Database Info

Why the Tegra2 shouldn't keep you from the Nexus S.

http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/for...ion-samsungs-implementation-of-arm-cortex-a9/
^^^^^^
I'm sick of hearing people cry omg Tegra2 awesome. NO. It's great, but it's not going to make the Hummingbird obsolete. The Hummingbird has a better GPU. Balance it out and you get unnoticeable performance gains from a Tegra2. Not to mention the Tegra2 phones are coming out with Froyo which simply put doesn't have dual core optimizations, so in the end, it might even be SLOWER than the Nexus S.
What you should be waiting for is the Snapdragon and OMAP dual cores as well as the Orion. But these won't be out for a while, so why not get the Nexus S?
It's either or in this case. Don't choose a Tegra2 phone because it's a Tegra2. Choose it because it is the right phone you want, that will get upgades when you want, and is on the right carrier you want. Get a Tegra2 or a Hummingbird, that's all I have to say. They're about equal.
Just sick of the overpraise that the Tegra2 gets when we already have that power in the Nexus S.
NVIDIA - they went from ARM11 (Tegra 1) to Cortex A9 (Tegra 2), skipping Cortex A8 design altogether. Tegra 2's CPU core will be competitive but its GPU appears to be weaker than even PowerVR SGX540. Heck, even Qualcomm's Adreno 205 may outperform this GPU. On the plus side, Tegra 2 is already available on the market NOW, and smartphones based on Tegra 2 will appear during Q4 of 2010. (Read this article for more details on Tegra 2). Samsung, LG and Motorola have announced their intention of producing phones based on Tegra 2 so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Power SGX540 = Hummingbird.
By no means am I saying to not get a Tegra2. All I'm saying is to not avoid the Hummingbird because you think the Tegra2 is that much better or something.

Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App

If you're that desperate for a Tegra branded chip, hang onto your Nexus S until next Christmas and go for a quad core Tegra 3...

Jayrod1980 said:
Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THANK YOU, WELL SAID...I was explaining this to someone the other day and it just wasnt making sense to them for som reason

Well you have the right spirit but little miss informed. What you fail to see is it has dual die so 2 proc thread can run each at 1ghz compared to 1 die 1ghz. I love how Samsung folks always has to bring the GPU in it whats your point? SGX540 is slightly by very small margin wins against Adreno 205. So does that mean NS can hold its ground with MT4G it has better GPU following your argument? No why due to higher memory that is allocated at faster speed.
But I myself would be waiting for Qualcomm to deploy dualcore for me thats when its serious business. Far as Samsung device goes it is already obsolete this is not rant of any from if you want to be head in the Tech world then you better have money for the changes which you will be required every 4-6months.

Jayrod1980 said:
Right on anderoid! Love hummingbird but I think I must have something wrong inside me. Kind off topic but I've had a siezure before and some epileptics electromagnetic field messes up semsitive electronics. After my workhorse 2 year old g1 I've had about 16 phones since then. 6 vibrants, 4 mytouch4g and warrantying my 5th and soon to be 6th sns. Granted not all problems have been pure hardware but these bleeding edge phones seem to be either fragile or sensitive.
That said, I love the nexus s. I loved humingbird in my vibrant and the awesome codecs but rfs and touchwiz and lag fixes drove me nuts. The nexus s on paper is amazing. Once you skin the outside or put a case, the scratch issue is pretty null and its such a clean beautiful phone. Cheap feeling? My ass. And it doesn't look anything like an iphone. The speed and battery life of hummingbird is amazing. Once google polishes gingerbread, especially gpu drivers or apps that jive better with it, I think people will regret passing it over. I've never had any slowdowns with it and dungeon defenders with no hacks or oc runs flawless.
Tegra 2 might turn out amazing but after tegra one was such a non starter (did it even make it into a phone?) And the gpu (nvidias pc meat and potatoes) not being as strong as an 8+ mo hummingbird, it seems to be a very short lived "king" if it amounts to that. I might end up very wrong but we will have to see what they bring when they finally go retail. The fact that the atrix needs a 1900mah battery scares me a bit. Maybe its needed for the extra ram and motoblur stuff, or extra resolution, but does anyone else not think it will get better battery life than the iphone4 or even the sns?
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't get me wrong, I love my Nexus S. Having had an Epic and an Evo I can easily say this is the most powerful phone I've ever owned; a fact that the people in the epic IRC like to try and dispute as we've established a stable 1.5GHz OC and they've never gone over 1.2GHz.
I love the graphics power it possesses and I definitely love that my friends with iPhones get jealous of how gorgeous the screen is and how blazingly fast the phone runs, even bone stock. However, I do have a few qualms:
I remember when the Nexus one came out. I still had a dumbphone but I had started looking at phones to get and then I found the Nexus One. It was by and large the most powerful phone on the market, nothing else even came close. Being on T-Mobile had given me access to the HTC Dream (G1) and the HTC Magic (MyTouch 3G) and neither of those phones were even close to what the Nexus One could do. Sadly, I was on a family plan and I couldn't afford to buy it off contract so I settled for a MT3G.
The memory of it faded and I had a chance to get off of my Family Plan on T-Mobile and join my wife on Sprint (who were going to be getting the Epic 4G) so I did it. Of course, it was a massive upgrade from my MT3G but I never particularly liked it. Eventually, I traded my Epic for an Evo and it was great. Not as fast or as powerful but I still quite enjoyed it. Then again, I had a chance to leave Sprint (I'd been very unhappy with them from the start) so I went back to T-Mobile and having read a little about the Nexus S I decided to buy one for both myself and my wife.
Again, don't get me wrong, I absolutely love it and so does my wife, but really when it comes down to brass tacks the Nexus S is pretty much a Vibrant without TouchWiz and with a NFC chip and a LED flash. The 'WOW' factor I had with the original Nexus just isn't there.
Is there anything wrong with the Hummingbird chip? Absolutely not. Its the most powerful processor in any phone on the market in the US without a doubt. But the Nexus line, to me, should be the pinnacle of Android performance. It should be the shining example of what the platform can do and where its going (like the Nexus One did with the Snapdragon and its eventual acceptance into most high-performance phones) and not feel like a re-badged five month old phone even if that phone is one of the best on the market. Had Samsung held off a little bit and made the Nexus S a dual-core phone I think it would easily usurp the Motorola Atrix from its lofty throne but as it stands it feels (and seems to be selling) like an afterthought.
Now, I'm still on the fence about these Tegra2 phones. Of course the gadget-whore in me wants to run out and buy one but the sensible part of me wants to see how they run and see how badly they eat battery life (as I'm sure no one can dispute they will). Will I eventually get one? Its more than likely, but I can't say when as I'm pretty happy with the Nexus S and I really like that updates are pushed out from Google and not a carrier or a manufacturer focused on selling more new handsets and less on supporting the ones they've already sold. Only time will tell.
That's just my two cents though.

I typically buy every new phone that comes out to try them and see if I liked it more them my blackberry bold 9700.. I would always end up selling them on ebay bc I didn't find much to love about them (i.e.- g2, vibrant, mt3g, g1 etc), after buying the nexus s, I was hooked. I had a nexus 1 for about two months and then sold that. It cracks me up to hear all the people already downing this nexus s. this phone is solid. I won't be switching to another phone unless it is pure google, no sense or touch whiz, and accompanies higher data speeds. A dual core would be nice , but until that happens, my nexus s is what I'm sticking with!
Sent from my Nexus S using XDA App

The simple fact is Tegra 2 and the Hummingbird wont stand a chance against Qualcomms dual core processors. Android at this point in time is more optimised for Qualcomm and being an owner of the Desire HD and Nexus S i can tell you the desire HD is much smoother even with its HTC Sense bloatware. But i can't stand waiting for updates so i gave it to my sister. But my advice would be don't get any Tegra 2 devices and just wait for the big guns (qualcomm)!

nice GPU is nice, but GPU is mostly for games......for kids....you kids wanna play some games, get yourself an xbox or some ****....

bratfink said:
The simple fact is Tegra 2 and the Hummingbird wont stand a chance against Qualcomms dual core processors. Android at this point in time is more optimised for Qualcomm and being an owner of the Desire HD and Nexus S i can tell you the desire HD is much smoother even with its HTC Sense bloatware. But i can't stand waiting for updates so i gave it to my sister. But my advice would be don't get any Tegra 2 devices and just wait for the big guns (qualcomm)!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, as when Qualcomm drops it thats when you know its serious business. Terga2 for the time being will hold the crown and make no mistake Hummingbird does not stand a chance against it.

Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.

LOL?
shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait? The hummingbird has always been faster cpu at the same Mz then a Qualcomm? Lets think about where your getting that idea..
The Hummingbird deffinitly outperforms the Nexus 1, Htc Desire etc etc which btw are all 1st gen yet i agree have the same 1Ghz clock speed. But still in cpu extensive tasks the 1st gen qualcomms are still not that far behind. Looking at the 2nd gen qualcomms however such as the HTC Desire HD we see the cpu out performing the Hummingbird and only been let down my an extremely marginal difference in the GPU performance. So forget about spec sheets and look at real world usage. Grab yourself a HTC Desire HD with a gingerbread rom (what i had) and a Nexus S and see for your self which wins. Im sorry but Samsung are ****, Google is the only good thing about the Nexus S, but thats good enough for me.

shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
honestly i always thought that the first gen snapdragon, such as the nexus one, outperformed the current hummingbird CPU in a lot of certain types of computational tasks/tests. cpu vs cpu, its very close, the hummingbird doesnt have that much of an advantage. it does have a much better GPU, which is where it shines.
so i'd imagine if the first gen snapdragon is nearly matching current hummingbird, then imagine what second gen snapdragon dual core, smaller die, will do. (i understand hummingbird dual will also come out, but just saying it will still be close).

RogerPodacter said:
honestly i always thought that the first gen snapdragon, such as the nexus one, outperformed the current hummingbird CPU in a lot of certain types of computational tasks/tests. cpu vs cpu, its very close, the hummingbird doesnt have that much of an advantage. it does have a much better GPU, which is where it shines.
so i'd imagine if the first gen snapdragon is nearly matching current hummingbird, then imagine what second gen snapdragon dual core, smaller die, will do. (i understand hummingbird dual will also come out, but just saying it will still be close).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The second-gen snapdragon is the processor in the G2 and the Evo Shift 4G, isn't it?

shep211 said:
Orion is going to be the fastest duel core chipset in 2011. The cpu can clock close to 2 ghz per core. Will have the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks (but not real world improvements). The hummingbird has always been the faster cpu atthe same mhz then Qualcomms cpus. Orion chipset is using a quad core gpu that performs better then xbox 360 gpu. I can not find any duel core that out performs these specs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, to expand upon this, the Orion will have a Cortex A9 which actually has "the same features that Qualcomms have that allow high linpack benchmarks," along with more features not found in the Snapdragon.
To be more specific, the Snapdragon has elements of speculative execution with branch prediction, which is most important area in which it differs from the Cortex A8 reference design. This causes its floating point performance (very important in 3D calculations) to be very high. Unfortunately for Qualcomm, though, even the Adreno 205 falls short in terms of performance. Thus, even though the Scorpion CPU core in the Snapdragon is better at 3D than the Hummingbird's Cortex A8, the Snapdragon's GPU is so castrated that it's much slower in games overall. As a side note, the Cortex A8 in the Hummingbird actually has 2 times the L2 cache compared to the reference A8 design.
The Cortex A9 in the Tegra 2, on the other hand, supports full out of order execution (in addition to speculative execution and branch prediction found in the Snapdragon's Scorpion CPU core). This yields roughly 25% higher IPC compared to the Cortex A8, which is why the CPU section of Tegra 2 benchmarks seem to be roughly that much faster than our Hummingbird. Benchmarks have been mixed for its GPU, as I pointed out here, though that could have been due to a higher screen resolution or immature drivers.
Bottom line is that while the CPU will be ~25% better per clock cycle than our Cortex A8 (when only using one core), its GPU is roughly on the same level--sometimes performing better, sometimes worse. Another thing to remember is that since the Hummingbird uses a PowerVR architecture, it is tile-based deferred rendering. This basically means that fillrate and memory bandwidth are much less of an issue than they are in traditional rendering methods.
What will differentiate Tegra 2 though (in my humble opinion) is software tailored for its strengths, which is what Tegra Zone will likely bring. Sure the Hummingbird's fast, and perhaps even better for GPU rendering, but the code optimized for the Tegra 2's GPU may perform better on a Tegra 2 than on our possibly-faster SGX 540.

Relax, just wait until all that Tegra 2 phones released.
Certainly there will be some reviews, comparisons, benchmarks, etc.
In the mean time, enjoy your Nexus S. It is fast enough for current apps that are available You don't need dual core to run Angry Birds
Then we can wait the next Nexus 3 !

kolyan said:
nice GPU is nice, but GPU is mostly for games......for kids....you kids wanna play some games, get yourself an xbox or some ****....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Err what? GPU relates to the smoothness in transitions of the home screen, the smoothness of the browser, the smoothness of everything. It's not just about games good sir. Compare screen swiping with a live wallpaper on G2 vs Galaxy S on stock Launcher2 and prepare to see why GPU matters.
Or use a phone that doesn't even have a GPU. Like a Wildfire. Then throw it out the window.
Going further, you can't count Quadrant 3d scores on the Nexus S because it doesn't render properly due to Gingerbread incompatibility.
The other reason the Optimus 2x scores higher is the i/o part. If we do the same ext4 lagfix that is probably built into the 2x we get the same i/o as it, and about the same Quadrant, maybe a little lower due to the GPU not running properly ever on Quadrant with Gingerbread.
As for CPU, yes the Tegra2 will be better. It's an A9. However the differences will be subtle at best until the end of 2011 when things are optimized for the Tegra2, which by then both the Qualcomm and Orion god processors will be out.
As far as processing power between the Hummingbird and Snapdragon, it definitely is more powerful than the Nexus One's processor, and GPU knocks it off it's feet.
As for the 2nd gen Snapdragon vs Hummingbird, they're probably about equal processors. The GPU gives the Hummingbird the edge and you will notice it if you take a Live wallpaper and compare Launcher2.apk screen swipes on a G2 vs Nexus S. It is very nudgy on the G2, but smooth on Nexus S.
What causes the Snap Dragon to score so high in Linpack for instance is the FPU aka float processing unit which isn't really worth caring about when it comes to every day tasks.
But yes, the Tegra2 will definitely be a bit more powerful than the Hummingbird. But it won't be tons tons tons rapejob over 9000. This is why Google released the Nexus S with the Hummingbird without second thought.

kenvan19 said:
The second-gen snapdragon is the processor in the G2 and the Evo Shift 4G, isn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well yes, i was referring to the original snapdragon in the nexus one. i think the snapdragon in the G2 and evo shift is just the same snapdragon CPU with an improved GPU. so there's kinda 2 separate topics, CPU vs CPU, and then the GPU vs GPU. i believe the hummingbird and snapdragon CPU vs CPU is rather close, sometimes the snapdragon beats it, sometimes the hummingbird does. then add in the GPU, i believe the hummingbird GPU is better than the new snapddragon adreno. not sure by how much though.
but an example of why it's important for the GPU to actually be taken advantage of in code, the nexus s web browser doesnt seem to be using the GPU properly, so relying soley on CPU vs CPU, we see the nexus one perform BETTER on some types of web pages as the snapdragon seems to be either coded properly, or it is just better for those certain types of tasks. basically my opinion is snapdragon is a better CPU, but the hummingbird has the better GPU.

Edited... I was ranting very off topic

The Nexus S really looks great, but I have doubts if I should really buy it when it's available in Germany/Austria or Switzerland...
The point is I start studying software development in the autumn 2011 and can't afford a new phone each year and would use the phone for about 2 years.
So my question is:
Will I have fun with this phone (as a developer) for the following 2 years or should I buy a more powerful phone?
Note: Currently I have a Nokia 5800 and I definitely want a new one because the bugs are annoying even with ported C6-Firmware it is not really satisfying...
thanks you very much!

Tegra 3 = Beast!

Wow, just reading this and watching the video got me really excited!
Quote: "...its benchmark puts Kal-El at a higher performance bracket than even Intel's Core 2 Duo full-on-PC processors."
Enjoy: http://pocketnow.com/android/nvidia-quad-core-kal-el-in-android-devices-this-summer
I guess my next phone will somewhere on par with my [email protected], nah not quite but still impressive.

Its freakin ridiculous isn't it, I can't imagine how powerful wayne, logan, or even stark will be.
By the way, those are the architectures coming after Kal-El as seen in the roadmap here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4181/...-a9s-coming-to-smartphonestablets-this-year/1

Can't wait for my Q6600 to have a little brother as well.

dreadlord369 said:
Its freakin ridiculous isn't it, I can't imagine how powerful wayne, logan, or even stark will be.
By the way, those are the architectures coming after Kal-El as seen in the roadmap here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4181/...-a9s-coming-to-smartphonestablets-this-year/1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow sick! I had a feeling the technology was gona explode once dual core starts being implemented into phones but this is just ridiculous. I wander which C2D they are comparing to though. Can't wait to play some Crysis on my phone !!

omg it looks so cool!
7

Its lie, arm can not beat intel dual core cpus for next three year
It might be better then atom dual...
Sent from my LG-SU660 using XDA App

uhh three years is too long if they havent already beat some dual core chips, least thats what i think...specially since the kal-el and omap 5 cpus and whatever qualcomm have planned are gunna be freaking awesome!

OMG!!!! Its amazing

Mobile phones better than my first PC

Well since nvidia is supposedly releasing quad core in q4 of this year I say that computers will prolly eventually die out. Especially since this year smartphone sales beat computers...just a thought
HTC HD2 w/ 2.3 : )

CTR01 said:
Well since nvidia is supposedly releasing quad core in q4 of this year I say that computers will prolly eventually die out. Especially since this year smartphone sales beat computers...just a thought
HTC HD2 w/ 2.3 : )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funny you mention that, I was just in uni talking about networking (my major) and technology and a classmate said the same thing. I would say it could happen in maybe 20+ years.
I would like to see a Tegra 3 rendering a complex 3D scene or something like that which would really show it's performance.

Is this the Q6600 club or what? <3
Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk

I have an Athlon X3 435 at 3.6 ghz. Can go up to 3.8 ghz as well. But too much v-core.

Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?

icecold23 said:
Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I don' think the battery technology is on par or evolving on par with the processors. At this rate, we'll have "stationary" tablets with the current battery technology.

icecold23 said:
Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.

vbetts said:
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed...while im no cpu expert i do know the slight basics and did a little reading that agrees with vbetts. they said the 4 core kal-el nvidia cpu is supposed to have ~12 hours of play back for hd video...least thats what someone on a thread of mine posted...

vbetts said:
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah exactly, I personally thought the move to dual core would be sooner with a 2 500mhz core cpu or lower since that would still be better then a single 1Ghz chip.
Battery is definitely a issue, with today's technology I wonder how much these chips will consume at 100% load or when playing a game which use most of the devices grunt. On my DHD I can take it up to 1.9Ghz stable and if i'm playing FPse while at that frequency current widget show consumption of around 425mA, while at 1Ghz it's around 285mA. That's quiet a difference! So in order for these chips to be efficient they shouldn't use much more battery then todays chips.
I love my Q6600, max OC I could get was 4Ghz but it required 1.6v Vcore and on air that was HOT. Still I made it into Windows and did some benching, 13.110s on a 1MB SuperPI/1.5 XS mod
CTR01 said:
agreed...while im no cpu expert i do know the slight basics and did a little reading that agrees with vbetts. they said the 4 core kal-el nvidia cpu is supposed to have ~12 hours of play back for hd video...least thats what someone on a thread of mine posted...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I read that as well or heard it somewhere.

Yeah exactly, I personally thought the move to dual core would be sooner with a 2 500mhz core cpu or lower since that would still be better then a single 1Ghz chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the app is multithreaded capable, then yes. Easily better. But 2 500mhz cpus would probably be best for multitasking.
Battery is definitely a issue, with today's technology I wonder how much these chips will consume at 100% load or when playing a game which use most of the devices grunt. On my DHD I can take it up to 1.9Ghz stable and if i'm playing FPse while at that frequency current widget show consumption of around 425mA, while at 1Ghz it's around 285mA. That's quiet a difference! So in order for these chips to be efficient they shouldn't use much more battery then todays chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Battery has always been an issue though, even on my old Moment the battery sucked. But that's what you get with these I guess. But man, 1.9ghz stable from 1ghz! For a small platform, that's pretty damn impressive.
I love my Q6600, max OC I could get was 4Ghz but it required 1.6v Vcore and on air that was HOT. Still I made it into Windows and did some benching, 13.110s on a 1MB SuperPI/1.5 XS mod
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ouch, how long did the chip last? I've got my 435 at 1.52vcore. I can go higher but I need this chip to last me for a year or so.

I can't believe that they set the time-frame for the release as early as they did. Hopefully they will live up to this standard

HTC sensation DUAL core Asynchronous system

So everybody says that the exynos processor is the best in the market as far as the mobile platform goes. I do agree. All the benchmarks prove it plus the Mali 400 mp GPU is supposed to be a beast. But i have questions. Is it fair to compare it to the qualcomm S3 chip? People say that most of the time the second core is in idle and isn't even used. how do you guys think the qualcomm will perform if both cores run at the same frequency at the same time? Just wanna know. Thanks guys.

well if u root it i think u can set it to run on both mines is rooted at 1.5 ghz i got about 3100 or so on quadrant standard

we're smokin' sgs2 benchmarks when we overclock compared to their stock clocks. I would have to assume if they overclocked to about 2ghz they'd then wipe the floor with us lol. That being said, I have zero lag with my MiUI or CM7 setups. They're both overclocked too with custom kernels, but still. I can watch hd movies which is ridiculous for a phone if you ask me. I don't know how much faster we need phones to get honestly. I suppose that depends on how much more eye candy the OS's get...

The A9 will always be 20% faster than a Scorpion. At the same clock speed, it's no contest. The Mali-400 MP4 also outclasses the Adreno 220 in most aspects.

I have to say im pretty happy with the speed on my sensation.. but i am wonderinh how come you guys want to overclock so bad as at this moment i run all games with no problem. And watch all videos with ease.
And i underclocked my cpu to rougly 1000 mhz.
Anyhow would like to hear your thoughts on this.
Sent from my Sensation using XDA App

aNYthing24 said:
The A9 will always be 20% faster than a Scorpion. At the same clock speed, it's no contest. The Mali-400 MP4 also outclasses the Adreno 220 in most aspects.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct.
You can overclock the Sensation all you want to reach or beat the stock SGS2, but don't forget the latter can be overclocked as well.

There is no real difference the user can feel. The difference is to low. SGS2 feel´s faster because of the software. If you use CM7 on the Sensation there is a big difference!
SGS2 feels like **** in your ahnd its big and thick it feels not good in the Hand it feels like plastic. And the software is as easy as it can be it looks awful.
Sensation feels like a High Quality Phone and the Software looks and feels awesome! Thats why i always will choose HTC.
In a Desktop PC you can prefer AMD above Intel or Intel above AMD but in a Phone there are other things that rule! The Sensation is way more better to use.
SGS starting an App for almost everything
Sensation all in one wonder!
All is to say:
Compare
Build Quality
and
Software
The CPU has nothing to say if there is such a low difference! Who say the SGS is better he only mean the Cores! But never the User Experience!!
Look at Sense 3.5 and TouchWIZ the SGS2 is jsut UGLY!

^ And a SGS2 user may disagree with all your points. You are also rationalizing a lot.

[Q] Most badass GPU and CPU in da world; Expert Knowedge please :)

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™

Exactly how good is this Qualcomm Processor?

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).