Database Info

[Q] tegra 2, exynos 4210, TI OMAP4430 and others

hello i have a few questions about different SoC.
-so first which is better?
-which have the fastest gpu?
-which gpu can render more triangles per second?
-on exynos 4210's mali-400 gpu has 4 cores (tegra 2 has 8 gpu cores are that the same cores)
-how many gpu cores have TI OMAP4430?
-and finaly benchmark test:
on quadrant the galaxy s2 scored onle around 1500 just like galaxy s (1) or htc desire HD. why?
why did motorola atrix scores ower 2500?
and why does exynos 4210 (galaxy s) record video in [email protected] and tegra 2 (motorola atrix) just in [email protected] is that software suppressed
ps.: if my English is incorrect i'm sory

so do anyone now something above this???

lol its seems that noone knows anything above this and this should be the top mobile forum XD

At this point, no one really knows which is best. The problem is some of the drivers for the chips are optimized (tegra 2, TI Omap) and some aren't (Exynos). When the Galaxy S II gets closer to launch we will have a better idea of which chip is the best.
GPU isn't just dependent on the GPU, but drivers matter a lot as well. It's not who has the fastest GPU, but it's which one has the best drivers and the fastest GPU.
The GPU cores in the Exynos (Mali-400) and the Tegra 2 are not the same cores. They most likely have different designs. The Mali-400 should work about as well as the Tegra 2, but we won't know that until the Galaxy S II is released.
The Galaxy S II scored around 1500 on Quadrant because like I said earlier, drivers are not yet optimized for it. The Atrix scored over 2500 because the drivers are mature and the Tegra 2 is a great chip. We unfortunately can't compare the Exynos with the Tegra 2 and the TI Omap because they have better drivers right now. When Samsung's drivers are optimized, we will have a much better idea of which chip is the best.
I hope this helps. If you have anymore questions, just ask.

thanks for the answer.
jea i got one more if u know how many triangles each gpu could rander in 1 second.

It looks like the OMAP 4430 is supposed to get approximately 20 million triangles/s. The Tegra 2 is, according to nVidia, 20-30% faster than that. There are no numbers I could find for the Exynos.
I do know that the Exynos is SUPPOSED to have 5 times the 3D performance as the current Hummingbird from Samsung. The Hummingbird has the PowerVR SGX540 (The same GPU in the OMAP 4). That means that the Tegra 2 and the Exynos are supposed to be a lot better than the OMAP 4430.
Don't quote me on that, it's just what I've heard.

coz i read (on some forum) that tegra 2 has 90mil tri/sec and exynos has 122mil tri/sec (that was for mali-604) and i wanted to confirm that but i couldnt find any proof except this:
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.php
in performance is information 30mil tri/sec and i think that it is for one core so 4 times 30 is 120. or it is just 30mil tri/sec???
o and in previous answer u wrote that tegra 2 and exynos dont have the same gpu cores but i wanted to know if that 8 cores (4cores = quadcore, 8cores = ?) in tegra 2 means the same that quadcore gpu on mali like it says in this picture:
http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=reviewsimg/mwc-11-samsung/pc/gsmarena_009.jpg

If you look at this wikipedia page and go to the SGX540 (The GPU in the OMAP 4), it says that it has approximately 20 Million tri/s.
Then if you go to this page it says that the Tegra 2 has a GPU that is 10-30% faster than the SGX540.
Also, this page says that the Exynos (code named the Orion) should have "5 times the 3D graphics performance over the previous processor generation from Samsung." The previous generation (The Hummingbird found in some phones including the Galaxy S and the Galaxy Tab) also had an SGX540.
I'm making all of my comparisons to the PowerVR SGX540 because those are the only numbers I could find. Also remember that the real world numbers you will get depend on other factors than just the GPU.
The cores are different, but the 8 cores in the Tegra 2 makes the GPU an octa-core GPU, not quad-core. The difference between them is the architecture and design of each core. Samsung could have made faster/more efficient cores and could get by with 4 of them. nVidia could have decided to go with a different design that got close to the same performance as the Exynos with more cores. It's all up to the manufacturer, design, and drivers, as well as some other factors. It's very hard to make a decent comparison between the cores without actual diagrams of them as well as the design.

Kumouri said:
If you look at this wikipedia page and go to the SGX540 (The GPU in the OMAP 4), it says that it has approximately 20 Million tri/s.
Then if you go to this page it says that the Tegra 2 has a GPU that is 10-30% faster than the SGX540.
Also, this page says that the Exynos (code named the Orion) should have "5 times the 3D graphics performance over the previous processor generation from Samsung." The previous generation (The Hummingbird found in some phones including the Galaxy S and the Galaxy Tab) also had an SGX540.
I'm making all of my comparisons to the PowerVR SGX540 because those are the only numbers I could find. Also remember that the real world numbers you will get depend on other factors than just the GPU.
The cores are different, but the 8 cores in the Tegra 2 makes the GPU an octa-core GPU, not quad-core. The difference between them is the architecture and design of each core. Samsung could have made faster/more efficient cores and could get by with 4 of them. nVidia could have decided to go with a different design that got close to the same performance as the Exynos with more cores. It's all up to the manufacturer, design, and drivers, as well as some other factors. It's very hard to make a decent comparison between the cores without actual diagrams of them as well as the design.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for youre time. now we must wate for them to come out and se some RL tests.

Yep. I've been waiting on good numbers for Exynos for about a month now. Trying to decide between the Galaxy S II and a few other phones.

Kumouri said:
Yep. I've been waiting on good numbers for Exynos for about a month now. Trying to decide between the Galaxy S II and a few other phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Choice is a good thing is it not?

Bumping because I was gonna post new thread but saw this instead.

What is the Actual frequency of OMAP4430?
I want to know the actual frequency of OMAP4430. Samsung is Advertising like its GALAXY SII (GT-I1900G with a OMAP4430) is powered by 1.2 GHZ processor. But Texas Instruments's site stating like it can clock up to 1 GHZ. which is true?
http://www.ti.com/general/docs/wtbu...ateId=6123&navigationId=12843&contentId=53243

Please vote for GT-I9100G for a seperate section in the forum
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1416406

Please Vote to get CyanogenMod on your I9100G
Guys,
Please vote the poll in the following link to get CyanogenMod on your I9100G.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1583091
You can find the poll at the top of the thread. Please spread the news.

[INFO/Q] HTC Sensetion only 1900 points with

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wondering if cm7 can help the score

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Maybe smartbench is right and the nand quality is poor?

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

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

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

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

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).

[Q] Tegra 3 GPU ULP GeForce Question

Hello,
I have a question that I've been scouring the internet for ages for but have never found the answer,
I own a Nexus 7 and a cheap Tablet that utilizes the Mali 400-MP.
In my expirences with general gaming (and benchmarks) the Mali 400 outperforms the tegra by a long shot.
My question is why this is the case, I checked the specs of both chips and the tegra has 12 cores vs the Malis 4 cores, the Tegra even has a higher clock rate so I just can't understand why the Tegra is less powerfull.
Is it just that the games I play are optimized for the Mali better than the tegra?
My thanks to anyone who can shed some light on this

chip are different as Pentium dual @3Ghz = core 2 duo @1.6Ghz
Both have 2 core, but since the first is netburst an the second core architecture they don't have the same way to calculate, manage tread etc etc

Thanks
chocoboss said:
chip are different as Pentuim dual @3Ghz = core 2 duo @1.6Ghz
Both have 2 core, but since the first is netburst an the second core architecture they don't have the same way to calculate, manage tread etc etc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow that was fast! thanks for responding so quickly,
im still a little unsure, the Tegra 3 uses the ARM Architecture and so does the Mali so i don't think its that simple, i could be wrong i guess...
if it is just for that reason, how would you go about comparing the two to find out which is better when looking at the specs?
Edit: ive just checked, they both use The ARM v7 Instruction Set, and i think they are both variations of the ARM Cortex-A9 chip,
plus what im looking for is more a comparison of the GPU where as i think Architectures are more to do with CPU's.

SIMD's and MAD's
I've been scouring the internet and came across the fact that the Mali 400 has more SIMD Units.
Could this be why the Mali is better? I must admit that I'm not really sure what a Single Instruction Multiple Data unit does performance wise.

Bump.
Recap: my question is why a GPU with more cores and a higher clock speed has less GFLOPS than a GPU with less cores and a lower clock speed

[Q] Android: Exynos 5250 (A15 dual core) vs Rk3188 (A9 quad core)

I was going to buy a tablet for uni, and as i have some experience with computers i decided to compare the tablets and buy which was best for me, however i realized I'm a complete greenhorn in terms of phone/tablet hardware.
I found that these two processor was the ones i had to pick from:
Samsung Exynos 5250 - A15 Dual core @ 2 Ghz
Has an excellent GPU T-604
Rockwell Rk3188 - A9 Quad core @ 1.8 GHz
Has an decent GPU Mali 400
I know that the Exynos has a MUCH better GPU and has the newer A15 architecture, clocked at higher speed but is a dual core.
But the Rockwell is a quad core but has a older A9 architure and has the worse GPU.
I tried to search for a comparison but came nil because I was comparing between different release date/architecture.
Could you guys people explain to this newbie the advantages and disadvantages of each processor, and which one i should pick?
Which Processor is better? why is it better? Better by how much?
Which processor would be better at Nds emulation? I know android nds emulator support multicore and GPU support
Rk3188 (quad core) vs exynos (better GPU, architechture)
Which one has the lower battery consumption?
Thank you for your time.

at first is it Rockchip RK3188 , not Rockwell .. 2nd, A15 is faster than A9 even A9 is in A9 quad core state, for better compatibility support for apps and games .. take exynos chip but the price is hinger than rockchip RK3188 tablet... battery comsumption are vary depnds actual MAH on the tablet + how the user usage on it's tablet + version ROM that perform

Tablet is not only about processor, build quality, screen, speakers - its a package.
As you did not mention exact models under comparison, it depends on what you look for and budget.
For price/quality top score, you can't go wrong with one of Cube u9GTV (quad) tablets :
Retina, aluminum body, IPS, HDMI, stereo speakers and 9+ hours of battery.
I have one myself, and I used the dual core (old model) for a year, so I know they last well and are robust.
One of issues to consider is that having ADB over USB to Cube tablets is sometimes a mess, so I'm using ADB over IP to debug things, which might be not the best solution for a developer.
Best luck with your choice!
Ramjali said:
I was going to buy a tablet for uni, and as i have some experience with computers i decided to compare the tablets and buy which was best for me, however i realized I'm a complete greenhorn in terms of phone/tablet hardware.
I found that these two processor was the ones i had to pick from:
Samsung Exynos 5250 - A15 Dual core @ 2 Ghz
Has an excellent GPU T-604
Rockwell Rk3188 - A9 Quad core @ 1.8 GHz
Has an decent GPU Mali 400
I know that the Exynos has a MUCH better GPU and has the newer A15 architecture, clocked at higher speed but is a dual core.
But the Rockwell is a quad core but has a older A9 architure and has the worse GPU.
I tried to search for a comparison but came nil because I was comparing between different release date/architecture.
Could you guys people explain to this newbie the advantages and disadvantages of each processor, and which one i should pick?
Which Processor is better? why is it better? Better by how much?
Which processor would be better at Nds emulation? I know android nds emulator support multicore and GPU support
Rk3188 (quad core) vs exynos (better GPU, architechture)
Which one has the lower battery consumption?
Thank you for your time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse