Related
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
Hi
Which is better? Tegra3 or Mali 400
I don't know mate, this is what my phone after the update is capable of now.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda premium
Well it will be a race for sure
Mali might be faster (or maybe not), but Tegra 3 definitely better. Because it has better, enhanced games. Developers develop for Tegra. They don't develop for Mali or Adreno.
One guy complained that Shadowgun looks better on my phone than on his iPad3 - I had to explain that I'm running THD version, that we have those Tegra enhanced games. That makes a difference.
Tegra 3 will run all games. Adreno/Mali will require Chainfire3D with plugins to run Tegra games.
Thats my view on that.
The Mali 400 is old now, it`s not what the sg3 is getting surely.
John.
Even if SGS3 will get Mali T-604, I will stick with Tegra 3 for now. Unless I see games dedicated for T-604, and more than just one.
more...
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/galaxy-s-iii-leak/
according to this it will have the 400
antipesto93 said:
http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/20/galaxy-s-iii-leak/
according to this it will have the 400
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Didn't notice it mention 400. But if true people would find it disappointing, even that 400 is still serious piece of hardware. Given 720p screen, performance would be worse compared to SGS2.
The Mali's performance is the same as the Tegra 3's in graphics benchmarks I've done on my Note Vs my Prime and my One X (just goes to show how average the Tegra 3 GPU really is I think, no better than something at least 6 months older). Disappointing it's not the upgraded GPU if that is accurate, but doesn't differentiate the products at all.
Tinderbox (UK) said:
The Mali 400 is old now
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically, so is Teg3. S4 uses 28nm and the 4212 uses 32nm. Teg3 is two 45nm A9 chips glommed together because Nvidia wanted to be first to market with a next-gen chip. It's the least advanced of any of the three SoCs. From a GPU perspective none of the three really move the ball forward and are just evolutionary vs. revolutionary. If I had to guess best overall performance I’d say 4212, Teg3, and S4 in that order. Because S4 and the 4212 are on smaller dies they’ll be more efficient and handily beat Teg3 at battery life (except maybe at idle).
delete post.
BarryH_GEG said:
Technically, so is Teg3. S4 uses 28nm and the 4212 uses 32nm. Teg3 is two 45nm A9 chips glommed together because Nvidia wanted to be first to market with a next-gen chip. It's the least advanced of any of the three SoCs. From a GPU perspective none of the three really move the ball forward and are just evolutionary vs. revolutionary. If I had to guess best overall performance I’d say 4212, Teg3, and S4 in that order. Because S4 and the 4212 are on smaller dies they’ll be more efficient and handily beat Teg3 at battery life (except maybe at idle).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
tegra3 is actually made on the 40nm. nvidia still has tsmc's 40nm process and is migrating towards 28nm with desktop GPUs and will eventually migrate to 28nm with the tegra3+.
i hate how people always say that its a bad thing that apple didn`t upgrade the gpu but fust added more cores or samsung didn`t change the mali 400 gpu. the fact is that the mali and sgx543mp2 were ahead when they were released. now there is actual competition like the adreno 320 and tegra 3/4. a simple overclocked sgx or mali chip is enough to keep up with the competition.
NZtechfreak said:
The Mali's performance is the same as the Tegra 3's in graphics benchmarks I've done on my Note Vs my Prime and my One X (just goes to show how average the Tegra 3 GPU really is I think, no better than something at least 6 months older). Disappointing it's not the upgraded GPU if that is accurate, but doesn't differentiate the products at all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mali 400/450 is a 2nd generation GPU like tegra 2, only 44 millions polygons/sec, My Adreno 205 is 41 millions & The Tegra 3 is 129 millions.
Gameloft games in the end of 2012 will need 100 millions...
The Mali 3rd generation is Mali T-604/640 & Mali say that's it is 500% the performances of previous Mali GPU's :
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
500% is using quad-core optimised applis (only tegra 3 will have it in less than 2 years) but it's 250% in dual-core...
As Tegra 3 is equal to T-604, Mali 400 is pawned...
-1st gen (Adreno 200, mali 200/300, SGX Power VR 520/530 & tegra 1)
-2nd gen (Adreno 205, Mali 400MP/450MP, SGX Power VR 540/554 & tegra 2)
-3rd gen (Adreno 220/225/320, Mali T604/640, SGX Power VR G 6200/6430 & Tegra 3)
Sekhen said:
Mali 400/450 is a 2nd generation GPU like tegra 2, only 44 millions polygons/sec, My Adreno 205 is 41 millions & The Tegra 3 is 129 millions.
Gameloft games in the end of 2012 will need 100 millions...
The Mali 3rd generation is Mali T-604/640 & Mali say that's it is 500% the performances of previous Mali GPU's :
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-t604.php
500% is using quad-core optimised applis (only tegra 3 will have it in less than 2 years) but it's 250% in dual-core...
As Tegra 3 is equal to T-604, Mali 400 is pawned...
-1st gen (Adreno 200, mali 200/300, SGX Power VR 520/530 & tegra 1)
-2nd gen (Adreno 205, Mali 400MP/450MP, SGX Power VR 540/554 & tegra 2)
-3rd gen (Adreno 220/225/320, Mali T604/640, SGX Power VR G 6200/6430 & Tegra 3)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
link to your numbers about Tegra 3?
I have not used any device with Mali 400. Sorry mate~~
I think that tegra 3 is better but we have to attend the 3.x kernel to solve the battery problem properly.
Sent from my HTC One X using xda app-developers app
Mali-400 is good and strong and Tegra 3 might not be the fastest one there is, but it's the only one that gets best looking games. On top of that, Tegra 3 Plus is coming soon and then next year another one with direct x and supposed console-like performance. See what Nvidia does for desktops and just hope they keep the pace with mobile GPU and we will get there too. I don't really consider non-tegra device unless it amazes me with noticeably better power efficiency or optimized games start coming out for it.
Would you buy non-nvidia and non-ati graphics card for your pc?
schriss said:
Mali-400 is good and strong and Tegra 3 might not be the fastest one there is, but it's the only one that gets best looking games. On top of that, Tegra 3 Plus is coming soon and then next year another one with direct x and supposed console-like performance. See what Nvidia does for desktops and just hope they keep the pace with mobile GPU and we will get there too. I don't really consider non-tegra device unless it amazes me with noticeably better power efficiency or optimized games start coming out for it.
Would you buy non-nvidia and non-ati graphics card for your pc?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly!
Given the choice, I would buy a Tegra device over anything else.
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.
The snapdragon version isn't available in my country, so I will have to buy the exynos (Pretty cheap right now $500 equivalent). The thing is reviews say the snapdragon doesn't lag a bit while exynos is made for a large device.
Is the performance really this bad? I'm not into eons right now by the way.
No its not worth buying the snapdragon version. My s4 is faster than my note...
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
With HMP enabled there is no comparison between the two, exynos is up to 50% faster and potentially more efficient. With HMP disabled (as things currently are) then qualcomm is the slightly better chip, but I'm not convinced that the difference is enough to prefer one soc over the other...
In short Exynos 5420 is artificially neutered to seem worse than qualcomm, yet -even so- going either way won't make much of a difference...
Do you have any benchmarks to prove your claim of a speed bump of 50 %?
to OP
There are a lot of threads about Exynos vs snapdragon, long story short
Exynos , tad better cpu
Snapdragon tad better gpu
I've had both, ended with exynos , because I didn't need 4g, but needed 32 GB ( in scandinavia 4 G seems to be 16 gb only)
Lag was more or less the same
I felt the battery time on the exynos was a tad better
They felt equally as snappy when they needed to
BUT!!!
App support was a tad better on Snapdragon, ie more apps in the plastore worked with the snapdragon version, a few more games etc... no big deal for me, but still get me ticked of when I noticed a few apps I bought weren't compatible ( yet?!) with the new exynos chip ( but worked with my sammy S3 also exynos chip, older )
Exynos is fine. I've played with both and from a UI and app use perspective you can't tell the difference. Adreno's a bit faster than Mali but no so much as to drastically alter performance. Some games are better optimized for Adreno so depending on your choice of games it could make a difference. As for app compatibility it's more likely the 2,560x1,600 display that's causing the issue not the specific SoC. If there were huge differences between Exynos and S-800 or drastic app performance differences and app compatibility issues it would be all over the N3 forum and it's not.
DeBoX said:
Do you have any benchmarks to prove your claim of a speed bump of 50 %?
to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HMP for 8 cores have not yet released but look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note, so by adding two more large cores you can expect the score to be about 50% more. As I said that is only true were all 8 cores would be used at the same time and they are not throttled (that is why I said "up to").
Stevethegreat said:
Look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really. It also has a 267 PPI display which is benefitting its graphics scores in AnTuTu compared to the SGS4 at 441 PPI and N3 at 386 PPI.
http://www.nairaland.com/1597298/samsung-budget-galaxy-note-neo
S-800 vs. Exynos on the N3...
BarryH_GEG said:
Not really. It also has a 267 PPI display which is benefitting its graphics scores in AnTuTu compared to the SGS4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was more properly referring to CPU scores which are the only ones benefitted from HMP.
I ran a quick AnTuTu (cpu) test to my Exynos 5420 equipped note and here are the results: http://i.imgur.com/zD32DZQ.png
Notice how remarkably similar they are to note neo's cpu score:
http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=newsimg/14/01/sgn3n-leak/gsmarena_006.jpg&idNews=7538
Note that note neo has only two large cores which are clocked lower by 10% compared to exynos 5420 and it still posts almost the same score merely by employing the help of the small cores. Now add two large cores more and you'd get 50% more performance, it's simple math really...
Now I'm not saying that it would be a performance that we would actually see in most occasions , it would either be throttled or -even- not supported by most apps but still it's potentially there (which was my point by saying "up to").
What will *definitely* be there if HMP is to be enabled is better battery -though- as it would make more efficient use of the small cores. Since exynos 5422 is also on 28nm yet has HMP enabled leads me to believe that we lack HMP for strategic reasons (so that samsung will sell more exynos 5422 / qualcomm equipped machines)
Stevethegreat said:
I was more properly referring to CPU scores which are the only ones benefitted from HMP.
I ran a quick AnTuTu (cpu) test to my Exynos 5420 equipped note and here are the results: http://i.imgur.com/zD32DZQ.png
Notice how remarkably similar they are to note neo's cpu score:
http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=newsimg/14/01/sgn3n-leak/gsmarena_006.jpg&idNews=7538
Note that note neo has only two large cores which are clocked lower by 10% compared to exynos 5420 and it still posts almost the same score merely by employing the help of the small cores. Now add two large cores more and you'd get 50% more performance, it's simple math really...
Now I'm not saying that it would be a performance that we would actually see in most occasions , it would either be throttled or -even- not supported by most apps but still it's potentially there (which was my point by saying "up to").
What will *definitely* be there if HMP is to be enabled is better battery -though- as it would make more efficient use of the small cores. Since exynos 5422 is also on 28nm yet has HMP enabled leads me to believe that we lack HMP for strategic reasons (so that samsung will sell more exynos 5422 / qualcomm equipped machines)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't divorce the impact of display area size and PPI from CPU performance. The GPU doesn't absolve the CPU's role in graphics output. An i3 PC with a killer graphics card will perform worse graphically than an i7 PC with a lesser card because most computational (not rendering, texture mapping, vectoring, and decoding) work is still done on the CPU. So I have no idea what AnTuTu's testing to come up with a CPU rating in isolation but if it's a real-time performance test the CPU's role in graphics output is impacting it. So comparing the Neo with a 5.5" display and 267 PPI against the N10.1-14 with a 10.1" display and 299 PPI isn't going to get you a relevant CPU comparison. That's why I used the N3 and SGS4 as comparisons because only the PPI is off. And the Neo would be well behind the SGS4 in the cumulative AnTuTu test if it had the same PPI because the lower workload of the lower PPI is artificially enhancing its score. At the end of the day an isolated CPU number is pretty meaningless. It's like bench horsepower in a car vs. horsepower to the wheels. A higher bench rating means nothing because none of us drive an engine, we drive a car. The total AnTuTu number (AKA: drive train loss) is more relevant even though it doesn't support the point you're trying to make about HMP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit#Computational_functions
BarryH_GEG said:
You can't divorce the impact of display area size and PPI from CPU performance. The GPU doesn't absolve the CPU's role in graphics output. An i3 PC with a killer graphics card will perform worse graphically than an i7 PC with a lesser card because most computational (not rendering, texture mapping, vectoring, and decoding) work is still done on the CPU. So I have no idea what AnTuTu's testing to come up with a CPU rating in isolation but if it's a real-time performance test the CPU's role in graphics output is impacting it. So comparing the Neo with a 5.5" display and 267 PPI against the N10.1-14 with a 10.1" display and 299 PPI isn't going to get you a relevant CPU comparison. That's why I used the N3 and SGS4 as comparisons because only the PPI is off. And the Neo would be well behind the SGS4 in the cumulative AnTuTu test if it had the same PPI because the lower workload of the lower PPI is artificially enhancing its score. At the end of the day an isolated CPU number is pretty meaningless. It's like bench horsepower in a car vs. horsepower to the wheels. A higher bench rating means nothing because none of us drive an engine, we drive a car. The total AnTuTu number (AKA: drive train loss) is more relevant even though it doesn't support the point you're trying to make about HMP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit#Computational_functions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe so, but the benchmark in question runs off screen. So while in real life resolution matter in Antutu Cpu score, or super pi , or, or, it doesn't. HMP will make the Cpu 50% faster in multi threaded operations, I never claimed it makes the total machine faster by the same amount. For example an HMP equipped note 2014 will score around 40000 in Antutu , NOT 49500. I don't see where we disagree, I merely think you misunderstood my initial claim
If you live for real world use, the Exynos Note is a wonderful tablet. If you live in the world of needing the highest quadrant and antutu scores you should pass.
Sent via Tapatalk and my thumbs.
Stevethegreat said:
With HMP enabled there is no comparison between the two, exynos is up to 50% faster and potentially more efficient. With HMP disabled (as things currently are) then qualcomm is the slightly better chip, but I'm not convinced that the difference is enough to prefer one soc over the other...
In short Exynos 5420 is artificially neutered to seem worse than qualcomm, yet -even so- going either way won't make much of a difference...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you enable HMP? My note 3 snap dragon is so much faster than my note.
Sent from my SM-N900T using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Stevethegreat said:
HMP for 8 cores have not yet released but look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note, so by adding two more large cores you can expect the score to be about 50% more. As I said that is only true were all 8 cores would be used at the same time and they are not throttled (that is why I said "up to").
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will never be released for Exynos 5420 either, unless Samsung want alot of complains about fried Exynos 5420 chipsets. Also they already said it wont release HMP for Exynos 5420 cause of the heat.
dt33 said:
It will never be released for Exynos 5420 either, unless Samsung want alot of complains about fried Exynos 5420 chipsets. Also they already said it wont release HMP for Exynos 5420 cause of the heat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again, that's not the reason that they won't release it, if anything the chip would be cooler because more use of A7 cores would be possible and if all 8 cores are needed Samsung could choose to throttle the thing. The reason that they don't release it is the Exynos 5422 which is the same chip but with all 8 cores enabled (also 28nm)...
So no fried socs, lesser profits more like
Well, the new mid-range CPU Snapdragon 650 found on the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 Pro is a beast, check this video minute 4:38, the results on Antutu are around 75000, my Nexus 5X gets around 56000, that is Snapdragon 810 performance from the 650, damn...
Just some food for thought for you guys, 2015 was not the year for Qualcomm, this year though...
The 650 is a lower end version of the 808 (28nm vs 20nm). Your own personal Antutu score does not represent what the 808 is capable of.
The 650 would be a downgrade from the 808 specifically in terms of power usage and heat generation.
lol... check yourself dude. 808 is so much better than anything mid range like SD 6XX. it even beats some SD810 devices. check my score.
AnTuTu means nothing! When you run AnTuTu on a Snapdragon 820 device, few times, it will drop on under 100k (from about 130k).
The new 650 runs like 808...
http://www.gizmochina.com/2016/01/1...x10-vs-snapdragon-808-antutu-scores-compared/
Here you get some realistic benchmarks, not that sience fiction screenshot from the user in #3