Related
Hello
Will the sensation be better for playing games than the SGS 2, which needs games to be updated before they can play on the mali400? I hoping apps and games don't have to be recoded/reprogrammed to work on the adreno 220, if they work/play fine on the adreno 205?
Thanks
Ian
Not 100% sure but I think the problem with the SGS2 is that the Mali400 GPU doesn't support any form of texture compression. So any games that use texture compression needs to be recompiled and have the textures modified.
The Sensation should not have the same problem since the adreno 220 is just the next gen of the 205 and should be backward compatible.
benchmark
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim
RADLOUNI said:
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wtf are you saying -_- ? String a complete coherent sentence together, damn no child left behind...
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
RADLOUNI said:
Any new benchmarks comparing ADRENO 220 with MAli 400
i've seen a benchmark for an overclocked CPU with ADRENO 220 (clocked at 1.5 GHz). This does not give a good comparison as the real life sensation will be clocked at 1.2 GHz
Also any new overall benchmarks for the sensation, the old ones scored horrible 1200 pts. People are saying this is because the preliminary firmware is using only one core, but they did not post any reference proving their claim
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What you're saying is not entirely true.
The 1.5 GHz is the chip's default speed (check Qualcomm's website) - the benchmark was of the Qualcomm development unit (MDP). The Sensation uses an underclock probably to reserve battery life.
Keep in mind, and I'm basing it entirely on tidbits I hear here and there on this forum and on tech blogs, that Qualcomm CPUs tend to get higher overclock speeds than the competition (or at least those who do it make more noise ).
As for the early benchmark - I was able to play with a similar device in question, software version 0.50.something, and yes - it was horrid. I ran Neocore just for laughs and it got 5 FPS. Later on I had a few minutes with one running 1.05 (not the final 1.20 that was leaked) and Neocore got 59.9. Wish I could upload a screenshot, but if I did I'd probably get fired (it has the confidential watermark with the serial number on it, which could than trace it directly to me).
Do take the above with a grain of salt - this is the internet and at the moment I have no way to give solid proof that what I said is true - you can just take my word for it (which if you're smart - you won't).
I will say this though - I have already pre-ordered one.
I think the Qualcomm cpus are the most efficent by far. My dhd runs undervolted all the way up to 1.2ghz and overvolts upto 1.6ghz, we have a stable 2ghz kernel atm too, my phone has never felt warm or hot. So it wouldn't surprise me if it was natural running at 1.5ghz.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
Trekest said:
What you're saying is not entirely true.
The 1.5 GHz is the chip's default speed (check Qualcomm's website) - the benchmark was of the Qualcomm development unit (MDP). The Sensation uses an underclock probably to reserve battery life.
Keep in mind, and I'm basing it entirely on tidbits I hear here and there on this forum and on tech blogs, that Qualcomm CPUs tend to get higher overclock speeds than the competition (or at least those who do it make more noise ).
As for the early benchmark - I was able to play with a similar device in question, software version 0.50.something, and yes - it was horrid. I ran Neocore just for laughs and it got 5 FPS. Later on I had a few minutes with one running 1.05 (not the final 1.20 that was leaked) and Neocore got 59.9. Wish I could upload a screenshot, but if I did I'd probably get fired (it has the confidential watermark with the serial number on it, which could than trace it directly to me).
Do take the above with a grain of salt - this is the internet and at the moment I have no way to give solid proof that what I said is true - you can just take my word for it (which if you're smart - you won't).
I will say this though - I have already pre-ordered one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the neocore was that fast, that'll do me nicely one other question, will the sensation struggle to play resource heavy games with the ram only being 768mb?
Thanks
Ian
Beaker491 said:
If the neocore was that fast, that'll do me nicely one other question, will the sensation struggle to play resource heavy games with the ram only being 768mb?
Thanks
Ian
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it will not heavy emulator rely more on the CPU than the gpu. Look at computer you can have a crappy gpu and an I7 processor would play an xbox Wii emulator just fine. Mytouch 4g plays n64 emulator just fine.
Sent from my HTC Vision using XDA Premium App
hmmm... honestly its what resources the games use because i have seen bench marks of the intel i5, i7 vs the amd phenom 2 x4 and the scores were quite similar because of the gpu... so i would take everything said with a bit of salt
Hey I thought it would be cool to just have a seperate thread for this so people can stop asking so much al throughout the other threads.
I've seen 2342 so far on the released version compared to the model in prerelease which was 1300 score. Thats a very fast speed.
Post yall quadrant scores here.
Remember also that all who view this the sensation has a qhd screen.
Makes a difference.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
And as I've been reading on other topics there might be a incompatibility problem due to two cores. It's new chipset and has different architecture etc. Lets give it some time.
mr.orange303 said:
Remember also that all who view this the sensation has a qhd screen.
Makes a difference.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
really? I wonder what goes into that technology. I kind of wanted the screen to be a full size 4.3 inch screen.. with the width the same size as the evo. I just love the space u get
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you prefer SGS 2 after using both? I'm asking because of your signature.
samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In real world testing. Can you feel lag at all?
Coming from the g2x. Its almost lag free. But has other problems.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
not accurate
Figure_desire said:
And as I've been reading on other topics there might be a incompatibility problem due to two cores. It's new chipset and has different architecture etc. Lets give it some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Helllo
People have been saying that the sensation is getting low scores because benchmark programs are not designed to test both cores.
I find that most people are throwing around nothing but assumptions for reasons i really cannot understand. Do you know for a fact whether those benchmark programs are optimized only for one core, or is your enthusiasm for the sensation subconsciously pushing you to say that ?????????????
The author of smartbench has posted a comment on another thread in this forum that one of the main reasons smartbench 2010 was pulled out and smartbench 2011 released was testing dual core phones. he added that he does not know why is the sensation getting such low scores as compared to other dual core phone, but will investigate and come back.
So irrespective of my personal preference to HTC phones, and if smartbench author cannot find a bug in his smartbench 2011 leading to low scores on sensation, i have to say that the sensation CPU does not seem to be at the same performance level as other dual core phones
check post #239
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1081531&page=24
That's on the low end compared to other qHD devices but not bad.
Any other benchmarks with the final release?
Figure_desire said:
Do you prefer SGS 2 after using both? I'm asking because of your signature.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First impression is yes, but i have only had to play with the Sensation for about 8hrs or so
mr.orange303 said:
In real world testing. Can you feel lag at all?
Coming from the g2x. Its almost lag free. But has other problems.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The overall UI is pretty fast, but web browsing... not as clear cut as i would have expected from the specs, the Ram used by Sense seems to be the problem.
I got a score of 2306 in quadrant advanced, only did one run as waiting to root before going further :S
samjpullen said:
I got a very low 1589 on the first Quadrant...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sam, I saw your youtube video of browser performance for Sensation. That flash pinch-zoom thing was horrible. Was this consistent across all websites?
I would have expected better. I feel most of the guys might know about this, rest of us who were unaware, check out Sam's youtube channel. Keep up the good work mate!
I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those
Do you have the device yet?
charnsingh_online said:
I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My g2x on froyo is higher than the sensation.
But I bet the sensation is just plain more reliable
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
No but i have the datasheet of the processor in it and i know the scores its getting in benchmarks, these scores can be calculated even via the datasheet.
About G2X Tegra2 is plain sucky when it comes to dual core and it is slowest of the bunch. The Java Apps dont perform well and that is what android is based on. Native Apps are mostly games and tegra 2 is good but Sensation is better on both
charnsingh_online said:
I just digged more into the CPU in QSD8x60 It seems to be the same scorpion cpu that ships in the MT4G. According to my data the exynos CPU is 16% faster than the qsd8x60 at the same clock speed ( 2.5 DMIPS vs 2.1 DMIPS ) being architecturally different as exynos is cortex a9 and the other one is Custom Cortex A8 so the lower score. The Sensation Smartbench productivity score is exactly 2.4x that of a stock mt4g. Other things that are affecting smartbench is the Memory Score, I/O of Sensation is around 0.5x that of GS2 and 2d score is around 0.25 x (lower due to more resolution) of that of GS2 maybe due to the fact GSII has hardware acceleration. In real day use Memory, I/O arent going to be affecting stuff much. The CPU on Exynos is faster, GSII has hardware acceleration and I/O and Memory score on the GSII are much higher. When it comes to graphics at the same resolution they are both on the same speed when on the same resolution but difference comes due to sensations qHD display. So for the performance in day to day life the Sensation isn't gonna be much of a difference over Desire HD or the GSII when executing single threaded apps which are 99% apps on Android market and like with most >1ghz CPU you wont experience lag and for the graphics they are gonna be much much faster and better. The Linpack score which tells you the speed of execution of apps written in Java which most Android apps are it is going to be same as GSII, No difference. When executing Native Apps GSII will be faster but when it comes to Native Apps, Most of the Native Apps are games which depend more on the gpu so here too both are same. When it comes to Multimedia Sensation is faster than GSII as it has a 128bit pipeline but both are capable of decoding/encoding 1080p at 30fps and no one is gonna go beyond that. It will only be different when using anything that is on Neon.
To sum it up
Both Phones are extremely powerful and perform better than each other in different scenarios. They are at a point where the difference are minor when coming to performance. To buy a device it entirely depends on your choice as IMO they are both no.1 at the android device table right now. You wont be disappointed by any of those
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They doesn't quite make sense as the mytouch is a stock 1.4 chip MSM8255 the g2 and mytouch are basically the same processors underclocked to 1ghz. The sensation is a stock 1.5 dual core capable of 2.6 ghz overclock The score the sensation getting is the same the score my mytouch was getting out of the box. That indicates that the other processor isn't quite doing anything. At its not the same as a mytouch. The chip in the sensation is MSM8660 Dual-Core SoC with Adreno 220 GPU. Equivalent to the one with HTC evo 3d. QSD8x60 dual core hasn't even been introduced yet.
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App
Killbynature said:
They doesn't quite make sense as the mytouch is a stock 1.4 chip underclocked to 1ghz. The sensation is a stock 1.5 dual core capable of 2.6 ghz overclock The score the sensation getting is the same the score my mytouch was getting out of the box. That indicates that the other processor isn't quite doing anything. At its not the same as a mytouch. The chip in the sensation is MSM8660 Dual-Core SoC with Adreno 220 GPU.
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it doesn't seem like most of the people hear understand the async tech used in the new qualcomm chip... there is soo much into it that i myself wonder if it is worth it to have a dual core phone at this point as much apps wont stress the first core enough to push the second core to a clock speed close to 1.2 ghz.. yes i do like the sync speeds of the sgs2 but still i think its over kill... to try to put it in lamens terms the sgs2 cores will be at 1.2 ghz in use and what ever mhz at rest while the sensation could have 1 core at a clock speed of 1.2ghz and the other at what ever to relieve the stress be it 3 4 5 6 hundred mhz so until we really get programs to mimic whats needed to make the second core jump to 1.2 ghz we will always wonder about benchmarks which are useless to me
boostedb16b said:
it doesn't seem like most of the people hear understand the async tech used in the new qualcomm chip... there is soo much into it that i myself wonder if it is worth it to have a dual core phone at this point as much apps wont stress the first core enough to push the second core to a clock speed close to 1.2 ghz.. yes i do like the sync speeds of the sgs2 but still i think its over kill... to try to put it in lamens terms the sgs2 cores will be at 1.2 ghz in use and what ever mhz at rest while the sensation could have 1 core at a clock speed of 1.2ghz and the other at what ever to relieve the stress be it 3 4 5 6 hundred mhz so until we really get programs to mimic whats needed to make the second core jump to 1.2 ghz we will always wonder about benchmarks which are useless to me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope I understand I said this early about lower benchmarks. I don't care about them and I do understand the qsd chip isn't similar to the msm Chipset. Similar processors would be g2 and the mytouch 4g as they have the exact same architecture. The mytouch architecture though similar being a a8 should be vastly different
Sent from my demonSPEED Glacier using XDA Premium App
RADLOUNI said:
Helllo
People have been saying that the sensation is getting low scores because benchmark programs are not designed to test both cores.
I find that most people are throwing around nothing but assumptions for reasons i really cannot understand. Do you know for a fact whether those benchmark programs are optimized only for one core, or is your enthusiasm for the sensation subconsciously pushing you to say that ?????????????
The author of smartbench has posted a comment on another thread in this forum that one of the main reasons smartbench 2010 was pulled out and smartbench 2011 released was testing dual core phones. he added that he does not know why is the sensation getting such low scores as compared to other dual core phone, but will investigate and come back.
So irrespective of my personal preference to HTC phones, and if smartbench author cannot find a bug in his smartbench 2011 leading to low scores on sensation, i have to say that the sensation CPU does not seem to be at the same performance level as other dual core phones
check post #239
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1081531&page=24
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I said "there might be". That doesn't mean there is. Most of us don't have this phone so we're making guesses of course.
Early anandtech benchmarks say (don't want links again just search yourself) this chipset at default 1.5 ghz is better than other dual cores. 0.3 Ghz downclock doesn't effect that much. So we're suspicious that there might be incompability problem. Because chipset is new, phone is new etc. And that author doesn't have Sensation too. Then I said "lets wait". Is that ok for you?
Hi
I've been testing and comparing some of the top candidates og android phones on the market now.
The competitors are: Samsung Galaxy SII, Lg Optimus 2x (CM7) and HTC Sensation
And I must say, I'm pretty disappointed with HTC Sensation so far. Don't know if I'm just unlucky, or if we should expect an update on this in the future, but the GPU is way behind in comparison to the two others.
www.antutu.com benchmark results:
4578 - Samsung Galaxy SII
4456 - LG Optimus 2x
3758 - HTC Sensation
Goint through the details, the most worrying is HTC Sensation scores low on 2d/3d graphics, about half of what LG Optimus 2x scores, which is the winner, with a total of 297 + 350 in graphics. Sensation scores about 300 in total.
Qaudrant benchmark goes like this:
3678 - Samsung Galaxy SII
3120 - LG optimus 2x
2170 - HTC Sensation
Basically Samsung wins because of scoring higher on both CPU and memory (1gb ram)
LG Optimus 2x got he best GPU and Database IO (data transfer rate)
HTC Sensation is just way behind
What is your results? Is it just me, or could we hope for an update?
I have heard rumors about HTC Sensation only running on half of the kernels ind the GPU, is this true?
I heard it scores so low because of the Sense 3.0 requiring so much to run.
Maybe HTC should start concerning themselves more with function rather than form. I think everyone hear would rather have a faster device with less eye candy. If you look at what Samsung had done since the Behold II they have progressively toned Touch Wiz down with each iteration. I just hope we get the boot loader unlocked quick.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
I hated touchwiz, and still hate Samsung.
Always have liked the sense. To.each their own.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App
Sensation has such low benchmarks because it has qHD screen and Sense 3.0. Take Sense 3.0 away and this thing'll fly!
As I said in my own Sense 3.0 thread, having Sense 3.0 and qHD screen beats having high benchmarks. Benchmarks don't mean ANYTHING unless they're running the same UI overlay. Put them on stock/CyanogenMod and the Sensation will be a lot lot faster!
redbullcat said:
Sensation has such low benchmarks because it has qHD screen and Sense 3.0. Take Sense 3.0 away and this thing'll fly!
As I said in my own Sense 3.0 thread, having Sense 3.0 and qHD screen beats having high benchmarks. Benchmarks don't mean ANYTHING unless they're running the same UI overlay. Put them on stock/CyanogenMod and the Sensation will be a lot lot faster!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. Sense requires a lot of ram and so does the qHD screen. That's the only reason benchmarks are so low. Get some stock GB on here and you'll see the difference. It also explains why the chip is clocked at 1.2GHz. I wonder how much further it can be pushed, though.
ericc191 said:
I agree with this. Sense requires a lot of ram and so does the qHD screen. That's the only reason benchmarks are so low. Get some stock GB on here and you'll see the difference. It also explains why the chip is clocked at 1.2GHz. I wonder how much further it can be pushed, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard the chip is underclocked to 1.2ghz to save battery...it apparently can go to 1.5ghz, at least.
jrwingate6 said:
Maybe HTC should start concerning themselves more with function rather than form. I think everyone hear would rather have a faster device with less eye candy. If you look at what Samsung had done since the Behold II they have progressively toned Touch Wiz down with each iteration. I just hope we get the boot loader unlocked quick.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't like sense then why buy the Sensation? That's like buying car that's a stick and then complaining because it's not an automatic. Yes sense is on the phone, yes sense may cause lower benchmarks, yes it's heavily intergrated. If those things bother you then perhaps purchasing a sensation was a mistake...not trying to start an argument, but really it illogical to complain about something you knew going in was a core part of the phone. I don't like touchwiz...so I don't purchase devices with touchwiz on them...it wouldn't make sense for me to buy a phone with touchwiz knowing I don't like it and then complaining about it.
Some ignorant people just don't get the fact. HTC had been advertised about Sense 3.0 for Sensation and we all do know it is a core part of the phone. So don't get the phone if you are for benchmarks isn't it? this sound silly, doesn't it?
Ah! Of course... the screen res is higher, that should influence on the benchmark for sure. Moto Xoom scores low also, but that too, has a higher res.
Im just concerned if it is still scoring lower when on stock. Does anyone have a true benchmark of the Adreno220, which is within the Sensation?
The benchmarks I found on the internet, the Adreno220/M8660 beats the crap out of LG optimus 2x and SGSII.
Anyone know if there is a truth to the "half cores only support" yet?
larsn84 said:
Ah! Of course... the screen res is higher, that should influence on the benchmark for sure. Moto Xoom scores low also, but that too, has a higher res.
Im just concerned if it is still scoring lower when on stock. Does anyone have a true benchmark of the Adreno220, which is within the Sensation?
The benchmarks I found on the internet, the Adreno220/M8660 beats the crap out of LG optimus 2x and SGSII.
Anyone know if there is a truth to the "half cores only support" yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When we get s-off, we'll have some true benchmarks for all devices. Optimus 2x, Galaxy S II, Sensation, and possibly Moto Atrix. Put them all on latest release of CyanogenMod7 and benchmark them using a range of apps.
ImHuge07 said:
I heard it scores so low because of the Sense 3.0 requiring so much to run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what every other new dual core cpu is set up with.
TheRiceKing said:
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what ever other new dual core cpu is set up with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As other people have stated, this view is nonsense. Scorpion is a parallel development to A9. It has advantages and disadvantages in comparison.
lol if you want to try and call it nonsense... I'm really just trying to help educate you and explain, but you can continue to think that if you wish
Scorpion incorporates some ARM 9 features, its basically like ARM 8 and a half and that is being optimistic -_-'
TheRiceKing said:
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what ever other new dual core cpu is set up with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your post is wildly inaccurate... First of all there is no ARM 8 instruction set. All A8, A9, and Scorpion processors use the ARMv7 instruction set. Second, Scorpion is Qualcomm's own architecture, it is not based on the A8 design, they created their own design from scratch. It is not as simple as A9 > A8 for this reason. The Scorpion architecture implements features that are not available on A8 but are available on A9. The main difference between the Scorpion and the A9 is the number of pipeline stages. The Scorpion has 13 while the A9 has 8. This is positive and negative for both, as more pipeline stages improves throughput, but is more costly if an instruction has to be aborted and the pipeline flushed.
I have gotten a lot of responses telling me that the Scorpion is based off A8 and tweaked. This is not correct. If it were simply tweaked, it would not be able to have a clock over 1 GHz without overclocking, as that is the limitation of the A8 architecture. It also could not support dual cores, again a limitation of A8. The Scorpion also has partial support of out-of-order processing. This is impossible on an A8 processor, but is fully supported on an A9.
You are correct in saying that every other dual core is based off an A9 processor because the A9 is the only design you can license from ARM that can support dual cores. The only alternative is for a company to license the instruction set itself and design their own architecture (Qualcomm's approach). I should also point out that the A9 processors are synchronous, while the MSM8260 is asynchronous, allowing separate clock speeds and voltages to each core, which can greatly increase battery performance (especially on processes that only utilize 1 core).
I will agree that A9 is more advanced than Scorpion, but it is not by nearly as much as the "Scorpion is A8" argument would indicate. The MSM8260 can also support clock speed up to 1.5 GHz, so the Sensation can be overclocked without actually overclocking the processor.
LittleMerc said:
Some ignorant people just don't get the fact. HTC had been advertised about Sense 3.0 for Sensation and we all do know it is a core part of the phone. So don't get the phone if you are for benchmarks isn't it? this sound silly, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly! I don't understand the logic of people that purchase a device that they know has certain features and then complain about it. That's like buying a phone with a slide out keyboard and then complaining saying you don't like the fact that it has a slide out keyboard. My thing is, Sense is not a surprise. Everyone knew going in that it was there, and they know what it is and how it works. If certain people don't like that, then they probably shouldn't have bought the phone. Doesn't make sense to complain about getting exactly what you were paying for.
mpjohns3 said:
Your post is wildly inaccurate... First of all there is no ARM 8 instruction set. All A8, A9, and Scorpion processors use the ARMv7 instruction set. Second, Scorpion is Qualcomm's own architecture, it is not based on the A8 design, they created their own design from scratch. It is not as simple as A9 > A8 for this reason. The Scorpion architecture implements features that are not available on A8 but are available on A9. The main difference between the Scorpion and the A9 is the number of pipeline stages. The Scorpion has 13 while the A9 has 8. This is positive and negative for both, as more pipeline stages improves throughput, but is more costly if an instruction has to be aborted and the pipeline flushed.
I have gotten a lot of responses telling me that the Scorpion is based off A8 and tweaked. This is not correct. If it were simply tweaked, it would not be able to have a clock over 1 GHz without overclocking, as that is the limitation of the A8 architecture. It also could not support dual cores, again a limitation of A8. The Scorpion also has partial support of out-of-order processing. This is impossible on an A8 processor, but is fully supported on an A9.
You are correct in saying that every other dual core is based off an A9 processor because the A9 is the only design you can license from ARM that can support dual cores. The only alternative is for a company to license the instruction set itself and design their own architecture (Qualcomm's approach). I should also point out that the A9 processors are synchronous, while the MSM8260 is asynchronous, allowing separate clock speeds and voltages to each core, which can greatly increase battery performance (especially on processes that only utilize 1 core).
I will agree that A9 is more advanced than Scorpion, but it is not by nearly as much as the "Scorpion is A8" argument would indicate. The MSM8260 can also support clock speed up to 1.5 GHz, so the Sensation can be overclocked without actually overclocking the processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, informative post. That should stop the A9 >A8 (Scorpion) because it's a bigger number rubbish, for a while.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA App
Anyone else have Galaxy S3 specs on AnTuTu benchmark? I was running some tests and saw this...
Sorry for the quality, took with my Focus Flash.
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Hmmm.....it seems there will be really a 1.4Ghz processor within. They are considering to improve the OS before they go for more hardware......
I hoped for little more juce.....
Red5 said:
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, that was the one they announced back in september, people thought it would be in the gnex I think
Red5 said:
All the specs look good except for the 4212 Exynos processor. Isnt that Samsungs dual core processor with no embedded LTE?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Red5, didn't expect to see you here.
But yeah, you're right. Even though it's dual core, it seems to have better battery consumption than the Galaxy S II chip and "50% better GPU performance."
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4900/samsung-talks-about-32nm-15ghz-exynos-soc
Edit: Just submitted this thread to Engadget. Let's see if they bite...
Edit2: Yup, found it through AnTuTu as well. It says "Certified Configuration" if that means anything.
Previous leaks have been of a quad-core phone, how does this being a dual core chip make any sense?
Edit: also the 4212 is clocked at 1.5 ghz, why is this reporting it at 1.4?
tehh4ck3r said:
Previous leaks have been of a quad-core phone, how does this being a dual core chip make any sense?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not at all! Or it's again dust in the wind? Soon we'll know
I think this is fake, i don't believe that Samsung could launch the Galaxy S3 with a dual-core A9 at this time... the previous leaks points to a quad-core processor - Exynos 4414.
This also could be one of the samples used for tests...
I it's true it sucks and won't really be able to compete with the IP5. Or are they aiming to smoke the now old IP4s? ... Not that impressive at all.
If it's true i think i would buy the HTC ONE X (Tegra3)
So if I overclocked my GNote's gpu I would get similar performance? If so then it looks like I'll be keeping my Note for another year.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
According to the bar graphs in antutu, the S3 would be just a bit under twice as powerful as the Note - which runs dual A9s at 1.4GHz also. The 32nm Mali-400s have been clocked 50% higher, which is the main performance difference - and that wouldn't go anywhere near explaining the massive overall performance gap. However that combined with an additional two A9 cores seems fairly realistic.
Either it's a complete fake, or it's just mislabeled - and is actually a 4412. Since this is reality, I'd lean towards the former.
Sjael said:
According to the bar graphs in antutu, the S3 would be just a bit under twice as powerful as the Note - which runs dual A9s at 1.4GHz also. The 32nm Mali-400s have been clocked 50% higher, which is the main performance difference - and that wouldn't go anywhere near explaining the massive overall performance gap. However that combined with an additional two A9 cores seems fairly realistic.
Either it's a complete fake, or it's just mislabeled - and is actually a 4412. Since this is reality, I'd lean towards the former.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can overclock an S2 or Note's GPU to 400mhz with Tegrak OC Ultimate, which is double the stock 266mhz.
EDIT:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/4/25/2975835/samsung-14gz-exynos-4-quad-processor-next-galaxy?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
So it's quad core but still Mali-400 at 400mhz.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
Yep. Seems like AnTuTu didn't know what chip it was so they reported it as a 4212.
tehh4ck3r said:
Yep. Seems like AnTuTu didn't know what chip it was so they reported it as a 4212.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndtvyTPIx3Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player
In the video they compare Exynos 4 dual vs quad and the quad is labeled as Exynos 4212 so it seems Antutu was correct.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA HD app.
It seems that Samsung change the name of the chips, see this http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_announces_new_quadcore_exynos_4_quad_processor-news-4160.php.
4212 - Quad-Core
4210 - Dual-Core
Now the name on the Antutu makes sense.
So I got my i9500 and already did some foolery with it.
Fine device, but I hate the raised lip around the screen edge. Something I definitely did not miss on the S3 and something very annoying.
Other than that small design critique:
THE ****ING PHONE ISN'T RUNNING FINAL FIRMWARE!
Basically the CPU is running on the cluster migration driver, meaning it switches all four cores from the LITTLE to the big cluster, as opposed to the core migration driver who does this in an individual core-pair manner.
You can pretty much throw all battery comparisons out of the window: it's completely unfinished and unoptimal.
I already compiled the kernel and flashed it without the cluster migration tidbit, but the phone won't boot. So yea. Current sources also useless.
Cleverly enough: you can't really distinguish between the two drivers apart from one manner: if /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/iks-cpufreq/max_eagle_count is present, you're running an IKS driver. If it's not, then you're running the sub-optimal IKCS driver.
So yea. We'll see what Samsung does about this, currently the advantages of big.LITTLE are pretty much unused.
Another nail in the coffin on how rushed and unprepared this phone has been.
Wow, this is seriously turning out to be a fiasco.
ChronoReverse said:
Wow, this is seriously turning out to be a fiasco.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is EXACTLY why at the end I don't care for technical details about socs but was rather waiting for real world usage first. As much I wanted to agree with Andrei Lux on how intelligent BigLittle is, I sort of felt that it wont be same at the end.
Question is now: Is this possible to fix in the near future?? So that maybe buying the Exynos will be beneficial if the devs take over. I wont bet on Samsung introducing mind-blowing improvements in that department in upcoming firmwares
Xdenwarrior said:
Question is now: Is this possible to fix in the near future?? So that maybe buying the Exynos will be beneficial if the devs take over. I wont bet on Samsung introducing mind-blowing improvements in that department in upcoming firmwares
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The code other driver is there in the kernel, it's just not used. No idea. It's not like we need Samsung for it: I already talked to a developer at Linaro about some incomplete switcher code that's being currently getting the green-light to be made public. But who knows how long that will take.
Whatever the case, I gather that they can't just let it be in the current state.
AndreiLux said:
The code other driver is there in the kernel, it's just not used. No idea. It's not like we need Samsung for it: I already talked to a developer at Linaro about some incomplete switcher code that's being currently getting the green-light to be made public. But who knows how long that will take.
Whatever the case, I gather that they can't just let it be in the current state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any way to just disable cortex a15 altogether yet just to see how well cortex a7 will perform in simple texting, browsing, calling and to see what the battery life will be like on that?? (cause cortex a7 only uses like 200 something mw as opposed to 1000mw for snapdragon). I know u wont be able to game. How often does Cortex A15 hits in? cause I would suspect a much worse battery life with incomplete drivers doing the switching if its very often on. But PocketNow reports very similar battery results to snapdragon variant which I find odd
Xdenwarrior said:
Any way to just disable cortex a15 altogether yet just to see how well cortex a7 will perform in simple texting, browsing, calling and to see what the battery life will be like on that?? (cause cortex a7 only uses like 200 something mw as opposed to 1000mw for snapdragon). I know u wont be able to game. How often does Cortex A15 hits in? cause I would suspect a much worse battery life with incomplete drivers doing the switching if its very often on. But PocketNow reports very similar battery results to snapdragon variant which I find odd
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Use any app to limit the CPU frequency to 600MHz. That'll limit it to the A7 cores running to 1200MHz. Basically you can just use CPU-Spy. Everything <= 600 are A7's mapped at half frequency, everything above it are A15's at 1:1 frequency.
As for PocketNow: irrelevant. The difference is what could be instead of what is, the Snapdragon doesn't play a role in the discussion here.
WOW , thats sucks
Samsung was too rushed and ruined it :/
AndreiLux said:
Use any app to limit the CPU frequency to 600MHz. That'll limit it to the A7 cores running to 1200MHz. Basically you can just use CPU-Spy. Everything <= 600 are A7's mapped at half frequency, everything above it are A15's at 1:1 frequency.
As for PocketNow: irrelevant. The difference is what could be instead of what is, the Snapdragon doesn't play a role in the discussion here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey thanks, but I don't have the S4 to test it with since i'm still debating on which to get. I live in Canada and so the only version here which I can get a lot cheaper on a contract is LTE snapdragon, but I wont mind getting the Exynos since it got potential. Besides 16GB internal isn't enough for me. So that's why asking if u seen any improvements in battery when only cortex a7 ran? If a7 doesn't do much in power consumption, then no point spending 800 bucks and loosing LTE altogether...
@bala_gamer please see my PM its important...
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda premium
Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...
AndreiLux said:
Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you elaborate a bit more pls?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
that's not what samsung exynos advertised..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6UNODPHAHo
Is it possible that we're having a simpler Exynos 5 system technically closer to Exynis 5 Quad (plus 4 A7 cores) than a real seamless Octa-core system? It was strange reading that "Octa-core manufacturing starts in Q2" (April-June) then see Octa-core versions hitting reviewers early April, that's way too low time frame. Maybe this is a 1st-gen 5410. In any case, performance and current-state battery life beats the Snapdragon version, even if only just.
AndreiLux said:
Basically the CPU is running on the cluster migration driver,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wtf? Well done Samsung... This is ridiculous...
AndreiLux said:
Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WHAT THE [email protected]??!!
Actually WTF is a massive understatement here....!!!
Please can you give more info about this matter whenever is possible? This is very serious...
Is it a specific hardware limitation? Something that Samsung specificly did in GS4 (I9500) ?
Because this can't be a generic exynos octa limitation. It makes no sense... Unless everything we've read from Samsung and ARM about exynos octa, are completely misleading...
A hardware limitation..? They advertised the functionality and to then release a device without it, is just plain stupid. Hopefully it is a just a kernel issue and can be resolved quickly.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Probably Samsung will implement it in their Note 3 device? It's a conspiracy so that people buy their next Note phone but this news is sad.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Now what is this all about? Is this a very serious issue?
So its either all A15s or all A7s?
so would the 'octa' really be a better choice than the S600? That should be powerful enough.. and the S600 is pretty power efficient too
rkial said:
So its either all A15s or all A7s?
so would the 'octa' really be a better choice than the S600? That should be powerful enough.. and the S600 is pretty power efficient too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I understood is its either the full cluster of a7 or a15 is used/ functional based on the load, dynamically turning on one or two cores of a15 to work along with a7 may not be possible it seems.
I may be wrong, waiting for an elaborate exp from andrei
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
bala_gamer said:
What I understood is its either the full cluster of a7 or a15 is used functional based on the load, dynamically turning on one or two cores of a15 to work along with a7 may not be possible it seems.
I may be wrong, waiting for an elaborate exp from andrei
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was always under the impression this was the intention of Samsung's particular implementation of it. I thought it was common knowledge that Samsung's version worked on a 4 or 4 (A15) or (A7) basis.
Maybe he was talking about the ability to change that.