Develop Bugs

[Q] Thoughts on 'weak' GPU?

Hi
Noob here. Was just wondering what the general consensus was on the 'old' GPU that the Galaxy Nexus will be supplied with. It isn't as powerful as say, the Galaxy S2 or the iPhone4s, but will this have an overall effect on how the phone performs in day to day use? Will it only effect the high end games that are currently available? I'm seriously tempted by this phone - mainly due to the lovely looking ICS but I'm concerned I may regret purchasing if there are serious issues with the GPU.
Cheers.

I am presuming the GPU is clocked all the way up to 384Mhz like the chip's specification says, if not then curses to Google.
TBH I believe it'll be fine, although it is an old GPU it is still quite a powerful one and can handle almost every game fine. Tegra 2 is generally a weaker GPU than SGX540 @ 200 and can still manage games just fine at 1280 x 800, I don't see why the SGX540 @ 384 can't do that. Although we'll never know for sure until we get the phone.

I'll quote myself from the other thread here:
Here's a lovely anecdote: I use an Eyefinity (three-monitor) setup on my gaming rig. It's a general rule of thumb that (compared to a single 1080p monitor) adding an additional 1080p monitor will reduce your performance by about 30%. A third 1080p monitor will reduce your performance to about 50% that of a single-screen setup.
Now consider, the Nexus Prime has about 2.4 times the number of pixels as the Nexus S. If the same formula as a desktop GPU holds true for mobiles, we could expect about a 40% loss in 3D performance. Now the GPU has been clocked up about 92%. It's throughput is now approaching double that of the Galaxy S, when it needed only make up a 40% defecit. Of course if you consider diminishing returns from clockspeed scaling, the [email protected] should perform at 720p about as well as it did at 200MHz and 480p. /shrug
The usual disclaimer: this was all conjecture on my part.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said, that's just my theory, and it's got no real grounding (since I haven't used the new Nexus yet.)

Hope you guys are right, of course I'm not going to hold you to it, I just would like to have seen fresh architecture.
If we get a kernel, or I should say when we get a kernel that allows overclocking, does that only OC the CPU cores or will it OC the GPU even more?
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk

And while you guys are skeptical of a gpu more powerful than the Geforce on the Tegra 2, which has its own games zone dedicated to it's well-known-to-be-awesome-or-atleast-marketed-well performance, I'm rocking an Adreno 200 powering a thoroughly shattered-yet-still-working-perfectly 4.3" WVGA standard LCD display. That powervr is probably more powerful than my Geforce3 ti 200 on my desktop.
I need a refresh.

Andreno200 < Adreno205 < [email protected] < [email protected] < or = Adreno 220
The Andreno 205 is 2X the 200, but the SGX is around 1.5X Adreno205, 220 is 2X Andreno205...So [email protected] is similar to Andreno 220 at same res, but slower at 720P?

I think it's stupid that people think it's weak because:
* It isn't brand new
* They've never seen it clocked like it is and/or matched with the OMAP processor it's matched with.
* Have never played a game optimized for it
* Can't name a game/movie/program that will run on something else but not the combination mentioned above
* Assume that superficial benchmark results mean much in real world applications
The entire conversation is like talking about a way to make your race car's top speed go from 210mph to 230mph on a track that is designed to make it impossible to go faster than 175mph.
For the last time, this is NOT the same GPU that is in the SGS.

Dragooon123 said:
I am presuming the GPU is clocked all the way up to 384Mhz like the chip's specification says, if not then curses to Google.
TBH I believe it'll be fine, although it is an old GPU it is still quite a powerful one and can handle almost every game fine. Tegra 2 is generally a weaker GPU than SGX540 @ 200 and can still manage games just fine at 1280 x 800, I don't see why the SGX540 @ 384 can't do that. Although we'll never know for sure until we get the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You got it wrong there dude, SGX 540 @304 Mhz is equal or +1 to 2 % faster then the Geforce ULP GPU @800x480( Note that this can be because of the Dual channel memory the 4430 soc uses (optimus 3d)). Also the ULP Geforce does not work the same way as the SGX. Geforce ULP has the tendency to not get major performance hits when resolution gets bigger hence why all tablets use Tegra 2(Got a source for this however cant find it right now), it was Nvidias plan all along to grab the Tablet market.
I hope the extra Mhz helps the sgx 540 to perform well on the galaxy nexus when it comes to Games and so on. If it doesn't there are tricks to bypass things and get good performance in gaming however it up to google/samsung to implement them

I'm looking forward to try the phone myself when it hits the stores, and hope it'll be ok...

taxas said:
You got it wrong there dude, SGX 540 @304 Mhz is equal or +1 to 2 % faster then the Geforce ULP GPU @800x480( Note that this can be because of the Dual channel memory the 4430 soc uses (optimus 3d)). Also the ULP Geforce does not work the same way as the SGX. Geforce ULP has the tendency to not get major performance hits when resolution gets bigger hence why all tablets use Tegra 2(Got a source for this however cant find it right now), it was Nvidias plan all along to grab the Tablet market.
I hope the extra Mhz helps the sgx 540 to perform well on the galaxy nexus when it comes to Games and so on. If it doesn't there are tricks to bypass things and get good performance in gaming however it up to google/samsung to implement them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That might be the case but I saw SGX540 outperforming tegra at 720p, so even then at a tablet resolution the SGX540 doesn't fail to perform. Regardless, the gpu in galaxy nexus is nothing short of high end and should perform fine.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk

...and Tegra isn't that great either!

Regardless of whether the phone is fast or not, there is the overwhelming feeling that it could have been better. I think most people wanted a 543MP2 or if it were possible, the 543MP4+ (it isn't) on th Vita.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium

There is no soc out yet apart from the A5 with the 543mp2, the lead time on a soc is huge, i mean they were designing the OMAP 4460 back in 2009 or earlier (first mentions in white papers of the 4460 where in Feb 2009) but i am sure they where working on it before then.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

veyka said:
There is no soc out yet apart from the A5 with the 543mp2, the lead time on a soc is huge, i mean they were designing the OMAP 4460 back in 2009 or earlier (first mentions in white papers of the 4460 where in Feb 2009) but i am sure they where working on it before then.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True. We know that the new A15s have been in development since at least 2009.
The Omap 5430 has a 544MPx; we don't know how many cores.
I suppose there was no alternative except the Exynos?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium

sauron0101 said:
True. We know that the new A15s have been in development since at least 2009.
The Omap 5430 has a 544MPx; we don't know how many cores.
I suppose there as no alternative except the Exynos?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well there is Exynos, OMAP or snapdragon for current generation soc's.
OMAP and exynos are S9 cores. Snapdragon is kinda A8 with extra SIMD performance.
That's generally why snapdragon gets out performed clock for clock by A9+neon designs (that's why a 1.5ghz snapdragon eg sensation xl gets or tmob USA sgs2 is out performed by a 1.2ghz exynos.
I am more happy with OMAP than snapdragon that's for sure.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

A lot of people seem to bemoaning the fact that this phone doesn't have a 1.5Ghz Exynos 4212 or even the 4210. The big worry is that the chip may not run well at 1280x720, hence the "lag" we saw in the leak videos.
There is disagreement on if the Mali 400 or the SGX 540 is better (at this clock anyways), but there seems to be a consensus that the Exynos is a faster CPU than the OMAP 4. I suppose that a few were hoping for a ARM Cortex A15 with a 2-core SGX 554. No such a SOC currently exists sadly.
I am also hopeful that there have been some software optimizations in Ice Cream that could improve performance.
Part of me wonders if Google should do what Apple did - get its own semiconductor design department and outsource the actual fab. It seems to be offering Apple a competitive advantage of sorts.

my thoughts are that i don't care.
eric b

veyka said:
Well there is Exynos, OMAP or snapdragon for current generation soc's.
OMAP and exynos are S9 cores. Snapdragon is kinda A8 with extra SIMD performance.
That's generally why snapdragon gets out performed clock for clock by A9+neon designs (that's why a 1.5ghz snapdragon eg sensation xl gets or tmob USA sgs2 is out performed by a 1.2ghz exynos.
I am more happy with OMAP than snapdragon that's for sure.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Better Omap 4 than Scorpion.
Apparently there are also a few people who were hoping for a Tegra 3. It might have been doable (and I stress the might), as the new Asus Transformer Prime is rumoured to carry Kal El.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium

TBH the GPU and CPU are more than capable off handling the gui, its not like they are pulling out a fully 3D gui, even if the resolution is bumped the hardware should still be able handle it without breaking a sweat. It's only the games where the doubt arises.

sauron0101 said:
Agreed. Better Omap 4 than Scorpion.
Apparently there are also a few people who were hoping for a Tegra 3. It might have been doable (and I stress the might), as the new Asus Transformer Prime is rumoured to carry Kal El.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure if kal el is ready yet, i dont think the transformer prime is due till q1 2012, and I'm sure if the smartphone Tegra 3 is ready as well.
And Tegra 2 doesn't even have neon!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

The One S beats the One X ?!

Hey guys, i was shocked when i saw that the benchmarks of the One X showed a slightly worse performance than the One S even though the One X is the one with the Tegra 3 quad-core processor. Is this because the ice cream sandwich is optimized for dual core processors which doesn't show the real power of quad-core? , or is the dual-core Snapdragon S4 better than the quad-core Tegra 3 in the One X?
Here's the engadget review that showed the benchmarks i'm talking about:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/02/htc-one-x-review/
And here's a video comparison between the one X and the one S:

The cpu in the One S is better than the tegra 3, all that lets the one s down is its only qhd resolution or I would have had one myself.

Same here, however I am curious why HTC went with Tegra 3 in the first place.

I just found this comparison between the Snapdragon S4 Krait and NVIDIA Tegra 3.
http://briefmobile.com/htc-one-x-snapdragon-s4-krait-vs-nvidia-tegra-3-comparison

I have used the Tegra 3 extensively in the asus transformer prime. Overall I would rate its actual performance better than the qualcomm processors in many areas. Though the qualcomm processor may show higher benchmarks, the tegra 3 will multitask better in reality. You also have to keep in mind that device is running a lower resolution than the one x, so obviously the benchmarks would be better... the gpu wouldnt have to work as hard.. make sense?
Heres the resolution information on the one x and one s
1280 x 720 HD (312ppi) < One X
960 x 540 qHD (256ppi)< One S

But I don't see why we need the tegra3 in a phone what kinda multi tasking are they performing on a phone it makes sense in tablet especially one as advanced as the transformer prime. But why isn't a dual core enough for a phone
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA

The Tegra 3 IS faster than S4.
It's just that application aren't optimized for quad core processors yet.

I know both will have excellent performance, now and in the future. What I want is the screen and the 32GB of the One X. But I also want the battery performance of the One S. Damn. :-\ But with updates I hope HTC can get more of the One X potensial out, performance and battery!!!

420kushking said:
I have used the Tegra 3 extensively in the asus transformer prime. Overall I would rate its actual performance better than the qualcomm processors in many areas. Though the qualcomm processor may show higher benchmarks, the tegra 3 will multitask better in reality. You also have to keep in mind that device is running a lower resolution than the one x, so obviously the benchmarks would be better... the gpu wouldnt have to work as hard.. make sense?
Heres the resolution information on the one x and one s
1280 x 720 HD (312ppi) < One X
960 x 540 qHD (256ppi)< One S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
mzaza said:
The Tegra 3 IS faster than S4.
It's just that application aren't optimized for quad core processors yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the GPU is on par, what I mean is that GLBenchmark the Tegra 3 result for the two 720p benchmark is 65fps and 88fps and Adreno 225 is 58fps and 102fps.
But on Nenamark 2, Adreno 225 on a 720p screen beats the Tegra 3 on a 720p (54fps vs 48fps).
The CPU is better on the Krait since its architecture is more advance than Tegra's A9. I'd prefer having the Krait CPU in the One X if I could choose. The Krait is easily gonna make the phone a lot smoother since it only has to scale through 'two' CPU's plus the CPU's are faster than Tegra A9's and Tegra 3 needs to scale 4 CPU to be on par with Kraits dual core which can be battery hungry and kill battery life faster where as Krait is built on 28nm which the heat and power is a lot lower.
Of course resolution is also related but if you go and look at Sprints HTC One X version which packs a Dual Core Kraits, it performs a lot smoother or the HTC One XL.

There are couple of thread here that discuss about this please read them ...

mzaza said:
The Tegra 3 IS faster than S4.
It's just that application aren't optimized for quad core processors yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it's certainly isn't. The S4 runs circles around tegra 3 are you kidding me? The whole fuss about tegra 3 is that it has 4 cores. The S4 gives you 2 cores based on a new architecture that gives you better performance. You don't know what you're talking about.

Both is good. There are areas both will outshine the other. In real life, both is excellent.

Just throwing my two cents....
.....Even my Motorola RAZR is better than the One X at this stage, really, I've ran some benchmarks with a custom kernel on it and the RAZR has beaten the One X without any problem on tasks that aren't CPU intensive.
OMAP4430 is a good chip, with A LOT of multimedia-oriented things in it, like IVA and the SGX530. Ducati does a good job.
Still, remember that Tegra3 is a "Multimedia SoC" with +2 cores and that will make it to score better on CPU intensive tasks even if the device using it is running a not well optimized / bad kernel.
The kernel that is running on the HTC One X is a first release and, while Motorola on their devices makes the kernel to generate stacktraces and faults here and there but still being optimal on performance, HTC prefers not to, giving a bad behavior on performance.
This is good for us developers because they allow us to directly work on clean and stable software, without having to debug various fails by them, so that we can give it the performance it deserves.
It's only a matter of time.
We're waiting for the kernel source to come out.
The EternityProject Team Manager & Main Developer,
--kholk

Quad core phones to be the standard?

I felt like once phones hit the 1 ghz mark the cpu race kicked into over drive....the dual core phase was short lived and just about old news with quad core phones hitting shelves. Is there anything left after quad core phones? Will this be standard for awhile? I just hope its not a gimmick. Like the whole 4g deal....especially LTE....i still dont feel like the benefit of the slight boost in data transfer is worth the crappy battery life. Hspa+ seems to be a good sweet spot for data transfer.... and instead of improving networks and creating quality broadband services companies waste millions on trying to be the company with the latest inadequate tech. Most people dont even understand what they have or what they are using....if only i had a dollar for everytime i heard....."i love my iphone 4g"
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

I don't know, but as I can't see how there would enough multi-tasking to make more than four cores worth sacrificing features, I would love to see improvements in battery life instead.
Doesn't Moore's law apply to more than just processing speed? Like, we could see improvements in cost, speed, or energy efficiency, but we just keep going for speed? Because I'd really love to have double the battery life.

I doubt that they will be the standard for a while. Look at how amazing the HTC ONE S is performing compared to the ONE X and the transformer prime.
I think that the dual core still has a lot of life in it. Quad core phones may be in all the flagship phones pretty soon, but I don't think that they will be "standard" for quite some time.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA

I hope so.....id rather have a high performance dual core than quad.....unless quad core phones will start flying planes
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

Don't worry about core counts. Just worry about overall performance.
Quad core is a meaningless number of cores.

Quad-Cores will remain flagship for at least another year. I predict the 2014 standard for lower-end phones will be quad-core. Dual-Core won't die out, however, because of low-power consumption and prices. Most changes we will likely see in the coming years:
1. Size (Probably a move to smaller 10nm chipsets, thinner screens and phones, Larger displays)
2. Optimization of Current Technologies (Software improvements, thinner AMOLEDS, power consumption)
3. BATTERY IMPROVEMENTS (It's needed the MOST)

Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core chips and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.

theherodrownd said:
Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core batteries and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.

Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore

Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sure? I looked a few places to check and saw it is still based on A9. Seems to be stamped on the same 40nm dye as the Tegra2. Its ghost core seems to have a different architecture however.
Edit: Valynor posted one of the links I was reading, thanks!

Valynor said:
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The next generation (Wayne) has 2 A9 and 2 A15 (est. Q4-Q1 13 release).

More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.

systemf said:
More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely, definitely too early. I mean it's cool and all but QUAD CORE on a phone right now really? If we keep going this fast we will have 16 cores by 2014. But in all seriousness google and oems should just focus on battery life improvements, software, skins like sense and touchwiz refinements and user experience. Once those things are perfected you can bring new crazy features that would require a quad core powerhouse but for now it really is not needed. Just upgrade the current dual core architecture to A15 based SoC.

Someday:thumbup:
Sent from my i9250 [GSM) Galaxy Nexus

[Q] HOX beats S3?

i really wanna know:
i got 1,5 ghz processor + Graphic Card (4+1)
i got design
i got beats
i got sense
S3 got:
1,4 ghz processor
Amoled...
Touchwiz
Battery ( 2200 mAh) with low energy usage Cpu
İ see benchmark points pass the S3 when JB comes
5 min ago i installed geekbench 2
my phone get 1300 benchmark points (power saving off) but s3 got 1700 -.-
its one of most important thing for me: HAVE BETTER PROCESSOR THEN S3
can anyone explain to me HOX have better cpu or not?
and what about iphone 5? is it beat hox too? with dual core??

This thread will be closed.
The HOX and S3 are basically on a par with each other. However the S3 just edges out the HOX for a few different reasons. First, most software needs further optimising for Tegra devices and secondly because the S3 doesn't have the S-On/S-Off problem.
It's worth noting that the HOX is closer in terms of following Google's phone design guidelines (no menu button) and also that the screen is better.

The Tegra3 version of HOX has a slower CPU than it's dual core version.
It's like comparing a Q8200 with a E8600 and then run dual core optimized programs.

Hmmm thx for explain
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Bassicaly there isnt much of a big difference.. Exynos is a bit faster(effective)than tegra 3.. So s3 has worse screen while htc has better.. S3 has amoled display while htc has only lcd display.. But they r kinda same.. Used both phone sense is good but still wud go for touchwiz.. Lack of toggles in notification menu rly bugs me.. (There r no official htc toggles there r just play stores one)..It is just my opinion
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

I have the One X but I think the S3 is better overall
The S3 has a faster processor, smoother gaming and UI, better quality camera, touchwiz features (pop up play, multi-window, smart rotation) and most importantly a great XDA thread
However the HOX does have a much better (& sturdier) design, better screen, THD games support, Beats audio

Headless_monkeyhunta96 said:
I have the One X but I think the S3 is better overall
The S3 has a faster processor, smoother gaming and UI, better quality camera, touchwiz features (pop up play, multi-window, smart rotation) and most importantly a great XDA thread
However the HOX does have a much better (& sturdier) design, better screen, THD games support, Beats audio
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding to beats.. Ok so when the driver is on the sound is just amazing it blows any other phone when it comes to that..But,but,but i think that they demolished sound when u play music without beats drivers just so u can say that the difference is sooo big.. And it is a good marketing trick gotta admit that.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

The amount of stupidity in this thread is unbelievable...
The S3 beats the Tegra 3 even though it has a slightly slower clock speed for a few reasons, mainly because the Exynos chip in the S3 is a 32nm chip as compared to the Tegra 3's 40nm process, so the Exynos is somewhat more efficient due to the smaller process. Also, blame Nvidia for crappy software optimisation. Furthermore, the Mali 400 chip in the S3 is far more powerful than the puny Tegra 3 ULP Geforce chip. Don't say more cores = more power, that is not true. Besides, the S4 in the HOXL is more powerful than the Tegra 3 because the S4 has the Cortex A15 architecture which gives about 40% more processing power per core against the Cortex A9. The comparison of a dual core CPU and a quad core CPU using a dual core optimised software I saw somewhere above in this thread means nothing in ARM terms. The Cortex A9 (for example Tegra 3) uses all 4 cores and loses against the Snapdragon S4, say the MSM8960 which the HOXL has.
All other discussions about S3 and HOX w.r.t. features (touchwiz is a feature?!) should be reserved for other threads.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

pandaball said:
The amount of stupidity in this thread is unbelievable...
The S3 beats the Tegra 3 even though it has a slightly slower clock speed for a few reasons, mainly because the Exynos chip in the S3 is a 32nm chip as compared to the Tegra 3's 40nm process, so the Exynos is somewhat more efficient due to the smaller process. Also, blame Nvidia for crappy software optimisation. Furthermore, the Mali 400 chip in the S3 is far more powerful than the puny Tegra 3 ULP Geforce chip. Don't say more cores = more power, that is not true. Besides, the S4 in the HOXL is more powerful than the Tegra 3 because the S4 has the Cortex A15 architecture which gives about 40% more processing power per core against the Cortex A9. The comparison of a dual core CPU and a quad core CPU using a dual core optimised software I saw somewhere above in this thread means nothing in ARM terms. The Cortex A9 (for example Tegra 3) uses all 4 cores and loses against the Snapdragon S4, say the MSM8960 which the HOXL has.
All other discussions about S3 and HOX w.r.t. features (touchwiz is a feature?!) should be reserved for other threads.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The amount of stupidity in this is ridiculous.
Snapdragon S4 doesn't use Cortex A15, it uses Krait cores.
Furthermore, the S4 beats Tegra 3 because at the time benchmark reviews came out, most of them were optimized for dual core, the T3 beats S4 in terms of raw power, of course software will do its part.
Mali-400 doesn't really beat the GeForce. Its running in 16 bit mode, and its vertex limited. Sure it has a good fillrate, but it cannot rim vertex heavy games.
GeForce ULP runs in 32 bit, and is pixel limited, which basically means its a draw, but when you factor in THD games, GeForce wins.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

XxVcVxX said:
The amount of stupidity in this is ridiculous.
Snapdragon S4 doesn't use Cortex A15, it uses Krait cores.
Furthermore, the S4 beats Tegra 3 because at the time benchmark reviews came out, most of them were optimized for dual core, the T3 beats S4 in terms of raw power, of course software will do its part.
Mali-400 doesn't really beat the GeForce. Its running in 16 bit mode, and its vertex limited. Sure it has a good fillrate, but it cannot rim vertex heavy games.
GeForce ULP runs in 32 bit, and is pixel limited, which basically means its a draw, but when you factor in THD games, GeForce wins.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I facepalmed. Especially at the very first statement. What architecture does Krait use, I wonder.
As for S4 not beating Tegra, S4 came out *after* Tegra 3. You'd think benchmarks would be optimised for quad cores before they became optimised for Cortex A15.
As for the last one, you forgot that ULP Geforce is not superscalar. The GPU cores have to wait for the first instruction to complete before the next one can process, making the process slow as hell. Mali is far more powerful than Tegra (just look at benchmarks), because the GPU cores are far beefier than the Tegra GPU cores, and also because ULP Geforce is based on Fermi cores which are a bit old and slow at this point.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

pandaball said:
I facepalmed. Especially at the very first statement.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read on Wikipedia more. Krait isn't Cortex A15.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

XxVcVxX said:
Read on Wikipedia more. Krait isn't Cortex A15.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its A15 plus Qualcomm enhancements...
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

Krait is a custom architecture made by Qualcomm. Its similar to A15, but its not A15, and performance sits between A9 and A15, bit its more power efficient than A15.
Its like Scorpion, where the performance was between A8 and A9.
As for GeForce ULP running with Fermi, you're wrong. Its definitely not Fermi since it still has seperate vertex and pixel cores, so its even before GT200.
Mali-400 is old, and its not beefier than GeForce. Samsung made it up to par by overclocking extensively and forcing 16 bit rendering on the thing. It ****s on GeForce on pixel fill rate, but GeForce ****s on it on vertex output, so its kinda a draw.
Most games run smoother on Mali because most applications on Play Store is optimized for the biggest phone company : Samsung. You can see how Gameloft downright ignored Tegra.
EDIT: The ULP is using NV47
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

XxVcVxX said:
Krait is a custom architecture made by Qualcomm. Its similar to A15, but its not A15, and performance sits between A9 and A15, bit its more power efficient than A15.
Its like Scorpion, where the performance was between A8 and A9.
As for GeForce ULP running with Fermi, you're wrong. Its definitely not Fermi since it still has seperate vertex and pixel cores, so its even before GT200.
Mali-400 is old, and its not beefier than GeForce. Samsung made it up to par by overclocking extensively and forcing 16 bit rendering on the thing. It ****s on GeForce on pixel fill rate, but GeForce ****s on it on vertex output, so its kinda a draw.
Most games run smoother on Mali because most applications on Play Store is optimized for the biggest phone company : Samsung. You can see how Gameloft downright ignored Tegra.
EDIT: The ULP is using NV47
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To use slightly crude terms, Qualcomm licensed A15 from ARM, then beat it with sticks until it became more optimised. Qualcomm has a slightly different license from ARM which allows them to take the design by ARM, beat it into shape then sell it.
As for Fermi in Tegra, I was mistaken. I didn't refer to anything, and my offhand memory sucks.
For Mali vs Tegra, refer to this: http://m.gsmarena.com/snapdragon_s4_pro_benchmarked_crushes_older_chipsets-news-4563.php. Look at the benchmark list, particularly GLbenchmark offscreen since its the most relevant.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

pandaball said:
To use slightly crude terms, Qualcomm licensed A15 from ARM, then beat it with sticks until it became more optimised. Qualcomm has a slightly different license from ARM which allows them to take the design by ARM, beat it into shape then sell it.
As for Fermi in Tegra, I was mistaken. I didn't refer to anything, and my offhand memory sucks.
For Mali vs Tegra, refer to this: http://m.gsmarena.com/snapdragon_s4_pro_benchmarked_crushes_older_chipsets-news-4563.php. Look at the benchmark list, particularly GLbenchmark offscreen since its the most relevant.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its offscreen test, as I have stated before, GeForce is pixel limited, at HD resolutions, it becomes less than Mali, however remember Mali is running at 16 bit.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

XxVcVxX is right.. we have discuss about this in hamdir thread for a long time and if s3 is running 32bit like us.. it just the same as ours..
BTW.. both phone have pros and cons.. so just choose any we,you,he or her like..

XxVcVxX said:
Its offscreen test, as I have stated before, GeForce is pixel limited, at HD resolutions, it becomes less than Mali, however remember Mali is running at 16 bit.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In offscreen 720p, Mali still (overall) eats Tegra, although what you said is correct, which makes me wrong. Therefore, I accept defeat and bestow my RD status to you
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

pandaball said:
In offscreen 720p, Mali still (overall) eats Tegra, although what you said is correct, which makes me wrong. Therefore, I accept defeat and bestow my RD status to you
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol wut.
I accept this honor, and I thank my friends and family for supporting me, and most of all, I thank pandaball for arguing with me XDXD
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

XxVcVxX said:
Lol wut.
I accept this honor, and I thank my friends and family for supporting me, and most of all, I thank pandaball for arguing with me XDXD
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But seriously, thanks. I learnt something, although losing to a stranger in an argument online on my birthday is totally the best way to start my year
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

pandaball said:
But seriously, thanks. I learnt something, although losing to a stranger in an argument online on my birthday is totally the best way to start my year
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hell, if I knew you were RD I wouldn't be so aggressive xD
Damned mobile app.
Happy Birthday
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.

How is powervr g6430 rogue when campared to top class gpu's like adreno 405 etc?

Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?

http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_5s_vs_lg_g2_vs_nokia_lumia_1020-review-997p5.php
The same GPU used on iPhone 5s. Based on this benchmark, it's better than Adreno 330 I think.
Adreno 405 isn't top class GPU. According to GFLOPS numbers, 405 is better than 1st gen Adreno 320 (S4 Pro, S4 Prime) and weaker 2nd gen.
But all about benchmarks, the most important is user experience and last but not least is optimization

GrandpaaOvekill said:
Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 405 is only half as power of powervgr g6430
Adreno 405 is middle range gpu
While powervgr g6430, adreno 320, 330, 420 are last year and current flagship gpu
Gpu mostly rated by gflops
http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/
And adreno each generation have basic, mid, high power gpu..
Adreno 405 is 4th generation (05 means basic) and can match 3rd Gen mid
Adreno 420 is 4th generation (20 is mid) and can match 3rd Gen high gpu
See gflops of each in that above link
And yes optimization is the most for gaming

The PowerVR G6430 in Zenfone 2 is clocked higher than iphone 5s but lower than ipads and Atom 3570. Its performance is between the Adreno 330 and 430 which is excellent given that it was designed in 2012 and released in 2013. Reclocking it at 640Mhz like its 3570 brother should give a nice run for its price, still technically, it won't be as fast as Adreno 430. However, in real world usage and coupled with a more powerful Intel cpu, it should match it as the CPU is able to extract more GPU power.
If you are really looking at the most powerful mobile GPU, the Nvidia Tegra X1 is at the top, close to twice the performance of the top Qualcomm 810 GPU, Adreno 430. In Antutu, it only scores 75K because the CPU is slower than others like Intel. 75K is still unbreakeable for the moment. Surely, Nvidia and ATI have much more experience in the GPU domain so its not surprising that they are the fastest.
Now, only if ATI partner with Intel to provide us with 14nm goodies :angel:
p.s: To have a broader picture, the Tegra X1 chip is close to twice the performance of a PS3 which is astonishing considering its small size and 2W max power consumption.

Nvidia Shield TV based on Tegra X1 has active cooling system.
So, how it can be compared to phone SoCs?

My bad, I though it was found in the Nvidia Shield tablet. Its its brother the Kepler K1 that is currently used but still at 365 GFlops on nvidia website, it competes with the adreno 430. Note that the PS3 was 192 GFlops.
Interesting fact is that the Tegra X1 actually draws much Less power at idle and slightly less power (1w less than Kepler) at load. Kepler would peak at 11w. Thanks to the new 20nm tech in Maxwell cores efficiency. The Nvidia TV Shield has much more and larger components to power, its also for sure clocked higher.
''According to Nvidia, the power consumption in a tablet powered by Tegra X1 will be on par with Tegra K1. In fact, idle power consumption will be even lower thanks to the various architecture improvements. Tegra K1 was designed to operate at around 5-8 watts, with infrequent peaks up to 11 watts when running stressful benchmarks, so the X1 will be well within the realm of tablet power requirements.'' Source: greenbot.com
Heres this too: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/NVIDIA-Announces-Tegra-X1-Maxwell-Hits-Ultra-Low-Power
I really like the fact that PC manifacturers enter the mobile market, after all, they were building computer components for ages. This will open the door to more powerfull and cheaper SoCs especially because they have the ability to mass produce and develop the latest tech with many factory plants worldwide.

aziz07 said:
My bad, I though it was found in the Nvidia Shield tablet. Its its brother the Kepler K1 that is currently used but still at 365 GFlops on nvidia website, it competes with the adreno 430. Note that the PS3 was 192 GFlops.
Interesting fact is that the Tegra X1 actually draws much Less power at idle and slightly less power (1w less than Kepler) at load. Kepler would peak at 11w. Thanks to the new 20nm tech in Maxwell cores efficiency. The Nvidia TV Shield has much more and larger components to power, its also for sure clocked higher.
''According to Nvidia, the power consumption in a tablet powered by Tegra X1 will be on par with Tegra K1. In fact, idle power consumption will be even lower thanks to the various architecture improvements. Tegra K1 was designed to operate at around 5-8 watts, with infrequent peaks up to 11 watts when running stressful benchmarks, so the X1 will be well within the realm of tablet power requirements.'' Source: greenbot.com
Heres this too: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/NVIDIA-Announces-Tegra-X1-Maxwell-Hits-Ultra-Low-Power
I really like the fact that PC manifacturers enter the mobile market, after all, they were building computer components for ages. This will open the door to more powerfull and cheaper SoCs especially because they have the ability to mass produce and develop the latest tech with many factory plants worldwide.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maxwell can very power hungry when you clock it all the way up, and X1 has more CUDA cores than K1. X1 has 2 SMM with 256 total while K1 only has 1 SMX with 192.
also, pc manufacturers have always been in the mobile market, or you could even say they started the mobile market. for instance, Apple was a pc manufacturer, steve jobs dedicated 70% of his life to PC rather than phones. samsung makes everything and they have a lot of experience too in making notebooks. so the two most powerful (or most successful) players in the mobile sector are also pc manufacturers, what do you mean by pc manufacturers entering the mobile market?

Its getting off topic but Intel or Apple weren't the first one to build a cell phone. Intel was the first company to build a CPU though. Motorola built the 1st cellphone.
On a sidenote, Apple never really built anything except for aesthetics, it started with IBM building for them after non-success with Synertek for a couple of months. Btw, Samsung does not manifacture PC CPUs or GPUs. Only CPU they build is the Exynos for mobile. I think you misinterpreted the fact the they sell laptops, yes they do, but they are not the one building its major components, its Intel and AMD. They may build its memory components but not CPU or GPU.
You are seeing technology the other way around. If we take, let say, a 2 years old gpu and a new one. The new one can have double the transitor and components count yet still consume less power. Its about architechture efficiency and transistor nm. e.g. the Intel in our Zenfone 2 is built with 3D 22nm transistor which is more power efficient. That's how tech flow.
Anyway, apple is slowly declining, Intel is building their PC segment, replacing IBM, and Samsung is building their next iphone and taking care of the mobile segment. We can already see whats next.
I have been building PCs for over 15 years, its my hobby.
@ mods There should be a ''resolved'' button just like other forums so threads don't get cluttered lol

GrandpaaOvekill said:
Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know benchmarks aren't everything, but GFX gives a good idea of the performance difference between the two. Basically, the PowerVR G6430 is much more powerful than the Adreno 405.
PowerVR G6430:
https://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?ben...VR Rogue G6430&base=device&ff-check-desktop=0
Adreno 405:
https://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?ben...ter=Adreno 405&base=device&ff-check-desktop=0
Here's some videos of a Zenfone 2 with a phone that utilizes the SD 615/Adreno 405 combo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3DcRHXrTHg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYZr53U2Tfk
Hope this helps.