Related
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
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).
Some exciting news, the first real-world benchmark has appeared for an ARM A15 chip, in this case the Samsung Exynos 5250, which has been launched in the latest Chromebook.
Chip Info - dual-core A15 @ 1.7 GHz & Mali T604 GPU.
http://www.samsung.com/global/busin...t/application/detail?productId=7668&iaId=2341
The benchmark is Sunspider, which is not multi-threaded, i.e. does utilise multiple cores, so you can evaluate the actual performance (javascript) of a single-core., now we can see the performance improvement ARM has baked into their latest hardware
Courtesy of Gigacom, Sunspider on the ARM version of Google Chrome that comes installed on the Chromebook = 660ms (Lower is better). Compared to the current King of the Hill ARM A9 device the Galaxy Note 2 (Exynos 4412), which is clocked at 1.6 GHz, it achieves 972 ms accorded to GSM Arena, other sites have similar figures.
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_note_ii-review-824p5.php
LOWER IS BETTER
Exynos 5250 - A15 @ 1.7 Ghz = 660 ms
Exynos 4412 - A9 @ 1.6 Ghz = 972 ms
The 5250 is clocked 6% higher than the 4412, so if we adjust the results for CPU frequency parity
Exynos 5250 = 660 ms
Exynos 4412 @ 1.7 Ghz = 914 ms
This is not an exhaustive performance test!, but we can see that in this one popular benchmark that ARM A15 is ~30% faster than the A9 architecture when adjusted for clock speed.
To sweeten the deal further A15 SoC will run at a higher clock than A9s, Tegra 4 (T40) is stated to run @ 1.8 GHz with a bump to 2 GHz after a couple of quarters, just like Tegra 3. Samsung has the even mightier 5450, a quad-core variant of the chip in this test, rumored to run @ 2 GHz, combined with much more powerful GPU, and Android's software optimisations 2013 is going to be one hell of year for tech fans:victory:
Source:
http://gigaom.com/mobile/video-hands-on-with-googles-new-249-chromebook/
Nice find. I am also looking for Mali-T604 results. GLbenchmark results will be interesting. 72GFLOPs does sound very good.
EDIT: I think he says 620ms in video. Also, I am sure it will get better as the Chrome OS code is optimized for ARM. This is just first release. Exynos 4 has been optimized to limit. They can't push it any further now, at least not by a big margin.
hot_spare said:
Nice find. I am also looking for Mali-T604 results. GLbenchmark results will be interesting. 72GFLOPs does sound very good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You may have to wait a while, ChromeOS can't run Android apps like GLbenchmark, only webapps. The reason Sunspider is a good test in this case, is that they both use the ARM version of Chrome, which uses the same underlying technology (Webkit & V8 Javascript engine)
Edit, there some unverified benchmarks from ES 2.0 Taiji, but there are v-sync limited to 60 fps, so we don't know how powerful the T-604, from that bench.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...i-T604-graphics-pops-up-in-benchmarks_id34681
True. I think have to wait for SGS4 for those benchmarks. More interested in browsermark, peacekeeper, google octane numbers. google itself mentioned that sunspider is outdated.
http://sunspider-mod.googlecode.com/svn/data/hosted/sunspider.html
hot_spare said:
EDIT: I think he says 620ms in video. Also, I am sure it will get better as the Chrome OS code is optimized for ARM. This is just first release. Exynos 4 has been optimized to limit. They can't push it any further now, at least not by a big margin.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the video he mentions 620 ms, but in the comments he states 660 ms for Sunspider when asked the question, I chose the 660 ms to be conservative.
Antutu benchmark!
I kept looking, and found something interesting now.
"Supposedly" first Antutu benchmark for Exynos 5250. Now the values show it's running at 1.5GHz. For a dual-core SoC, 14185 score sounds very good.
The most interesting part is the 3D graphics numbers. This is 3x compared to 4412 SoC.
Source: http://www.antutu.com/view.shtml?id=2718
With more optimization, this can be really powerful.
Looks like this chip will also end up in the Nexus 10
Turbotab said:
Looks like this chip will also end up in the Nexus 10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's going to be a monster tablet.
Peacekeeper browser benchmark for Exynos 5250 gets more than 1200:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/+JoeWilcox/posts/8LrBK9CKJG4
Better than any other mobile SoC so far.
This chip rapes every other chip out there, even the s4 pro and apple a6. look here- http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/
prajju123 said:
This chip rapes every other chip out there, even the s4 pro and apple a6. look here- http://www.androidauthority.com/exynos-5-dual-benchmarks-125134/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude please don't use the word rape, an ugly word. But we must wait for the a GL Benchmark results of the Mali T-604 against the Apple A6 & A6X, I hope it beats them, but it won't be easy Apple used a lot of die space to create them.
Hoping for a Exynos 5450 (5 Quad) by March or April of 2013
Is it the same chip they use in the new Chromebook?
lz2323 said:
Is it the same chip they use in the new Chromebook?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly the same, dual-core Exynos 5250 - Mali T-604.
Does anyone else think that the new-generation Exynos SoC will support 802.11ac and LTE-A? Or playing back 1080p video at 60 fps and 2k quality at 30 fps? These are features which were never really discussed about the chipset itself.
The Snapdragon 800 was confirmed to have compatibility and capability of all of the aforementioned. It sounds as if the Snapdragon 800 series will be the superior chipset, while the Exynos Octa will likely provide better power efficiency in some regard. It would be pretty disappointing if the Galaxy S IV got stuck with a Snapdragon 600 processor, given the date it's likely going to be pushed out on. It might make me consider the Note this time around.
i really hope all these rumors are fake, samsung should use Exynos on there flagship Galaxy S line ! if not the octa, maybe the Exynos 5 Quad Core 1.8-2.0GHz !
All the Snapdragon 600 happens to be is a mid-tear SoC, which improves upon the same GPU and performance of the S4 Pro. Real A15 architectures should blow this chipset out of the water. People seem to think that what they see now is good. But when the Snapdragon 800 and other A15-based chips start making their debut, this will feel dated quickly in the coming months.
megagodx said:
All the Snapdragon 600 happens to be is a mid-tear SoC, which improves upon the same GPU and performance of the S4 Pro. Real A15 architectures should blow this chipset out of the water. People seem to think that what they see now is good. But when the Snapdragon 800 and other A15-based chips start making their debut, this will feel dated quickly in the coming months.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
clock-per-clock a15 is just 15% faster than krait, dont think that there's so much differences between the two.
they are both really solid performers and the batle is all on the maximum clock/power required rateo.
The SD800 will also feature Quick Charge 2.0, which is supposed to charge your battery 75% faster than other SoC chipsets without that same function. SD600 doesn't feature that either. I'm pretty sure if you seen the initial Tegra 4 benchmarks (based off of real A15 architecture) - they wipe the floor with the HTC One's SD600. Being 75% increased in performance over the Snapdragon S4 Pro (last year's best mobile SoC), the SD800 should bring comparatively the same or better results than the T4 mentioned. That's kind of going to be a disappointment if the S IV ends up with a SD600 and no Exynos 5 Quad/Octa, at least.
See benchmark details here
Top scores....
Note 3: 5130
Note 4: 4942
Duh...
Quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A53 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A57 (SM-N910C)
quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A15 (N9000)
The Exynos CPU in the N3 and N4 hava exactly the same speed... And yet the N9005 only has a 1920x1080 screen, whereas the Note 4 has to render 2560x1440.
Thank you for proving why I absolutely hate Exynos.
I'd like to know the Snapdragon variants. Since the Note 4 does have a significantly more powerful Snapdragon CPU, and the Snapdragon is the 80% of the market model, the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Quad-core 2.7 GHz Krait 450 (SM-N910S)
Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400 (N9005)
But the Exynos in the Note 4 is pretty awesome already:
http://anandtech.com/show/8718/the-samsung-galaxy-note-4-exynos-review
Good things are to come with the one in the Galaxy S6.
If you would run the PCMark test yourselves and post the results, that would be great!!
Thanks
ShadowLea said:
the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is kind of offending!, and I am non emotional guy who hates Exynos too :|
devilsdouble said:
This is kind of offending!, and I am non emotional guy who hates Exynos too :|
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If a market sells less or requires less high-level hardware due to an older, less sophisticated network system, it's considered a lower market. The demand and proceeds are lower compared to the high-selling markets, thus the word lower.
That's not a personal attempt at insult, it's a corporate definition.
Until 4G was rolled out, the Netherlands was one of those lower markets. (Though, frankly, I still consider it as such..) In the days of the S3, every non-US country was considered a lower market.
(Besides, I'm a sociopath, I don't do emotional )
Marketing aside: Temasek's CM12 + arter97 kernel + data&cache partitions in f2fs.
The phone is superfast as hell, but benchmark result was this:
Times are changing, for the worse and for better, i know it makes no sense, but so doesnt sammy.
They seem to drop Snapdragon, and with 810 in sight (ignored too), Exynos is going for a PR fight with overheating accusations, and being the sucky ones in performance and the best in sales (Samsung generally), they just made their phones even less open to the people, HOWEVER...they are dropping bloat too.
As i said, they are making no sense.
sirobelec said:
Marketing aside: Temasek's CM12 + arter97 kernel + data&cache partitions in f2fs.
The phone is superfast as hell, but benchmark result was this:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stock Note N900 seems to perform better
PCMark for Android claims to......
Measure the performance and battery life of your Android smart phone and tablet using tests based on everyday tasks, not abstract algorithms.
ShadowLea said:
If a market sells less or requires less high-level hardware due to an older, less sophisticated network system, it's considered a lower market. The demand and proceeds are lower compared to the high-selling markets, thus the word lower.
That's not a personal attempt at insult, it's a corporate definition.
Until 4G was rolled out, the Netherlands was one of those lower markets. (Though, frankly, I still consider it as such..) In the days of the S3, every non-US country was considered a lower market.
(Besides, I'm a sociopath, I don't do emotional )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ShadowLea said:
Duh...
Quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A53 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A57 (SM-N910C)
quad-core 1.3 GHz Cortex-A7 & Quad-core 1.9 GHz Cortex-A15 (N9000)
The Exynos CPU in the N3 and N4 hava exactly the same speed... And yet the N9005 only has a 1920x1080 screen, whereas the Note 4 has to render 2560x1440.
Thank you for proving why I absolutely hate Exynos.
I'd like to know the Snapdragon variants. Since the Note 4 does have a significantly more powerful Snapdragon CPU, and the Snapdragon is the 80% of the market model, the Exynos is only for lower markets.
Quad-core 2.7 GHz Krait 450 (SM-N910S)
Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400 (N9005)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why don't you simply run the test yourself with the superior phone/network you have and let the results speak for themselves?
PCMark for android
4354 here UK note 3
If Samsung do end up dropping Qualcomm in their next generation of phones, my N9005 Note 3 will be my last Samsung for the foreseeable future. Exynos holds no interest for me, as it's closed source nature inevitably means little to no support for non-stock AOSP/CM roms. And the non-stock roms that are available are generally unstable and bug ridden.
^ +100
We know S6 is not going to have S810, why wouldnt they follow the same path with Note's too?
SM-N9005 is my last Samsung device, i am not going to drag myself to pain with Exynos.
New top score... 5130
Benchmark scores between flagship phones mean precisely jack s**t these days, they're little more than **** waving. Discernible features is what should be compared.
"Wow, my Android phone scored 200 more points than your Android phone! And please, let's ignore the fact it will make precisely zero difference in real world use!"
Beefheart said:
Benchmark scores between flagship phones mean precisely jack s**t these days, they're little more than **** waving. Discernible features is what should be compared.
"Wow, my Android phone scored 200 more points than your Android phone! And please, let's ignore the fact it will make precisely zero difference in real world use!"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ignorance is bliss!!
The whole point of these tests is to show that most of the other benchmarks don't show a true picture of real-life use.
Why else would Note 3 appear to perform better than Note4?
The PCMark webpage states the following...
PCMark for Android introduces a fresh approach to benchmarking smart phones and tablets. It measures the performance and battery life of the device as a complete unit rather than a set of isolated components. And its tests are based on common, everyday tasks instead of abstract algorithms.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, that completely changed my opinion.*
* may contain sarcasm.
Beefheart said:
Yeah, that completely changed my opinion.*
* may contain sarcasm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have it your way... at least , I, am actually investigating
It's in the interest of the benchmark app developers for users to believe their offerings aren't pointless.
Beefheart said:
It's in the interest of the benchmark app developers for users to believe their offerings aren't pointless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you on this....... generally.
I however found this particular benchmark interesting for the following reasons....
1. It proves software is the biggest bottleneck in android phones, not hardware. ( Lollipop on Note3 >>beats>> kitkat onNote4 )
2. It proved that my Note 3 performs better in everyday use than my Note4 ( This I have always known but no benchmark showed it.)