Related
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
The galaxy tab s products that are available to me have an octa-core processor, with the high speed cores being 1.9ghz. I can't really understand why Samsung chose to use that instead of a 2.3ghz quad-core like in the tab pro.
See Wikipedia for an explanation of the concept: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_...multi-processing_.28global_task_scheduling.29
Because the Exynos 5 Octa-core is the one processor that Samsung has to be able to compete with Snapdragon 800, and is cheaper to implement since it's their own processor. I don't buy the Octa-core hype, I'd be happier with the Snapdragon 800 honestly like on the Tab PRO 8.4.
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
ssuper2k said:
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yet I am getting 35,300 on Antutu using Shaheers t800 rom which is higher than any other current tablet or phone. (Shaheer's rom should go out of beta today - don't flash until final has been posted).
The Tab Pro 8.4 Antutu is 32,806.
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
I can see the argument that you don't always need full power, thus the four slow cores, but since all cores can't run at once, it seems a cheat to have 1.9ghz as the top speed for the faster four cores. Since, or at least I assume, cores step up and down as needed, it seems to me a snapdragon 800 or higher at 2.3ghz or higher would have been just fine. I mean, if you are going to put in 3gb of RAM, then you should put in a great cpu also and not pretend less (1.9ghz) is a better contribution to what is supposed to be a premium tablet.
And yet I don't think samsung is doing enough to utilizing this hardware capability. In theory it should run at least 4x faster and 6x more effecient then the snap dragon and apple current A8 chip. It has failed to outshine the competitors because samsung software department sucks. Samsung hardware is still great though.
sku|| said:
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blame the developer for not making it compatible. Tegra powered Htc one x is incompatible too so not sure that is exynos issue..
i wish my t805 had Full HD screen resolution :cyclops:
Funny. Was just browsing the web a bit on my i5 ultrabook and it occurred to me that the browser on my Tab S is actually faster. If gaming is your primary thing, I'd buy the Nvidia Shield, not the Tab S. This tablet is designed for eye candy media consumption (internet and video) not for gaming enthusiasts. Try running your PC video card at 2560 x 1600 on ultra and see what you get.
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
You cannot compare the clock speeds from two different processors. For instance, you can't compare the 1.9GHz quad-core of the Exynos to the 2.3GHz quad-core of the Snapdragon 800. This doesn't mean anything. If you compare the clock speed of two Snapdragon chips, that's ok, or if you compare the clock speed of two Exynos chips, then that's ok too. Comparing the clock speed of an Intel chip against the clock speed of an AMD chip, is the same as comparing the clock speed of an Exynos chip to the clock speed of a Snapdragon chip.
The Exynos chip in this tablet has been shown to compete very well/close with the Snapdragon on every level except GPU. The Mali GPU in this chip just doesn't match the Adreno GPU from the Snapdragon. However, the RAM is faster in the Exynos than the Snapdragon.
That said, I am a fan of the Snapdragon chip, of course. I was holding off to see if the LTE variant of this tablet would have the Snapdragon 800, but instead they shipped with an Intel LTE modem. Besides apps/games not being optimized for Exynos, I am fairly satisfied with my purchase. I'm just anxious to get CyanogenMod(or any other AOSP ROM installed on it).
fletch33 said:
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could also mean increased battery consumption,don't know. Overall I am satisfied with this Tab including battery life.
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
pibach said:
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
UpInTheAir said:
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's impossible.
AndreiLux said:
It's impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What and why?
pibach said:
What and why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...ta-can-use-eight-cores-simultaneously-267316/
I've found a few articles saying it should support it, then a couple Deva saying they had to goto the 5422 for a working implementation of HMP.
Here is a post from odroid
http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=5651
That's weird. The (newer) 5422 supports HMP but not 3gb RAM.
Greetings xda
I just purchased a secondhand/used/pre-owned Verizon model LG G Pad 8.3 (vk810) on ebay and have noticed that sinnce day one that I've had it (maybe 4 days?), that overall performance is pretty inconsistent. Sometimes it flies through the UI with impressive ease and other times it seems bogged down simply running Chrome with a single tab open and hitting the Home button.
First thing I did when it arrived was run some benchmarks. I noticed that across the board I was receiving results that were roughly 40-50% lower than all the charts I've seeen others posting online, including proffessional reviewers' articles.
I cannot recall *all* the scores for each of the different programs, but for instance in Antutu it seems everyone else is hitting 25000+, whereas my device is sitting at around 15000 or so. I did this on stock 4.2.2, 4.4.2, rooted, unrooted, fresh stock rom flash, with TWRP and without, and each time it's been the same outcome. Antutu reports all the same hardware everyone else's does, yet this. I'm fairly certain it wasn't some kind of bait and switch for a knockoff or inferior tablet.
When gaming, most of the stuff I play runs decent enough, with some stutter here and there, albiet they are not all demanding games (from Hay Day, to Walking Dead, to CoD: Strike Team and everything in between), but I've still been noticing more overall chug factor than the specs of this tablet should be delivering all day with ease. I started to worry something was wrong when I was strugging to run GTA: San Andreas on Medium. When I look at say the Antutu example again, other people's G Pad 8.3 rank shy of a Galaxy S4, where on mine I'.m getting beat our by the Galaxy S III.
The tablet doesn't appear to be overheating, causing throttling; but I just can't seem to wrap my head around it or even know where to begin troubleshooting other than coming here and asking for assistance. If someone could possibly be so kind enough, any thoughts on how I should proceed in troubleshooting this? Thanks in advance!
Kaiyo Droid said:
First thing I did when it arrived was run some benchmarks. I noticed that across the board I was receiving results that were roughly 40-50% lower than all the charts I've seeen others posting online, including proffessional reviewers' articles.
I cannot recall *all* the scores for each of the different programs, but for instance in Antutu it seems everyone else is hitting 25000+, whereas my device is sitting at around 15000 or so. I did this on stock 4.2.2, 4.4.2, rooted, unrooted, fresh stock rom flash, with TWRP and without, and each time it's been the same outcome. Antutu reports all the same hardware everyone else's does, yet this. I'm fairly certain it wasn't some kind of bait and switch for a knockoff or inferior tablet.!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Verizon 8.3/VK810 is only clocked at 1.5GHz vs the 1.7GHz of the V500/510.
Planterz said:
The Verizon 8.3/VK810 is only clocked at 1.5GHz vs the 1.7GHz of the V500/510.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting... Thanks for the info, Planterz Wasn't aware of that.
I'm certainly no expert when it comes to CPU's, especially in the mobile world. Would a mere 200Mhz per core difference in clock speed provide such disparaging results among otherwise identical hardware?
Kaiyo Droid said:
Interesting... Thanks for the info, Planterz Wasn't aware of that.
I'm certainly no expert when it comes to CPU's, especially in the mobile world. Would a mere 200Mhz per core difference in clock speed provide such disparaging results among otherwise identical hardware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
15 000 antutu is in range of s3, I think, which has inferior hardware! You should have scored easily over 21-22000 with this beast's snapdragon 600 no matter even with a 200mhz difference! Charge the battery to full, switch off for about 2 hours, boot, standby for about 1 hour and check again! If still under 20 000, something is wrong with device and you should change it!!
Fullmetal Jun said:
15 000 antutu is in range of s3, I think, which has inferior hardware! You should have scored easily over 21-22000 with this beast's snapdragon 600 no matter even with a 200mhz difference! Charge the battery to full, switch off for about 2 hours, boot, standby for about 1 hour and check again! If still under 20 000, something is wrong with device and you should change it!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I only get around 20000 on my V500, but I'm still running stock (rooted) 4.2.2. I am about to finally updated to 4.4 and flash the updated Dalvik and Qualcomm binaries though.
I don't know why Verizon's version is only clocked at 1.5GHz, when the SD600 is clearly capable of much more (the Galaxy S4 has the SD600 clocked to 1.9GHz). Maybe they saved a few bucks by going with a lower bin, or maybe it's just underclocked to stretch out the battery life. 200MHz across 4 cores definitely makes a difference in benchmarks, especially with the amount of pixels they have to push on the 8.3 (1920x1200 makes it 1200p, not the standard 1080p of FHD). The Galaxy S3 might get 15000 in Antutu, but it also has less than half the pixels to push. My Galaxy Light, which is NOT a high performance device, also gets 15000-16000, but it has less than half the pixels of the S3. Remember, benchmarks aren't always an indicator of real-world performance.
EDIT: I haven't used the Verizon 8.3, but being a Verizon device, I imagine it's chocked full of the typical Verizon bloat. Check your processes to see if there's something unnecessary running in the background and delete that crap, or at least disable or Greenify it.
Planterz said:
I only get around 20000 on my V500, but I'm still running stock (rooted) 4.2.2. I am about to finally updated to 4.4 and flash the updated Dalvik and Qualcomm binaries though.
I don't know why Verizon's version is only clocked at 1.5GHz, when the SD600 is clearly capable of much more (the Galaxy S4 has the SD600 clocked to 1.9GHz). Maybe they saved a few bucks by going with a lower bin, or maybe it's just underclocked to stretch out the battery life. 200MHz across 4 cores definitely makes a difference in benchmarks, especially with the amount of pixels they have to push on the 8.3 (1920x1200 makes it 1200p, not the standard 1080p of FHD). The Galaxy S3 might get 15000 in Antutu, but it also has less than half the pixels to push. My Galaxy Light, which is NOT a high performance device, also gets 15000-16000, but it has less than half the pixels of the S3. Remember, benchmarks aren't always an indicator of real-world performance.
EDIT: I haven't used the Verizon 8.3, but being a Verizon device, I imagine it's chocked full of the typical Verizon bloat. Check your processes to see if there's something unnecessary running in the background and delete that crap, or at least disable or Greenify it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good stuff here... Thanks!
Yeah, honestly I typically don't depend on benchmarks, but like to refer to them as a ballpark figure of sorts. For instance, on PC, I typically wouldn't be able to tell a single difference in terms of actual, real worl performance when comparing say 3 Ghz quad vs a 3.2 Ghz quad. But synthetic benchmarks might show one edging the other out by a significant enough margin to make it worth mentioning.
I ran Antutu on my Moto G - a 1.2 Ghz quad core Snapdragon 400 - and pulled like ~16600, but only got ¬15700 on the 1.5 Ghz quad core Snapdragon 600 found in the G Pad. Could be a software bug perhaps too. I also flashed the June 2014 Adreno drivers, but it hasn't seemed to make a difference in how this thing is scoring.
Edit: Okay, weird. Both Antutu & CPU-Z are reporting that I have a 8064 Snapdragon S4 Pro... NOT the 8064T Snapdragon 600. Would explain a lot. Spec sheets show the G Pad (presumably the V500/V510) having the 600. I used a hardware identifier app, but it reports I have the Snapdragon 600 on 8064 board. Now I'm wonderin if the VK810 ships with an S4 Pro instead of the 600 like the V500V510.
Kaiyo Droid said:
Take this for instance: I ran Antutu on my Moto G - a 1.2 Ghz quad core Snapdragon 400 - and pulled like ~16600, but only got ¬15700 on the 1.5 Ghz quad core Snapdragon S4 Pro found in the VK810. Could be a software bug perhaps too, but not sure what's going on. I also flashed the June 2014 GPU drivers, but it hasn't seemed to make a difference in how this is scoring.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember that the Moto G has less than half the pixels to drive than the VK810, so it takes less processing power to keep the framerates up and thus score well on the benchmarks. 3D games run far smoother (and with higher detail settings) on my Nexus 4 than on my 8.3 V500, most likely because of this same thing.
Still, your scores do seem low, and I would have expected the optimized binaries to improve things. If you look at this thread, others with the VK810 have been getting 19-20000 scores, although they also report some choppiness. I guess itt's possible you got a bum unit.
Planterz said:
Remember that the Moto G has less than half the pixels to drive than the VK810, so it takes less processing power to keep the framerates up and thus score well on the benchmarks. 3D games run far smoother (and with higher detail settings) on my Nexus 4 than on my 8.3 V500, most likely because of this same thing.
Still, your scores do seem low, and I would have expected the optimized binaries to improve things. If you look at this thread, others with the VK810 have been getting 19-20000 scores, although they also report some choppiness. I guess itt's possible you got a bum unit.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! I think I'm beginning to understand the difference in needing to push more pixels now.
Came across this thread too regarding someone's trouble identifying the CPU on their LG device using CPU-Z and Antutu: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2341947&page=2
Kaiyo Droid said:
Came across this thread too regarding someone's trouble identifying the CPU on their LG device using CPU-Z and Antutu: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2341947&page=2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What does CPU-Z say your VK810 has? I've looked around and can't find specifics on this anywhere that I can be sure of. Both LG and Verizon merely list it as a "1.5 GHz Quad-Core Processor, Qualcomm® Snapdragon™ Chipset". There's other sites that state that it's a Snapdragon 600, but this could just be an assumption they made because the V500/510 have the S600.
According to wikipedia, The S600 is sometimes marketed as an S4 pro. The Nexus 7 (2013) for example, is advertised as having an S4 Pro, but apparently it's actually in the S600 series. On my V500, CPU-Z gives me a model number of APQ8064T. If CPU-Z gives you a model number, you might be able to track down exactly what it has on the wikipedia page I linked to.
Planterz said:
What does CPU-Z say your VK810 has? I've looked around and can't find specifics on this anywhere that I can be sure of. Both LG and Verizon merely list it as a "1.5 GHz Quad-Core Processor, Qualcomm® Snapdragon™ Chipset". There's other sites that state that it's a Snapdragon 600, but this could just be an assumption they made because the V500/510 have the S600.
According to wikipedia, The S600 is sometimes marketed as an S4 pro. The Nexus 7 (2013) for example, is advertised as having an S4 Pro, but apparently it's actually in the S600 series. On my V500, CPU-Z gives me a model number of APQ8064T. If CPU-Z gives you a model number, you might be able to track down exactly what it has on the wikipedia page I linked to.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As you stated, many of the places that list specs for the LTE model of the G Pad 8.3 simply mirror the ones found for the V500/V510; incorrectly specifying the SoC as the S600 clocked at 1.7Ghz (which we know isn't true). Probably simply assumed they would be the same, only one would feature LTE connectivity.
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=5693&c=lg_vk810_g_pad_8.3_4g_lte
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/LG-G-Pad-8.3_id8141 (scroll to the bottom under Variants)
CPU-Z reports that my VK810 has an S4 Pro, APQ8064. However, the hardware identifier app states it's an S600 clocked @ 1.5 Ghz, APQ8064"T". The Antutu Benchmark and Tester apps also say it's the APQ9064T clocked @ 1.5Ghz. Maybe it's a software side miscalculation with CpU-Z, yet it still doesn't explain why CPU-Z can properly identify the S600 in V500/V510's, but not the VK810.
Qualcomm's own website for the Snapdragon 600 specifically cites the LG G Pad 8.3 LTE (VK810) as having the S600 APQ8064T under the hood (as well as the Galaxy S4 and HTC One). Oddly, the V500/V510 aren't listed on that page, only the LTE variant. Link: http://www.qualcomm.com/snapdragon/processors/600
Other sources:
http://www.devicespecifications.com/en/model/122a2b68
http://www.gsmarena.com/lg_g_pad_8_3_lte-6173.php
I used SetCPU to change the govenor from On Demand to Performance, ran Antutu twice and scored ~18800 both times. I haven't tried disabling thermal throttling, because frankly, I haven't been able to find out how.
Now to figure out why my unit is benching well below other users' VK810's.
Fixed! (Well, somewhat...)
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
So, here's what I ended up doing:
I am on 4.4.2, rooted.
I unistalled SetCPU, and installed the "Trickster MOD Kernel Settings" app (Google Play: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bigeyes0x0.trickstermod&hl=en )
In Trickster MOD, I did the following:
Under the General menu, I set the governor to "Interactive".
Under the Specific Menu, I changed the following:
Temperature Throttle = On (default is OFF)
GPU Governor = On Demand or Performance (either one seemed to work, default is On Demand)
GPU Max Frequency = 400 (default on mine was 320 for some reason)
Once you set everything up, reboot the tablet.
Recall that in the beginning, with no tweaks, I was scoring around 16000 in Antutu Benchmark.
With these minor tweaks, I've benchmarked it several times and now consistently score between 21000 to 22000 in Antutu.
Hi all,
so me and a friend got our t-mobile Samsung Note 3 within a week of each-other at the same T-mobile store about 8 months ago, so just the other day we were siting around and ran Antunto to see how our phones would ring up, we both have stock phones, he ran 36??? on Antutu and I got 42742, so we started to look at our specs and he has an Qualcomm Snapdragon MSM8974 and I had a Qualcomm Snapdragon MSM8974AB even our dpi are different he has I think 340 and I have 480 dpi...
Any info on this would be appreciated.
Thanks
Did you guys have the same version of Antutu?
Note 3
Techniques said:
Did you guys have the same version of Antutu?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes Antutu 5, but even other benchmarks there always was at least a 10 to 12% difference...
The Note 3 uses and Snapdragon 800 - 8974AA SOC
I suspect something is off in the build.prop or Antutu had a brain fart.
I agree
rjohnstone said:
The Note 3 uses and Snapdragon 800 - 8974AA SOC
I suspect something is off in the build.prop or Antutu had a brain fart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think im complaining, Sh*&t , I love my phone its fast and vibrant, was just wondering if any one had this happen to them...I feel bad is for my friend who thinks his phone sucks...
but even the screen ppi of 480 is above norm....
480 is stock DPI. I use app settings to maximize real estate on my screen, usually end up using 400/420 DPI myself so it doesn't look like something a 3yr old would use. As for the antutu, installed apps, and apps running in the background, and time since last reboot all contribute to your overall score. Even having a case that restricts heat dissipation will cause you to hit the thermal throttle easier as well.
BTW, same model number with the ab and DPI on my device, 44053 over here.
Sent from my SM-P600 using XDA Premium HD app
Over the years I have switched rom's many times.
Now I am back on stock 5.1.1
I use app2sd pro to help improve performance and it was in the app I noticed that it shows the device only has four cores.
So I downloaded cpu id and antutu and they all show four cores.
I am wondering why. Did I install the wrong stock rom even though it was labelled as Australia XSA?
Something else?
Strange.....
Edit: the p600 should have an octa-core
So how can one verify that it is octa-core?
meekspace said:
Over the years I have switched rom's many times.
Now I am back on stock 5.1.1
I use app2sd pro to help improve performance and it was in the app I noticed that it shows the device only has four cores.
So I downloaded cpu id and antutu and they all show four cores.
I am wondering why. Did I install the wrong stock rom even though it was labelled as Australia XSA?
Something else?
Strange.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For me in Aida64 and CPU-Z it says:
Cores: 8
4x ARM Cortex-A15 @1.90GHz
4x ARM Cortex-A7 @1.90GHz
jeffrey268 said:
For me in Aida64 and CPU-Z it says:
Cores: 8
4x ARM Cortex-A15 @1.90GHz
4x ARM Cortex-A7 @1.90GHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok.. I used those apps and the data is the same.
But it only shows four cpu/cores. Why?
Kernel adiutor shows four cpu's. How do you get access over all eight?
meekspace said:
Ok.. I used those apps and the data is the same.
But it only shows four cpu/cores. Why?
Kernel adiutor shows four cpu's. How do you get access over all eight?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't , it is first gen big.little SoC, meaning that you can only use 4 at a time. It is the SoC immediately after this that allowed for all 8 to be used synchronously.
There was a guy some time back that tried to enable all 8 cores working in synergy. Eventually he gave up IIRC , I just can't recall the reason.
IMO the reason that Samsung did not allow for it was that the SoC would throttle due to high temps if you were to enable all 8 at once leading to actually lower performance. So they simply disabled it. After a node shrink they finally managed to do it without thermal throttling, so the first phone that had it in a useful manner was the Note 4 (we use Note 3 tech). IIRC S5 had the feature as well however it throttle to hell and back, so it was not very useful there (hence why Note 4 was the first to use 8 cores syncronously in a useful manner)
Stevethegreat said:
You can't , it is first gen big.little SoC, meaning that you can only use 4 at a time. It is the SoC immediately after this that allowed for all 8 to be used synchronously.
There was a guy some time back that tried to enable all 8 cores working in synergy. Eventually he gave up IIRC , I just can't recall the reason.
IMO the reason that Samsung did not allow for it was that the SoC would throttle due to high temps if you were to enable all 8 at once leading to actually lower performance. So they simply disabled it. After a node shrink they finally managed to do it without thermal throttling, so the first phone that had it in a useful manner was the Note 4 (we use Note 3 tech). IIRC S5 had the feature as well however it throttle to hell and back, so it was not very useful there (hence why Note 4 was the first to use 8 cores syncronously in a useful manner)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So when you throttle the cpu, does it work on the slower or faster quad core?