Database Develop

[Q] Is Android 2.2 on galaxy like Nexus one? (because of Nexus CPU type)

Hi guys..
I sad Google developed 2.2 to improve snapdragon cpu and becuase of that the benchmarks shows 3X faster cpu on nexus,
will work 2.2 on galaxy like nexus ? or not for SGS cpu!
at all what you think about power of CPU/GPU in SGS on 2.2 ?
Is nexus cpu better than galaxy on Android 2.2 ?

The Galaxy's CPU/GPU is the best on the market right now and with 2.2 it should fix a lot of software problems with the SGS.

Actually can't wait for 2.2, and it's released around about my birthday!

When is your birthday

22nd September mate. You can buy me a Galaxy S as a spare if you want

well I have to see it first.
Guess Samsung finds a way to **** up the phone again i'm sure of that.

matty___ said:
well I have to see it first.
Guess Samsung finds a way to **** up the phone again i'm sure of that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it has rfs file format and TouchWiz, consider it ****ed up.

kgk888 said:
If it has rfs file format and TouchWiz, consider it ****ed up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If froyo on the SGS sucks, then the chefs in here will cut it open and make it run properly and it won't matter what the FW was like when samsung sent it out. Also, TouchWiz is fine, even if it does have a dumb name.

I have been worried about this. The sgs line and droid line do not get over 15 in linpack with 2.2. I dont see the same increase in speed as I do with snapdragon based phones. I have read this is due to the snapdragon having 128 bit vs 64 bit something but cant find the forum post about this. The sgs line with 2.1 is still faster then a 2.2 snapdragon based phone but it must have the lag fix installed. Without the lag fix it is slower for sure. I will try to find the forum post about 128bit vs 64bit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKsAUR61ByM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji49qFNxC4c
Edit: found the forum post
Originally Posted by Gimic26
Your question was answered already...it comes down to processor architecture. Qualcomm's Snapdragon platform and more specifically the Scorpion application processor, while being related to TI's Omap Arm series, has enhancements made by Qualcomm. The part of the cpu that handles the SIMD instructions has a wider pipeline, 128 bits vs 64 bits in TI's Omap. Scorpion also has a deeper pipeline to better handle all that data which I'd assume offsets some of the performance benefits a little bit.
As far as the difference between the two benchmarks, they are written to benchmark two different things. Linpack can run almost entirely within the SIMD/NEON portion of the cpu thereby showing off the enhancements made by Qualcomm. Quadrant stresses the entire core showing off total system performance showing that only in certain situations will Snapdragon outperform any other Arm based core.

shep211 said:
I have been worried about this. The sgs line and droid line do not get over 15 in linpack with 2.2. I dont see the same increase in speed as I do with snapdragon based phones. I have read this is due to the snapdragon having 128 bit vs 64 bit something but cant find the forum post about this. The sgs line with 2.1 is still faster then a 2.2 snapdragon based phone but it must have the lag fix installed. Without the lag fix it is slower for sure. I will try to find the forum post about 128bit vs 64bit.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKsAUR61ByM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji49qFNxC4c
Edit: found the forum post
Originally Posted by Gimic26
Your question was answered already...it comes down to processor architecture. Qualcomm's Snapdragon platform and more specifically the Scorpion application processor, while being related to TI's Omap Arm series, has enhancements made by Qualcomm. The part of the cpu that handles the SIMD instructions has a wider pipeline, 128 bits vs 64 bits in TI's Omap. Scorpion also has a deeper pipeline to better handle all that data which I'd assume offsets some of the performance benefits a little bit.
As far as the difference between the two benchmarks, they are written to benchmark two different things. Linpack can run almost entirely within the SIMD/NEON portion of the cpu thereby showing off the enhancements made by Qualcomm. Quadrant stresses the entire core showing off total system performance showing that only in certain situations will Snapdragon outperform any other Arm based core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've seen and read, the 2.2 builds for the Galaxy S do NOT have a JIT compiler enabled which explains the lower scores. The N1 got the huge CPU boost from having JIT enabled. That doesn't explain the Droid X's scores, but then again I haven't read enough about 2.2 running on the DX to see if it has JIT installed.

What're you think? I'll buy SGS 2.1 or wait for SGS 2.2 ?
It's very important to buy most powerfull phone.
I like Nexuse cus it's tested sucssasfuly in Android 2.2 and I'm gono love SGS if it will be better than nexus in 2.2.
Help me to choose better path )

Vogie said:
What're you think? I'll buy SGS 2.1 or wait for SGS 2.2 ?
It's very important to buy most powerfull phone.
I like Nexuse cus it's tested sucssasfuly in Android 2.2 and I'm gono love SGS if it will be better than nexus in 2.2.
Help me to choose better path )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would wait at this time before purchasing an SGS if that's your concern.
Out of the box, the current phone/software is laggy and disappointing. If you're willing to hack it with some of the various fixes found here (I prefer samset with mimocan kernel), then you won't be unhappy with the phone, but there's no guarantee that Samsung will get FroYo right, and that if they do get it wrong that the devs here will be able to bring you a hot, non-laggy, super FroYo ROM before there's better, or at least comparable hardware done right by the manufacturer available.
That's no reflection on the devs here at all, I'm just thinking that Samsung won't release the firmware until the end of September, the devs will need a couple of weeks to make magic at least, and so now we're well into October. By October, the SGS will be a six month old phone. Six months is a very long time in the Android hardware world, and we'll likely see a landslide of new phones with faster CPU, maybe even dual-cores in the fall for the holiday season. The only thing the SGS will have over other phones at that point is the Super AMOLED screen by Samsung, since they're holding it all to themselves. I wouldn't be surprised if Moto or HTC try to kang the iPhone display tech for newer models if they can't get Super AMOLED for themselves.

In the android world it is nearly impossible to but a device that won't be out of date within at most a year and sometimes within 6 months.
Having said that, I don't see anything that will topple the sgs quite that soon. Although there is talk of dual core snap dragons, there has been nothing announced yet, and indeed the two new Desire handsets are still on the same chip.
I wouldn't expect to see anything that will have more raw power than the sgs until at least mid 2011. If there was anything closer than that it'd already be getting hyped.
If you keep looking at what is just over the horizon then you won't end up ever getting one, because there always seems to be something new out in a few months time. The sgs isn't prefect, but it beats the hell it of most anything that you'll be able to buy this year.
My humble opinion of course, but I think that if you want top end hardware, the sgs will serve you very well.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

Based on your responses so far, I'd just get an iPhone 4 and be done with it.
There are a lot of people here and elsewhere who are perfectly happy with the device. I for one haven't installed the lag fix and I don't experience any lags, except for the situations below:
1. I'm trying to do something while there are several apps being installed/downloaded from the marketplace in the background. I think this will be resolved with the dualcore next gen CPU's.
2. Using LauncherPro, for all that is good and nice on this earth, I do not know why it took me 3 months before the option to change the shortcut on its drawer was shown to me. Imagine that, 3 months just to show the option to add a shortcut. Jeezus. I click on add shortcut and it took 3 months. Someone shoot me. I'm using ADW now and am very happy.
Out of sheer curiosity, why is it that you need "THE MOST POWERFUL PHONE"?

shep211 said:
As far as the difference between the two benchmarks, they are written to benchmark two different things. Linpack can run almost entirely within the SIMD/NEON portion of the cpu thereby showing off the enhancements made by Qualcomm. Quadrant stresses the entire core showing off total system performance showing that only in certain situations will Snapdragon outperform any other Arm based core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The hummingbird core is widely recognized to be faster than the snapdragon core. Benchmarks do not tell you everything. Reference:
You might think that the Hummingbird doesn’t stand a chance against Qualcomm’s custom-built monster, but Samsung isn’t prepared to throw in the towel. In response to Snapdragon, they hired Intrinsity, a semiconductor company specializing in tweaking processor logic design, to customize the Cortex-A8 in the Hummingbird to perform certain binary functions using significantly less instructions than normal. Samsung estimates that 20% of the Hummingbird’s functions are affected, and of those, on average 25-50% less instructions are needed to complete each task. Overall, the processor can perform tasks 5-10% more quickly while handling the same 2 instructions per clock cycle as an unmodified ARM Cortex-A8 processor, and Samsung states it outperforms all other processors on the market (a statement seemingly aimed at Qualcomm).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is a GPU comparison for some of the leading smartphones:
Motorola Droid: TI OMAP3430 with PowerVR SGX530 = 7-14 million(?) triangles/sec
Nexus One: Qualcomm QSD8x50 with Adreno 200 = 22 million triangles/sec
iPhone 3G S: 600 MHz Cortex-A8 with PowerVR SGX535 = 28 7 million triangles/sec
Samsung Galaxy S: S5PC110 with PowerVR SGX540 = 90 million triangles/sec
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Wait for G2 as nexus one is old news and i think they are winding down production. Frankly i love my sgs. Get it now cos frankly froyo is way over hyped compared to what sgs can do now with a lagfix
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

ickyboo said:
Wait for G2 as nexus one is old news and i think they are winding down production. Frankly i love my sgs. Get it now cos frankly froyo is way over hyped compared to what sgs can do now with a lagfix
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't really say froyo is over hyped, I mean its free, and beyond that its an incremental upgrade.
I don't see why anyone would be staying on eclair once official froyo drops, and you can't deny that it will bring a performance boost.
Now I doubt it will bring quite as much of a boost as it gave to the N1 until we get a few months of development to really get it running sweetly, but all the same its still not over hyped if I ask me.
With optimized ROMs and whatever fixes we need (cuz samsung WILL break something) I figure the sgs will shred the N1's new scores. I recon we'll see around 3k in quadrant.
Considering how far ahead of almost everything a lag fixed non-stock-rom sgs is now, we'll see something really special once froyo starts rocking our crotches.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App

The.Opethian said:
Based on your responses so far, I'd just get an iPhone 4 and be done with it.
There are a lot of people here and elsewhere who are perfectly happy with the device. I for one haven't installed the lag fix and I don't experience any lags, except for the situations below:
1. I'm trying to do something while there are several apps being installed/downloaded from the marketplace in the background. I think this will be resolved with the dualcore next gen CPU's.
2. Using LauncherPro, for all that is good and nice on this earth, I do not know why it took me 3 months before the option to change the shortcut on its drawer was shown to me. Imagine that, 3 months just to show the option to add a shortcut. Jeezus. I click on add shortcut and it took 3 months. Someone shoot me. I'm using ADW now and am very happy.
Out of sheer curiosity, why is it that you need "THE MOST POWERFUL PHONE"?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why powerfull phone? ok i'll tell u:
Because I don't like to buy an expensive phone (like SGS) that power is lesser than a chipper phone (like N1) !
Because I'd rather a phone without stalling (lagging) to play games and running big applications. I will very gray if i'll se lagging/stalling...
Because I need a phone with a good support (it's enough, don't need mazing support). a phone with a clear (alive or nice) Future

JIT for Hummingbird should be promising.

High Mem
anyone got any idea on the high mem issue?... when i was browsing the Gmarket.com, i realize 305 total available memory is not enough for me... and the web page just closed....

[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.

My Own LG 2x GLbenchmark VS Exynos

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

[Q] i9000 or i9001?

I want to buy a Galaxy S but... which is better? Galaxy S Plus has a few custom roms.. But its 1400 mhz.. hummingbird or scorpion? I'm a noob on these smartphones. some people say Galaxy S's processor is better than SGS+'s.. Which could I buy? Thanks.

I will recommend paying a few more and go for galaxy r .

Samsung Hummingbird is the best single-core chipset. ARM Cortex-A8 with PowerVR SGX540 = awesome combination.

..

Bes05 said:
The sgs+ is better compared to hardware, (there is the + for) but in my opinion the sgs is a better choice cause there are more people with this phone.. more people = more devs = more custom roms
And if you can pay more.. sgs2 is a much better choice
Sent from my Galaxy S i9000 - ICS
sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you. i9001 have a better hardware but have less devs working on them!

i9000 by far. Much more software, and in my opinion better machine.
BR

I'm running 1400 mhz on stock voltage of 1000 mhz. And -125 mv undervolted all of other frequencies.
Also I have a hummingbird + powervr 540 gpu
So I have Galaxy S+++

I9000 to the win
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App

i9000+ will provide better web experience from the start thanks to higher cpu frequency, but you can oc i9000 to get pretty much the same effect. You need to decide whether you want customize your phone or use as it is straight grom the box. In terms of graphics i9000 crushes the i9000+, because it's powered by powervr540 while i9000+ uses adreno205 which is older and slower. Also there's the community backup thing. i9000 is one of the most popular and supprted android phones and this will continue even though much more powerful devices are released. It's just so user friendly in so many ways you can't ignore it. My vote would be for i9000, but it all comes down to what do you want from your phone and what are you going to use it for. Either way you go, you'll ebd up with a great sammy phone.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using xda premium

i9001 is a nice choice, but i9000 better because of community and official samsung support.
I'll recommend u to look at the LG Optimus Black - it has almost the same price/specs but it's a newer model, so u'll get a support for a longer time...

I was in same situation as you, I choosed i9000 and I don't regret it - you can OC the CPU and the PowerVR SGX540 is much better than Adreno 205 + more ROMs and mods, bigger community, more people with this phone. I get around 3500 score in Quadrant benchmark.

..

Look guys i know all people owning the i9000 are very proud of the powervr sgx540 gpu it uses, but actually adreno 205 is better than sgx 540, samsung has recently updated the adreno 205 gpu drivers in the galaxy w which uses the same chipset as the i9001, those who have the i9001 can download these egl drivers from here "http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1376462"
i have personally tested both the phones. the i9001 is in fact a good choice, the 1.4 ghz snapdragon cpu is the best single core processor i have seen, I don't want to hurt anyone here but all phones get old after sometime, the i9000 cant stay on the top always,and now we have the dual cores ready to woop our ares anytime

galaxy s i9000
for sure
DO THANK if you feel i helped you

Definitely the I9000! The latest stock rom (JW1) is incredibly smooth!

nail16 said:
Look guys i know all people owning the i9000 are very proud of the powervr sgx540 gpu it uses, but actually adreno 205 is better than sgx 540, samsung has recently updated the adreno 205 gpu drivers in the galaxy w which uses the same chipset as the i9001, those who have the i9001 can download these egl drivers from here "http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1376462"
i have personally tested both the phones. the i9001 is in fact a good choice, the 1.4 ghz snapdragon cpu is the best single core processor i have seen, I don't want to hurt anyone here but all phones get old after sometime, the i9000 cant stay on the top always,and now we have the dual cores ready to woop our ares anytime
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Adreno 205 is not better, it's a piece of crap actually. 265m fillrate? that is the same as PowerVR MBX lite. PowerVR GPUs have much higher fillrate 1G fillrate which ensures gameloft games can be rendered with A.I. with lots of activities on screen. Adreno 205 renders OpenGL benchmark at very low choppy frame rates with disappearing polygons while PowerVR GSX 540 runs it smoothly without graphics glitches.
The 1.4GHz snapdragon processor is indeed better for multi-tasking, but what is the use of a faster processor with a combination of a ****ty GPU?

Not everybody is dependant on a gamer GPU. I personally don't play any games at all on my phone. So this depends on what you want your phone to deliver.

Go for Galaxy R
Go for Galaxy R, as samsung will be providing ICS for Galaxy R and Galaxy S2....

puneetgandhi said:
Go for Galaxy R, as samsung will be providing ICS for Galaxy R and Galaxy S2....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't that only available for Roger's network in the USA and not worldwide?

you can't get the answer here... because most of the guys here have Galaxy S i9000, so they have to defend they're own device lol!!! and for all you guys here who doesn't know anything about "GPU's" i can give you a quiick info. here is a simple benchmark by two of the most respectable benchmarking groups anandtech and mobiletechworld.
http://www.mobiletechworld.com/2010...-vs-sgx540-htc-desire-hd-vs-samsung-galaxy-s/
PowerVR SGX540 is a beast but Adreno 205 held its floor against it and wins by inches at the majority of categories. (slap on the face of the sgx540) users hahahahaha :silly:

Galaxy S4 and G2 are faster than G2

I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?

Not sure why you are comparing benchmarks on phones http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/

The only thing I care is real world performance and thermal throttling.
How is it running Real Racing 3 and other super-demanding games?

& this is why benchmarks are pure BS.
Here is a more realistic comparison in speed between the Galaxy S4 & the N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-F6bJ218Bc&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4

ste1164 said:
Not sure why you are comparing benchmarks on phones http://www.anandtech.com/show/7384/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
very funny, I lost that article.

Android manufacturers are known to optimize for specific benchmarks, Anandtech did an article on this. I will only trust real world performance and analysis by reputable tech sites like AT.

sblantipodi said:
I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google has always throttled their devices. So when you push it to the extremes in benchmarks for 5 min straight it throttles back the CPU therefore giving a lower score. Like said real world performance is what matters.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

Even a 'cheating' S600 phones shouldnt be near an S800 phone. The N5 does seem to have very aggressive throttling indeed, indeed my HTC One beats my N5 in just about all benchmarks. Something im sure the devs will fix soon enough.

ChrisM75 said:
Even a 'cheating' S600 phones shouldnt be near an S800 phone. The N5 does seem to have very aggressive throttling indeed, indeed my HTC One beats my N5 in just about all benchmarks. Something im sure the devs will fix soon enough.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't have any throttling at all.
They just don't play the benchmark game like OEMs do.
The N5 is noticeably faster than an S4 in all tasks yet the S4 scores higher on Antutu for example.
benchmark apps are pure BS.
Which is better - having the fastest smoothest phone available or being slower at everything yet scoring higher on a benchmark app?
People need to get their priorities right.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4

chrisjcks said:
It doesn't have any throttling at all.
They just don't play the benchmark game like OEMs do.
The N5 is noticeably faster than an S4 in all tasks yet the S4 scores higher on Antutu for example.
benchmark apps are pure BS.
Which is better - having the fastest smoothest phone available or being slower at everything yet scoring higher on a benchmark app?
People need to get their priorities right.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ALL phones have thermal throttling, thats not up for debate, what is up for debate is how aggressively they set the limits.
What many here fail to realise is that the 'cheating' that goes on is just thermal management tricks, nothing more than that. Samsung and the others have programs that detect benchmarks launching, and then set the thermal management to very light limits. In the case of the S4 they clock the GPU to the maximum rated limit and dont throttle it down (533MHz), whereas its normally limited to 480 for thermal management reasons. 533 is not an overclock, 480 is an underclock.
An N5 should be faster than an S4 even if the S4 is at 533, so either Google is heavily throttling the N5, or its got some serious optimisation work to do.

Benchmarks mean fcuk all and too be honest if that's all the op cares about them the nexus ain't for him.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

ChrisM75 said:
ALL phones have thermal throttling, thats not up for debate, what is up for debate is how aggressively they set the limits.
What many here fail to realise is that the 'cheating' that goes on is just thermal management tricks, nothing more than that. Samsung and the others have programs that detect benchmarks launching, and then set the thermal management to very light limits. In the case of the S4 they clock the GPU to the maximum rated limit and dont throttle it down (533MHz), whereas its normally limited to 480 for thermal management reasons. 533 is not an overclock, 480 is an underclock.
An N5 should be faster than an S4 even if the S4 is at 533, so either Google is heavily throttling the N5, or its got some serious optimisation work to do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again - look at the video link I posted above against the S4.
Which is better - faster phone throughout or a nice pretty score in a free benchmark app?
When will people learn - these apps are absolute junk and in No Way do they reflect the speed of the device or the power of the internals inside.
It seriously sounds like you'd accept a slower less powerful phone as long as it scored higher on the pretty charts in these apps.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk

Anandtech pointed out that OEMs like Samsung boost CPU & GPU clocks during benchmarks, that's why you get higher numbers.
For Gods sake, it's the same SoC.

sblantipodi said:
I'm trying to understand how a G2 that uses the same Snapdragon 800 and Adreno 330 could be faster than Nexus5.
Is seems that G2 is faster than N5.
Ridiculusly there are many test where Galaxy S4 beats N5.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3uZdVsND1E&feature=youtube_gdata_player
GS4 runs on a Snapdragon 600, how can be faster than N5?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus 5 is absolutely faster than Galaxy S4 in real life usage, no doubt about it. When it comes to G2 its more even between the two.

chrisjcks said:
Again - look at the video link I posted above against the S4.
Which is better - faster phone throughout or a nice pretty score in a free benchmark app?
When will people learn - these apps are absolute junk and in No Way do they reflect the speed of the device or the power of the internals inside.
It seriously sounds like you'd accept a slower less powerful phone as long as it scored higher on the pretty charts in these apps.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats not what I said. Read again..
SOME benchmarks are purely about number crunching and the fact is the S800 should wipe the floor with the S600, if its not, something is going on.
While it doesnt matter if the device is smooth in real world usage it still points to the fact that the software needs a lot of optimisation to be done yet.

ChrisM75 said:
Thats not what I said. Read again..
SOME benchmarks are purely about number crunching and the fact is the S800 should wipe the floor with the S600, if its not, something is going on.
While it doesnt matter if the device is smooth in real world usage it still points to the fact that the software needs a lot of optimisation to be done yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not just about smoothness.
Go look at some comparisons of the N5 vs Galaxy S4.
N5 is faster at booting, browsing speed, smoothness, speed of loading of apps, gaming frame rates & loading speeds - basically EVERYTHING!
so you either believe the benchmark app or the actual speeds of the devices.
Simply put - you'd prefer a slower phone so long as it scores higher in these apps.
If you want one of these s600 phones like the S4 & ONE - go & get one! - but don't expect anything to be faster than the N5 just because these free benchmarking apps tell you so.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA-Premium 4

You should change the title. " Galaxy S4 and G2 are faster than G2 "

Lol.
This is the Nexus 4 performance discussion all over again.
Other Manufacturers use specific Dalvic patches that grearly improve performance in benchmarks.
If you really want to compare performance of the SoC use something like Geekbench that runs native
code and not ontop of the Dalvic Virtual Maschine.
---------- Post added at 06:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:46 PM ----------
aletto said:
You should change the title. " Galaxy S4 and G2 are faster than G2 "
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It should be changed to "Galaxy S4 and G2 perform better then the N5 in useless Benchmarks that don't reflect real world performance"

The only thing obvious from the video comparing the N5 to the G2 is the on screen black levels.
Blacks seem blacker on the G2 in menus and in game, the N5's blacks are grayer.
Google doesn't seem to be interested in calibrating their Nexus line screens

Why does my golden retriever outperform my cat in the fishing dead ducks out of the pond test?
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 4