Related
I have a question about the 3D's dual core that I'd like more clarification on the vague answers I'm getting by searching this site and google. So I've read that the core is asynchronous so basically meaning the second core doesn't do much work unless needed as others like the tegra 2 and exynos have both cores running or something similar to that, and that this is affecting the benchmark scores. I also read that one would basically double the score of the 3D to get a more accurate reading. Can anyone confirm or further explain this?
Yes, asynchronous is when something operates on another thread whereas the main thread is still available for operating. This allows for better performance in terms of managing tasks. Now just because it doesn't score high on a benchmark, it doesn't mean it is going to perform. Also this allows for better performance for the battery.
I haven't slept for the past 12 hours so if this doesn't help you, just let me know and I will fully elaborate on how the processor will operate on the phone. Now time for bed :'(
In short, asynchronous operation means that a process operates independently of other processes.
Think of transferring a file. A separate thread will utilized for doing so. You will then be able to do background things such as playing with the UI, such as Sense since you will be using the main thread. If anything were to happen to the transferring file (such as it failing), you will be able to cancel it because it is independent on another thread.
I hope this makes sense man, kind of tired. Now I'm really going to bed.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.
donatom3 said:
To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This too
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I was also very curious to learn a little more about the async cores and how it differes from a standard "Always-On" dual core arctechiure.
Thh first page/video I found talks about the SnapDragon core specifically.
http://socialtimes.com/dual-core-snapdragon-processor-qualcomm-soundbytes_b49063
From what I've gathered, it comes down to using the second core and thus more power, only when needed. Minimizing voltage and heat to preserve battery life.
The following video goes into similar and slightly deeper detail about the processor specifically found in the EVO 3D. The demo is running a processor benchmark with a visual real time usage of the two cores. You can briefly see how the two cores are trading off the workload between each other. It was previously mentioned somewhere else on this forum, but I believe by seperating a workload between two chips, the chip will use less power across the two chips vs putting the same workload on a sinlge chip. I'm sure someone else will chime in with some additional detail. Also, after seeing some of these demos, I'm inclined to think that the processor found in the EVO 3D is actually stable at 1.5 but has been underclocked to 1.2 to conserve battery. Only time spent within our hands will tell.
Another demo of the MSM8660 and Adreno 220 GPU found in the EVO 3D. Its crazy to think we've come this far for mobile phone technology.
What occurred to me is how complex Community ROMs for such a device may become with the addition of Video Drivers that may continue to be upgraded and improved (think early Video Card tweaks for PC). Wondering how easy/difficult it will be to get our hands on them, possibly through extraction of updated stock ROMs.
EDIT: As far as benchmarks are concerned, I blame the inability of today's bench marking apps to consider async cores or properly utilize them during testing to factor the over all score. Because the current tests are most likely to be spread across cores which favors efficiency, the scores are going to be much lower than what the true power and performance of the chips can produce. I think of it as putting a horsepower governor on a Ferrari.
thanks for the explanation everyone
The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.
Harfainx said:
The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I was thinking that not just the battery savings but there could be a performance gain. Think of this if the manufacturer knows they only have to clock one core up to speed when needed they can be more aggressive about their timings and have the core clock up faster than a normal dual core would since they know they don't have to clock up both processors when only one needs the full speed.
I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.
I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.
mevensen said:
I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.
I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App
RVDigital said:
The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went through all of your links, I didn't see anything that confirms that the benches are somehow affected by the asynchronous nature of the chipset. It's not that I don't believe you, I actually had that same theory when the benches first came out. I just don't have any proof or explanation of it. Do you have a link that provides more solid evidence that this is the case?
NVIDIA actually tells a different story (of course)
http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/24/nvidia-tegra-2-outperforms-qualcomm-dualcore-1015/
AnandTech's article does explain some of the differences
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/4
It appears that Snapdragon (Scorpion) will excel in some tasks (FPU, non-bandwith constrained applications), but will fall short in others .
I'm pretty sure none of the benchmark apps have even been updated past the release of the sensation so yeah....How could they update the app to use the asynchronus processors the if the only phones to use them have only recently been released.
Sent from my zombified gingerbread hero using XDA Premium App
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
tyarbro13 said:
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, if someone were to develop an app for that. I do not see why not.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Hmm...
If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.
I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...
Ex:
2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.
The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...
Maedhros said:
Hmm...
If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.
I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...
Ex:
2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.
The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
tyarbro13 said:
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is something that the hardware needs to be capable of. Software can only do so much. As far as I've seen Tegra isn't capable of it.
I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.
DDiaz007 said:
There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?
nkd said:
I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What?!?
Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.
The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.
Arm 7 vs arm 9?
Maedhros said:
Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?
What?!?
Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.
The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.
Arm 7 vs arm 9?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude go back to sleep. You have no clue what you are talking about.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
I've noticed that the evo 3d has been scoring lower than the sensation, which is spec'd performance-wise. Exactly the same except for the evo having more ram. So I don't really understand why it would eb scoeing lower
Also if you're here to try and dispute the credibility of benchmarks leave now because that's not the point of this topic.
Sent from my G2X
Well, the Evo 3D does have the ability to do 3D, so I imagine it will take up some resources, but I have a feeling that the benchmark scores will only get better as HTC and Sprint release updates and fixes for it.
Probably the bloatware
Benchmarks are boo boo! For a benchmark to read correctly the cores need to be ramped up to max for the test. The app does not draw full ramp from the dual cores. Plus they are asynchronous, once we root and have kernel source for added tweeks we will blow tegra away (even with tegra tweeked)!
For the most part synthetic benchmarks are not really useful. How much are they off anyways? I'll bet you'll never notice the difference.
Swyped from my Atari 2600
because you touch yourself at night.
cordell12 said:
Benchmarks are boo boo! For a benchmark to read correctly the cores need to be ramped up to max for the test. The app does not draw full ramp from the dual cores. Plus they are asynchronous, once we root and have kernel source for added tweeks we will blow tegra away (even with tegra tweeked)!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
pretty much what I came into say. the Nexus S scores don't blow you away before you root either,but once Rooted, it is capable of truly amazing power.
pretty much every review says the Evo 3d feels much faster and much more fluid than the sensation.
hondarider525 said:
because you touch yourself at night.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LMAO!
10 char
the processor is an ASYNC and the cores are able to run at different speeds for different task. The programs testing are better suited to your normal SYNC processor which are both always running at full all the time.
The need to write code to take advantage of the ASYNC and its methods to reach max must be included in the programming before they will ever be able to measure the full potential of the ASYNC.
you could say in those test I could garuntee you one processor is running max one is not. if at all. But if it is. its just a little as the program has not told it to run both processors at max if its a ASYNC,
ADD the qHD and the program would need to account for that.
imagine if the screen was amoled or just 800 x 480. this thing would be brutal beast.
but at the end of the day I love HTC phones.
HTC Sense is known to produce low benchmark scores. Once AOSP gets on this baby, it will fly through the irrelevant benchmarks like nothing.
Not only that but benchmarks are known to produce pointless infighting and petty bickering over measures that are not only highly suspect but also not related to actual use...
...or so the old wives tale goes...
Sent from my PC36100
xdmds said:
I've noticed that the evo 3d has been scoring lower than the sensation, which is spec'd performance-wise. Exactly the same except for the evo having more ram. So I don't really understand why it would eb scoeing lower
Also if you're here to try and dispute the credibility of benchmarks leave now because that's not the point of this topic.
Sent from my G2X
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, check out Anandtech's bench of the Evo 3D and Sensation from a couple of weeks ago, and the check out the same bench of those 2 devices when they tested the Droid 3 a couple of days ago.
Comparing the scores, the 3vo scored the same both times. First time it was higher than the Sensation, and second time lower. So somewhere in between, the Sensation got a software update that made it score higher on those benchmarks. I'm guessing we'll see the same kind of improvement with the 3vo in time.
leaving now. Just beating a dead horse here, this has been debated a million times.
your holding it wrong?
NewZJ said:
your holding it wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah he should call up for his free rubber band.
freeza said:
HTC Sense is known to produce low benchmark scores. Once AOSP gets on this baby, it will fly through the irrelevant benchmarks like nothing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I did run asop on my evo no way will an asop rom touch my evo 3d. Sense 3.0 is great and I doubt asop will supoort 3d.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using XDA Premium App
I hate people who point out benchmarks on a phone... :|
LOL if htc's scrap snapdragon duel core had good benchmarks I bet all of you would be posting about how elite your phone is and how good it does in benchmarks but since it sucks you say benchmarks don't matter. Don't fool yourself benchmarks do matter. Yes quadrant can be tricked by unlocked phones with edits but benchmarks ran on tegra 2 & crap snapdragon using smartbench 2011 (does use both cores) gives realistic performance.
evo 3d
2089 cpu
1648 gpu (lol slower then galaxy s 1)
tegra 2 (stock atrix 2.3.4 with crap motoblur)
2737 cpu
2661 gpu
tegra 2 overclocked
3989 cpu
2900 gpu
shep211 said:
LOL if htc's scrap snapdragon duel core had good benchmarks I bet all of you would be posting about how elite your phone is and how good it does in benchmarks but since it sucks you say benchmarks don't matter. Don't fool yourself benchmarks do matter. Yes quadrant can be tricked by unlocked phones with edits but benchmarks ran on tegra 2 & crap snapdragon using smartbench 2011 (does use both cores) gives realistic performance.
evo 3d
2089 cpu
1648 gpu (lol slower then galaxy s 1)
tegra 2 (stock atrix 2.3.4 with crap motoblur)
2737 cpu
2661 gpu
tegra 2 overclocked
3989 cpu
2900 gpu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bro its because tegra manages different. Tegra uses both cores to do one single task. While the EVO 3D chip set is asynchronous. This means when you run a benchmark only one core is being processed during that application. The other core is running other processes to keep your EVO lag free and running smoothly. Benchmark is only a number anyway.
Remember this tho forever. benchmarks are like a girl in a bikini, they show a lot but not quite everything.
Sent from a dual core beast 3VO. Do this on your iFail 4
I finally found a comparable tegra 2 bench posted online in a droid x 2 review, both devices have a qHD screen. It's looking like the hardware we have here isn't particularly impressive, and let's not even go there with the Galaxy s 2 *shudder*, it's a massacre.
I was to understand that the Qualcomm/Adreno setup was going to at least be competitive, and was supposed to be all out superior to Tegra 2. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Levito said:
I finally found a comparable tegra 2 bench posted online in a droid x 2 review, both devices have a qHD screen. It's looking like the hardware we have here isn't particularly impressive, and let's not even go there with the Galaxy s 2 *shudder*, it's a massacre.
I was to understand that the Qualcomm/Adreno setup was going to at least be competitive, and was supposed to be all out superior to Tegra 2. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't look at benchmarks too much... but it can download n' upload like a God that's its power tool
My overlocked 1.5 Ghz tegra 2 lags behind my EVO 3D but it scores 900 more points in quadrant so my epeen feels alright. Seriously most of these benchmarks are not coded well.
I think the 3vo uses only one core with quadrant. You have to use a dual core benchmark test like CF Bench for better results. Then again benchmarks really don't mean much.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Benchmarks are nearly useless measures.
Using benchmarks to determine real world performance is like licking your finger and sticking it up in the air to determine how fast the wind is moving.
Yeah, it'll put you roughly in the ballpark--roughly. But that ''ballpark'' is big enough to drive a couple dump trucks through...
Both the droid x2 and the galaxy s2 aren't running sense, which usually drags down bench marks even though the phone is silky smooth. Benchmarks may be useful for testing modifications on the same phone, but not for comparing different phones. Just ask yourself... Does it seem to suffer to you?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Who gives a #$% about benchmarks, all I know is that this thing is fast, way faster than the EVO. I have a gTablet (tegra 2, Honeycomb) that runs games very well and this 3VO runs the same games but only smoother and faster, no hiccups at all. Totally happy here and I have like 200 apps on this thing and I have like 280 megs left.
Oh, and my gTablet is clocked to 1.5ghz!
G_Dmaxx said:
Who gives a #$% about benchmarks, all I know is that this thing is fast, way faster than the EVO. I have a gTablet (tegra 2, Honeycomb) that runs games very well and this 3VO runs the same games but only smoother and faster, no hiccups at all. Totally happy here and I have like 200 apps on this thing and I have like 280 megs left.
Oh, and my gTablet is clocked to 1.5ghz!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously my Tegra 2 Transformer has nothing on my EVO 3D. Why people look only at benchmarks and not what is in front of them I have no clue.
danaff37 said:
Both the droid x2 and the galaxy s2 aren't running sense, which usually drags down bench marks even though the phone is silky smooth. Benchmarks may be useful for testing modifications on the same phone, but not for comparing different phones. Just ask yourself... Does it seem to suffer to you?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've actually never had an AOSP rom run all that much faster than a Sense rom. Enough of a variance to say that there isn't a difference at all.
Like many others have pointed out. Quadrants is a terrible bench for dualcore phones until it's updated. When it reads off a bunch of question marks as the evo3ds CPU, CPU speed,etc. You know its not going to be a reliable test.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Go to anand-tech for the Adreno 220 benches... It crushed the competition so maybe that'll make you feel better.
1 possible reason why the EVO 3D isn't scoring as high as you expect is because I think the benchmark tests don't utilize CPU's with asynchonous dual cores correctly.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Galaxy uses synchonous cores which mean they can only work on the same thing at the same time, they can't work on separate operations at the same time.
The EVO 3D has asynchonous cores which allow for true multitasking meaning each core will work on separate tasks. As I understand it, support for this type of CPU is going to be added in Android 2.4 and later, but don't quote me on that.
LOL @ benchmarks
DDiaz007 said:
Go to anand-tech for the Adreno 220 benches... It crushed the competition so maybe that'll make you feel better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any similar comparisons to the exynos/mali(?) that the sgs 2 is packing?
Some of the above statements about asynchronous processing do make me feel better if true.
Levito said:
Any similar comparisons to the exynos/mali(?) that the sgs 2 is packing?
Some of the above statements about asynchronous processing do make me feel better if true.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not feel good in the first place?
This phone screams. You're comparing it to a Moto phone with Tegra 2 which will likely be one of the last new phones with Tegra 2. Enjoy the 3D. By the time something comes around to crush it, we'll be into 4 core territory, or Android will be updated to better support multiple cores (if I remember right, this was only really started for 3.0).
I'll agree the SGS2 seems like a killer but I'll take HTC build quality over Samsung any day of the week. Plus, let's see Exynos pushing qHD.
No I hear you. Truth is that there probably won't be any software written for quite sometime that is going to really push our current hardware. Besides I upgrade every year or so anyway, making future proofing less of an issue for me.
It's the principle of the thing.
Levito said:
No I hear you. Truth is that there probably won't be any software written for quite sometime that is going to really push our current hardware. Besides I upgrade every year or so anyway, making future proofing less of an issue for me.
It's the principle of the thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear ya too, but you gotta try not to get caught up in numbers. Numbers can be manipulated. Manufacturers can tune their phones to perform better in Quadrant (this can also be done with custom ROMs; when it is, performance in other categories suffers). AMD and Intel still participate in this ePeen warfare.
I won't be surprised if we see that Evo 3D outperforms the Tegra Moto overall.
The good thing is, we will eventually see this thing rooted completely (hopefully not after it's lost most of its luster). THEN we will see what we can push out of this phone. Look how fast it's running sense. Imagine a vanilla Android experience on it, or an overclock to say, 1.8 GHz (which will probably happen). I dunno about you but I'm salivating.
Ok, the only benchmark I need to know is that my phone boots up from "off" in 10-12 seconds. Base your satisfaction on a constant, not on relativism.
megatron-g1 said:
1 possible reason why the EVO 3D isn't scoring as high as you expect is because I think the benchmark tests don't utilize CPU's with asynchonous dual cores correctly.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Galaxy uses synchonous cores which mean they can only work on the same thing at the same time, they can't work on separate operations at the same time.
The EVO 3D has asynchonous cores which allow for true multitasking meaning each core will work on separate tasks. As I understand it, support for this type of CPU is going to be added in Android 2.4 and later, but don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be no difference to code for asynchronous or synchronous. The cores will run at full speed if they're pushed. Quadrant scores are more based on database read and write speeds than anything.
I've owned many many phones, and this one is by far the most fluid (although I have not had hands on with the Galaxy SII, but I hate Samsung's software)
I haven't run into a case where the phone stutters, have you?
I believe in the Anandtech benchmarks, they used a developer phone that has the same qualcomm chipset running at the stock 1.5ghz, while our phones were downclocked to 1.2ghz.
They might have done this for various reasons, it would be interesting to see how our phones overclock and if there's any changes in battery life.
I've been looking for a more technical analysis of these SOCs and I have been trying to learn how the async CPU setup on the MSM8660 affects performance.
Nvidia claims that the power saving feature of our CPU (async) will inevitably cause a decrease in performance:
http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/2...ed&utm_campaign=Feed:+IntoMobile+(IntoMobile)
Does anyone have any comments on this? If this is the case, I am wondering if through software we can force both cores to run at the same voltage/frequency. I wonder if it would cause an increase in performance (at least in benchmarking). Many claim that the Evo 3d only gets medicore benchmark scores due to having asynchronous cores that are not being accurately benched. It would be interesting to verify this claim.
Also, does anyone know which SOC between the three I listed in the title is the highest in performance (not talking about useless benchmarks like quadrant)?
So....there is possibly a 10–15% decrease in performance.....that's fine with me. Most of the time you won't even notice until you run benchmarks and looks at the numbers.
SetCPU + Performance mode are all you should need
DarkManX4lf said:
So....there is possibly a 10–15% decrease in performance.....that's fine with me. Most of the time you won't even notice until you run benchmarks and looks at the numbers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well the 10-15% slower is nVidia's claim, not sure if its true.
Does that make both cores run at the same time or running cores at the same time not possible due to the processor
xHausx said:
SetCPU + Performance mode are all you should need
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
ttieder said:
Does that make both cores run at the same time or running cores at the same time not possible due to the processor
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will keep the cpu running at full speed. Which core gets used for what depends on a lot of things but it mostly depends on how the apps and kernel are programmed.
xHausx said:
It will keep the cpu running at full speed. Which core gets used for what depends on a lot of things but it mostly depends on how the apps and kernel are programmed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but is it possible to keep both cores at their full frequency? Setting the exynos or tegra 2 on performance mode makes both cores stay at their maximum frequency since they are synchronous. I think setting performance mode on the Evo 3d would only guarantee that one of the core will remain at its full frequency.
Not sure about this of course. Anyone have any insight into this?
Second Core wouldnt kick in if ur not heavily multitasking or running multithreaded apps and u wouldnt need second core for minor multitasking or single threaded operations as single core is enough
i will tell you that on paper the msmx60 should beat out all, but in real world use, the exynos hammers everything. the s2 is a beast
The Exynos is the better SoC, plain and simple. If we get into GPU discussions, the Adreno 220 is the best, as in better than Mali 400.. Go to Anandtech, and watch them use a Qualcomm device for the benches.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Is it a "for sure" thing that ICS will use the GPU acceleration in the OS? Or is that just everyone's hopes and dreams
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA Premium App
You could program the kernel to keep both cores at max frequency. Im not a developer but am sure something like this could be done
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk
bballer71418 said:
Is it a "for sure" thing that ICS will use the GPU acceleration in the OS? Or is that just everyone's hopes and dreams
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ics will include all of the features that honeycomb has and honeycomb has 2d acceleration so yes
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA Premium App
Maybe we should make some real world benchmarks and get some SGS2 people in on it. Like how fast a particular app opens(say angry birds), How many fps a game plays at, Convert a file to another format, complete a 5 step plan to take over the world things like that. Alot of things like that are how reviewers rate and test things like new video cards and cpus plus all the benchmark programs.
I used to use a program called fraps to see how many fps my pc games were playing at so I could tweak stuff( long live unreal tournament!!!!). It would just display the fps in the top corner of the screen.
Also comparing the 3vo and SGS2 will really heat up when we get root and CM7. 400mb less roms have gatta make a huge difference on performance. I dunno about you guys but I haven't been able clog up my 3vo yet(and I've been trying!), I'm pretty impressed with the hardware so far.
Drewmungus said:
Maybe we should make some real world benchmarks and get some SGS2 people in on it. Like how fast a particular app opens(say angry birds), How many fps a game plays at, Convert a file to another format, complete a 5 step plan to take over the world things like that. Alot of things like that are how reviewers rate and test things like new video cards and cpus plus all the benchmark programs.
I used to use a program called fraps to see how many fps my pc games were playing at so I could tweak stuff( long live unreal tournament!!!!). It would just display the fps in the top corner of the screen.
Also comparing the 3vo and SGS2 will really heat up when we get root and CM7. 400mb less roms have gatta make a huge difference on performance. I dunno about you guys but I haven't been able clog up my 3vo yet(and I've been trying!), I'm pretty impressed with the hardware so far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Fraps tends to lie with FPS.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
GPU acceleration will be nice. Hope we see ICS soon.
Sent from my EVO 3D w/ Tapatalk
It is known that the MSM8660 can achieve higher clock frequencies than the Exynos, though clock for clock the Exynos has better IPC.
As of right now the GSII beats the 3VO in both benchmarks and real world tests, but I suspect this is because Sense is a pig that takes far too much ram and system resources. HTC also seems to have poorer unoptimized drivers. In addition to this, the async CPUs of the 3VO may not be properly tested by current benchmarking tools.
I think comparing a rooted 3VO and a rooted GSII should be much closer. Imagine the MSM8660 at 1.8-2.0 Ghz both cores running full frequency with no Sense and other bloat to slow it down. Combine that with a hardware accelerated GUI and this phone should be amazing.
The Adreno GPU will get better over time... and will develop much faster than before. Since Qualcomm purchased the branch from AMD (ATi), there has been much improvement in a reasonably small amount of time. There are various claims that the Adreno 220 outperforms the Tegra 2. I havent seen a solid comparison of the Adreno 220 vs the Exynos although I have read that the Exynos is a very capable processor.
As they both stand in stock offering, the Samsung GS2 will be faster; it has tremendous less resources to move. I agree with what has been said about root & rom options: CM7 on the EVO 3D will likely result in unprecedented (real world) benchmarks .Also note that the current Android releases are not yet optimized for dual/quad core management. But rest assured, it is well under development and the Sprint EVO 4G4D (hypothetical name) will behold a treasure trove of menacing capabilities.
HTC + Qualcomm + Android = Future
I think we should just wait until we can do a head-to-head AOSP CM 7 benchmark/real world test to see what happens. I'm confident the SGSII will get shredded by the E3D.
It seems unfair to compare anything within the phone itself now, because of what each phone has to run. Sense is pretty tasking on our phones and I can't say as much for the opposition.
It's funny to see NVIDIA make snide comments about Qualcomm when their phones are getting bested. Although I must say it is impressive to see that Tegra 2 phones are over a year old and keeping up with the E3D's dual-core deliciousness.
Just my thoughts.
Personally I don't believe Nvidia, plenty of benchmarks contradict their statement. That and whoever said "Additionally, the operating systems like Android and many apps aren’t set up for an asynchronous architecture." is an idiot because 99% of apps in the market don't support dual core lmfao.
I figured I would run quadrant stand and see what I got and I got some interesting results. I got a score of 1830 which is a little bit less then what people have gotten on my phone the Samsung Galaxy Prevail which is a lowend single core 800 MHz Qualcomm MSM7627-3 plus the phone only has 384megs of ram. On top of that quarant says the device only has 1 core so Im not sure whats going on with that
I really don't care for quadrant -- at all. It provides far too divergent results on different devices of the same model/SW, it often does not use all available resources to test a device, and I find its results far too inconsistent to be worth regarding as anything other than a random grouping of numbers.
Im just wondering what other apps see the cpu as 1 core and not the dualcore it really is like quadrant does.
This section is not for discussions like this. This is more suited to the general section.
Moved to General
Montisaquadeis said:
Im just wondering what other apps see the cpu as 1 core and not the dualcore it really is like quadrant does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nook Tablet usually turns off the second core in order to conserve battery power. I don't know what the conditions are wherein it will spin up the other core.
hmm could be why some apps are a bit slower then others. and why a lowend smartphone is getting better quadrant scores then this dualcore of a monster
Montisaquadeis said:
I figured I would run quadrant stand and see what I got and I got some interesting results. I got a score of 1830 which is a little bit less then what people have gotten on my phone the Samsung Galaxy Prevail which is a lowend single core 800 MHz Qualcomm MSM7627-3 plus the phone only has 384megs of ram. On top of that quarant says the device only has 1 core so Im not sure whats going on with that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Mine got 2140. And a phone with a 800 mhz processor cant reach that unless it is rooted and overclocked. Only on CPU i got around 1500 points. So that means with custom rom the graphics can be improved and with overclock i think it will be able to reach at least around 3500. And quadrant its not so accurate either.
If you check this thread you will see a couple of people that are running CM7 have gotten 1900-2100 scores
http://androidforums.com/galaxy-prevail-all-things-root/479489-quadrant-score.html