Related
I've been reading a lot of discussion on this and would love to hear some opinions and see some benchmarks.
I currently own a Nexus One & where I live they are priced about $150 dollars more for a Nexus than a Galaxy S (It's my understanding Nexus are regarded as cheaper phones in America?) So basically I can sell my 4 month old Nexus One & buy a brand new 16GB Galaxy S for no extra cost. Here is what I am wondering...
I know the Galaxy S has an amazing GPU, it facerolls the Nexus One & even seems to stomp the Droid X with its improved GPU so that is great.
The CPU however seems to under perform in every benchmark I can find versus the Nexus/Droid2 & many more current high end Androids.
I realise these devices are running Android 2.2 with JIT. I've seen Linpacks of 2.2 running Galaxy S devices and JIT enabled ROMs that still don't compare with these other devices.
Question 1
What I'm wondering is the difference we can see in CPU benchmarks going to be surpassed with the addition of a proper 2.2 JIT rom on our devices or is simply that the Snapdragons & other Qualcomm CPU are actually better than our Hummingbird.
Question 2
My Nexus One is Linkpacking 30 MFlops atm, I think with OC etc I can get it higher too. Does anyone have any evidence of a Galaxy S phone (running 2.2, JIT, lagfix or anything) that competes (or even comes close to competing) with this? I have been unable to find anything.
Question 3
Is the current Quadrant scores that I'm seeing people reporting in the Lag Fix threads (2000+) actually representative of speed or are these (as Cyanogen & others seem to be claiming) distorted?
(I realise a lot of people are reporting lag fixed.. what I'm asking is the number represented there (x2 N1 Froyo's score) actually accurate. I don't understand the mechanics behind the I/O benchmark so I don't understand if the lagfix is distoring the reported results from it.)
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes. That's what lag fixes help. Cpu wise we eat snapdragons for breakfast, lunch and tea.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
andrewluecke said:
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what he said ^^^
regards
ickyboo said:
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
andrewluecke said:
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Croak said:
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, that was a really insightful post.
So basically even though our processor should outperform or ATLEAST match the snapdragons. Due to the mass optimization of 2.2 JIT for Snapdragon devices it's likely we'll never see the same performance. Unless Samsung gets really keen to do some optimization themselves.
I searched all over the internet to see why the CPU scores in Quadrant and other benchmarks are waaaay lower then the Nexus ones, but still I can't find anything.
Does Samsung disable the JIT in their Froyo ROMs? Because both Snapdragon and Hummingbird are still based on the same Cortex A8 cores
"It's clear that FroYo's JIT compiler currently only delivers significant performance gains for Snapdragon CPUs with the Scorpion core. This in turn explains why, so far, only a beta version of Android 2.2 is available for the Cortex-A8-based Samsung Galaxy S — the JIT compiler is the outstanding feature of FroYo. For the widespread Cortex-A8 cores, used in many high-end Android smartphones, the JIT compiler needs to be optimised. A Cortex-A8 core will still be slower than a Scorpion core at the same clock speed, but the Scorpion's advantage may not be as much 260 percent."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://androidforums.com/samsung-ca...ant-scores-why-humming-bird-doing-so-bad.html
There are multiple reasons, not optimised jit, slow memory for caching and more. Most of them are solved in the CM roms (it performs on par with the N1), and i can tell you that when Gingerbread comes it will blow the snapdragons away.
Which custom ROM provides CPU performance close to Snapdragon?
[ignore this post please]
Still the 1Ghz humming bird out performs the 1Ghz snap in real world performance
Even the LG Optimus One ARM11 600MHz Core scores better than Galaxy S. I still believe it's a software problem.
http://lgoptimusonep500.blogspot.com/2011/01/custom-rom-for-lg-optimus-one-p500.html#more
Another benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-n8-review-/7
...where the Nexus S proves that the Hummingbird can do more than it currrently does in Galaxy S.
i only bought the lg 2x for 3 weeks, and this is sad to watch.
However, i don't see the point of the gpu being such powerful, since android does not have any thing to push the gpu at all besides benchmark. This is a good way to make myself feel better.
I would like to know is there difference between Tegra 2 cpu vs Exynos cpu at all?? besides Exynos gpu being so much more powerful than Tegra 2?
Thanks
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
oh thats just terrible
Now my O2x are completely useless - it will just stop functioning im sure
No wait - thats not right - whats happening, it still works ? My games still play, I can still read the news, I can still do all the things I did yesterday.
It's just a benchmark - does it really matter that much ?
Those are just numbers in my opinion.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
I might have wrong, but that benchmark is made for mobile gpus and tegra 2 is not like normal mobile gpus it's more like a desktop gpu. A eight core gpu can't be beaten by a quad core or?
Tegra is our one, probably futile, hope of future proofing our phones.
Sent from my LG-P990 using Tapatalk
Don't expect Tegra to lead benchmarks for a while until mobile graphics are more geared towards immediate mode rendering (Stuff more like PC graphics.). Everyone else uses Tile-based rendering. I believe NVidia did this to avoid changing the rendering (which changes the drivers even more and etc) once they reach "console-level" graphics. The Tegra 2 will excel in a few things. Don't expect it to be the best performer for now. Expect it to be a capable one.
Don't forget. SGS II is capped to 60fps and we won't know what it's truly capable of
I've seen several gaming videos and the tegra walks all over the Orion. I do agree that push for tegras are the last hope for a unified gaming platform and I think it will work. Nvidia has this backed and will see it through.
i am really sick of the fact every android phone has its own different games on each platform. same game cant be run on different android phones. this is stupid.
its one of the reasons i like Nvidia. they are trying to do something good here for once. you see all those samsung galaxy S2 hardware. but where all the games ? those same games i can play on nexus S. with good frames too. however with nvidia and tegra 2, the users are getting exclusive games that can take advantage of the hardware. thats nice for a change.
let the galaxy S2 owners have fun with there powerful phone on paper. at the end of the day. the Tegra 2 owners are the people who are getting the best looking games.
i am not saying i hate S2. because i will buy it as soon as i can. i love super amoled and the techs for the phone. but if i want a pure gaming phone. tegra 2 wins hands down. not because its the most powerful. but because there are exclusive games that take advantage of that GPU.
wrong thread...........
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
ithe reasons i like Nvidia. they are trying to do something good here for once.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No their not, they're taking games already under development which Android users were going to see anyway regardless of nvidia's involvement and paying the developers off to make them exclusive titles, this is a bad thing as most Android users will lose out because of it.
One of the Tegra 2 only pinball games once cracked works fine on a legend ffs!
Benchmarks are just numbers. Real life performance is what counts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYkEUOA6Spo
rd_nest said:
Benchmarks are just numbers. Real life performance is what counts.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oYkEUOA6Spo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What are we looking at exactly? Looks like they're both just playing a video
fallout0 said:
What are we looking at exactly? Looks like they're both just playing a video
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this video shows at how the flash player performance is on web browsing watching a video and at this point watching an anime on both phones
so you can see that samsung galaxy with exynos and with 1.2ghz against lg2x nvidia tegra2 with 1ghz and lg optimus 2x seems for me faster for playing videos at this ..!i wanna only know if lg use stock 2.2.2 at this video against samsung galaxy s2 2.3.3 stock
lets compare those two videos and see that there are no differences between samsung s 2 and lg2x
and again dont forget...lg 2x has stock 2.2.2 rom
samsung galaxy s 2 has gingerbread 2.3.3 wich supposed to be faster..
think that when lg 2x will get official ginger 2.3.4 at this summer
gaming comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAFs9OQinNo
web browsing comparison
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PO0gSLf73AI
Shocky2 said:
No their not, they're taking games already under development which Android users were going to see anyway regardless of nvidia's involvement and paying the developers off to make them exclusive titles, this is a bad thing as most Android users will lose out because of it.
One of the Tegra 2 only pinball games once cracked works fine on a legend ffs!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, and Nvidia is causing fragmentation by using their own compression formats. Afaik Mali supports the one and only standard format, but that don't help much when Nvidia is paying off devs to use their proprietary stuff. Yeah not very techical i know, but check out the SGS2 thread for more info.
Sent from my Legend using XDA Premium App
I am going to buy a new smartphone in couple of days.
For the first time i thought of buying Neo V because of its design and bravia engine display with large screen for gaming[ Ray would be little bit small to hold in both hands for gaming so dropped it ].
But,
Now i am confused to choose which phone to buy after seeing Galaxy S even though its on old model it has the same stand in the market.
I actually want to buy smartphone for HD gaming from gameloft and nonGL.
Which mobile supports all HD games
So please tell me which one should i buy....?
I have the SGS (Samsung Galaxy S) and it's a very good phone!
Anyway, for HD gaming is not too good... I don't have the Neo V, but checking the specs I can tell that it ain't very good neither.
I would recommend you to get a Xperia Play ( If you want your smatphone for gaming), is Cheaper than the SGS and has a better GPU.
The good thing about the SGS is that it has a lot of attention from the community (that means a lot of custom ROMs).
If you can get the money get a SGS2 or a Galaxy Nexus.
Cheers
For gaming, Galaxy S has PowerVR SGX 540 graphics is probably one of the best low priced android phones for gaming since iPhone has PowerVR SGX 535 graphics . Because games are natively coded and optimized for PowerVR GPUs, there is none of that "porting" thingie needed to be done.
That means the games are stable, fast and efficient when running on PowerVR graphics. There isn't "lost in quality" as much as regular ports, that unless you're playing it on a HD TV via TV out. Otherwise, WVGA is the limitation to that.
Neo V has Adreno 205, a non-powervr chip and is relativity slower than PowerVR SGX 540. So I wouldn't recommend that for gaming.
what about galaxy r i9103
Nvidia Tegra 2 AP20H
Dual-core 1 GHz Cortex-A9
ULP GeForce
1 GB RAM
I dont know, but if you play so much your battery will be down in 2-3h
Xperia play probably would be good, but the custom rom side of things is a bit of a barren wasteground compared to over here on the SGS forum. There are only 1-2 custom roms that are any good.
Had very mixed results with converting my own PSX games with psxperia, but the dedicated hardware controller is soooo much better than a on-screen one
vamsikrishnach said:
what about galaxy r i9103
Nvidia Tegra 2 AP20H
Dual-core 1 GHz Cortex-A9
ULP GeForce
1 GB RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know, Tegra 2 shares many of the similarities to PowerVR architecture. Some graphically intensive games are also optimized for this particular chip and are listed THD.
Lets sum up the pluses:
1) Similar architecture
2)THD optimized games enabling extra detail for ULV Geforce GPUs
So why not?
During the keynote of the new iPhone in 07 days, Phil Schiller, Apple's VP of markting, showed a mysterious plot that claimed the new processor A5X tablet offering up to four times more graphics performance than the quad-core NVidia Tegra 3 .
Nvidia did not like this chart.
Ken Brown, a spokesman for the company, told ZDNet that he was "flattered" to have been compared by Apple, but that tests performnace require more information.
"We have no information on this benchmark," said Brown. "We need to understand what application was used. Was only one or several applications? What drivers did they use? There are many issues in benchmark tests."
Ken is right to argue that Apple simply hid that information. Nowhere in the Cupertino company shows how he got those numbers, and probably will not even explain.
Nvidia promised to do their own benchmark tests so the new iPhone is released, March 16. Of course, these new tests Tegra 3 will do better on tests than Apple, as happened so many years (and still does) in disputes between NVidia and AMD, where each of the companies showed different benchmark tests where their chipsets fared better.
At least we know that once the new iPhone is released, numerous comparative tests and the Internet began to emerge, and we have more solid information about who gets the better of the fray.
jeiih said:
Ken is right to argue that Apple simply hid that information. Nowhere in the Cupertino company shows how he got those numbers, and probably will not even explain.
Nvidia promised to do their own benchmark tests so the new iPhone is released, March 16. Of course, these new tests Tegra 3 will do better on tests than Apple, as happened so many years (and still does) in disputes between NVidia and AMD, where each of the companies showed different benchmark tests where their chipsets fared better.
At least we know that once the new iPhone is released, numerous comparative tests and the Internet began to emerge, and we have more solid information about who gets the better of the fray.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be iPad I think.
lamborg said:
Should be iPad I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA
i cant imagine the A5x being anywhere close to the speed of the Tegra 3.
its basically an incremental upgrade to the A5, and the Tegra 3 is in a league of its own.
This kind of seems more as bs than actual truth. I agree with what emjlr3 said, the Tegra 3 by far sets the standard for high end tablet hardware in my opinion.. The A5X is merely an incrementally improved A5. Not to mention the Tegra 3 has a Quad Core.. While the A5X is only a dual core at most but the specs of the Tegra 3 are 12 Graphics Processing Cores, while the A5X has 4.
i've seen the "RESOLUTIONARY" iPad video its complete bull****. Everything on there is definitely untrue with no evidence. for example they claimed that their so awesome s(*it)Pad has a better display than any HDTV.. seriously my 30" Sony Monitor with which i am typing now manages 2048x1536 with ease.. and its much more sharp than what ive seen on the ipad.. and since years nvidia is miles ahead with its gpus and the A5X(which isnt even their own creation or how they would call it "groundbreaking innovation" (its made by Samsung)) isnt even near the performance of the tegra 3 or even the Adreno 225 ..
Hmm..
Well, i would like to see proof instead of just bold claims. I've seen the tegra 3..and its pretty darn impressive. Let's see how the A5x stack up ay?
realfelix said:
i've seen the "RESOLUTIONARY" iPad video its complete bull****. Everything on there is definitely untrue with no evidence. for example they claimed that their so awesome s(*it)Pad has a better display than any HDTV.. seriously my 30" Sony Monitor with which i am typing now manages 2048x1536 with ease.. and its much more sharp than what ive seen on the ipad.. and since years nvidia is miles ahead with its gpus and the A5X(which isnt even their own creation or how they would call it "groundbreaking innovation" (its made by Samsung)) isnt even near the performance of the tegra 3 or even the Adreno 225 ..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude, you yourself said, that you are using a monitor for Hi Res display. Apple never claimed that the new iPad's display is better than any "monitor's" display. It only claimed it has better resolution than any HDTV because the highest resolution for any HDTV right now is 1920 x1080. So in that point, apple did not lie.
In my opinion if the new iPad can display graphics that is more crisp but at the same speed as the current iPad, then it at least doubled it's own speed from the last iPad. If it renders graphics faster, then the 4x faster claim need to be proven by benchmarking.
I've had both an iPad and a Tegra tablet. Depending on configurations, the Android tablets can match the iPad when it comes to graphics, but I noticed there are some programs which are not written well and graphics stutter. This happens more for the Android, I guess it could be because Apple has strict coding regulations as compared to the Android which is more open.
Either way, I think it's more what you prefer to use. I have a Galaxy Nexus for my phone but I have the 1st gen iPad for my tablet.
Let's do the logic here, ipad 2 with sgx 543mp2> Tegra 3. Therefore ipad 3 with sgx 544 that is twice the sgx 543 is also greater than the Tegra 3.
Just search for off screen 720p benchmarks and you'll seen the proof.
Now cpu wise the Tegra 3 is more than likely much more powerful.
$1 gets you a reply
emjlr3 said:
i cant imagine the A5x being anywhere close to the speed of the Tegra 3.
its basically an incremental upgrade to the A5, and the Tegra 3 is in a league of its own.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uh... whut. They were talking about graphics performance and the even the A5 is faster than tegra 3 in that respect. The A5x being 4 times faster is quite plausible.
red12355 said:
Uh... whut. They were talking about graphics performance and the even the A5 is faster than tegra 3 in that respect. The A5x being 4 times faster is quite plausible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i thought the point of the Tegra 3 was to bring desktop graphics to a tablet/phone?
the ipad 2 surely did not have desktop like graphics
AnandTech benchmark ASUS Eee Pad Transformer Prime & iPad 3. Although the number is not up to 4x, but iPad 3 still comes with slightly better graphic performance. Obviously, CPU on Tegra 3 is better.
Why Asphalt 7 and Need For Speed Most Wanted's graphics are minimal? no blur no reflection....nothing...why? I'm reading the comments on market and averibody says that the game grate graphics but on my tegra 2 phone (optimus 2x) nothing special....these games are not optimized for tegra 2 powered devices or what?
As much as I hate to say this about our phone, the Optimus 2X among the dual cores holds one of the weakest graphics processors.
Sure, when it first came out it was a beast of a phone both in terms of CPU and GPU. However, once other brands caught up in the battle, it was quite clear that Tegra 2 was the least proficient in graphics.
Funny how you'd expect a company like Nvidia that specialises in GPU units to make the best GPUs in any area, especially smartphones. However, even Tegra 3, while still powerful in its own right, is still vastly overshadowed by the GPUs on the other quad core devices.
You probably see "Tegra optimised" because of Nvidia's marketing attempts to compensate for their weak processors. It's becoming increasingly common knowledge that in smartphones, Nvidia have been useless in upholding their reputation built from computer GPUs.
ilooze said:
Why Asphalt 7 and Need For Speed Most Wanted's graphics are minimal? no blur no reflection....nothing...why? I'm reading the comments on market and averibody says that the game grate graphics but on my tegra 2 phone (optimus 2x) nothing special....these games are not optimized for tegra 2 powered devices or what?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
NEON instruction set missing. Simple as that.
The optimus 2x has a good gpu
new cm10 nightly Nenamark 2 = 44 fps with new gpu Driver no oc and old and the prime has 47fps is not bad
and other games like death Trigger runs on tegra 3 setings fluid
and the games are not full suport the tegra gpu well
Nootubo said:
The optimus 2x has a good gpu
new cm10 nightly Nenamark 2 = 44 fps with new gpu Driver no oc and old and the prime has 47fps is not bad
and other games like death Trigger runs on tegra 3 setings fluid
and the games are not full suport the tegra gpu well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes that is weird why dead trigger and shadowgun can run at high details? and those other games not?
petr.klos said:
NEON instruction set missing. Simple as that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh god what an utter utter facepalm...
NEON has NOTHING to do with graphics. Lack of NEON is why our phone can't play high-profile 1080p not the reason of bad graphics.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Nootubo said:
The optimus 2x has a good gpu
new cm10 nightly Nenamark 2 = 44 fps with new gpu Driver no oc and old and the prime has 47fps is not bad
and other games like death Trigger runs on tegra 3 setings fluid
and the games are not full suport the tegra gpu well
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what new gpu drivers are you using? do you installed chainfire?
The thing is that games are often optimized for PowerVR sgx (as ported from Iphone) and adreno and mali.
Tegra2 has minimal part is whole graphic cards so why dev has to waste time for such ****ty gpu?
kaspar737 said:
Oh god what an utter utter facepalm...
NEON has NOTHING to do with graphics. Lack of NEON is why our phone can't play high-profile 1080p not the reason of bad graphics.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well... well... not really.
What an utter overreaction Truth is that NEON handles AV decoding encoding and linking it to a frames. So yes, in fact it has an impact.
Overreaction cause mostly it is because in settings T2/P990 is recognized as low-end device.
petr.klos said:
Well... well... not really.
What an utter overreaction Truth is that NEON handles AV decoding encoding and linking it to a frames. So yes, in fact it has an impact.
Overreaction cause mostly it is because in settings T2/P990 is recognized as low-end device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please, explain to me how something that decodes audio and video files helps in games?
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Nvidia creates one of the best lp gpu,even mali in s2 no compition for o2x gpu, but the real fact is the t2 is kicked by its own creator, to priortised t3 or next tegra version ,lg under repute its previou gen phone due to thr lame developer and nvidia support.
In return other phones+new phone roll out and here we are whinning and criticizing our gpu:thumbdown:
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
is there a way to improve the graphics in asphalt7 n nfs most wanted??? has anyone tried chainfire3d??
rom-cm10
ullekh99 said:
is there a way to improve the graphics in asphalt7 n nfs most wanted??? has anyone tried chainfire3d??
rom-cm10
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I tried but it doesn't let me to install it.....in cmw i get an error and if i install the drivers normally the phone wont boot up....so make a backup first
seriousia said:
Nvidia creates one of the best lp gpu,even mali in s2 no compition for o2x gpu, but the real fact is the t2 is kicked by its own creator, to priortised t3 or next tegra version ,lg under repute its previou gen phone due to thr lame developer and nvidia support.
In return other phones+new phone roll out and here we are whinning and criticizing our gpu:thumbdown:
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, GS2 GPU is faster. The Tegra GPUs are actually a pain in the ass to code for if nVidia doesn't offer support. Devs have to split graphics processing onto 8 or 12 cores. The situation is quite similar with PS3 CPU, where devs also have to split graphics processing onto 7 different cores.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Gameloft doesn't make this game available on tegra 2 i mean their's no proper game files specifically for tegra 2 only unlike in adreno, mali and other gpu beside tegra they provide separate files for those gpu's so if you want to play great games on your o2x please first search on google for tegra 2 sd files of the game you want like bard's tale there is a specific file for our gpu and as expected its size is incredibly big 3gb
Our gpu is powerful if nvidia let the developers play with their codes i think users not only praise the developer but they praise for nvidia also for this creation in my own opinion
Sent from my Optimus 2X using xda premium
grimmyrippy said:
Gameloft doesn't make this game available on tegra 2 i mean their's no proper game files specifically for tegra 2 only unlike in adreno, mali and other gpu beside tegra they provide separate files for those gpu's so if you want to play great games on your o2x please first search on google for tegra 2 sd files of the game you want like bard's tale there is a specific file for our gpu and as expected its size is incredibly big 3gb
Our gpu is powerful if nvidia let the developers play with their codes i think users not only praise the developer but they praise for nvidia also for this creation in my own opinion
Sent from my Optimus 2X using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you, with good optimization great results can be achieved on Tegra GPUs. Its like on the PS3. When devs are money hungry they make crappy ports but when a dev invests time and money awesome games can be made (for example, Uncharted and The Last of Us)
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
I"m confused by Electronic Arts.
I have an old single-core Motorola Defy + and on it that other racing game Fast5 from Gameloft runs superfluid with real-time reflections.
Now why in the hell does EA opt to choose for minimal graphics on my and other phones.
Imho it"S better to have an adjustible slider to have settings from low to max graphics on the new need for Speed on Android.
The same with Riptide by Vektor Unit.
Let people choose for themselfs dammit.
hey guys!
Did you tried out "Dead Trigger" from the Tegrazone website?
Just instal it (free!), go to options and put graphic quality to max and BE AMAZED!
why from tegrazone website.. u can download it from play store for free...
btw sorry for offtopic but does tegrazone app work for u'll...it used to work for me wen i bought my phone... but has not been working since almost a yr..says no network?? had forgotten about it but now remembered coz of mention of tegrazone website
cheveux_ said:
hey guys!
Did you tried out "Dead Trigger" from the Tegrazone website?
Just instal it (free!), go to options and put graphic quality to max and BE AMAZED!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes! that is why I am angry about this phone.....dead trigger and shadowgun have quality settings....and the o2x can handle it...so the developers of EA or GLU or Gameloft why they dont make games look excelent on our phone?