just my observation: Quadrant run for touchpad only gives score of around 2400... my nook color with 1.3ghz single core gives score of over 2600 all the time!!! i looked into the device info, it seems like it only using 1 core!!! does cm7 only recognizing one core??? what r ur guys thought??? is there a fix for it or any kernels that utilize both cores of touchpad!!!
The Quadrant results on the TP are skewed because the GPU code has not yet been implemented (or optimized) which primarily affects the FPS section (looks like is is only doing about 4 frames per second) where all the other graphics demos (especially the planet one) do 20-60 frames per second which is a 300%-600% improvement over the Nook Color running 1.2GHz.
I would be interested in other benchmarks that are not dependent on the GPU code.
try using Antutu - free from market
it separates the scores according to each test
(also shows total)
i got around 5000 - OC 1.7 ghz
Maybe it is because we are running an un-optimized alpha build...Don't worry about synthetic benchmarks anyway.
Both cores are already being used, what is your processor clocked too?
I'm completely aware benchmarks don't really mean much, but for curiosities sake, out of 3 runs, I averaged 3228 in quadrant. I am overclocked to 1782mhz ondemand.
I suggest you run SunSpider also.
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.
Hi,I Wanted To Buy A New Android Tablet At A Reasonable Price...
And I Found Asus Memo Pad HD7 On The Internet..
I Like The Specs Of This Tablet But I Don't Know If This Tablet Is Good For Gaming
So I Wanted To Know If This Tablet Is Good For Gaming ?..
Asus Memo Pad HD7 Main Specs :
Processor Type : 1.2 GHz Quad Core Cortex A7 MediaTek MT8125
Gpu : PowerVR SGX544
1 Gb Ram
________________________
I Used To Own Ainol Novo 7 Crystal 1 (Specs Below) And I Want To Know If Asus Memo Pad HD7 Will Be Better Then Ainol Novo 7 Crystal 1
Ainol Novo 7 Crystal 1 Main Specs
Cpu : Amlogic 8726-M6 Cortex-A9 Dual-core ARMv7 Processor
CPU Frequency: 1.5GHz
Gpu : Mali-400
1 Gb Ram
_____________________________
Thanks For Replying In Advance
Edit : There Is Another Tablet Called Ainol Novo 7 Crystal 2(Specs Below) So Should I Buy This One Or Asus Memo Pad HD7 ?
Ainol Novo 7 Crystal 2 Specs
Actions ATM7029 Quad Core 1.5Ghz
GPU : GC1000+
1 GB Ram
____________________________
From the PC Mag review of the Asus: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2422790,00.asp
The HD 7 is powered by a quad-core 1.2GHz MediaTek MT8125 processor with 1GB RAM. It's not the same as the Tegra 3 chip powering the original Nexus 7, but it delivers performance that is largely similar in most applications. Where it does falter, however, is gaming. It only managed 14 frames per second in the Taiji graphics benchmark and intensive games like N.O.V.A. 3 really tripped the HD 7 up, with load times in excess of five minutes and barely playable frame rates. General system performance is reliable and relatively speedy, matching the Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 8.0 and besting the HP Slate 7. Web browsing scores were surprisingly solid, with a Sunspider score of 1470 milliseconds and a Browsermark score of 2191. None of these scores, however, can come close to the new Nexus 7, which absolutely dominates the MeMO Pad HD7 in the performance department. Navigating the system and launching apps didn't yield anything beyond your typical Android stutters and occasional lag. If you want the absolute best for reasonable money, that'll be the Nexus 7. If you want good enough for the least money, that'll be the HD 7.
For the Aionol Crystal: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Ainol-Novo-7-Crystal-Quad-Core-Tablet.92243.0.html
The SoC is built by the Chinese manufacturer Actions Semiconductor and is dubbed Actions ATM 7029. The manufacturer's website specifies four ARM Cortex A9 processors in this SoC, which would be a considerable powerhouse for this price. However, the cores' clock rate of 1 GHz is not very high. Ainol's Novo 7 Crystal Quad Core only offered a poor performance in the synthetic as well as processor benchmarks and constantly placed itself at the lower end.
For Crystal 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XM07JLrlU0
es0tericcha0s said:
From the PC Mag review of the Asus: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2422790,00.asp
The HD 7 is powered by a quad-core 1.2GHz MediaTek MT8125 processor with 1GB RAM. It's not the same as the Tegra 3 chip powering the original Nexus 7, but it delivers performance that is largely similar in most applications. Where it does falter, however, is gaming. It only managed 14 frames per second in the Taiji graphics benchmark and intensive games like N.O.V.A. 3 really tripped the HD 7 up, with load times in excess of five minutes and barely playable frame rates. General system performance is reliable and relatively speedy, matching the Samsung Galaxy Tab 3 8.0 and besting the HP Slate 7. Web browsing scores were surprisingly solid, with a Sunspider score of 1470 milliseconds and a Browsermark score of 2191. None of these scores, however, can come close to the new Nexus 7, which absolutely dominates the MeMO Pad HD7 in the performance department. Navigating the system and launching apps didn't yield anything beyond your typical Android stutters and occasional lag. If you want the absolute best for reasonable money, that'll be the Nexus 7. If you want good enough for the least money, that'll be the HD 7.
For the Aionol Crystal: http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Ainol-Novo-7-Crystal-Quad-Core-Tablet.92243.0.html
The SoC is built by the Chinese manufacturer Actions Semiconductor and is dubbed Actions ATM 7029. The manufacturer's website specifies four ARM Cortex A9 processors in this SoC, which would be a considerable powerhouse for this price. However, the cores' clock rate of 1 GHz is not very high. Ainol's Novo 7 Crystal Quad Core only offered a poor performance in the synthetic as well as processor benchmarks and constantly placed itself at the lower end.
For Crystal 2: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7XM07JLrlU0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I Did Read And View Alot Of Reviews For These Devices But I Want A Suggestion From Someone Who Has Actually Used Any Of These Tablets Or Has Some Experience With Android Hardware(Cpu,Gpu Stuff)...
Hi sir,admins and moderators,I just want to ask about android cpu,I want to buy new phone,what should I get,Octa core Mediatek or Quadcore snap dragon? An android with 5 and above inch with 2 or 3gb ram,Asus,Vivo or Oppo?I like xiomi but I havnt tried yet so not now. I play a lots of PPSSPP Games and my problem is always about FPS.I dont hate SAMSUNG but What I always see in my cpu-z was no cpu on or all cpu was stopped and the governor is aknown.and unlike samsung I try to play others phone like Asus snap dragon,all quad core is on but the governor is in interactive and the Fps is in 40 and above,And other is Oppo, Octa core mediatek,Governor is in interactive but I only see one core is remaining on and the 4 core sometimes every 4 or 6 seconds they turn on and the other 3 core turn on only when other hard games is running,PPSSPP FPS is in 41 and above but when the phone gets lowbatt.it drops into 17 FPS and beIow.I think the snap dragon is in 1.7 Ghz and the mediatek is in 1.4 or 1.7 to? So Im asking what phone is the best to buy? T.Y