Database Info

[INFO] glbenchmark score

They had scores on pocketnow. Based on anandtech review on adreno 220 gpu I thought it was going to blow away Tegra 2 but it was only about 7% higher.

At least it did better than the Tegra 2 phones. I was seriously starting to think the Snapdragon processor was going to be the weakest out of the bunch. And do you mind posting links?

Isn't it smartbench rather than glbenchmark ??
Smartbench isn't very accurate although not as flawed as quadrant, glbenchmark is the best one for now

Virtue94 said:
At least it did better than the Tegra 2 phones. I was seriously starting to think the Snapdragon processor was going to be the weakest out of the bunch. And do you mind posting links?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://pocketnow.com/android/htc-sensation-graphics-benchmarked-compared

The sg2 gpu is the weakest out of all of them if you seen the test the nexus s has a weaker and gpu than that if a vibrant and the sg2 gpu is weaker than that
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App

Search up the results for the ODroid A tablet that's using the same Exynos 4210 processor. The results blow everything away even though the tablet is running at a higher resolution. All the tests so far on the SGSII are only done on prototype firmware so it isn't fair to test it and see how it stacks up at the moment.

That's overclocked to 1.5 GHz?

worker1 said:
That's overclocked to 1.5 GHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.2 GHz; its from the actual Sensation device.

Wow... are you a troll? Run-on sentence with bad grammar and baseless (and completely wrong) claims, yea I probably shouldn't be feeding you.
Killbynature said:
The sg2 gpu is the weakest out of all of them if you seen the test the nexus s has a weaker and gpu than that if a vibrant and the sg2 gpu is weaker than that
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

dinan said:
Wow... are you a troll? Run-on sentence with bad grammar and baseless (and completely wrong) claims, yea I probably shouldn't be feeding you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not even trying to troll Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540 can do 90M triangles/sec, but according to webpage for mali-400mp from Arm's website, it can only do 30M triangles/sec meaning it is weaker but most likely has better performance probably a reason why Samsung didn't go qhd super amoled on it.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App

Yes, a single core Mali400 can do what the website says. You do know that the setup in the galaxy S2 is a QUAD CORE Mali right?
EDIT: Also the widely thrown around statistic of 90m triangles/sec for the SGX540 is wrong.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR#Series_5
Killbynature said:
I'm not even trying to troll Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540 can do 90M triangles/sec, but according to webpage for mali-400mp from Arm's website, it can only do 30M triangles/sec meaning it is weaker but most likely has better performance probably a reason why Samsung didn't go qhd super amoled on it.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Killbynature said:
I'm not even trying to troll Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540 can do 90M triangles/sec, but according to webpage for mali-400mp from Arm's website, it can only do 30M triangles/sec meaning it is weaker but most likely has better performance probably a reason why Samsung didn't go qhd super amoled on it.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Feeding a troll goes against my better judgement but I can't help but say something about why Samsung didn't include a qHD SAMOLED. The new SAMOLED+ has more subpixels on it which requires more space than what a 4 inch screen can provide to get the same WVGA resolution. If Samsung were to make the resolution qHD, it would probably be way larger than the 4.3 inches it is currently, making it way too big to be a smartphone and pushing it into tablet territory. And do you even understand the costs it takes to make an OLED panel that large?!? Add that to the increased difficulty of making a large OLED panel successfully. The larger one makes the panel, the more room there is for error. Its not that Samsung doesn't want to make the screen qHD, it's because they can't. Oh and btw, the Exynos processor has plenty of power to utilize a qHD if they did manage to fit one in.

I had read somewhere that it was pretty hard for samsung to get their OLEDs to have a pixel density higher than 200ppi with a 3 subpixel layout rather than their original pentile 2 subpixel layout. At 4.27" diagonal this panel is already pushing slightly over 200ppi which I think is their theoretical production limit currently. So ya, a qHD SAMOLED Plus panel would probably need to be 4.5" at least with their current manufacturing limits. It's probably why the samsung infuse (which was their first samoled plus screen) is 4.5" and the SGS2 is 4.27" which means they're getting better, but not quite there yet.
Virtue94 said:
Feeding a troll goes against my better judgement but I can't help but say something about why Samsung didn't include a qHD SAMOLED. The new SAMOLED+ has more subpixels on it which requires more space than what a 4 inch screen can provide to get the same WVGA resolution. If Samsung were to make the resolution qHD, it would probably be way larger than the 4.3 inches it is currently, making it way too big to be a smartphone and pushing it into tablet territory. And do you even understand the costs it takes to make an OLED panel that large?!? Add that to the increased difficulty of making a large OLED panel successfully. The larger one makes the panel, the more room there is for error. Its not that Samsung doesn't want to make the screen qHD, it's because they can't. Oh and btw, the Exynos processor has plenty of power to utilize a qHD if they did manage to fit one in.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Killbynature said:
I'm not even trying to troll Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540 can do 90M triangles/sec, but according to webpage for mali-400mp from Arm's website, it can only do 30M triangles/sec meaning it is weaker but most likely has better performance probably a reason why Samsung didn't go qhd super amoled on it.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So your a troll in fact ? ew
Exynos at 1Ghz can actually run a graphic intensive game at 60fps on a 1080p screen, it can even go up to 70fps with a proper 1.4 HDMI cable...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/03/samsungs-exynos-4210-flexes-3d-gaming-muscle-at-gdc-2011-video/
Not to mention the Exynos on the Galaxy S II is clocked at 1.2Ghz
Enough, you have eaten enough for today

touness69 said:
So your a troll in fact ? ew
Exynos at 1Ghz can actually run a graphic intensive game at 60fps on a 1080p screen, it can even go up to 70fps with a proper 1.4 HDMI cable...
http://www.engadget.com/2011/03/03/samsungs-exynos-4210-flexes-3d-gaming-muscle-at-gdc-2011-video/
Not to mention the Exynos on the Galaxy S II is clocked at 1.2Ghz
Enough, you have eaten enough for today
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not trolling I was wrong I admit it. Calm down.
Sent from my HTC Glacier using XDA Premium App

Hm..
I still think that Tegra 2 OC will beat Snapdragon OC.
And the SGS will be king again -_-
I REALLY wish HTC would get its hardware from Samsung and NOT Qualcomm.

Maedhros said:
Hm..
I still think that Tegra 2 OC will beat Snapdragon OC.
And the SGS will be king again -_-
I REALLY wish HTC would get its hardware from Samsung and NOT Qualcomm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. An HTC phone with both the Exynos and SAMOLED+ would completely destroy its competition. I guess that's why Samsung doesn't want to supply them with it...

Is the Hummingbird processor, just an OC'ed 1ghz?

I can't seem to find a model number of the processor used in the Infuse. Is it the same Hummingbird that is in the Nexus S (S5PC110), just OC'ed to 1.2gh?
If so, does that mean that we are tapped out at 1.2?

Yes, same processor, just OCed. I'm sure it could overclock a little more up to at least 1.4 like the original Galaxy S could, maybe 1.6 if you're lucky.

thanks... not that I am complaining about the speed... just hoping for a higher baseline to work with

gtg465x said:
Yes, same processor, just OCed. I'm sure it could overclock a little more up to at least 1.4 like the original Galaxy S could, maybe 1.6 if you're lucky.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes. it seems to be identical. some users may be topped, but they may have saved better tested units for faster clocked phones. there may be a greater percentage of users that can see above 1300mhz than on the sgs. if you are concerned about clockspeeds then get a snapdragon powered phone. qualcom has there own dies and some of them see speeds as high as 1.8ghz.
but im sure if you see this chip at 1.4ghz+ benchmark you wont see a need for more

Dani897 said:
yes. it seems to be identical. some users may be topped, but they may have saved better tested units for faster clocked phones. there may be a greater percentage of users that can see above 1300mhz than on the sgs. if you are concerned about clockspeeds then get a snapdragon powered phone. qualcom has there own dies and some of them see speeds as high as 1.8ghz.
but im sure if you see this chip at 1.4ghz+ benchmark you wont see a need for more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
meh... this seems more than fast enough for me (right now)... not sure I need to mess with it, just for benchmark bragging rights.
oh, who am I kidding, of course, I will OC it when a kernel gets released

I just wanted to post this for information only.
Even though the chip is the same, since is OC'd from the factory it means a higher quality chip. Thus it should still be able to clock higher than the other 1Ghz chips.

It may be a similar chip, but much smoother than when I overclocked galaxy. Benchmarks are better than the inspire I overclocked 1.5g
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App

Rldowney said:
It may be a similar chip, but much smoother than when I overclocked galaxy. Benchmarks are better than the inspire I overclocked 1.5g
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't feel any smoother than an overclocked Captivate running a 2.2.1 firmware to me and didn't bench any higher either. If it is smoother, it's probably because of tweaked software and different memory and/or nand components.
The chip itself has the same model number.

Papi4baby said:
I just wanted to post this for information only.
Even though the chip is the same, since is OC'd from the factory it means a higher quality chip. Thus it should still be able to clock higher than the other 1Ghz chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Probably true, but I've seen several reports of stock Infuses overheating, which doesn't inspire confidence in its overclocking abilities.

gtg465x said:
Probably true, but I've seen several reports of stock Infuses overheating, which doesn't inspire confidence in its overclocking abilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you say that so you could say Inspire and Infuse in the same sentence?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App

h8rift said:
Did you say that so you could say Inspire and Infuse in the same sentence?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did it captivate you?

gtg465x said:
Did it captivate you?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*facepalm* You could say it fascinated me to see such a vibrant and epic galaxy of Android phones!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I997 using XDA App

gtg465x said:
Probably true, but I've seen several reports of stock Infuses overheating, which doesn't inspire confidence in its overclocking abilities.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well the heat seems to come from one of the radios.

Benchmark BS

When i bought my sensation i googled for benchmark results and was pretty disappointed. The quadrant scores were quite low for it's generation.
Then i did further research and found alot of reviewers say quadrant is a load of horse **** and can't be trusted for proper testing.
One review i saw even said the Sensation's MSM8260 was a Cortex A8 based chip and A9's were going to blitz it. Looking further i found it's a Cortex A9 based chip!
There's just so much noise in the benchmark area.
AnandTech's benchmarks put it in some ways faster then the Tegra 2 in more reputable benchmarks and really low in the quadrant but they have a bit to say about that.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4471/htc-sensation-4g-review-a-sensational-smartphone
I *think* i've heard the the Exynos chipset that the US samsung galaxy s 2's have (not all GS2's have the same chipset) is quadcore and probably a bit of a beast once the 2.3.5 multi core update is popular.
Which is fine i don't need the fastest phone on the planet but what i really don't need is people telling me it's up to half as powerful as it really is.
Rant over..

2.3.5 Multi-Core? Link me

Benchmarks have always been a dubious way to compare hardware. If you ever go to a real hardware review site they always do real world testing and not synthetic benchmarks.

The galaxy s2 does not and will not have quad core. Nvidia who first showcased their quad core 'kal-el' chip said that its coming out next year for smartphones. So maybe the galaxy s3 will have quad core but the s2 wont
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

"my benchmark scores are slow, can we fix it mr Dev?", quadrant only gave me a score of 916 gigifloppiecycles, blah blah blah.
will version 1.2.8 fix it? when is it due?, how's that update coming along.
who gives a toss? the question you should be asking yourselves is this.
"is MY phone fast enough doing the things i want it to do?" if it is, who cares what benchmark score you get.
If it doesn't, buy a faster phone.
My rant also over

Corrections:
The CPU in the GSII is not quad core and the Sensations CPU does not use the A9 architecture.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App

jrwingate6 said:
Corrections:
The CPU in the GSII is not quad core and the Sensations CPU does not use the A9 architecture.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It uses some elements of the A9 architecture and some elements of the A8 architecture. It's a hybrid.

We don't need another post about how the Quadrant scores on the S4G are low on the stock ROM and kernel.
Thread closed.

[Q] HTC Vivid poor quadrant?

As I already know Quadrant isn't the best benchmark, but I noticed that the Evo 3D which seems to be about the same spec wise as the Vivid gets better scores and especially in FPS almost double at times, almost as if the Vivid is capped
Is this because Quadrant isn't optimized for the Vivid? I'm guess that the answer but would like to know just for sake of cursorily.
Thanks!

Quadrant isn't optimized for any dual core devices. Its an extremely inaccurate benchmark. Looking at specs, they should be pretty close if using a good benchmark test, unless there's a big difference in the gpu.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA Premium App

Seems like quadrant hasn't been changed in a long while considering the phones on the result list.
I'm pretty sure they share the same GPU, just seems like the phone is getting a bad wrap for that reason.

i9103 Galaxy S II Tegra (Galaxy Royal) Benchmark

Here the results of my i9103 benchmarks with:
quadrant
smartbench
antutu
Click pictures to see them bigger.

err...what do you want us do with these stats?

overclock to 1.3Ghz?

Darkside Agent said:
err...what do you want us do with these stats?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For what we do Benchmarks?
To look at them.

Why this is called S2? It sits perfectly between S and S2 specs wise.

legion1911 said:
For what we do Benchmarks?
To look at them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
benchmarks are a crap waste of time - they dont give a true reflection (did you run each one 4-5 times before screenshotting? - thats about the closest you will get to a relevant score)
And you have posted screenshots for a i9103...this forum is for the i9100...so, what are you expecting to gain with this thread?

ambar_hitman said:
Why this is called S2? It sits perfectly between S and S2 specs wise.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you look at the benchmark?
It is much much faster then S. And even faster then S2.

That's because you over clocked it, If I did the same with my S2 yours wouldn't stand a chance.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

So what? No oc and CM7, benchmark is just ****

avocco said:
That's because you over clocked it, If I did the same with my S2 yours wouldn't stand a chance.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not true. In games and in particular in games optimized for Tegra II (those from www.tegrazone.com) the i9103 is faster then SII also without overclock.

Dude why do you keep posting it in S II thread? Are you so naive and think that you're gonna impress anybody here? I also own i9103, but we've got no chance in benchmarks against them.
First of all they have custom roms which affects benchmark score pretty much. For us slower stock is everything we can get. We can compete only in terms of gaming. Otherwise sorry we're slower. There's no need for childish competition.

m.kochan10 said:
Dude why do you keep posting it in S II thread?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the benchmark it is compared to i9100 so to post it here is appropriate.
Do we have a i9103 forum? No.
To post a benchmark is not childish.
"For us slower stock is everything we can get." WTF are you writing? The fact that we do not have custom ROMs yet does not mean we will not get them in the future. Market presentation of the Galaxy R in Germany was this week! We are much newer.

Tegra 2 is already known to be slower than exynos.......benchmarks give an idea but not always/rarely true real world performance.
Your games are optimized but exynos still runs them pretty flawlessly.

legion1911 said:
In the benchmark it is compared to i9100 so to post it here is appropriate.
Do we have a i9103 forum? No.
To post a benchmark is not childish.
"For us slower stock is everything we can get." WTF are you writing? The fact that we do not have custom ROMs yet does not mean we will not get them in the future. Market presentation of the Galaxy R in Germany was this week! We are much newer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OMG dude chill out and read between the lines, I meant that sgs2 has everything right now while we just have stock roms. That's why all benchmarks have no sense right now. Sgs2 has custom roms, kernels originally faster processor, while the one oc kernel is everything we've got now. See the difference? Be less emotional and more rational. It was really stupid to interprete my post that we won't ever get any aftermarket development, seriously.
And I'm sorry about little too offensive form, I didn't mean to offend you.
Sent from my GT-I9103 using XDA App

legion1911 said:
In the benchmark it is compared to i9100 so to post it here is appropriate.
Do we have a i9103 forum? No.
To post a benchmark is not childish.
"For us slower stock is everything we can get." WTF are you writing? The fact that we do not have custom ROMs yet does not mean we will not get them in the future. Market presentation of the Galaxy R in Germany was this week! We are much newer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Run a cf bench and linpack.
And you'll see who is faster.
Also, your score is low at antutu. 8050 here.
Run a nenamark 2 bench too.
Caps at 60 fps here.
Mali 400 is a way more powerful than Tegra 2. You'll see it by yourself.
Sent from HydrOG3N MOD S2.
Technology Evolves, Android Evolves.
HydrOG3N is THE Revolution.

Yes, but you gotta remember that SGR's processor is originally 1 ghz, while SGS2 is equipped with 1,2 ghz (or even 1,5 without OC - correct me if I'm wrong) processor. Thus we need to use oc kernel (set cpu least to 1,2 mhz) to start a fair competition.
When I tested 1,2 ghz on CF bench I got slightly better results that sgs2.

Hold on to your horses tegra boys.Your CPU might appear faster in *some* benchmarks because it's built with a 40nm die as opposed to our 45nm die in the Exynos.That is good and all and you can brag about it,but the Tegra 2 is missing on something really crucial.NEON instructions.And NEON does make a difference.So sorry,but comparing the I9100 to the I9103 is unfair for you.We have the upper hand,live with it.
Also,chech Anandtech's review of the SGS2.The Mali MP-400 beats the Tegra 2's CPU by leaps and bounds in clock for clock performance.You have games optimized for your platform?Right...Check them running on the Mali.There is where the games show their potential.
Again sorry,but no,the Tegra is in no perceivable way better than the Exynos.

Thank you for informative post. I'm truly aware that Exynos is supreme in this comparison and I do not argue about that. I don't see point for competition, and that's what I meant, when I call it "childish". I didn't mean anything personal, but I knew it would end up like that "we against them" "tegra boys against Exynos boys" which I do consider totally unnecessary. There's no competition, it's nonsense. Our chipsets are absolute world's top products and that's all. Exynos has overall better performance. I'm ok about that, because tegra2 is still nothing to be ashamed.

m.kochan10 said:
Thank you for informative post. I'm truly aware that Exynos is supreme in this comparison and I do not argue about that. I don't see point for competition, and that's what I meant, when I call it "childish". I didn't mean anything personal, but I knew it would end up like that "we against them" "tegra boys against Exynos boys" which I do consider totally unnecessary. There's no competition, it's nonsense. Our chipsets are absolute world's top products and that's all. Exynos has overall better performance. I'm ok about that, because tegra2 is still nothing to be ashamed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Chill out dude,it wasn't meant for you.Nor do I want to start some "we against them" kind of bull****.It was just a direct answer to the guy who came to our forums to bully us.
The Tegra 2 is one hell of a chipset,no one can doubt that.But better things have come out and it's past its prime,as Exynos will be in a few months time.It has its flaws,it's older.End of story.I just don't want some pricks to act so offensively when they can't actually.Plus,we shouldn't get all emotional-they are just gadgets after all.

tolis626 said:
Chill out dude,it wasn't meant for you.Nor do I want to start some "we against them" kind of bull****.It was just a direct answer to the guy who came to our forums to bully us.
The Tegra 2 is one hell of a chipset,no one can doubt that.But better things have come out and it's past its prime,as Exynos will be in a few months time.It has its flaws,it's older.End of story.I just don't want some pricks to act so offensively when they can't actually.Plus,we shouldn't get all emotional-they are just gadgets after all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude I'm chilled I didn't take your post offensive. No problem at all (I referred to another user's comment to be honest. My bad, I should have mark it better.) Seriously I found your post worth to read, and I completely agree with you about getting too emotional and so on. That's why I pressed "thanks" (due to these technical infos I was unaware of before.)
Cheers