Last summer, I decided to buy a Nexus 7 for using it mainly as an ebook reader. It's perfect for that with its very sharp 1280x800 screen. It was my first Android device and I love this little tablet.
I'm a fan of retro gaming and I installed emulators on every device I have: Pocket PC, Xbox, PSP Go, iPhone, iPad3, PS3. So I discovered that the Android platform was one of the most active community for emulation fans like me and I bought many of them, and all those made by Robert Broglia (.EMU series). They were running great on the N7 but I found that 16GB was too small, as was the screen.
I waited and waited until the 32 GB Nexus 10 became available here in Canada and bought it soon after (10 days ago). With its A15 cores, I was expecting the N10 to be a great device for emulation but I am now a little disapointed. When buying the N10, I expected everything to run faster than on the N7 by a noticeable margin.
Many emulators run slower on the N10 than on the N7. MAME4Ddroid and MAME4Droid reloaded are no longer completely smooth with more demanding ROMs, Omega 500, Colleen, UAE4droid and SToid are slower and some others needed much more tweaking than on the N7. I'm a little extreme on accuracy of emulation and I like everything to be as close to the real thing as possible. A solid 60 fps for me is a must (or 50 fps for PAL machines).
On the other side, there are other emus that ran very well: the .EMU series and RetroArch for example. These emulators are much more polished than the average quick port and they run without a flaw. They're great on the 10-inch screen and I enjoy them very much. The CPU intensive emulators (Mupen64Plus AE and FPSE) gained some speed but less that I anticipated.
So is this because of the monster Nexus 10's 2560x1600 resolution? Or is it because of limited memory bandwith? Maybe some emulators are not tweaked for the N10 yet. I wish some emulators had the option to set a lower resolution for rendering and then upscale the output. I think that many Android apps just try to push the frames to the native resolution without checking first if there is a faster way.
The N7 has a lower clocked 4 core CPU but has only 1/4 the resolution. I think that it's a more balanced device that the N10 which may have a faster dual core CPU but too much pixels to push. It's much like the iPad3 who was twice as fast as the iPad2 but had a 4x increase in resolution.
I am now considering going for a custom ROM on the N10 but I wonder if I will see an increase in emulation speed. Maybe those of you who did the jump can tell me. I'm thinking about AOKP maybe.
Any suggestion on that would be appreciated, thanks!
The emulators just need to be tweaked a bit to better perform on the completely different processor architecture. Really our processor is far more powerful than the Nexus 7 so the emulators should run faster. I too am a fan of the old games, and I play Super Nintendo and Game Boy Advance (and some Color) games quite often. I find performance to be perfect with no issues at all, but then again those arent exactly "demanding" emulators.
We do not have any sort of memory bandwidth limitation on the Nexus 10. The tablet has been designed to give the full needed 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth that is required for 2560x1600 resolution.
EniGmA1987 said:
The emulators just need to be tweaked a bit to better perform on the completely different processor architecture. Really our processor is far more powerful than the Nexus 7 so the emulators should run faster. I too am a fan of the old games, and I play Super Nintendo and Game Boy Advance (and some Color) games quite often. I find performance to be perfect with no issues at all, but then again those arent exactly "demanding" emulators.
We do not have any sort of memory bandwidth limitation on the Nexus 10. The tablet has been designed to give the full needed 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwidth that is required for 2560x1600 resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Having to render to that size of screen [2560x1600] will slow the game down. It’s called being ‘fill rate bound’. Even for a good processor it's a lot of work as the game uses quite a lot of overdraw.
The solution is to draw everything to a smaller screen (say half at 1280x800) and then stretch the final image to fill the screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A sad true my nexus 10 get dam hot and i have to play games at 1.4 or 1.2 that sux
Sent from my XT925 using xda app-developers app
espionage724 said:
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But fillrate isnt memory bandwidth. We need both more MHz and more raster operations to get higher fill rate of pixels per second. We can overclock the GPU to get the MHz, and that will help, but we have to find a way to solve the higher heat output too from that. More ROP's are impossible as it is a hardware design for how many we have. If we ever get to overclock up to around 750 MHz then we should see a 30-40% improvement in fill rate. At that point we may have memory bandwidth problems, but we wont know for sure until we get there. But the 12.8GB/s of bandwidth that we currently have is enough to support 2560x1600 resolution at our current GPU power. Our Nexus 10 also has the highest fillrate of any Android phone or tablet to date, about 1.4 Mtexel/s. And if we have memory bandwidth limitations, then we would see no improvement at all from the current overclock we do have up to 612-620MHz because the speed wouldnt be where the bottleneck is. Yet we can clearly see in benchmarks and real gaming that we get FPS increases with higher MHz, thus our current problem is the fillrate and not the memory bandwidth.
Also, the solution is not to render the game at half the resolution as that is a band-aid on the real problem. If the developer of a game would code the game properly we wouldnt have this problem, or if they dont feel like doing that then they should at least stop trying to put more into the game than their un-optimized, lazy project is capable of running nicely.
espionage724 said:
Hmm, if no memory bandwidth limitation exists on the N10, wouldn't I be able to run GTA 3 at 100% screen resolution and not have significantly lower FPS, as compared to 50% resolution?
Even Beat Hazard Ultra seems to be a bit laggy on the N10. When I inquired about it to the developer, he said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With that logic you could buy any video card for a PC and it would run any game at the resolution the video card supports. That isn't the case because rendering involves more than just memory fill rate. There are textures, polygons, multiple rendering passes, filtering, it goes on and on. As EniGmA1987 mentioned nothing has been optimized to take advantage of this hardware yet, developers were literally crossing their fingers hoping their games would run 'as is'. thankfully the A15 cpu cores in the exynos will be used in the tegra 4 as well so we can look forward to the CPU optimizations soon which will definitely help.
Emulators are more cpu intensive than anything else, give it a little time and you won't have any problems with your old school games. Run the new 3DMark bench to see what this tablet can do, it runs native resolution and its not even fully optimized for this architecture yet.
2560*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth. Most emulators don't use 3D functions so fillrate, rendering, overdraw won't be a factor. Most emulators are single-threaded (correct me if I'm wrong) and the A15 should shine in this particular situation and even more so in multi-threaded scenarios. With its out-of-order pipeline and greatly enhanced efficiency it should be perfectly suited for the job.
We have the fillrate, we have enough CPU power and I'm still wondering why simple app like emulators aren't much faster than that. Is it Android? Is it the Dalvik VM? Or is it because some emulators need to be written in native code instead of using Java VM? I'm not a developer and I have only minimal knowledge in this department. I can only speculate but I'm curious enough about it that I started googling around to find why.
Lodovik said:
2560*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just curious but what is that calculation supposed to be? total bandwidth needed? Cause I don't see your bit depth in there, unless the 4 is supposed to be that? If that is true than you are calculating on 4-bit color depth?
And then the result would just be bandwidth required for pixel data to memory wouldnt it? It wouldnt include texture data in and out of memory and other special functions like post processing.
2560*1600 = number of pixels on the screen
4 = bytes / pixels for 32-bits depth
60 = frames / second
/1024/1024 = divide twice to get the result in MB
Actually, I made a typo the result is 937,5 MB/s or 0.92 GB/s. This is just a rough estimate to get an idea of what is needed at this resolution just to push the all pixels on the screen in flat 2D at 60 fps, assuming that emulators don't use accelerated functions.
My point was that with 12.8 GB/s of memory bandwith, we should have more than enough even if this estimate isn't very accurate.
Thanks for the explanation
If there really were a memory bandwidth limitation the newer Trinity kernels and newest KTManta should help. In addition to the higher GPU speed they both allow (KTManta up to 720MHz) both ROM's have increased memory speeds which increase memory bandwidth to 13.8GB/s, up from 12.8 on stock.
Thanks for the info. There's so many configuration options available for the Nexus 10. I really enjoy having all those possibilities.
EniGmA1987 said:
If there really were a memory bandwidth limitation the newer Trinity kernels and newest KTManta should help. In addition to the higher GPU speed they both allow (KTManta up to 720MHz) both ROM's have increased memory speeds which increase memory bandwidth to 13.8GB/s, up from 12.8 on stock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
=Lodovik;40030*1600*4*60/1024/1024 = 937,3 MB/s for a 60 fps game at 32-bit depth. Most emulators don't use 3D functions so fillrate, rendering, overdraw won't be a factor. Most emulators are single-threaded (correct me if I'm wrong) and the A15 should shine in this particular situation and even more so in multi-threaded scenarios. With its out-of-order pipeline and greatly enhanced efficiency it should be perfectly suited for the job.
We have the fillrate, we have enough CPU power and I'm still wondering why simple app like emulators aren't much faster than that. Is it Android? Is it the Dalvik VM? Or is it because some emulators need to be written in native code instead of using Java VM? I'm not a developer and I have only minimal knowledge in this department. I can only speculate but I'm curious enough about it that I started googling around to find why.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are taking what I said out of context. I was responding to someone else, thus the "quote" above my post.
Since you posted I loaded up some Super Nintendo, N64, and PlayStation games on my n10 without any issues. It may just be your setup. There are a lot of tweaks out there that could easily increase performance. One great and very simple one is enabling 2D GPU rendering which is in developer options. Just do some searching. GPU Overclocking won't help much, as you said above your games are only 2D. I am sure you can get them running just fine.
Related
just want to know how noticable the difference in GPU performance is vs the iPhone 4S graphics. Iv seen all the benchmarks, however I dont believe they measure accurately so therefore i am just wondering how different or noticable the graphics are in comparison...
1) Benchmarks are utterly pointless/meaningless. They do not even remotely simulate real world use.
2) How do you make an honest/objective/realistic comparison between two phones with completely different hardware ? Answer: You can't. Any comparison made will be purely subjective/opinion only.
peterdan1506 said:
just want to know how noticable the difference in GPU performance is vs the iPhone 4S graphics. Iv seen all the benchmarks, however I dont believe they measure accurately so therefore i am just wondering how different or noticable the graphics are in comparison...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ive yet to play a game on the sgs2 that doesnt run super smooth....
Riptide gp, dead space etc
Should developers start making more advanced games to maximize GPU potential, the iphone4s will reach its bottleneck for its 800mhz cpu anyway.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Hi all,
I have been developing a small android app which is sort of a reader for results coming from a desktop application. Some of these results are in the shape of a 3-dimensional structure made of a number of basic geometries, which I have been generating using a library which I coded in C++ using OpenSceneGraph and compiled with NDK. I have tested my app on both my HTC 3D EVO (before on stock rom, then on a few gingerbread custom ROMS and finally on a few ICS roms too) and also on a crappy 7'' chinese tablet which I bought really cheap a while ago. This tablet has a pretty basic AllWinnerTech A10 single core 1GHz processor, 512 Mb RAM and a Mali 400 GPU. So nothing fancy at all. However in all my tests I get about 2 to 3 times as many FPS from the tablet compared to the EVO. The structure can be moved, zoomed in and out much more smoothly. Remarkably so!
Am I missing something obvious here? Is there a "turn on graphics acceleration, you idiot!" button which I have not found yet? I mean, just in terms of specs I would have expected the EVO to run circles around that tablet.
Has anyone got any idea?
Cheers.
Have you tried forcing HW acceleration threw your build prop to see if makes a difference on your setup??
#Root-Hack_Mod*Always\
debug.sf.hw = 1 already. anything else in the build.prop file that may improve this? Could it be a drivers issue, or is it just me expecting more that I should from this phone?
Are you hitting the frame limit cap ?
what would the value of this cap be? I barely go above 15-20fps on the smallest structures. anyway, don't get me wrong: I can live with it.
It was just curiosity, because I expected much better performance from the EVO. and so I was wondering where/what is the bottle neck
From what I understand HTC shipped the EVO 3D with terrible drivers, I think that they fixed this problem with the ICS update. With these drivers the Adreno 220 is able to surpass the Mali 400 mp4 (galaxy s2 version) in some situations.
XXXUPDATEXXX
Anandtech have now published the perfromance preview of the Nexus 10, lets the comparison begin!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/google-nexus-4-and-nexus-10-review
Well, the first full result has appeared on GLBenchmark for the iPad4, so I have created a comparison with the Samsung Arndale board, which uses exactly the same SoC as the Nexus 10, so will be very close in performance to Google's newest tablet. GLBenchmark, as its name suggests test Open GL graphics perrformance, which is important criteria for gaming.
Which device wins, click the link to find out.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....ly=1&D1=Apple iPad 4&D2=Samsung Arndale Board
If you're really impatient, the iPad 4 maintains it lead in tablet graphics, the Nexus 10 may performance slightly better in final spec, but the underlying low-level performance will not change much.
I've also made a comparison between the iPad 3 & 4.
Interestingly the in-game tests GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt HD C24Z16 - Offscreen (1080p) :, which is run independent of native screen resolution show the following
iPad 4: 48.6 FPS
iPad 3: 25.9 FPS
5250 : 33.7 FPS
So the iPad is twice as fast as its older brother, the Exynos will probably score nearer 40 FPS in final spec, with new drivers and running 4.2, the board runs ICS, however Jelly Bean did not really boost GL performance over ICS. What is interesting is that iPad 4, whose GPU is supposed to clocked at 500 MHz vs 250 MHz in the iPad 3 does not perform twice as fast in low-level test.
Fill Rate, triangle throughtput, vertex output etc is not double the power of the iPad 3, so although the faster A6 cpu helps, I reckon a lot of the improvement in the Egypt HD test is caused by improved drivers for the SGX 543 MP4 in the Pad 4. The Galaxy S2 received a big jump in GL performance when it got updated Mali drivers, so I imagine we should see good improvements for the T604, which is still a new product and not as mature as the SGX 543.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....tified_only=1&D1=Apple iPad 4&D2=Apple iPad 3
I'd imagine the new new iPad would take the lead in benchmarks for now as it'll take Sammy and Google some time to optimize the beast, in the end however actual app and user interface performance is what matters, and reports are overwhelmingly positive on the Nexus 10.
So Mali 604T didn't match 5 times better than Mali 400, or maybe Samsung underclocked it.
Still very good but not the best.
________________
Edit: I forgot that Exynos 4210 with Mali400MP4 GPU had very bad GLbenchmark initially (even worse than PowerVR SGX540), but after updating firmware it's way better than other SoCs on Android handsets.
hung2900 said:
So Mali 604T didn't match 5 times better than Mali 400, or maybe Samsung underclocked it.
Still very good but not the best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure about this, but don't benchmark tools need to be upgraded for new architectures to? A15 is quite a big step, SW updates may be necessary for proper bench.
Damn..now I have to get an iPad.
I believe we have to take the Arndale board numbers with pinch of salt. It's a dev board, and I doubt it has optimized drivers for the SoC like it's expected for N10. Samsung has this habit of optimizing the drivers with further updates.
SGS2 makes for a good case study. When it was launched in MWC2011, it's numbers were really pathetic. It was even worse than Tegra2.
Anand ran benchmark on the pre-release version of SGS2 on MWC2011, check this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4177/samsungs-galaxy-s-ii-preliminary-performance-mali400-benchmarked
It was showing less than Tegra2 numbers! It was that bad initially.
Then look when Anand finally reviewed the device after few months:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
Egypt (native resolution) numbers went up by 3.6x and Pro also got 20% higher. Now they could have been higher if not limited by vsync. GLbenchmark moved from 2.0 to 2.1 during that phase, but I am sure this would not make such a big difference in numbers.
If you again check the numbers now for SGS2, it's again another 50% improvement in performance from the time Anand did his review.
Check this SGS2 numbers now:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5811/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-preview
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6022/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-review-att-and-tmobile-usa-variants/4
This is just to show that how driver optimization can have a big affect on the performance. My point is that we have to wait for proper testing on final release of N10 device.
Also, check the fill rate properly in the Arndale board test. It's much less than what is expected. ARM says that Mali-T604 clocked at 500MHz should get a fill rate of 2 GPixels/s. It's actually showing just about 60% of what it should be delivering.
http://blogs.arm.com/multimedia/353-of-philosophy-and-when-is-a-pixel-not-a-pixel/
Samsung has clocked the GPU @ 533MHz. So, it shouldn't be getting so less.
According to Samsung, it more like 2.1 GPixels/s: http://semiaccurate.com/assets/uploads/2012/03/Samsung_Exynos_5_Mali.jpg
Fill rate is a low-level test, and there shouldn't be such a big difference from the quoted value. Let's wait and see how the final device shapes up.
hung2900 said:
So Mali 604T didn't match 5 times better than Mali 400, or maybe Samsung underclocked it.
Still very good but not the best.
________________
Edit: I forgot that Exynos 4210 with Mali400MP4 GPU had very bad GLbenchmark initially (even worse than PowerVR SGX540), but after updating firmware it's way better than other SoCs on Android handsets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In areas where the Mali 400 lacked performance, like fragment and vertex lit triangle output T604 is comfortably 5 x the performance, whereas in these low-level tests iPad is not a concrete 2x the power of iPad 3, but achieves twice the FPS in Egypt HD than its older brother. I suspect drivers are a big factor here, and Exynos 5250 will get better as they drivers mature.
hot_spare said:
I believe we have to take the Arndale board numbers with pinch of salt. It's a dev board, and I doubt it has optimized drivers for the SoC like it's expected for N10. Samsung has this habit of optimizing the drivers with further updates.
SGS2 makes for a good case study. When it was launched in MWC2011, it's numbers were really pathetic. It was even worse than Tegra2.
Anand ran benchmark on the pre-release version of SGS2 on MWC2011, check this:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4177/samsungs-galaxy-s-ii-preliminary-performance-mali400-benchmarked
It was showing less than Tegra2 numbers! It was that bad initially.
Then look when Anand finally reviewed the device after few months:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
Egypt (native resolution) numbers went up by 3.6x and Pro also got 20% higher. Now they could have been higher if not limited by vsync. GLbenchmark moved from 2.0 to 2.1 during that phase, but I am sure this would not make such a big difference in numbers.
If you again check the numbers now for SGS2, it's again another 50% improvement in performance from the time Anand did his review.
Check this SGS2 numbers now:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5811/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-preview
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6022/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-review-att-and-tmobile-usa-variants/4
This is just to show that how driver optimization can have a big affect on the performance. My point is that we have to wait for proper testing on final release of N10 device.
Also, check the fill rate properly in the Arndale board test. It's much less than what is expected. ARM says that Mali-T604 clocked at 500MHz should get a fill rate of 2 GPixels/s. It's actually showing just about 60% of what it should be delivering.
http://blogs.arm.com/multimedia/353-of-philosophy-and-when-is-a-pixel-not-a-pixel/
Samsung has clocked the GPU @ 533MHz. So, it shouldn't be getting so less.
According to Samsung, it more like 2.1 GPixels/s: http://semiaccurate.com/assets/uploads/2012/03/Samsung_Exynos_5_Mali.jpg
Fill rate is a low-level test, and there shouldn't be such a big difference from the quoted value. Let's wait and see how the final device shapes up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with most of what you have said. On the GPixel figure this is like ATI GPU teraflops figures always being much higher than Nvidia, in theory with code written to hit the device perfectly you might see that those high figures, but in reality the Nvidia cards with lower on paper numbers equaled or beat ATI in actual game FPS. It all depends on whether the underlying architecture is as efficient in real-world tests, vs maximum technical numbers that can't be replicated in actual game environments.
I think the current resolution of the iPad / Nexus 10 is actually crazy, and will would see prettier games with lower resolutions, the amount of resources needed to drive those high MP displays, means lots of compromises will be made in terms of effects / polygon complexity etc to ensure decent FPS, especially when you think that to drive Battlefield 3 at 2560 x 1600 with AA and high textures, requires a PC that burn 400+ watts of power, not a 10 watt SoC.
Overall when we consider that Nexus 10 has twice the RAM for game developers to use and faster CPU cores, games should look equally as nice as both, the biggest effect will be the level of support game developers provide for each device, the iPad will probably be stronger i that regard. Nvidia was able to coax prettier games out of Tegra 3 through developer support, hopefully Google won't forget the importance of this.
What's the point of speculation? Just wait for the device to be released and run all the test you want to get confirmation on performance. Doesn't hurt to wait
BoneXDA said:
Not sure about this, but don't benchmark tools need to be upgraded for new architectures to? A15 is quite a big step, SW updates may be necessary for proper bench.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both A9 & A15 use the same instruction set architecture (ISA) so no they won't. Benchmarks may need to be modified, if the new SoC are too powerful and max out the old benches, but for GL Benchmark, that has not happened yet and there are already new updates in the pipeline.
I can't wait to see this Exynos 5250 in a 2.0ghz quad-core variant in the semi near future... Ohhhh the possibilities. Samsung has one hell of a piece of silicon on their hand.
Chrome
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/google-nexus-4-and-nexus-10-review
Google if you want to use Chrome as the stock browser, then develop to fast and smooth and not an insult, stock AOSP browser would be so much faster.
Turbotab said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/google-nexus-4-and-nexus-10-review
Google if you want to use Chrome as the stock browser, then develop to fast and smooth and not an insult, stock AOSP browser would be so much faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True.. Chrome on mobile is still not upto desktop level yet. I believe it's v18 or something, right? The stock browser would have much better result in SunSpider/Browsermark. The N4 numbers looks even worse. Somewhere the optimizations isn't working.
The GLbenchmark tests are weird. Optimus G posts much better result than N4 when both are same hardware. It infact scores lower than Adreno 225 in some cases. This is totally whacked.
For N10, I am still wondering about fill rate. Need to check what guys say about this.
Is it running some debugging code in the devices at this time?
Turbotab said:
Both A9 & A15 use the same instruction set architecture (ISA) so no they won't. Benchmarks may need to be modified, if the new SoC are too powerful and max out the old benches, but for GL Benchmark, that has not happened yet and there are already new updates in the pipeline.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually not. A8 and A9 are the same ISA (Armv7), while A5 A7 and A15 are in another group (Armv7a)
Once we get rid of the underclock no tablet will be able to match. I'm sure the Mali t604 at 750 MHz would destroy everything.
hung2900 said:
Actually not. A8 and A9 are the same ISA (Armv7), while A5 A7 and A15 are in another group (Armv7a)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to disagree, this is from ARM's info site.
The ARM Cortex-A15 MPCore processor has an out-of-order superscalar pipeline with a tightly-coupled low-latency level-2 cache that can be up to 4MB in size. The Cortex-A15 processor implements the ARMv7-A architecture.
The ARM Cortex-A9 processor is a very high-performance, low-power, ARM macrocell with an L1 cache subsystem that provides full virtual memory capabilities. The Cortex-A9 processor implements the ARMv7-A architecture and runs 32-bit ARM instructions, 16-bit and 32-bit Thumb instructions, and 8-bit Java bytecodes in Jazelle state.
http://infocenter.arm.com/help/index.jsp?topic=/com.arm.doc.set.cortexa/index.html
Keion said:
Once we get rid of the underclock no tablet will be able to match. I'm sure the Mali t604 at 750 MHz would destroy everything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except the iPad 4, which has a GPU that is currently 57% faster than the T604.
Sent from my iPad Mini using Tapatalk
Do remember that Awesome resolution does tax the GPU a lot. Heck most lower end desktop GPUs would struggle
Harry GT-S5830 said:
Do remember that Awesome resolution does tax the GPU a lot. Heck most lower end desktop GPUs would struggle
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed it does,but not in offscreen testing, where Anand made his proclamation.
Sent from my iPad Mini using Tapatalk
Hemlocke said:
Except the iPad 4, which has a GPU that is currently 57% faster than the T604.
Sent from my iPad Mini using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, I think we can beat that too.
Drivers + OC.
Hey guys! Just got my Nexus 10 an am thrilled with it.
Has anyone set up FPSE on it? I downloaded it and installed a bios etc. but when I try to play a game (I ripped an old copy of Star Wars Jedi power battles I found in a box in my room) the graphics do not load properly. I have tried with and without the Opengl plugin. Does anyone have any insight? I have played with the settings for video as well but am not really sure what to change to fix this. I'm running paranoid android if that has any effect...
Edit:
OK Turned off OPENGL and now the graphics load perfectly! Theyre not as smoothed as they would have been I guess, but at least I can play now!! The only thing is that the game seems to be moving is fast motion! I'll try the frame limiter and report back
Twisted metal
Can Twisted Metal be played on Google Nexus 10? I think that game will be awesome to play in touch screen mode.
lidzhet said:
Can Twisted Metal be played on Google Nexus 10? I think that game will be awesome to play in touch screen mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure it can. I got a couple of my old games working flawlessly now. The framerate limiter stops the games from being payed in fast forward. Doesn't look like the Nexus 10 is playing nice with opengl though, will have to see if there is an update to allow this to work.
I doubt nexus 10 will ever work with opengl. It uses the frame rate of the nexus 10 to upscale. Don't think the tablet can handle that kind of processing demand.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
duarian said:
I doubt nexus 10 will ever work with opengl. It uses the frame rate of the nexus 10 to upscale. Don't think the tablet can handle that kind of processing demand.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And why do you think that?
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
ady_seray said:
And why do you think that?
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because upscaling a ps1 game to 2560x1600 resolution is going to take more than a dual core processor and onboard GPU. Its on a resolution basis...the higher the resolution the more demanding.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
duarian said:
Because upscaling a ps1 game to 2560x1600 resolution is going to take more than a dual core processor and onboard GPU. Its on a resolution basis...the higher the resolution the more demanding.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but then why do games like dead trigger and vice city work in 2560x1600 with very good fps, and a 14 year old ps1 game would not.
Personally I think it can handle it easily (if a tegra 3 can do it then the exynos 5 can do it blindfolded, hands tied to the back, one foot chopped off and thrown into the sea with a boulder tied to its neck)
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
Because game emulation =/= PC games.
Emulating games take much more CPU power than modern PC games mainly because those PS1 games were made for a PS1 and not a PC. That would be why you can't just stick in your PS1 disc and play the game. The emulator makes the game readable by the PC and that takes tons of power.
Emulating games take about 100x the power of the original system. So while the CPU frequency won't translate directly to 100x, the architecture of the CPU also is taken into account.
EDIT: I consider Android games PC games since the gap between PCs and mobile devices are starting to close.
404 ERROR said:
Because game emulation =/= PC games.
Emulating games take much more CPU power than modern PC games mainly because those PS1 games were made for a PS1 and not a PC. That would be why you can't just stick in your PS1 disc and play the game. The emulator makes the game readable by the PC and that takes tons of power.
Emulating games take about 100x the power of the original system. So while the CPU frequency won't translate directly to 100x, the architecture of the CPU also is taken into account.
EDIT: I consider Android games PC games since the gap between PCs and mobile devices are starting to close.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well then, don't want to sound ignorant, if a PC cpu that has approximately the same performance as the cpu in the N10 ( the means of comparison being geekbench), is able to emulate PS2 games then it would easily emulate PS1 games.
Through deduction the N10 having a similar performance to that PC CPU should be able to easily emulate PS1 games. Hence why gentlemen I do believe that the n10 can breeze through PS1 games.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
ady_seray said:
Well then, don't want to sound ignorant, if a PC cpu that has approximately the same performance as the cpu in the N10 ( the means of comparison being geekbench), is able to emulate PS2 games then it would easily emulate PS1 games.
Through deduction the N10 having a similar performance to that PC CPU should be able to easily emulate PS1 games. Hence why gentlemen I do believe that the n10 can breeze through PS1 games.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I don't understand all the basics -- I can see the point though if it's trying to upscale the resolution.
2560x1600 = 4096000 pixels
320x240 = 76800 pixels (most common ps1 resolution)
So if you figure that you're running about 60fps...
That's information for 241152000 more pixels in a second that it needs to create information for.
Depending on the efficiency of the algorithm in the emulator/openGL code -- it's very possible it can tax the system. Remember also the heat throttle on the N10 which will reduce its performance below what you might expect it to max out at. I also think you're overestimating the power of an N10 to a PC. Think more maybe along the lines of a netbook or older laptop if trying to find a power comparable just because of all the differences in the architecture (for example you don't have the entire system in a single chip... there will be bottlenecks in the N10).
ady_seray said:
Well then, don't want to sound ignorant, if a PC cpu that has approximately the same performance as the cpu in the N10 ( the means of comparison being geekbench), is able to emulate PS2 games then it would easily emulate PS1 games.
Through deduction the N10 having a similar performance to that PC CPU should be able to easily emulate PS1 games. Hence why gentlemen I do believe that the n10 can breeze through PS1 games.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I never said it wouldn't work on the N10. Your reasoning behind emulation was just wrong so I felt the need to correct it. This way, you will probably now understand why you can't emulate PS3 and xbox360 games on your computer. It won't happen anytime soon.
Emulation also depends on the emulator. If it's well-coded, then it'll emulate things well. If it's not, well then you'll get slow downs. I never used FPse so I don't know how great it is, but I'm assuming it's good.
Anyway, most likely than not, the N10 can probably emulate PS1 games. It probably can't emulate PS2 games at that resolution though.
The N10 emulates ps1 games fine. Its when you use openGL that it really has a performance hit. Which attempts to upscale everything to the resolution of the tablet...which is very high
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
ceribaen said:
I also think you're overestimating the power of an N10 to a PC. Think more maybe along the lines of a netbook or older laptop if trying to find a power comparable just because of all the differences in the architecture (for example you don't have the entire system in a single chip... there will be bottlenecks in the N10).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess I might be overestimating a bit, but my core2duo laptop had the same geekbench score as my (at the time) 2.0 GHz OC'ed N10, which was around 3000. My core2duo laptop can emulate ps2 games ok-ish that's why I believed the N10 can emulate PS1 games fine, because it's on par with my PC CPU.
The thermal throttle issue, while being a pressing and annoying one, can be reduced or eliminated entirely by upping the thermal limits with ktoonsez kernel.
Although I do agree that proper software is as important, or more important, than hardware, and that if the emulator is not coded properly it's useless to have all this horse power.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda app-developers app
I use ePSXe and it works very well. Open gl plugin is no good though as the device seems to process faster than the plugin is coded. Using hardware gpu works well enough but you will have original ps1 graphics.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I317 using xda premium
The Nexus 10 can easily emulate a PS1. The fact that the OP has been forced to use the frame limiter proves that the emulation was much faster than needed. Also, even without the OpenGL plugin, you are already pushing the game at the native N10 resolution if you play full screen, so it's not a question of bandwidth or GPU because you're using the same number of pixels, accelerated or not.
What the OpenGL plugin brings is nicer graphics with less jaggies and the GPU of the N10 can easily handle the very low polygon count of the PS1 games. The benefit of that is to play PS1 games with even better graphics that on the original console. But, remanipulating the textures to fit an higher resolution is a difficult task and you end up with artifacts that were not originally there. The N10 GPU can handle the output but the problem is feeding it fast enough to keep the original framerate.
If you want to see some videos of emulation on the N10, you can watch this one and some others on the same Youtube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9leFKGewvsM
As you will see, the N64 and PS1 emulator only take a fraction of the CPU power of the N10. Thermal throttling may be a factor on the N10 but not with those older consoles.
My N7 handles quite nicely the OpenGL plugin of FPSE. The Tegra3 chip isn't the most powerful out there but it has better support than the Exynos. That will change when N10s will finally be in the hands of all those that (like me!) are waiting for more stock to buy one. I live in Canada and, about 10 times a day, I check to see if the N10 is available on the Google Store. It's a very looooong wait...
I don't think it is possible to run fpse OpenGL currently on the Nexus 10. OpenGL is upscaling the graphics to 2560 x 1660 native, which is causing tremendous slowdown when you consider this + hardware comsumption of Console emulation. Is there any way we can recommend a "Resolution downscale" option for fpse? At LEAST bring the game down to 1920 x 1080p which is still a great resolution. It would be nice to NOT have an "MAX" or "MIN" setting, but an "In Between" regarding screen resolution.
Speed isn't the issue because if the OP had OpenGL disabled he was running in software mode which means it was only running off the CPU.
Nexus 10 isn't the issue because the GPU supports OpenGL 3.0 standard, so any OpenGL issues will be software related which means they can be fixed quite easily.
Only question is who needs to fix it, the emulator dev or Samsung driver team?
brees75 said:
Only question is who needs to fix it, the emulator dev or Samsung driver team?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At this point in the development of an entirely new architecture it could be either one. We do know that the Mali GPU driver does have at least one issue already. Most likely though I would guess it would need to be fixed in the emulator software, because the people who create those while good, are not as good as the people working with those who design the hardware itself. And again, the software would need to be written to take advantage of an entirely new architecture. And Im not talking about the CPU only here. That is a pretty large architectural step for ARM too, but the GPU is a huge step in design. This is ARM's first unified shader architecture and both drivers and software need to be written differently to take advantage of such. The CPU is a large evolution of previous designs, the GPU has a lot of complete rework from the ground up.
Okay, so I'm REALLY anal about the speed of my phone, the slightest bit of stutter or lag from just the notification center itself really bothers me. I was wondering if someone could recommend some really good settings for my phone
I currently am running
JellyBam 6.3.0 (JB 4.2.2)
4Aces Kernel
I would like some good settings regarding governor, CPU Frequency, and any other things I can do including stuff in developer options, if that helps. Thanks!
It is likely that you will always have "some" degree of lag present in the note 1. Due in large part to our GPU. We are also limited in performance by our dual core CPU.
That being said, the closest to zero lag I've found, is using Flappjaxxx current JB AOSP build, (0225) combined with nova launcher, and his newest 3.0.9 ALT kernel.
Windows, transition, and animator settings to "off" in development settings.
Wheatley governor set to 384 min, 1.72 max.
system tuner app on system controls set to "recommended".
No over/undervolt.
forced GPU rendering in development settings.
These are my main settings, but yours will likely differ.
Happy tuning....g
^^Limited performance from "only a dual core" ...
Hardware is WAY ahead of software right now.
The second core is offline most of the time due to no load and developers of apps not fully understanding how to utilise multiple threads...
Adding more cores on top of an unused core ain't really gonna help much.
And yet we cant even stream a quality youtube video above 22 FPS, all the while the MSM8660 specs boast a capability of nearly 60 FPS with the Adreno 220 GPU.
So my question is, Are we seeing reduced performance from the CPU, or the GPU. It cant be all software, as we see the reductions when ranging software from GB to JB.
Drivers are in play of course, but I can't hardly imagine a piece of code so poorly made, as to reduce output capacity by 50%.
Not doubting you brother because I "know" you know your way around this machine, and because we so many times have traveled the same paths of thought. And it's entirely possible I'm missing a critical point here. But damn...I wanted the stated video speeds, and I'm not getting what Qual and company promised me. and in a direct comparison to the note2 quad, it's night and day as I watch the same video on my note1 next to my wifes 2. The odds are in favor of 2 cores running low speed on the quad core unit, as opposed to our note 1 running a single core wide open until the second one is needed. That of course was the basis for my statement.
OP can tweak for many great improvements, but I personally feel like we were duped on the claimed output of the 8660.....g
Just get a wife - then the phone lag will seem so trivial.
LOL .....he speaks the truth ....g