Today I was showing my cousin Panda Run (copy of temple run, but is playable)
She downloaded it on her galaxy mini (exactly same specs as O1, but with touchwiz and half resolution display) and it had no lag at all!!(I am not saying it was smooth, the 320x240 does not support any smoothness, looks like ****)
Ok, but why did the performance on her phone at 245/600 (not rooted or anything, actually full of bloat) was higher than my phone on ICS at 320/787? (best performance I ever had)
Here is what I think:
1. The display makes it look lagless (like old phones with no possibility of smoothness, those had no lag)
2. Touchwiz
3. Our phone really sucks
4. Because of low resolution, it is 2x less processing...
So, what do you think it is? You can say more...
Seek the signature below the line
vlt96 said:
So, what do you think it is? You can say more...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both the Galaxy Mini and P500 have a Adreno 200 as a GPU.
Since the Galaxy Mini is 240x320, it has to process 76 800 pixels. (240x320=76800)
The P500 is 320x480, so it has to process 153 600 pixels, exactly double that of the Galaxy Mini.
Both phones have the same GPU, but for ours, it has to process double the amount of pixels, so it makes sense for the performance to be half.
An example of this (non-Android), would be the iPad 3 vs iPad 2, although the new GPU is claimed to have 4x the performance (its shown to be close to that through benchmarks), real life performance is lower on the iPad 3 due to the higher resolution of the display.
dancom96 said:
Both the Galaxy Mini and P500 have a Adreno 200 as a GPU.
Since the Galaxy Mini is 240x320, it has to process 76 800 pixels. (240x320=76800)
The P500 is 320x480, so it has to process 153 600 pixels, exactly double that of the Galaxy Mini.
Both phones have the same GPU, but for ours, it has to process double the amount of pixels, so it makes sense for the performance to be half.
An example of this (non-Android), would be the iPad 3 vs iPad 2, although the new GPU is claimed to have 4x the performance (its shown to be close to that through benchmarks), real life performance is lower on the iPad 3 due to the higher resolution of the display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly my 1st thought
Seek the signature below the line
Related
I'm a Samsung fan (even with GPS and Froyo-gate) and have been a Captivate user for 6-7 months. I damn near have my mind set on the S II but that's until I saw the EVO 3D. That phone is niiicceee...
My question is, what's your favorite of the 2? Even though it's a a dual core Qualcom, isn't the EVO still A8 based while the Exynos is A9 so theoretically the S II should be a good percentage faster? The Mali400mp seems to be pretty beastly as well. How would you rate qHD vs SAMOLED+?
Lastly... what is the better advantage of the two: 3D camera capabilities vs NFC?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
qhd is just a resolution nothing else, it means 960x540 while galaxy s2 is 800*480
just another marketing crap tbh.
In terms of image quality, you will never be able to compare a proper oled to any lcd in the world, its just a different technology in a different league, since oled beats the crap out at every aspect, yes (including power consumption in sgs2 at least thats what ive read).
LCD since day 1 has not had any sucesss in image quality, it still stands behind CRT in many aspecs but 1, since its active matrix, the pixel static position helps lcd gain a better advantage at max res in sharpness over crt, and more luminance but thats just it.
OLED again beats lcd in every single aspect and if u like games, the oled 0.01ms pixel response time vs lcd top of the line 2.00ms (GTG) which actually means around 4-5ms real response time is just no competition, again in a whole different league, and no matter what other trolls around the forum try to tell you, yes even at 2ms(gtg) it blurrs like crap at 60fps in a 2d game or any game that u have to move ur camera angle often.
OLED
Hi everyone,
I know 60 fps is a great thing on a smartphone. But with dual cores and high performance GPUs , it would be great to lift the FPS cap that is placed on Galaxy S II and SGS1.
How is it possible to lift the FPS cap on SGS II ? Is it something which can be done once we have the source code for the 2.3.3 which Galaxy S II comes with?
Tegra 2 equipped devices have a limit of over 80 FPS.
I dont want this fix to increase the already ridiculously high Quadrant scores (doesn't equate to real life performance anyway). I want to see how the games would run if the FPS cap is lifted?
lycan_codex said:
Hi everyone,
I know 60 fps is a great thing on a smartphone. But with dual cores and high performance GPUs , it would be great to lift the FPS cap that is placed on Galaxy S II and SGS1.
How is it possible to lift the FPS cap on SGS II ? Is it something which can be done once we have the source code for the 2.3.3 which Galaxy S II comes with?
Tegra 2 equipped devices have a limit of over 80 FPS.
I dont want this fix to increase the already ridiculously high Quadrant scores (doesn't equate to real life performance anyway). I want to see how the games would run if the FPS cap is lifted?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quite likely slower. Big change the screen has a refresh rate of 60 FPS. A danger when running @ higher FPS (aside from the battery use and overheating) is that you may get frame stutter. You shouldn't, but I've seen it happen on more mobile devices.
How come the LG Optimus 2X does 80 fps? is it something to do with the screen refresh ratio of an LCD vs SuperAMOLED ?
lycan_codex said:
How come the LG Optimus 2X does 80 fps? is it something to do with the screen refresh ratio of an LCD vs SuperAMOLED ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They're cheating to get higher benchmark scores.
Capping the frame rate is a good thing, the only reason to uncap it is to find the technical benchmark prowess of the device and not for actual usage.
lycan_codex said:
Hi everyone,
I know 60 fps is a great thing on a smartphone. But with dual cores and high performance GPUs , it would be great to lift the FPS cap that is placed on Galaxy S II and SGS1.
How is it possible to lift the FPS cap on SGS II ? Is it something which can be done once we have the source code for the 2.3.3 which Galaxy S II comes with?
Tegra 2 equipped devices have a limit of over 80 FPS.
I dont want this fix to increase the already ridiculously high Quadrant scores (doesn't equate to real life performance anyway). I want to see how the games would run if the FPS cap is lifted?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Anything higher than the screen refresh rate is a waste of battery used to calculate non-displayed images.
Optimus 2x cheats benchmarks like that.
supercurio said:
Anything higher than the screen refresh rate is a waste of battery used to calculate non-displayed images.
Optimus 2x cheats benchmarks like that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hehehe...thanks for pointing that supercurio...
supercurio said:
Anything higher than the screen refresh rate is a waste of battery used to calculate non-displayed images.
Optimus 2x cheats benchmarks like that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but... but... I wanna cheat too...
Lol... yes please, we need a patch to leech the battery for nothing...
We really need a higher score in a useless benchmark to prove who has the longest one...
/sarcasm off
Damn guys, having the best phone is not enough? You need a totally useless patch just to boost a score (you won't even notice it... except the battery drain)...
Talking about a cap -.- My x10 has a 32fps cap be happy you guys haven't got that.
some people are just greedy.. why in the world would you need to go past 40 FPS let alone 60???
For the benchmarks? If you want to really benchmark the phone go and use a benchmarking app that has a benchmarking test that has actual textures to draw in the test, unlike CRAPPPPPY bench like Quadrant.
hahahaha my limit is 120Hz on lg 2x hahahahahaha
rulezzzor said:
hahahaha my limit is 120Hz on lg 2x hahahahahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you sir got the longest one
every phone in the last few years have screens with physical limits of 60 FPS. nexus one, nexus s, desire, etc all of them have screens which max out at 60 fps as a physical limitation of the screen. i doubt the super amoled plus will be any different, so it likely has the same physical limitation as well. no way to increase it.
RogerPodacter said:
every phone in the last few years have screens with physical limits of 60 FPS. nexus one, nexus s, desire, etc all of them have screens which max out at 60 fps as a physical limitation of the screen. i doubt the super amoled plus will be any different, so it likely has the same physical limitation as well. no way to increase it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Of course you can make the phone produce more than 60 frames per second. But the display cannot show all of them. Except for 120Hz 3D LCDs, no LCD I know of has more than 60Hz. And it doesn't make sense to render more frames than the display can show, so the software locks it down to a maximum of 60 (VSync). This way it conserves battery and reduces heat production.
The LG 2X doesn't display more than 60Hz either, but Nvidia, not new to the game of benchmarking, decided to increase the number of produced (not displayed!) frames in order to win with benchmarks.
It is theoretically possible to do the same with the SGS2, thus creating an apples to apples comparison.
I hope some reviews like Anandtech will be able to do that. But the average Joe really doesn't.
So again, it is a software limitation set in place to get the best results from the given hardware.
Original GS already has a patch that uncap the fps to allow more than 60fps...
rulezzzor said:
hahahaha my limit is 120Hz on lg 2x hahahahahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Uneducated Troll Alert!
If any man or beast thinks that the LG 2x is anywhere near the quality of the Samsung S II then they need to be locked up in a mental asylum. And by the look of your message it looks like you have been in one some time..
JD
Sent from my Samsung Galactic Beast S II
touness69 said:
Original GS already has a patch that uncap the fps to allow more than 60fps...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting, had no idea about that.
JupiterDroid said:
Uneducated Troll Alert!
If any man or beast thinks that the LG 2x is anywhere near the quality of the Samsung S II then they need to be locked up in a mental asylum. And by the look of your message it looks like you have been in one some time..
JD
Sent from my Samsung Galactic Beast S II
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL dddddddddddddddddddd
rulezzzor said:
hahahaha my limit is 120Hz on lg 2x hahahahahaha
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I bet your e-penis is huge. Ah well... We don't care...
Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
Some have raised points along the lines of Samsung Galaxy S2 phones already having a smoother UI and indicating that they are doing something different vs. the Galaxy Nexus. When comparing individual devices though you really need to look at all of the factors. For example, the S2's screen is 480x800 vs. the Galaxy Nexus at 720x1280. If the Nexus S could already do 60fps for simple UIs on its 480x800, the CPU in the S2's is even better off.
The real important difference between these two screens is just that the Galaxy Nexus has 2.4x as many pixels that need to be drawn as the S2. This means that to achieve the same efficiency at drawing the screen, you need a CPU that can run a single core at 2.4x the speed (and rendering a UI for a single app is essentially not parallelizable, so multiple cores isn't going to save you).
This is where hardware accelerated rendering really becomes important: as the number of pixels goes up, GPUs can generally scale much better to handle them, since they are more specialized at their task. In fact this was the primary incentive for implementing hardware accelerated drawing in Android -- at 720x1280 we are well beyond the point where current ARM CPUs can provide 60fps. (And this is a reason to be careful about making comparisons between the Galaxy Nexus and other devices like the S2 -- if you are running third party apps, there is a good chance today that the app is not enabling hardware acceleration, so your comparison is doing CPU rendering on the Galaxy Nexus which means you almost certainly aren't going to get 60fps out of it, because it needs to hit 2.4x as many pixels as the S2 does.)
To be complete, there is another big advantage that the GPU gives you -- many more drawing effects become feasible. For example, if you are drawing a bitmap in software, you basically can't do anything to it except apply an offset. Just trying to scale it is going to make rendering significantly slower. On a GPU, applying transformations well beyond simple scales is basically free. This is why in the new default Holo themes in Android we have background images -- with hardware accelerated drawing, we can afford to draw (and scale) them. In fact, if the hardware path is not enabled by the app, these background images will be turned off.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
I agree. It's the same with a gaming computer. Just because ur monitor has 1080p doesn't mean u can play all games in that rez. U will need a much more powerful gpu. I am certain though the tegra3 can support 1080p but it won't be smooth as 720p like our device. Unless u lower the rez but how would u on an android. Furthermore how ugly games would look who aren't optimize for 1080p.
Nvidia always!
The question isn't whether there's going to be a performance hit, it's what the performance hit looks like. If it's invisible in everything but gaming, I'd bet a lot of people will go for the HD display and gamers will stick to the lower res. If it's obvious in UI performance and transitions, it makes the benefit of the HD screen a little more questionable. The new chip in the iPad3 and Samsung's new Exynos chip won't make you choose (on paper). Benchmarks are useless except for bragging rights.
I have been saying this since people were trying to compare the new acer and samsung back in Dec. The higher the resolution, the more power and resources it takes. Also you have to look at the app market right now. What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now. Once they (1080p tablets) are released, it will be a few months before most apps will adapt to the new higher displays.
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
For what it's worth, ICS is supposed to be fully hardware accelerated, so the Tegra 3 could be enough to power the higher resolution for everything but games.
Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5348/...-with-asus-1920-x-1200-tablet-running-ics-403
That said, there are still questions as to the benefit of such a high resolution on a 10" form factor designed to be held only 1-2' away from your face. They didn't bump up to 1920 x 1200 resolution monitors until 24" LCDs and up.
The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at. Almost all run at the full Res of the screen, which means slideshow on a 1080p Prime.
avinash60 said:
I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display- there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish. Just bumping up the resolution while not working on improving the true render process (in case of games or animations) does not make any sense to me.
A retina display just for the heck of it is not a great idea, at least to me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, there is just no point..... there is more important things to improve than pixel count....
Thanks, at least I am not alone on this idea. It seems like when the news came that the iPad 3 is going to have a retina desiplay all the manufacturers didn't care anymore and just were thinking "We also need that!". I am comparision the text from thread with my HTC Sensation which should have a better DPI:
Transformer Prime: 149
The new Prime: 218
HTC Sensation: 260
and from NORMAL viewing distance both look great. However, when i come closer the pixels on the Transformer Prime are a little visible where the Sensation stays sharp. However the phone has a better DPI then the new res. panel so I'm not sure how that is.
I'm sure it will look some better, but I am not sure if it is worth the wait (again) and also the possibilty of the new Prime itself can't keep up with its own resolution..
Oh, again not trying to defend the Prime here.. I have to return it anyway because of backlight bleeding and am not sure if I want a new one or my money back, however if I see this result I think the resolution is just pure marketing.. I mean who is going to sit with its prime 5 cm from their heads.. lol.
http://androidandme.com/2012/01/news/hands-on-with-the-acer-iconia-tab-a510-and-zte-7-tablets/
Watch the video on Acer Iconia a510 (unannounced tablet). 1080p that comes with this tablet... does look a bit sluggish.
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Seems to run pretty good since it is still a pre-production model, however not as smooth as the Prime with ICS yes..
Danny80y said:
Just to add my galaxy nexus is 316 dpi..... unless your 2in from the screen...there really isn't much difference.
Also, I love how laptop and desktop DPI is half what most phone/tabs are and people are having a fit......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_displays_by_pixel_density#ASUS
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, exactly what I mean.. you can see it if your very close to the screen, but why would you do that, lol.
Oh, btw.. for the iPad 1&2 it still is 132, which is much lower then our Transformers (149,5), never heard real complaints about that.
>What app's are out that will use that 1080p display...NONE as of now
eBooks & PDFs. Sharper texts. More texts. One can conceivably view 2 pages side-by-side (16:10 / 2 = 8:10, or close to the 8.5:11 printed page).
With display mirroring, you get 1:1 pixel ratio when plugged into a HDTV via HDMI. This makes above use-case (high-density text consumption) much more feasible. Ditto for remote access.
Gaming perf will take a hit. Then again, gaming isn't exactly an Android forte right now, or for mobiles in general. The bulk of games are casual stuff, geared for handset resolution.
One can argue that hardcore Android gaming will prosper over time, and FPS perf will matter more. There are problems with this line of thought. First, is simply the assumption that Android will prosper on tablets, which given current sales is hardly a forgone conclusion. Second, are the fast advances in hardware and their correspondingly short lifespan. GPU-wise, the Teg3 isn't the fastest even now. By the time we get to see enough hardcore games, we'd be on Teg 5 or 6, or their equivalent. Teg3 will be old news.
But sure, if shooters and frame count are your thing, then 720p sounds like a plan, at least for the Teg3.
>I continue to question the need for having a 1080p 10 inch display
Some don't see the need for GPS in tabs either. Some don't use the cams. Different people have different uses. You shouldn't generalize your use to be everyone else's.
Rest assured that when it comes to marketing, toys with lo-res display will be viewed as inferior. Bigger is better. It's the same thing with quadcore vs dualcore vs single-core. Do you actually need a quadcore?
>there has to be a limit as to high a ppi count the human eye can reasonably distinguish
This argument has been bouncing around ever since Apple's Retina Display. Per this PPI calculator, 1920x1200 is 224ppi on a 10.1". Reportedly, people can discern 300ppi at 12" distance, given 20/20 vision. The real test is simpler and much less theoretical: walk into a store and compare the TF201 and TF700 side-by-side, and see if you can discern the difference.
>Anandtech (who I probably trust the most when it comes to hardware evaluations) seemed to suggest in an early preview that the higher resolution *may* perform ok:
Anandtech is good for chip-level analysis. For (mobile) system hardware and use-case analysis, he's just as green as many other tech blogs. Note the gaffs on the Prime testing wrt GPS and BT/wifi coexistence. I do see signs of improvement, however. They came out with a new Mobile Benchmark suite, whatever that means.
>The real issue is that games on Android don't let you pick a resolution for them to run at.
The real issue is that Android is still a nascent OS for tablets. HC was a beta which never took off. ICS was just released. The bulk of Android apps & games are still for handsets.
I have been concerned about this as well. Tegra 3's GPU is fine enough for a 1200x800 tablet, but it's going to be stretched at 1080p (this is nearly the resolution that my desktop runs at!).
I'd love a higher-resolution display, but it's a luxury (well, a tablet itself kinda is already, but even more so). It's not as if 1280x800 is cramped and blocky. I'm happy to wait a bit longer for 1080p tablets to mature and come down in price.
(I'd rather have 2GB RAM, actually.)
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
JoeyLe said:
Hi all,
I know this article has been floating around here for some time, but this I found rather interesting:
This is kinda the same as with the Prime and the T700/other high-resolution tablets, isn't it? I'm not sure, but it sounds pretty obviously since the Tegra3 GPU isn't very good (yes, it is fine but I'm not sure for those high-res screens?). However I could be completely wrong..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
gogol said:
Don't underestimate.
Let's wait a review or test.
Probably the Tegra 3 is more than capable of handling this kind of resolution in terms of playing HD movie, high profile compression, etc.
I saw several tests on current prime, and it has no problem with HD videos.
My only concern is battery life ... that's all.
I expect the 1920x1200 will result worse battery life, unless ASUS pump up the battery capacity or any other improvement.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Asus has already stated that battery life will be pretty much the same as the current Prime...So that should equal shorter battery life.I'll stick with my Prime for now.No Need in buying another tablet right now IMO.I'm waiting to see what Samsung brings to the table.
hyunsyng said:
Well, perhaps this new release will coincide with a bump in the specs of Tegra 3. By the time the new tablet comes out, I would assume that's been almost half a year.... That's usually about the time span that nvidia would come out with a refresh of a chip design (well, they do this with their desktop GPUs, so not a great comparison, but it's possible?). So in the end perhaps the question of performance will be moot because there will be a faster Tegra 3 and more RAM in the new higher resolution tablets.
Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think they can bump the specs within the generation of a chip. The only thing that can happen till then is that Asus finds an economical way to add 2GB memory to the device, Nvidia improves the production capabilities of Tegra 3 and we get a better yield of the chips. The spec increase can only happen from one generation to the next.
I think the performance will be fine. Even the battery life.
Most of the battery usage screen-wise is from the backlight, which will be the same.
Also, not much more power may be used necessarily either, especially if it doesn't end up taxing the Tegra 3 as much as we think it will. As far as we know, our 1200x800 displays may not even be taxing the Tegra 3 that much. If anything, the article shows that the Tegra 3 may be more qualified to handle that high a resolution with little to no performance degradation. There are demos on youtube of a tegra 3 device playing 1440p movies just fine, all while driving a second screen at the same time.
Of course I too don't feel the need for something that high of a resolution on a 10 inch screen, but I'll never really know until I see one in person.
Hi,
I'm proud user of LG Optimus P990, fond of Django Manouche ROMs. Right now i must choose one of 3 phones. As I'm LG fan, the G2 Mini would be a nice shot as it looks as the freshest one from three below:
1. LG G2 mini LTE
2. Samsung Galaxy S4 mini LTE
3. Samsung Galaxy Grand 2 LTE
Could You please help me and post some pros/cons for the above list? I'm considering rooted custom ROMs. I didn't see any for G2 mini for now...
Thanks in advance!
after my first hands-on, i observed that g2 mini's screen display isn't that good, i felt that there's a big gap between the touch layer of the screen and the display itself, which might also be the reason why the contrast isn't that good when you tilt the viewing angle.
kingblade20 said:
...i felt that there's a big gap between the touch layer of the screen and the display itself, which might also be the reason why the contrast isn't that good when you tilt the viewing angle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, maybe the Gorilla2 feels this way?
What about screen responsiveness, does it feel smooth or laggy?
Is 1GB RAM enough?
Most of apps are single core and i didn't find any single-core comparisons... Does G2 Mini CPU - Quad A7 at 1,2GHz (MSM8926 Snapdragon 400) offer similar single-core performance to S4 Mini Dual Core 1,7GHz Krait (MSM8930 Snapdragon 400)?
it was smooth. of course the single core performance will surely win, g2 mini only has the power efficient as compared to th krait 300 of s4 mini.
benchmark wise, they are close to each other. s400 used here is enough for most applications and games.
anyway, gorilla glass used on high end phones are almost zero gap, this is the only disadvantage i saw on g2 mini as midrange phone, unsatisfied.
So i've chosen LG G2 Mini.
Runs smooth, screen is clear, colors nice. Only thing I've seen so far is that sometimes i'm unable to end the call, seems like the lack of response from screen.
Thanks for replies!
kingblade20 said:
after my first hands-on, i observed that g2 mini's screen display isn't that good, i felt that there's a big gap between the touch layer of the screen and the display itself, which might also be the reason why the contrast isn't that good when you tilt the viewing angle.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I got to agree with the screen response. Sometimes it's responding sometimes it's not though hopefully it'll get resolved on the next update.
Sent from my LG-D618 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Is it just me or does this lag a little.?!
Don't get me wrong i love it, it's just i have a nexus 5 with the snapdragon 800 in it and it's perfectly smooth.
It's quick.. but not as good, particularly in web browsing zooming and scrolling. (sometimes you touch things when you dont mean too, sometimes it's slow to pinch zoom,maybe this is the touch screen issue not shaw.. )
Hopefully it's just software and sony will get it better. With this hardware it should be perfect!
Have you upgraded the firmware to the latest available ? Some people reported occasional lags that went away after upgrading.
yes I'm on 402..but my nexus 5 is smoother and it shouldn't be..anyway I'm still happy..
The touch screen does have a grounding issue, of which the severity seems to differ per device. Maybe that's what you are experiencing.
A 10.1 inch tablet which has the same specifications and is exactly as fast as a 5 inch smartphone will ALWAYS seem more laggy!
This is just because lags which are very small on the phone (bordering on un-perceivable) are magnified on the tablet and thus seem more severe!
But in reality it's just a matter of scale, an optical "illusion".
the nexus 5 has resolution 1080 x1920 and a slower cpu snapdragon 800...
i think maybe it is a touch screen issue, it's a bit random.
I'm sure sony will get it better..
Nexus has same resolution. Nexus is a pure android software with minimal background processes. Sony has customized their own ui with extra and not as optimized background processes. There is also the scale thing, where as u won't notice lag on small screen as much as big screen.
Ur welcome
Sent from my SGP512 using Tapatalk
Yes, right.
Coreo, you can use alternative launcher instead of the Sony one; you can root the device and disable/uninstall the Sony bloatware/unnecessary background processes.
coreo said:
the nexus 5 has higher resolution 1080 x1920 and a slower cpu snapdragon 800...
i think maybe it is a touch screen issue, it's a bit random.
I'm sure sony will get it better..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Z2 tablet actually has a marginally higher resolution of 1920x1200 pixels.
fair enough... but it still feels smoother and quicker.. yes I've rooted, deleted a few sony apps, replaced the keyboard with swift keyboard and installed nova launcher..
PS im not complaining, it's still fast and am very happy with it. im just comparing it against the snap dragon 800, as a fair or unfair comparison it may or may not be..
in someways its a good thing as sony have room to improve..