Database Info

[Q] Benchmark Scores

So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?

QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon

I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.

QuacoreZX said:
So we all know the Nexus S has a 1Ghz Cortex A8 Hummingbird CPU, which sounds unimpressive considering the Nexus One has a 1Ghz Snapdragon QSD 8250, but it's a known fact that clock speed often has little to do with actual computational power. Qualitative previews have said that the Nexus S "flies," but I'd like to see something more in the numbers. If anyone has a demo device, could you run a few benchmarks? Or perhaps comment on performance after quick opening/closing several computationally intensive applications?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S5PC11x (Hummingbird) has 2x the memory bandwidth of the MSM8250.
The MSM8250 gets about 2x the floating point performance of the S5PC11x.
I believe the SGX540 GPU in S5PC11x is on the whole a bit faster than the GPU in the 8250, but I don't have hard numbers on that in front of me. They're architecturally different GPUs and will have different strengths and weaknesses.
It's really hard to do a good apples to apples comparison of different SoCs -- memory interconnect, cache sizes, ARM architecture version, GPU, etc, etc all play into overall system performance.
Gingerbread, overall, tends to be faster than Froyo on the same hardware.

Not really too familiar with this stuff, but will the JIT compiler being optimized for snapdragon instruction set make a huge difference still? My Vibrant plays games way better than the MT4G (imo) but scores terribly on Linpack and is terribly slow at opening applications and things vs. the MT4G.

Read the post above you. Linpack is mainly a benchmark for numerical performance(floating point etc), where the Snapdragon chips are MUCH better.
But the Hummingbird(PowerVR) GPU is better than the Adreno GPU found in the Snapdragon line. That's why the gaming performance of your Vibrant is better than the MT4G.

Ronaldo_9 said:
1gb humingbird is fast as galaxy S and iphone 4. both which are like 30% or more faster then snapdragon
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PhoenixFx said:
I think the key improvement is in graphics performance. Here is a comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup, just anecdotally, hummingbird is MUCH faster than snapdragon IMHO

galaxyS/NS SGX540= 90 million triangles/sec
HTC G2 Adreno 205 =44 million triangles/sec
Nexus one = Adreno 200 = 22 million triangles/sec
nexus S is running on the fastest GPU out now. And another good thing about running on power VR GPU is that iphone runs on one also so when lazy iphone porting happens you will have optimal performance running on that GPU than you would on Adreno
Ive noticed this especially on gameloft games
Trust me im on a vibrant and came from nexus one with out a doubt the nexus S GPU smokes nexus one GPU even out performance 2nd gen snapdragon

Hummingbird > all atm.
Orion will be the same.

Don't make pre-assumptions about the dual core chips.. Orion has good competition from the TI OMAPS line.. Qualcomm looks like they'll stay behind GPU wise though.
Plus the Sound Quality of the Hummingbird chip is awesome. MUCH better than the Snapdragon chips.

Also, you have to be cautious of manufacturer specs for GPU pixels/sec and triangles/sec -- the "box numbers" are always under optimal conditions and often not representative of real workloads.
For modern non-fixed-pipe GPUs (gl ES 2.x, etc) compute capabilities (how many shader ops / pixel/ etc you can get away with) factor in as well.
Depending on what your workload is like (geometry heavy? fill heavy? texture heavy? shader heavy?) you will see different strengths and weaknesses when comparing GPUs.
All that said, the SGX540 is indeed quite snappy.

chip
I agree the sound chip is good in the NS, as is the GPU

[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

More powerful Exynos chipset coming soon from Samsung

Samsung have the luxury of making their own chips and they are quick to put out new and better versions of them. The Exynos chipset, which debuted with the Samsung Galaxy S II at a 'mere' 1.2GHz is getting a 1.5GHz version, called the Exynos 4212.
Samsung also has a pair of high-end mobile cameras headed for the production line. One is a 16MP main shooter with a back illuminated sensor for better low-light performance (expected to ship in November) and the other is a 1.2MP module with [email protected] capture capabilities for front-facing cameras.
We can't quite make out the Google-translated press release but it seems the front facing camera will have 1/8.2 sensor (that sounds pretty small, but we'll see) and the ISO of the main shooter goes up to 1,600.
Going back to Exynos, it's built using the 32nm process and was designed with 3D performance in mind. Gameloft is apparently showing interest and will offer several titles to put the new SoC to good work.
The Korea-bound Galaxy S II LTE and Galaxy S II HD LTE will sport Exynos chipsets with the CPU clocked at 1.5GHz, which makes them the most likely candidates for being the first phones with the new chipset.
Samsung already has a 1.4GHz version of Exynos that's powering the Galaxy Note and the Galaxy Tab 7.7, but there's no info what kind of change in performance we can expect in the 3D department (beyond the obvious gain from the faster clock speed).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_announces_15ghz_exynos_chipset_16mp_camera-news-3200.php
FWAP FWAP FWAP at the highlighted bits. One thing Samsung is perfectly good at making is chips.
I think this might mean I'll give the Nexus Prime a miss and wait for the Galaxy S III. Probably jizz in my pants when I hold it.

Should be epic, loving the Samsung processors. iPhone5 should be feeling scared. Hopefully ICS will be a hit as well.
Let's see what Apple can do and whether it tempts away current galaxy users.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App

http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-unveils-new-dual-core-exynos-4212-processor
50% increase in 3D performance. Something to rival the A5 perhaps?
I hope they put this in the Galaxy Note.

Killer Bee said:
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-unveils-new-dual-core-exynos-4212-processor
50% increase in 3D performance. Something to rival the A5 perhaps?
I hope they put this in the Galaxy Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SGX 543mp2 is a lot faster than 50% compared to the Mali400. Really hoping for Kal-El in the SGS3.

Killer Bee said:
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-unveils-new-dual-core-exynos-4212-processor
50% increase in 3D performance. Something to rival the A5 perhaps?
I hope they put this in the Galaxy Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Something to crash the A5 for sure.The Galaxy S II's Exynos 4210 rivals the A5.
Toss3 said:
The SGX 543mp2 is a lot faster than 50% compared to the Mali400. Really hoping for Kal-El in the SGS3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
W-wa-wait.What?****in' ****.Where did you see this?Go check the Anandtech review.It shows the high-end mobile GPUs' performance in cold numbers and shows technical specs clearly.The 543MP2 might be 50% faster than the Adreno 220,not the Mali MP-400.

Killer Bee said:
http://pocketnow.com/android/samsung-unveils-new-dual-core-exynos-4212-processor
50% increase in 3D performance. Something to rival the A5 perhaps?
I hope they put this in the Galaxy Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe this is a simple die shrink from 45 to 32nm. So it still has the Mali-400 GPU but clocked at 400MHz instead of 267MHz (i e 50% clock increase). The very subtle name change from Exynos 4210 to Exynos 4212 almost confirms this.

Until the Mali-400 can compete with the SGX543MP2 in GLBenchmark at the same resolution, I'm going to wait for a Kal-El phone.

tolis626 said:
Something to crash the A5 for sure.The Galaxy S II's Exynos 4210 rivals the A5.
W-wa-wait.What?****in' ****.Where did you see this?Go check the Anandtech review.It shows the high-end mobile GPUs' performance in cold numbers and shows technical specs clearly.The 543MP2 might be 50% faster than the Adreno 220,not the Mali MP-400.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
Check the GLBenchmark numbers again; the SGX 543mp2 is over 100% faster than the Mali mp-400.

Toss3 said:
Check the GLBenchmark numbers again; the SGX 543mp2 is over 100% faster than the Mali mp-400.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And it's driving over twice the resolution. The GPU in the iPhone 5 is going to blow away the competition, as it's at a lower resolution compared to the iPad 2. I'm actually kind of jealous. I refuse to use a device with a lower performing GPU than an Apple product! Hope the GPU in the Kal-El will actually be competitive.

YOUCANNOTDENY said:
And it's driving over twice the resolution. The GPU in the iPhone 5 is going to blow away the competition, as it's at a lower resolution compared to the iPad 2. I'm actually kind of jealous. I refuse to use a device with a lower performing GPU than an Apple product! Hope the GPU in the Kal-El will actually be competitive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it is not; both were running the benchmarks at 1280x720. Kal-El is a lot faster than both the Mali MP-400 and SGX 543mp2 while having a lot more features let alone having five cores.
"GLBenchmark 2.1 now includes the ability to render the test offscreen at a resolution of 1280 x 720. This is not as desirable as being able to set custom resolutions since it's a bit too high for smartphones but it's better than nothing." Anandtech
EDIT: Apple might decide to cut back the A5 running inside the iPhone 5 to just one 543, or a lower clocked version, as having two doesn't really make any sense on a mobile phone at least when battery life is taken into consideration.

tjtj4444 said:
I believe this is a simple die shrink from 45 to 32nm. So it still has the Mali-400 GPU but clocked at 400MHz instead of 267MHz (i e 50% clock increase). The very subtle name change from Exynos 4210 to Exynos 4212 almost confirms this.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This sounds plausible.
YOUCANNOTDENY said:
And it's driving over twice the resolution. The GPU in the iPhone 5 is going to blow away the competition, as it's at a lower resolution compared to the iPad 2. I'm actually kind of jealous. I refuse to use a device with a lower performing GPU than an Apple product! Hope the GPU in the Kal-El will actually be competitive.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a developer tablet called ODROID-A that uses the Exynos 4210 SoC and it benches pretty well with an even higher resolution than the iPad 2 (1366x768 vs 1024x768).
Comparison for reference.
With a 50% increase, the Mali-400 (assuming they keep this GPU) will be comparable to the SGX-543MP2.

Toss3 said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
Check the GLBenchmark numbers again; the SGX 543mp2 is over 100% faster than the Mali mp-400.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well,for all I know,the CPU in the iPad 2 is larger(The chip itself is larger),which instantly translates in more transistors being placed in the same space.I can only suspect that same goes for the GPU.But even if it does not,it's most likely that the version in the iPhone 5/4s/whatever won't be the same.Will it be underclocked?Smaller?I don't know.
By the way,I personally believe manufacturers **** all over their tablets when they put phone SoC's in them.There should be a different,more powerful(albeit more power-hungry) variant of each SoC for tablets.But that's just me.
As for the iPhone part,don't mistake me as a hater(I hate it btw,but I won't flame it or anything.If it's better than what I have,I'll just admit it.It's not the hardware I hate).In fact I wish it's THAT powerful,so that the competition will drive performance up for everyone.And that,for us,is a win.

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).

Galaxy S 4 - Powered by a Better Snapdragon 600 (APQ8064AB)?

At a high level, Samsung's Galaxy S 4 integrates Qualcomm's Snapdragon 600 SoC. From what Qualcomm told us about Snapdragon 600, we're dealing with four Krait 300 cores and an Adreno 320 GPU. The Krait 300 cores themselves are supposed to improve performance per clock over the original Krait CPU (Krait 200) through a handful of low level microarchitectural tweaks that we've gone through here. The Krait 300 design also allegedly improves the ability to run at higher frequencies without resorting to higher voltages. This isn't the first time we've talked about Snapdragon 600, but since then a few things have come to light.
For starters, Chipworks got their hands on a Snapdragon 600 SoC (from an HTC One) and delayered the SoC. In its investigation, Chipworks discovered that Snapdragon 600 had the exact same die area as the previous generation Snapdragon S4 Pro (APQ8064). Also, although you'd expect APQ8064T markings on the chip itself, the part carried the same APQ8064 label as previous S4 Pro designs.
Chipworks did note however that there were some subtle differences between a standard APQ8064 and the Snapdragon 600 SoC from the HTC One. The Snapdragon 600 from the One is labeled with an Avenger2 codename rather than Avenger, the latter was apparently present on prior APQ8064 designs. Chipworks also noticed differences in the topmost metal layer, although it's not clear whether or not they stopped there or found no differences in lower layers.
All of this points to a much more subtle set of physical differences between APQ8064 and the earliest Snapdragon 600s. Metal layer changes are often used to fix bugs in silicon without requiring a complete respin which can be costly and create additional delays. It's entirely possible that Krait 300 was actually just a bug fixed Krait 200, which would explain the identical die size and slight differences elsewhere.
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.
Source - http://anandtech.com/show/6914/samsung-galaxy-s-4-review/3

this is very interesting, I hope that's the case
then a little overclocking will probably not hurt?

Do people over clock just because they can? Or do they need to for some application?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app

SlimJ87D said:
Do people over clock just because they can? Or do they need to for some application?
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
may help with games and performance
but for me 1.9ghz just doesn't sound right xD I like even numbers, and numbers that sound good.
1.9 just sounds annoying to me, yes I know. dumb reason to overclock but if it doesn't hurt...

Just saw the specs for the new lg opt g pro.. its also got a 1.7ghz s600 processor
This is interesting I would like to see how this develops..
In4info
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app

This is interesting.
I will sub for topic, keep us informed.
Looking onto it.
Sent from my LT26i using xda app-developers app

Samsung is a key player ann the biggest producer of microcontrollers and soc. So definitely they may have a deal with qualcomm , that their team wanted to tweak the soc before finishing. So in this way they might have added some special capabilities to distinguish it from others.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app

qazibasit said:
Samsung is a key player ann the biggest producer of microcontrollers and soc. So definitely they may have a deal with qualcomm , that their team wanted to tweak the soc before finishing. So in this way they might have added some special capabilities to distinguish it from others.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I highly doubt Samsung had any design work in Qualcomm's chip. They probably asked "How can we clock it to 1.9 and not overheat." And Qualcomm said "We can, don't' worry."

It's clear that Samsung had big problems into bringing the new Exynos octa and the HD Amoled screen (they even considered shipping the S4 with lcds - that's why the initial firmwares used a white theme) to the market in time for the S4 launch.
My guess is they knew that they will not have enough Exynos octa cpus for the huge demand of the S4 so they had to search elsewhere for something similar. Who else could deliver this? Qualcomm - their biggest competitor. Unfortunately the S800 (which would offer very much the same performances or even better) wasn't ready so... only the S600 remained... which wasnt enough.
What do you do when you want to get more performance out of a cpu? You overclock it! I think it's pretty safe to assume they use some higher binned cpus for this but it is also possible they made some architecture changes, tweaks, to make this jump from 1,7 Ghz to 1,9 Ghz feasible in time.
As people start to receive their S4s, I'm sure this story would develop into something very interesting...

anandtech's most probably right that its nothing more den a respin with better binning. in the semicon industry we typically slap on a new appended codename on respun sillicon.

I was a little intrigued by this too because the galaxy s4 had much better graphics benchmaks than the HTC One even if they both had the S600. though it might be updated drivers 4.2.2 > 4.1.2 or maybe the the gpu is just simply overclocked at maybe 450mhz because we get similar offscreen results with the HTC One at 450mhz.

Wait so the 800snapdragon is equal or more the octocore? and the 600 is weaker? so how weak is the 600series
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
---------- Post added at 11:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 PM ----------
I thought the octocore was as powerful as the 600 not the 800 and I thought the 800 was double that of the 600 and octocore cause it can play 4k videos in ultra hd and use have the battery of the 600? and as far as I know the octocore can handle 4k like the 800snapdragon so I doubt the octocore is anywhere near the level of the 800 I think its between the 600 and the 800 but it does perform equal to the 800.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app

gabrielpina4 said:
Wait so the 800snapdragon is equal or more the octocore? and the 600 is weaker? so how weak is the 600series
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
---------- Post added at 11:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 PM ----------
I thought the octocore was as powerful as the 600 not the 800 and I thought the 800s double that of the 600 and octocore cause it can play 4k videos in ultra hd and use have the battery of the 600? and as far as I know the octocore can handle 4k like the 800snapdragon so I doubt the octocore is anywhere near the level of the 800 I think its between the 600 and the 800 but it does perform equal to the 800.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The octocore is just slightly more powerful. Though there is absolutely no difference in everyday use. One thing to note is that the adreno 320 is just as powerful as the sgx544mp3 in the octocore. When oced the adreno 320 is actually more performant and since that is what really matters nowadays in gaming the S600 MIGHT be a little better. The S800 completely destroys both of them cpu and gpu wise. The S800 ate the ipad 4 so it completely obliterates the S600 and sgx544mp3 in the octocore

crzykiller said:
The octocore is just slightly more powerful. Though there is absolutely no difference in everyday use. One thing to note is that the adreno 320 is just as powerful as the sgx544mp3 in the octocore. When oced the adreno 320 is actually more performant and since that is what really matters nowadays in gaming the S600 MIGHT be a little better. The S800 completely destroys both of them cpu and gpu wise. The S800 ate the ipad 4 so it completely obliterates the S600 and sgx544mp3 in the octocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
MY THOUGHTS EXACTLY !
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app

Andrei F.
‏@andreif7
 @nerdtalker ab chip variants = +200 MHz CPU (obvious), +50MHz (450) GPU, +66MHz memory (600). Info taken from source code
https://twitter.com/andreif7/status/326992332404707328

bungadudu said:
At a high level, Samsung's Galaxy S 4 integrates Qualcomm's Snapdragon 600 SoC. From what Qualcomm told us about Snapdragon 600, we're dealing with four Krait 300 cores and an Adreno 320 GPU. The Krait 300 cores themselves are supposed to improve performance per clock over the original Krait CPU (Krait 200) through a handful of low level microarchitectural tweaks that we've gone through here. The Krait 300 design also allegedly improves the ability to run at higher frequencies without resorting to higher voltages. This isn't the first time we've talked about Snapdragon 600, but since then a few things have come to light.
For starters, Chipworks got their hands on a Snapdragon 600 SoC (from an HTC One) and delayered the SoC. In its investigation, Chipworks discovered that Snapdragon 600 had the exact same die area as the previous generation Snapdragon S4 Pro (APQ8064). Also, although you'd expect APQ8064T markings on the chip itself, the part carried the same APQ8064 label as previous S4 Pro designs.
Chipworks did note however that there were some subtle differences between a standard APQ8064 and the Snapdragon 600 SoC from the HTC One. The Snapdragon 600 from the One is labeled with an Avenger2 codename rather than Avenger, the latter was apparently present on prior APQ8064 designs. Chipworks also noticed differences in the topmost metal layer, although it's not clear whether or not they stopped there or found no differences in lower layers.
All of this points to a much more subtle set of physical differences between APQ8064 and the earliest Snapdragon 600s. Metal layer changes are often used to fix bugs in silicon without requiring a complete respin which can be costly and create additional delays. It's entirely possible that Krait 300 was actually just a bug fixed Krait 200, which would explain the identical die size and slight differences elsewhere.
That brings us to the Galaxy S 4. It's immediately apparent that something is different here because Samsung is shipping the Snapdragon 600 at a higher frequency than any other OEM. The Krait 300 cores in SGS4 can run at up to 1.9GHz vs. 1.7GHz for everyone else. Curiously enough, 1.9GHz is the max frequency that Qualcomm mentioned when it first announced Snapdragon 600.
Samsung is obviously a very large customer, so at first glance we assumed it could simply demand a better bin of Snapdragon 600 than its lower volume competitors. Looking a bit deeper however, we see that the Galaxy S 4 uses something different entirely.
Digging through the Galaxy S 4 kernel source we see references to an APQ8064AB part. As a recap, APQ8064 was the first quad-core Krait 200 SoC with no integrated modem, more commonly referred to as Snapdragon S4 Pro. APQ8064T was supposed to be its higher clocked/Krait 300 based successor that ended up with the marketing name Snapdragon 600. APQ8064AB however is, at this point, unique to the Galaxy S 4 but still carries the Snapdragon 600 marketing name.
If we had to guess, we might be looking at an actual respin of the APQ8064 silicon in APQ8064AB. Assuming Qualcomm isn't playing any funny games here, APQ8064AB may simply be a respin capable of hitting higher frequencies. We'll have to keep a close eye on this going forward, but it's clear to me that the Galaxy S 4 is shipping with something different than everyone else who has a Snapdragon 600 at this point.
Source - http://anandtech.com/show/6914/samsung-galaxy-s-4-review/3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OH, do you add the GPU difference? S4 use Adreno 320 with 450 MHz, which is different from another Snapdragon 600 phone
---------- Post added at 05:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:10 PM ----------
crzykiller said:
The octocore is just slightly more powerful. Though there is absolutely no difference in everyday use. One thing to note is that the adreno 320 is just as powerful as the sgx544mp3 in the octocore. When oced the adreno 320 is actually more performant and since that is what really matters nowadays in gaming the S600 MIGHT be a little better. The S800 completely destroys both of them cpu and gpu wise. The S800 ate the ipad 4 so it completely obliterates the S600 and sgx544mp3 in the octocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you think of the Adreno 330 and 430? They will be in APQ8084 and Snapdragon 800, approximately available in the market in end 2013

jackchong0828 said:
OH, do you add the GPU difference? S4 use Adreno 320 with 450 MHz, which is different from another Snapdragon 600 phone
---------- Post added at 05:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:10 PM ----------
Do you think of the Adreno 330 and 430? They will be in APQ8084 and Snapdragon 800, approximately available in the market in end 2013
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was talking about the adreno 330. In certain benchmarks we see MSM8074 which is the name for the Snapdragon 800. Though supposedly there is also a Adreno 420 in the works too which is even more powerful than the adreno 330

95% certain that APQ8064T = APQ8064AB. Same chip, just confusing designators. Labeled T in marketing material, AB in kernel source.

Entropy512 said:
95% certain that APQ8064T = APQ8064AB. Same chip, just confusing designators. Labeled T in marketing material, AB in kernel source.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so you mean they are physically the same but just overclocked?

jackchong0828 said:
so you mean they are physically the same but just overclocked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not even overclocked. I believe they are exactly the same chip.