Database Develop

[Q] Galaxy S CPU Performance

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.

[Q] Galaxy S and HTC Desire HD Linpack

Even though the HTC desire HD and Galaxy s have the processor with 1Ghz clock speed their linpack scores vary. SGS has about 12-14 and HTC Desire HD has 35-38. Also the same case with Nexus One. Can someone help me with this dilema?

vivekrk44 said:
Even though the HTC desire HD and Galaxy s have the processor with 1Ghz clock speed their linpack scores vary. SGS has about 12-14 and HTC Desire HD has 35-38. Also the same case with Nexus One. Can someone help me with this dilema?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Simple. Linpack is optimised for snapdragon processors. I'm sure if you searched you could have solved this by yourself.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

And it's a synthetic benchmark anyway. Benchmarks are only useful if you know what exactly they are testing, they produce verbose outputs and if they test similar workloads to what you normally perform. Linpack is only somewhat useful if you only care about the speed floating point operations.
By the way, please stop saying it's optimised for snapdragon! To the best of what I've heard, that isn't the case. Snapdragons simply handle floating points better apparently. So yes, it might run better on snapdragon, but the developer probably didn't shift through the Dalvik code finding ways to speed it up on snapdragon.
We still don't really have enough information to understand if Snapdragon or hummingbird are faster in most applications, because we don't have an application similar to PCmark

Auzy said:
We still don't really have enough information to understand if Snapdragon or hummingbird are faster in most applications, because we don't have an application similar to PCmark
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know for a fact that in the "real world" the Desire HD $hits all over the SGS... I have both devices, and its very clear that the lag kills the SGS experience.
Its also worth noting, the Desire HD has the more optimised rev II Snapdragon processor. Clock for clock vs original Snapdragon, rev II is about 25% quicker...
PS - It is a shame tho, the Desire HD does not have native DIVX player support. You have to download Rockplayer for $10 to get that..

cheetah2k said:
I know for a fact that in the "real world" the Desire HD $hits all over the SGS... I have both devices, and its very clear that the lag kills the SGS experience.:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The lag is caused by the internal memory and file system though, not the Hummingbird.

cheetah2k said:
You have to download Rockplayer for $10 to get that..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
eum. Rockplayer is free.

cheetah2k said:
I know for a fact that in the "real world" the Desire HD $hits all over the SGS... I have both devices, and its very clear that the lag kills the SGS experience.
Its also worth noting, the Desire HD has the more optimised rev II Snapdragon processor. Clock for clock vs original Snapdragon, rev II is about 25% quicker...
PS - It is a shame tho, the Desire HD does not have native DIVX player support. You have to download Rockplayer for $10 to get that..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does the desire HD handle 3D games? When i went to the HTC event in London, it wasnt really very impressive when it came to the 3D games, the SGS was clearly superior thanks to its PowerVR 540 GPU.

cheetah2k said:
I know for a fact that in the "real world" the Desire HD $hits all over the SGS... I have both devices, and its very clear that the lag kills the SGS experience.
Its also worth noting, the Desire HD has the more optimised rev II Snapdragon processor. Clock for clock vs original Snapdragon, rev II is about 25% quicker...
PS - It is a shame tho, the Desire HD does not have native DIVX player support. You have to download Rockplayer for $10 to get that..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For starters, the question was based on linpack, but you are comparing the overall device. The software has already been shown to have a large impact on the devices. Furthermore, it's running bytecode, so it depends on the dalvik implementation.Your "facts" are actually non-conclusive, and seem to be based on observations.
Secondly, 25% faster isn't enough info when you don't know how hummingbird is in comparison. And even that is total crock, because 25% under which workload? It's like saying that a mechanical harddisk is half as fast as an SSD. However, under which conditions? We KNOW that mechanical HDD's operate horribly with random access. Well, what conditions have been improved on the scorpion CPU?
The harsh reality is, we don't know how exactly they compare, and benchmarks like Linpack or Quadrant only provide a tiny picture. It's more important to identify what kind of operations you need, and test those operations specifically. What we should ask is why you care about linpack?
I'm interested in finding out how the CPU's perform exactly though honestly (even against snapdragon).

What I've seen on quadrant is that it tests all aspects of a cpu. Arithmetic of int, short, long, xml parsing, audio and video decoding and the nexus one still has a better score only in cpu. Nexus one has about 4500 and my sgs has a max of 1992. Dosent this provide the big picture?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

get CyanogenMod in SGS and try again

vivekrk44 said:
What I've seen on quadrant is that it tests all aspects of a cpu. Arithmetic of int, short, long, xml parsing, audio and video decoding and the nexus one still has a better score only in cpu. Nexus one has about 4500 and my sgs has a max of 1992. Dosent this provide the big picture?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The big picture of what exactly? That quadrant doesn't give accurate results when comparing phones? This thread is a waste of time

There's been a topic about this before. To get a proper comparison of actual MFLOPS performance of both devices, we'd need to make a comparison that is not hampered by different versions of Android software, different Linux kernels or different levels of JIT optimization.
To properly compare them, you could load Ubuntu (same version) on both devices, and have them run a properly optimized version of native UNIX Linpack. That'd actually be testing the hardware capabilities. Native UNIX Linpack runs 62+ on the iPad's 1 GHz Apple A4 (of which the execution core is said to be identical to the Hummingbird) which is over four times as much as we're getting on Android Linpack on the Hummingbird.
I'd be happy to volunteer my Galaxy S, but we'd need someone with a Snapdragon phone to do the same.

vivekrk44 said:
What I've seen on quadrant is that it tests all aspects of a cpu. Arithmetic of int, short, long, xml parsing, audio and video decoding and the nexus one still has a better score only in cpu. Nexus one has about 4500 and my sgs has a max of 1992. Dosent this provide the big picture?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope.. Because as mentioned, it still goes through the VM, and you are looking at a weighted score or does it show every component individually? Also, when you say "all aspects of the CPU", how do you know it's all aspects. The fact you mention XML parsing as a proper test is silly, because it's basic string operations (array of numbers generally).
You also forget that Android is a timesharing OS, so background processes can have an effect. When I say the overall view, I mean a total breakdown of the CPU, cache, average cycles taken for specific instructions, etc.
You can't test the CPU with Dalvik, or even the NDK. And in the case of Linpack as mentioned, it's a very specific workload. There might be CPU specific workloads which hummingbird performs significantly faster than the other processors (we don't know). All that should matter to you, is how well your apps run.

As all the smart people have said, don't trust benchmarks and also Froyo's JIT compiler isn't yet optimized for hummingbird, That will change once google plays around with the nexus s.

Droid/Milestones' weak graphic performance. OC possible?

The Droid2/X use the same graphic processor as Droid 1, which is PowerVR SGX 530. According to the datasheet, this core is designed to run at 200Mhz with power of rendering 14M triangles/sec. But our Droid/Milestone runs underclocked at 110Mhz(7M tri/s) while D2/X at 200Mhz. That leads to major UI responsiveness&gaming difference between D2&D1.
I wonder if there's any possibility to overclock the GPU as well?
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App

TeroZ said:
The Droid2/X use the same graphic processor as Droid 1, which is PowerVR SGX 530. According to the datasheet, this core is designed to run at 200Mhz with power of rendering 14M triangles/sec. But our Droid/Milestone runs underclocked at 110Mhz(7M tri/s) while D2/X at 200Mhz. That leads to major UI responsiveness&gaming difference between D2&D1.
I wonder if there's any possibility to overclock the GPU as well?
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know this has been tried (overclocking), but with no results (constant reboots)

Imagination Technologies (PowerVR) defines the GPU internals and sells the "plans" for the part, to be included in SOCs like TI's OMAP.
But PowerVR does not, however, define the exact clocks at which the parts should run, nor other things like number of memory channels, memory speed, etc.
Texas Instruments are the ones who defined the GPU clocks. The OMAP 34xx chips (Droid 1, Milestone, XT720, Flipout, etc) are made using 65nm process, and that determines a certain power consumption using certain clocks, hence why they defined a ~100MHz clock for the GPU and ~600-800MHz for the CPU.
The OMAP 36xx (Droid X, Droid 2, Defy, etc) are made using a newer, smaller 45nm process, which allows them to run at higher speeds while spending approx. the same power, which is why Texas Instruments decided to clock the GPU at ~200MHz and the CPU at ~1-1.2GHz.
So it's not like the Milestones and Droids have their GPUs underclocked, those are just their factory clocks.
Of course, overclocking the GPU would be nice and it could be possible. If someone found out how to change the GPU's voltage and clocks, I'm sure it could come in handy in future games.
However, right now, the 1st gen Milestones/Droids are running every high-end HD game from gameloft at full speed, and I bet it'll even do Infinity Blade and other UE3 games when they're out for Android.
Every "HD" Android game has to be compatible with the 1st-gen Snapdragon's GPU, the Adreno 200, which is a lot slower than the SGX530 @ 100MHz, so we're sitting confortably above the base spec for now. And with all the Windows Mobile 7 phones coming with a 1st-gen Snapdragon (mandatory requirement), it'll be like this for a while.
So there's really not a big need for overclocking the GPU right now, except for getting higher scores in mobile benchmarks (some of them terribly unoptimized, like GLBenchmark 1.1 and 2.0).
Furthermore, I it seems the first factor to limit the 1st-gen Droids in games will be the RAM amount.
The first UE3-based game for Android is already out, and it requires 512MB of RAM.
So the game runs on Nexus One and not on a Droid/Milestone, which has far superior graphics performance.
(I'm pretty sure this has something to do with the fact that Android doesn't allow graphics buffering in the main memory, though, which could be resolved in future firmware revisions).
Then again, overclocking the GPU would be cool, and I'm pretty sure getting our SGX530 to work @ ~200MHz would significantly increase the gaming longevity of our phones for quite a while.

Thanks for your useful and important reply.
"The Manhattan Project" on Galaxy S Series just made me curious about Droid's gpu oc, because SGS also use a PowerVR gpu. But things isn't easy due to a fact that one is made by TI while another is made by samsung, the structure inside both SoCs may be completely different.
But I still hope someone capable would try something on this.
That's really cool and significantly lengthen the lifetime of our Droid and Milestone.
Thx again for your reply!
PS: I also felt strange why the UI(not games) on N1 is faster than an OCed droid, could it be the optimization problem?
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App

TeroZ said:
PS: I also felt strange why the UI(not games) on N1 is faster than an OCed droid, could it be the optimization problem?
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely part of the optimization --a fast ROM with a good theme like the Droid X theme on the GOT 2.2.1 ROM has as fast a GUI as I've encountered on Android, even without overclock.

Also take in consideration that all the current 2.1 and 2.2 roms have a cap of 30fps in 2D, perhaps when the final 2.2 update arrives there will be some perfomance gain
Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk

Overclock and OMAP vs Tegra?

So, I went to the store and just now realized it has an OMAP dual core. I know the Tegra2 can reach 1.5 easily enough....do we know anything about how well this OMAP can overclock?
I ran a quick quadrant for the Bionic in store and honestly wasn't too happy with the graphics side of the benchmark. It was running on the same level as my wife's Galaxy 1

shadowclock said:
So, I went to the store and just now realized it has an OMAP dual core. I know the Tegra2 can reach 1.5 easily enough....do we know anything about how well this OMAP can overclock?
I ran a quick quadrant and honestly wasn't too happy with the graphics side of the benchmark. It was running on the same level as my wife's Galaxy 1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because they're the same graphics chip.
I'm guessing the OMAP can hit 1.5 or higher, similar to the Tegra. The old OMAP3430s in the OG Droid were stable at 1-1.1GHz, so I'd say a 4-500GHz overclock is easily achievable, but no one has tested it yet on the new OMAP4s, so who knows for now.

Berzerker7 said:
That's because they're the same graphics chip.
I'm guessing the OMAP can hit 1.5 or higher, similar to the Tegra. The old OMAP3430s in the OG Droid were stable at 1-1.1GHz, so I'd say a 4-500GHz overclock is easily achievable, but no one has tested it yet on the new OMAP4s, so who knows for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the OMAP just killed it for me....I want a better graphics processor....I may upgrade to DX2 now and the rumored Droid Prime (Nexus) later.

shadowclock said:
I think the OMAP just killed it for me....I want a better graphics processor....I may upgrade to DX2 now and the rumored Droid Prime (Nexus) later.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is ironic - part of the reason they went with OMAP instead of tegra was due to performance (do a quick google search for some tegra bionic vs. omap bionic bench marks)

*All-Around* the OMAP4430 is a better chip than the Tegra 2. The GeForce in the Tegra doesn't perform as well in real-world scenarios compared to an SGX540 on an OMAP4. You'll still get higher real-world performance on an OMAP4430 compared to both the Hummingbird in the GSI and the Tegra 2.

Its a shame they are not using gpus similar in power to those in the galaxy s 2.

shadowclock said:
So, I went to the store and just now realized it has an OMAP dual core. I know the Tegra2 can reach 1.5 easily enough....do we know anything about how well this OMAP can overclock?
I ran a quick quadrant for the Bionic in store and honestly wasn't too happy with the graphics side of the benchmark. It was running on the same level as my wife's Galaxy 1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember the Bionic is pushing quite a few more pixels in the benchmark than the Galaxy. 960x540 vs 800x480
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using xda premium

shadowclock said:
So, I went to the store and just now realized it has an OMAP dual core. I know the Tegra2 can reach 1.5 easily enough....do we know anything about how well this OMAP can overclock?
I ran a quick quadrant for the Bionic in store and honestly wasn't too happy with the graphics side of the benchmark. It was running on the same level as my wife's Galaxy 1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Galaxy S's SGX540 is clocked at 200mhz. In the OMAP4, it is clocked at 304mhz. In theory, even though it has to push more pixels, it will outperform it. And if you run a real GPU benchmark, like An3Dbench XL, the OMAP4 performs far better than the Tegra 2. The planets test in Quadrant glitch because of Moto's drivers-the Tegra 2 in the DX2 uses proprietary drivers from NVIDIA. And in terms of CPU performance, the OMAP4 performs considerably better. The OMAP4 has NEON instruction sets that the Tegra 2 lacks. And the Tegra 2 has trouble playing certain types of video files(it can't decode/encode h.264 videos or something), while the OMAP is able to.

nrage23 said:
Remember the Bionic is pushing quite a few more pixels in the benchmark than the Galaxy. 960x540 vs 800x480
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't look like much of a difference, but QHD is 35% more pixels to keep up with. That's significant.

Galaxy Note Using Mali-400MP GPU (Outdated GPU)?

hello guys..i heard that galaxy note and other samsung device are using an outdated GPU (Mali-400MP GPU)...so is it a little "fail" for our note to have an outdated GPU?plss give ur opinion.. thanks guys
..u can read the review about the GPU--> Here

It's so much faster than the sgx540 in the nexus it's ridiculous and since my choice was between those two I'm very happy with it.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

Check out the real world performances. Mali 400 outclasses Adreno 220 easily.
The weakpoint of Mali is geometry performance, but it does not matter much with mobiles until now as mobile games are not geometry heavy.
On the other hand, the OpenGL ES 2.x performance and real world performance of Mali is excellent.
With the clock speed of exynos in Note which actually gives much better real world performance with Mali 400 than even SGS2, it runs circles around Adreno 220 powered devices like sensation and even SGX540 powered devices.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
The above review is of SGS2. And mind you the performance of note is much better than SGS2. It is one of the most balanced GPUs on market with great gaming as well as multimedia performance (which actually matters more to someone like me.)

Funkym0nkey said:
Check out the real world performances. Mali 400 outclasses Adreno 220 easily.
The weakpoint of Mali is geometry performance, but it does not matter much with mobiles until now as mobile games are not geometry heavy.
On the other hand, the OpenGL ES 2.x performance and real world performance of Mali is excellent.
With the clock speed of exynos in Note which actually gives much better real world performance with Mali 400 than even SGS2, it runs circles around Adreno 220 powered devices like sensation and even SGX540 powered devices.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
The above review is of SGS2. And mind you the performance of note is much better than SGS2. It is one of the most balanced GPUs on market with great gaming as well as multimedia performance (which actually matters more to someone like me.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for this info sir

although mali has been here for a very long time, it was well ahead of its time. and it still is i guess

anjath said:
although mali has been here for a very long time, it was well ahead of its time. and it still is i guess
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah well Scott Adams is wayyyyyyy past his heyday (heck, even being relevant).... haven't read him since 2007 or so, when he started dabbling in intelligent design woo and sexist claptrap...

for being a heavy mobile gamer
i can assure you that the mali 400 on the note does very well with the latest games (asphalt7, dead trigger to name a few) despite having to compute for a much higher resolution display than other phones...
and with a little overclocking (tegrak app or gl notecore kernel) gpu performance can get sky high.
best phone i ever got :victory:

GAME ON said:
hello guys..i heard that galaxy note and other samsung device are using an outdated GPU (Mali-400MP GPU)...so is it a little "fail" for our note to have an outdated GPU?plss give ur opinion.. thanks guys
..u can read the review about the GPU--> Here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The note was released ten months ago but still its gpu is better than all the others except sgs3 and and maybe one x..
Btw do you even own a note?? Did you every notice any lag in any game??

Whiskeyjack4855 said:
The note was released ten months ago but still its gpu is better than all the others except sgs3 and and maybe one x..
Btw do you even own a note?? Did you every notice any lag in any game??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The NOTE's and SGS3's GPU are the same.
However, the S3 is built on a smaller 32nm die-size, so it means it uses less space and less power for same performance. Samsung uses this advantage to clock the frequency much higher than the NOTE (which is built on a 45nm die).
Also, the S3 implements a new, updated driver for the gpu and squeezes more performance out. This was a same move Samsung made with the SGX540, which is also a very fast gpu. The original SGS was clocked real-low and had outdated drivers... after stealing the driver sources from the LG with OMAP 4440 SoC, the SGS (with 4.0.3) was performing in the same league as the 2011/2012 devices.

Kangal said:
The NOTE's and SGS3's GPU are the same.
However, the S3 is built on a smaller 32nm die-size, so it means it uses less space and less power for same performance. Samsung uses this advantage to clock the frequency much higher than the NOTE (which is built on a 45nm die).
Also, the S3 implements a new, updated driver for the gpu and squeezes more performance out. This was a same move Samsung made with the SGX540, which is also a very fast gpu. The original SGS was clocked real-low and had outdated drivers... after stealing the driver sources from the LG with OMAP 4440 SoC, the SGS (with 4.0.3) was performing in the same league as the 2011/2012 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that that both the note and sgs3 has same gpu.. But the one in sgs3 its more powerful cause you said it's overclocked and has better drivers..
Btw do you know why the mali in sgs3 gets so high benchmark scores even wih the 720p screen? I mean is it all due to oc and better drivers?

Whiskeyjack4855 said:
I know that that both the note and sgs3 has same gpu.. But the one in sgs3 its more powerful cause you said it's overclocked and has better drivers..
Btw do you know why the mali in sgs3 gets so high benchmark scores even wih the 720p screen? I mean is it all due to oc and better drivers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
An easier way to understand is to look at the new RIM PlayBook.
It's got the same processor as the Gnex (Galaxy Nexus) however its much much faster, especially in browsing. It decimates it. It even decimates the ASUS Transformer Prime Infinity (O'C Tegra3 + ICS).... or the Nexus7 (U'C Tegra3 + JBean).
You are only as fast as your slowest component. In the case of Android, its the high-level (slow) implemented software.
= Getting a faster soc with more cores and more ram doesn't really increase performance that much.

Some serious thread necromancy going on here!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

Kangal said:
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By toe to toe with the one x do you mean benchmarks or real life perfomance..
Hey one thing more..aren't you a engadget reader?

Whiskeyjack4855 said:
By toe to toe with the one x do you mean benchmarks or real life perfomance..
Hey one thing more..aren't you a engadget reader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both.
But I don't live by the benchmarks. I mean have you tried some of the HD Apps from TegraZone. On stock TouchWizz, the NOTE really struggles. With a custom setup, I don't get much/any problems.
Yeah, I do frequent engadget... also on heaps of other sites.

Kangal said:
Both.
But I don't live by the benchmarks. I mean have you tried some of the HD Apps from TegraZone. On stock TouchWizz, the NOTE really struggles. With a custom setup, I don't get much/any problems.
Yeah, I do frequent engadget... also on heaps of other sites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you be kind enough to educate me about your setup?

Kangal said:
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
An easier way to understand is to look at the new RIM PlayBook.
It's got the same processor as the Gnex (Galaxy Nexus) however its much much faster, especially in browsing. It decimates it. It even decimates the ASUS Transformer Prime Infinity (O'C Tegra3 + ICS).... or the Nexus7 (U'C Tegra3 + JBean).
You are only as fast as your slowest component. In the case of Android, its the high-level (slow) implemented software.
= Getting a faster soc with more cores and more ram doesn't really increase performance that much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Even though the Playbook has its many flaws (owned two both with screen/USB issues) it was a powerhouse. Multimedia was outstanding and web surfing was by far the fastest.
But the OS, QNX, is to thank for that. If the Playbook was running android it would be nothing out of the ordinary. As much as I love Android it really is not as efficiant as QNX
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app

anything on market today is outdated tommorow
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2

Recently I had a doubt about if it's possible to unlock the 2 locked remaining cores in the Galaxy Note N7000? Because I realize that the Note only uses 2 of the 4 GPU cores... It's there a possibility to do this? How?

i think mali 400 is a good GPU because Note1 and Note2 using it. and really nice GPU for gaming