokes even on 720p content.
Let me answer this. How good is it? More than good enough. Almost all apps and games are catered to weaker phones so the T3 and S4 are both more than good enough.
And my two cents, the S4 beats tegra 3
MattMJB0188 said:
Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
The S4 compared to the Tegra3 says it all. dualcore that beats a quadcore in almost everything.
Intel released the first native dual core processor in 2006 and shortly thereafter released a quad core which was basically two dual cores fused together (this is what current ARM quads are like).
That was 6 years ago and these days pretty much all new desktop computers come with quad cores while laptops mostly stick with dual. Laptops make up the biggest share of PC sales so for your everyday PC usage, you'll be more than comfortable with a dual core.
You really can't assume mobile SoCs will follow the same path, but it's definitely something to consider. I think dual core A15-based SoCs will still rule the day this year and next at the very least.
I was really on the fence about the X or the XL. But the S4 got me. Not having 32GB is already bugging me. But the efficiency (and my grandfathered unlimited data paired with Google Music) is definitely worth the sacrifice. Very happy so far! Streaming Slacker, while connected to my A2DP stereo, running GPS was great. I'm not a huge gamer though. I miss Super Mario Bros being the hottest thing!
krepler said:
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Tankmetal said:
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is inaccurate.
The Exynos 4 and the Tegra 3 are based on the ARM A9 reference design.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 is "roughly equivalent" to the A15, but not based on the A15. The same was true for Qualcomm's old S3 (which was equivalent to something between the A8 and A9 design)
One thing that most people don't realize is that Qualcomm is one of the very few companies that designs its own processors based on the ARM instruction set, and while S4's is similar to the A15 in terms of architecture, it's actually arguably better than the ARM reference design (e.g. asynchronous clocking of each core which is a better design than the big.LITTLE or +1 design).
Some exciting news, the first real-world benchmark has appeared for an ARM A15 chip, in this case the Samsung Exynos 5250, which has been launched in the latest Chromebook.
Chip Info - dual-core A15 @ 1.7 GHz & Mali T604 GPU.
http://www.samsung.com/global/busin...t/application/detail?productId=7668&iaId=2341
The benchmark is Sunspider, which is not multi-threaded, i.e. does utilise multiple cores, so you can evaluate the actual performance (javascript) of a single-core., now we can see the performance improvement ARM has baked into their latest hardware
Courtesy of Gigacom, Sunspider on the ARM version of Google Chrome that comes installed on the Chromebook = 660ms (Lower is better). Compared to the current King of the Hill ARM A9 device the Galaxy Note 2 (Exynos 4412), which is clocked at 1.6 GHz, it achieves 972 ms accorded to GSM Arena, other sites have similar figures.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_note_ii-review-824p5.php
LOWER IS BETTER
Exynos 5250 - A15 @ 1.7 Ghz = 660 ms
Exynos 4412 - A9 @ 1.6 Ghz = 972 ms
The 5250 is clocked 6% higher than the 4412, so if we adjust the results for CPU frequency parity
Exynos 5250 = 660 ms
Exynos 4412 @ 1.7 Ghz = 914 ms
This is not an exhaustive performance test!, but we can see that in this one popular benchmark that ARM A15 is ~30% faster than the A9 architecture when adjusted for clock speed.
To sweeten the deal further A15 SoC will run at a higher clock than A9s, Tegra 4 (T40) is stated to run @ 1.8 GHz with a bump to 2 GHz after a couple of quarters, just like Tegra 3. Samsung has the even mightier 5450, a quad-core variant of the chip in this test, rumored to run @ 2 GHz, combined with much more powerful GPU, and Android's software optimisations 2013 is going to be one hell of year for tech fans:victory:
Source:
http://gigaom.com/mobile/video-hands-on-with-googles-new-249-chromebook/
Nice find. I am also looking for Mali-T604 results. GLbenchmark results will be interesting. 72GFLOPs does sound very good.
EDIT: I think he says 620ms in video. Also, I am sure it will get better as the Chrome OS code is optimized for ARM. This is just first release. Exynos 4 has been optimized to limit. They can't push it any further now, at least not by a big margin.
hot_spare said:
Nice find. I am also looking for Mali-T604 results. GLbenchmark results will be interesting. 72GFLOPs does sound very good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You may have to wait a while, ChromeOS can't run Android apps like GLbenchmark, only webapps. The reason Sunspider is a good test in this case, is that they both use the ARM version of Chrome, which uses the same underlying technology (Webkit & V8 Javascript engine)
Edit, there some unverified benchmarks from ES 2.0 Taiji, but there are v-sync limited to 60 fps, so we don't know how powerful the T-604, from that bench.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...i-T604-graphics-pops-up-in-benchmarks_id34681
True. I think have to wait for SGS4 for those benchmarks. More interested in browsermark, peacekeeper, google octane numbers. google itself mentioned that sunspider is outdated.
http://sunspider-mod.googlecode.com/svn/data/hosted/sunspider.html
hot_spare said:
EDIT: I think he says 620ms in video. Also, I am sure it will get better as the Chrome OS code is optimized for ARM. This is just first release. Exynos 4 has been optimized to limit. They can't push it any further now, at least not by a big margin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the video he mentions 620 ms, but in the comments he states 660 ms for Sunspider when asked the question, I chose the 660 ms to be conservative.
Antutu benchmark!
I kept looking, and found something interesting now.
"Supposedly" first Antutu benchmark for Exynos 5250. Now the values show it's running at 1.5GHz. For a dual-core SoC, 14185 score sounds very good.
The most interesting part is the 3D graphics numbers. This is 3x compared to 4412 SoC.
Source: http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2718
With more optimization, this can be really powerful.
Looks like this chip will also end up in the Nexus 10
Turbotab said:
Looks like this chip will also end up in the Nexus 10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's going to be a monster tablet.
Peacekeeper browser benchmark for Exynos 5250 gets more than 1200:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JoeWilcox/posts/8LrBK9CKJG4
Better than any other mobile SoC so far.
This chip rapes every other chip out there, even the s4 pro and apple a6. look here- http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/
prajju123 said:
This chip rapes every other chip out there, even the s4 pro and apple a6. look here- http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude please don't use the word rape, an ugly word. But we must wait for the a GL Benchmark results of the Mali T-604 against the Apple A6 & A6X, I hope it beats them, but it won't be easy Apple used a lot of die space to create them.
Hoping for a Exynos 5450 (5 Quad) by March or April of 2013
Is it the same chip they use in the new Chromebook?
lz2323 said:
Is it the same chip they use in the new Chromebook?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly the same, dual-core Exynos 5250 - Mali T-604.
Why did they go with adreno gpu when nexus 6 that came out 1 year ago has adreno 420 already
Will you really be able to tell the diference? I doubt it. Its just a number game really
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Geordie Affy said:
Will you really be able to tell the diference? I doubt it. Its just a number game really
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
gtg465x said:
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but it sucks that the whole android ecosystem has to depend on qualcomm. Imagine if next year they screw up again... It seems like samsung cpu rock this year and apple too..
Sent from my LG-D800
ambervals6 said:
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point exactly lol. Whatever phone you buy it will be an upgrade in some way ... all this numbers game is becoming a tad OTT.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk
ambervals6 said:
Yeah but it sucks that the whole android ecosystem has to depend on qualcomm. Imagine if next year they screw up again... It seems like samsung cpu rock this year and apple too..
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, it does suck. And it is a shame that Qualcomm could have made a great SOC instead of two meh ones. If they were smart, they would have put the Adreno 430 GPU in the 808 and marketed it as their flagship phone SOC, and marketed the 810 as a tablet only SOC, because tablets can better dissipate the heat. But none of that is Motorola's fault. I think Motorola chose wisely between the not so great choices they had.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using XDA Forums Pro.
gtg465x said:
Yep, it does suck. And it is a shame that Qualcomm could have made a great SOC instead of two meh ones. If they were smart, they would have put the Adreno 430 GPU in the 808 and marketed it as their flagship phone SOC, and marketed the 810 as a tablet only SOC, because tablets can better dissipate the heat. But none of that is Motorola's fault. I think Motorola chose wisely between the not so great choices they had.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using XDA Forums Pro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as long as there is no serious competition out there, qualcomm will continue not to give a single **** and unfortunately upgrades will come in lame increments.
Sent from my LG-D800
I think it's funny how all the new 810 soc have the cores down clocked to 1.8ghz.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
ambervals6 said:
Well as long as there is no serious competition out there, qualcomm will continue not to give a single **** and unfortunately upgrades will come in lame increments.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Competition is coming. Qualcomm should be worried. http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/0...qualcomm-begun-a-long-slow-fall-from-the-top/
gtg465x said:
They had no choice. They could choose the 805, the 808, or the 810. If they chose the 805, everyone would complain that it's a processor from 2014. If they chose the 810, everyone would complain that it will overheat and get crappy battery life. The 808 is the best choice for the least number of complaints. Yeah, it has a slightly slower GPU than the 805, but the CPU is much faster than the 805, and even faster than the 810 in demanding situations because the 810 will completely turn off its BIG cores if it gets too warm, whereas the 808 doesn't get hot enough that it needs to turn off the BIG cores and switch to little.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this isn't the full story + its a little misleading. here are the technical details:
the 418 is as good, if not better than the 420 for the following reasons:
1. The 418 has the same "system specs" as the 420, minus the down-throttling.
2. The 418 was fabbed on smaller architecture (20nm) vs. the 420 (28nm). This means greater power savings and less heat.
3. The 418/420 is to the 430 like the NVIDIA 960 is to the 980 GTX, but you wont get the 430 unless you get the 810.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adreno#Variants
640k said:
this isn't the full story + its a little misleading. here are the technical details:
the 418 is as good, if not better than the 420 for the following reasons:
1. The 418 has the same "system specs" as the 420, minus the down-throttling.
2. The 418 was fabbed on smaller architecture (20nm) vs. the 420 (28nm). This means greater power savings and less heat.
3. The 418/420 is to the 430 like the NVIDIA 960 is to the 980 GTX, but you wont get the 430 unless you get the 810.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adreno#Variants
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
gtg465x said:
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did anyone else notice how high the 2014 moto x was in those benchmarks. Motorola must really optimize the kernel.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
Positive spin time!
The 808's gpu handles games fine and consumes less power than the 7420's gpu (S6 & Note 5). I would rather have a GPU that handles games as is, rather than drains more battery and prefer a more power economical GPU for a portable device. There is a reason you see a lot of complaints about the S6 battery life and others do not. Most correlates to those that use apps that are GPU heavy.
rushless said:
Positive spin time!
The 808's gpu handles games fine and consumes less power than the 7420's gpu (S6 & Note 5). I would rather have a GPU that handles games as is, rather than drains more battery and prefer a more power economical GPU for a portable device. There is a reason you see a lot of complaints about the S6 battery life and others do not. Most correlates to those that use apps that are GPU heavy.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lmao this guy
Sent from my A0001
What was comedic besides my awareness it is spin? True that games perform fine on the 808 and the 7420 gpu consumes more power. As far as bigger fancier games that need even more power, not very practical on a portable device so kind of moot with a small battery.
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
If it's a concern you should wait for the nexus to drop with its rumored snapdragon 820 and next gen adreno.
Also for the issue of this year's qcom products sucking, remember that market pressure forced them to release chips with generic ARM cores because their in-house 64 bit designs weren't ready. The 820 ditches the octocore big.LITTLE architecture for a quad core qcom design. Lots to look forward to.
And I think the 808 is probably the best chip they could have picked for the X this year.
ambervals6 said:
Cool story. If I use that logic my old lg g2 should be enough.
Sent from my LG-D800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is, but you're all too spoiled to make it out
SchmidtA99 said:
I think it's funny how all the new 810 soc have the cores down clocked to 1.8ghz.
Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think 810 is way better than 808. Adreno 430 vs 418. The 430 is WAY BETTER. And if the 810 gets too hot, you can always turn off 2 high performance cores. But you can never have an adreno 430 in the 808
gtg465x said:
I'm not sure I trust that Wikipedia article. There are no references cited for the 418 information. Looking at Anandtech, the Adreno 418 is slower in EVERY graphics benchmark than the Adreno 420, even though it has the advantage of being paired with a faster CPU.
Here's a quote from Anandtech: "In GFXBench, we can see that the Adreno 418 GPU is a definite step up from the Adreno 330 in the Snapdragon 801, but not quite at the level of the Snapdragon 805's Adreno 420."
Look at the benchmarks for yourself here. The Nexus 6 and Note 4 (SD 805 / Adreno 420) both beat the LG G4 (SD 808 / Adreno 418) in every single graphics and gaming test performed. http://www.anandtech.com/show/9379/the-lg-g4-review/7
So I think it's safe to say the 420 is a little better than the 418. I don't think they would have named it the 418 if it was just a die shrunk 420. Usually a die shrink allows for faster clock speeds, and if a die shrink was the only difference, you would expect the 418 to match the performance of the 420, or even surpass it because the clock speed could go higher. That isn't the case, so I think there are some architectural differences as well that aren't shown in the Wiki article. I think Qualcomm naming it the 418 instead of the 422 even though it's newer is a pretty good indication that Qualcomm knows it isn't as good as the 420.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's slower because Qualcomm halved the memory bus from 128-bit to 64-bit. The S810/A430 has the same bandwidth as the S805 because they doubled the speed of the RAM. So, 128-bit LPDDR3-800 (1600MHz effective) is equal to LPDDR4-1600 (3200MHz effective): 25.6 GB/s
Unfortunately, Qualcomm limited the S808 to LPDDR3-933 (1866MHz effective): 14.9 GB/s
The 418 and 420 are the same GPU, architecturally. The 418 could probably be slightly faster in non-bandwidth limited scenarios (low resolution 3D).
Memory bandwidth dropped from 25.6 GB/s to 14.9 GB/s. That's nearly a 25% loss and about equal to the real world performance losses. Hence, it's a 418.