Related
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
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
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.
Optimus G Pro vs Galaxy Note 2
Hey guys i need help with this list, i have never used a LG phone, Im listing the advantages of both plz let me know if i have left something out
Galaxy Note 2
S Pen
microSD, up to 64 GB
Stereo FM
True Blacks (AMOLED Display)
Air View
64 GB storage
Split Screen
Simultaneous Video & Image Recording
Removable Battery
Optimus G Pro
13MP Camera
Lighter
1080p Resolution
Higher PPI
Brighter Display (IPS Display)
True Whites (IPS Display)
Adobe Flash Built In
2.4 MP Front Camera
Slimmer Bezel
Curved Glass
Wrong forum
Sent from my LG-E970 using xda app-developers app
note 2 got true black? while og pro got true colors
Sent from my LG-F180K using xda app-developers app
Miracast for LG.
LG Optimus G E971
Note 2 winner big battery.n quadrant high score
nabilsweet007 said:
Note 2 winner big battery.n quadrant high score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant means nothing. I would go with the optimus since it has a superior processor, screen, and build quality.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
nabilsweet007 said:
Note 2 winner big battery.n quadrant high score
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wuuuuut? Are you natttttttz? The OG Pro has bigger battery it's 3140mAh. And Quadrant is 12300
Also it only slightly inferior to Intel's tablets in memory speed and is top of the hill in overall speed
cyprusx said:
microSD, up to 64 GB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OG Pro has
cyprusx said:
Stereo FM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OG Pro has
cyprusx said:
Air View
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What's that? Miracast? OG Pro has it
cyprusx said:
Split Screen
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sort of has
cyprusx said:
Simultaneous Video & Image Recording
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OG Pro has
cyprusx said:
Removable Battery
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OG Pro has
cyprusx said:
Optimus G Pro vs Galaxy Note 2
Hey guys i need help with this list, i have never used a LG phone, Im listing the advantages of both plz let me know if i have left something out
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The primary differences are the screen & the S-Pen.
720 vs 1080 => G PRO
Pen => Note II
Everything else is subjective; too close to call.
Highly capable quad-core processors, screen (phone) size is 5.5", µSD card slot in both devices and removable battery in both - battery capacity is 3100 (Note) vs 3140 (G Pro).
Standard eMMC storage: G Pro is listed as 32GB vs. 16GB for the Note II
If the 32GB G Pro comes in at the same cost as the 16GB Note II, then the G Pro edges out the Note (in my book).
Here, this small comparison from Phone Arena should help.
hirent said:
The primary differences are the screen & the S-Pen.
720 vs 1080 => G PRO
Pen => Note II
Everything else is subjective; too close to call.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Qualcomm Adreno320 blows Eyxos 4412 out of the water, it's twice as fast especially in new benches, not like in outdated Quadrant, Nenamark etc
Billy Madison said:
The Qualcomm Adreno320 blows Eyxos 4412 out of the water, it's twice as fast especially in new benches, not like in outdated Quadrant, Nenamark etc
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are comparing a GPU to a CPU. Our CPU (APQ8064) kicks the 4412's ass, but our GPU is about equivalent. Our CPU is more efficient and theoretically faster than the Exynos due to a newer ARM architecture base and other Qualcomm optimizations.
I have both Note2 and E975.(No G pro of course)
If you want a phone with 5.5 inch screen, I think you should treat it as a memo or notebook, not a regular phone.
So S-Pen is a very essential part of this kind of usage(memo and notebook).
I am going to sell out my Note2 because it's not very convenient for daily use.(too big to handle with one hand)
I think I will not apply any phone with screen bigger than 4.8/5.0 inch in the future.
E975 is perfect for me, both in performance and look and size~
So, please consider usage of your phone before you buy one of these big devices.
xboxfanj said:
but our GPU is about equivalent
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, you've mistaken. Go in this thread, catch GPU mark, fire it on both 4412 and adreno 320 and post your results 2 compare. You'll see that 320 is twice faster than your Mali 400.
You simply look into old benchmarks results if you think our GPUs are equivalent
Billy Madison said:
No, you've mistaken. Go in this thread, catch GPU mark, fire it on both 4412 and adreno 320 and post your results 2 compare. You'll see that 320 is twice faster than your Mali 400.
You simply look into old benchmarks results if you think our GPUs are equivalent
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In antutu, we beat exynos in 3d graphics but they beat us in 2d.
Sent from my LG-LS970 using xda app-developers app
xboxfanj said:
In antutu, we beat exynos in 3d graphics but they beat us in 2d.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2D? What's that? The most irrelevant spec to bench in the first place. When your 2d rendering speed is slow and not enough? And probably Exynos is faster in 2d cause it renders 2d at full throttle while Qualcomm only work on slow speed like 384Mhz or something. Just probably
Billy Madison said:
2D? What's that? The most irrelevant spec to bench in the first place. When your 2d rendering speed is slow and not enough? And probably Exynos is faster in 2d cause it renders 2d at full throttle while Qualcomm only work on slow speed like 384Mhz or something. Just probably
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe he was only talking benchmark wise, not real situation. However, 2D is also important. since your launcher run in 2d. You are also mixing CPU and GPU speed.
Is adreno 418 the reason why this phone lags? Makes no sense why nexus 6 made in 2014 comes with adreno 420, while g4 made in 2015 comes with adreno 418. Seems like snapdragon screwed up big time.
Actually not at all really. Qualcomm made the specs be optimal for the g4 specifically working with lg on it from scratch.
wadamean said:
Actually not at all really. Qualcomm made the specs be optimal for the g4 specifically working with lg on it from scratch.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am talking numbers, not perception. Why would they go with adreno 418 instead of more advanced gpu. 1+2 comes with adreno 430
Sent from my LG-D800
The went will a non flagship chip to avoid the heating issues that were being reported with other handsets. It also allows for good performance with a nice uptick in battery life for such a high resolution screen.
Yeah he is right, heating issues with the 820 chip are hecka wack that to avoid it on needed to add extra thermal protection or what not. Why do you think qualcomm has to release a newer chip asap.
wadamean said:
Yeah he is right, heating issues with the 820 chip are hecka wack that to avoid it on needed to add extra thermal protection or what not. Why do you think qualcomm has to release a newer chip asap.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's how they all stay in business by releasing b.s super minor upgrades.
Sent from my LG-D800