http://www.engadget.com/lg-star/preview/
Definitely an impressive piece of hardware, the Nexus S will have to do for now I guess.
A key question:
Does it have any US 3G (850/AWS/1900) band?
If not, it lost a leg.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cULT5ZeI44s&feature=player_embedded
^ video
Yes, such a beautiful phone, is it SLCD? I guess I can bypass SAMOLED if it is.
I am still waiting to see, the first orion-based phones, as they will be without a doubt the fastest phones. I just hope Samsung up the looks of the phones, maybe not so plasticy, more glass is nice though.
Impressive but not a fan of LG phones. Samsung galaxy 2 will be the talk bigining of next year
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
irishrally said:
Engadget just put the LG Start dual core tegra2 running on 2.2 through Quadrant and it only scored 2100. Galaxy S phones have scored much higher than this which makes me feel good about Google's choice. I just hope the file system issues are gone in the Nexus S.
If the dual core LG star was going on sale next Thursday, I would still go for the Nexus S, without a doubt.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My thoughts exactly
Those high 20k plus quadrant scores are due to lagfix that tricks quadrant I/O score not actual performance increase
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
also keep in mind that that phone will probably come to the US 5-10 months from now and probably only be on one provider, and it won't be t-mobile, so if your a t-mobile fan, nexus s is still for you.
You can get a better real world estimate of galaxy s series without using ext2 loop. ie all ext4. Which gives 1400 - 1700 depending on setup. I saw where nexus s did quadrant with ext4 plus some other fs and was comparable: 1400–1500. I'm with above poster, can't wait to see Orion vs tegra2.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Also for those who don't know...galaxy s phones gpu is capped at 56 fps seems to be same with NS..not that you really need more that 60fps but score could be much higher.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Heh...my MT4 got 56FPS.
Not bad.
gogol said:
Not really impressive if I see the Neocore benchmark.
LG-Star = 67 fps
Nexus S = 55 fps (Engadget review)
My friends HTC Desire HD = 58 fps
My HTC Desire = 27 fps
Well, I would expect at least 1.5 times compared to single core, more than 80 fps.
The difference right now is only 12 fps average ...
But, it might change if the LG Star is also using Android 2.3, that might be more than 67 fps.
Still, 55 fps is more than enough for games !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.
Tegra2 ~ Hummingbird. About the same power.
Rawat said:
Nexus S is capped to 55.55* fps, just like the other Galaxy S phones. The phone is maxing out the benchmark
The nenamark1 scores on Nexus S are higher than LG star.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.
demo23019 said:
Nice try to out do me and talk over me but its 56 not 55.55 lol i just ran 55.8 on neocore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not trying to talk over you. It is capped to 55.555*. There's a parameter that can be changed when compiling the kenrel, and it'll be capped at 65fps. Neocore scores 65fps with a kernel that's compiled with the parameter
Anderdroid said:
Haha it is definitely 56. Quadrant maxes out at 56 as does quake 3 arena.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
55.5 rounded up is 56. And 55.55 rounded up is 55.6, which is what my Galaxy S has scored since they day I got it.
EDIT: you can check build.prop, and it mentions (a rounded down) 55fps: windowsmgr.max_events_per_sec=55
this phne may be fast but it's ugly and it also has a skined version of android
The Nexus S does
Related
I am highly interested in this phone as a gaming device and I know it would be awesome to see this phone truly benchmarked video wise. The droidx beats it because of uncapped FPS even though it has a worse GPU.
don't worry too much about it. 56 is a really good number. once more graphics intensive games come out, our phones will shine at 56 FPS while others will struggle.
I thought it was already determined that the FPS wasn't capped. I know on my phone when running quadrant it does go above 56 but seems to average around 56. Besides I don't see any games out right now that would benefit from high frame rates, except maybe ps1.
speoples20 said:
I thought it was already determined that the FPS wasn't capped. I know on my phone when running quadrant it does go above 56 but seems to average around 56. Besides I don't see any games out right now that would benefit from high frame rates, except maybe ps1.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is not the point of the games but if our fps is uncapped right now, the droidx gets more fps than our phone with a older model GPU. 60 FPS is all you need for games but Im saying, why would I want a SGS for video games with apparently a DroidX gpu is better according to benchmarking.
I think the lower scores vs. the Droid 2 is more an indication of how lousy Quandrant is as a benchmark than any indication of the actual potential of the SGS.
^^
The droid X does NOT have a higher fps. I've tested one, an incredible, rooted/stock droid, nexus,etc....
None of these phones came close to 56.7 fps like the Vibrant.
Not sure where you got that, but it's incorrect.
Mark271 said:
It is not the point of the games but if our fps is uncapped right now, the droidx gets more fps than our phone with a older model GPU. 60 FPS is all you need for games but Im saying, why would I want a SGS for video games with apparently a DroidX gpu is better according to benchmarking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Find anywhere where the Droid x gpu is faster. Necore is like 42 fps vs sgs 55+, nenomark 1 is 44 on sgs and what? 22 on dx?
Your info is wrong, now the dx may jump that high during testing at one point, but average the sgs holds steady framerates much better.
There is a cap though. No matter what I can never go above 56 fps on any app.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
smashpunks said:
Find anywhere where the Droid x gpu is faster. Necore is like 42 fps vs sgs 55+, nenomark 1 is 44 on sgs and what? 22 on dx?
Your info is wrong, now the dx may jump that high during testing at one point, but average the sgs holds steady framerates much better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I had seen a video of reviews and was surprised when they said the Droid X got like 59 FPS on quadrant while the SGS got 56
Mark271 said:
I had seen a video of reviews and was surprised when they said the Droid X got like 59 FPS on quadrant while the SGS got 56
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But that's untrue. Sgs wins in every gpu benchmark.
smashpunks said:
But that's untrue. Sgs wins in every gpu benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I wish I could find the video, I am too lazy to look through the 1000 of comparison videos.
But granted, maybe I was mistaken.
^ trust me, I've tested both... whatever you say you saw, again, it is incorrect.
Mark271 said:
Hmm, I wish I could find the video, I am too lazy to look through the 1000 of comparison videos.
But granted, maybe I was mistaken.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've seen probably every dx and sgs gpu benchmark video out. I can 100 % guarantee that the sgs not only beats the dx, but whips it by a good margin. They may have said at point during the test the dx may go over 60 at some points, but its all over the place going from 40 to 60 back down and up and etc. Where as the sgs just chills nicely around 56 although I've seen it jump to 58 its just all around more smooth and steady framerate vs the dx.....
Here's a video where they run the sgs against the dx, n1 and evo. Clearly see in neocore that the sgs eats the others alive and also in real world testing on them. Sgs clearly even beats the dx.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtube_gdata_player&v=FRK2stnV3Wg
Haha okay. My bad. I would still like an uncapped to get a proper benchmark.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Mark271 said:
Haha okay. My bad. I would still like an uncapped to get a proper benchmark.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why are you so into mines is bigger than yours?
I have an idea but I don't think it is worth posting...
Hi if anyone wanted to know how the desire HD stacks up here are some benchmarks.
Quadrant = ~1800
Linpack = ~40
Neocore = ~58 fps
Uploding a video now :-D
[EDIT]
Video Taking Ages To Upload ...... here are some 0xBenchmark comparisons of the GalaxyS / Desire HD / Desire
http://0xbenchmark.appspot.com/run/[email protected]/GalaxyS
cool!
That Quadrant is a little lower than others have posted. I saw a vid on youtube of it reaching over 2000!
Just did quadrant again and got 1998 so yer 1800 - 2000 sounds right
:-D
having a higher neocore score means this phone does 3D better compared to galaxy s? Any game demo review on the DHD? really wanna see how does it does 3D gaming like asphalt or sandstorm - modern combat (multi touch intense)
------ Added 0xBenchmark to first post ------
override182 said:
having a higher neocore score means this phone does 3D better compared to galaxy s? Any game demo review on the DHD? really wanna see how does it does 3D gaming like asphalt or sandstorm - modern combat (multi touch intense)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Higher score is one thing but the games run better on PowerVR
Beards said:
Higher score is one thing but the games run better on PowerVR
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thats why.. hurm.. too bad then, having a higher neocore than the SGS dosent do any good..
Beards said:
Higher score is one thing but the games run better on PowerVR
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Isn't this just an optimization issue?
real life apps
but how does the phone perform in normal use apps? Because i'm thinking about getting the phone but i would like the phone to perform better in apps like psx4Droid than my desire does now.
So does anybody know anything about this ?
Galaxy s phones are limited to 56 fps, check the results for a more demanding benchmark like nenamark
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
android53 said:
Galaxy s phones are limited to 56 fps, check the results for a more demanding benchmark like nenamark
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
then whats the use of having a theoretical 90mil triangle p/s hardware but it cant reach higher than 56fps.. hurm.. such a waste..
override182 said:
then whats the use of having a theoretical 90mil triangle p/s hardware but it cant reach higher than 56fps.. hurm.. such a waste..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Erm. No. The vsync on the screens is 60fps anyway, so rendering faster than that is mostly useless. Also, if you are rendering a more complex scene, you will still have a higher fps with the 90M triangle hardware, it just won't go over 60.
jords12 said:
Erm. No. The vsync on the screens is 60fps anyway, so rendering faster than that is mostly useless. Also, if you are rendering a more complex scene, you will still have a higher fps with the 90M triangle hardware, it just won't go over 60.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly... Anything over 60 is a waste.
Here is my quadrant results.
Look this
HTC Desire HD unboxing + Neocore + Linpack + Quadrant test
ww.youtube.com/watch?v=eTBE9OkDRnU
DevilzDontCry said:
but how does the phone perform in normal use apps? Because i'm thinking about getting the phone but i would like the phone to perform better in apps like psx4Droid than my desire does now.
So does anybody know anything about this ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PSX4Droid runs slow. Quite disappointing. Im not playing PSX-games on Desire HD. Too many good games, and Desire HD doesn’t do the justice.
Okay so I ran Nenamark on both my Vibrant and Nexus S. To my surprise, Nexus S scored 39.5 FPS while the Vibrant scored 51.8 FPS.
Anyone know what GPU is in the Nexus S? I was under the impression it would be the same as the SGS line; there doesn't seem to be a definite answer either on the forums.
EDIT: Bleh, stupid me. Nenamark displays the GPU information. According to Nenamark, both Nexus S and Vibrant have a PowerVR SGX 540. So why the huge difference in benchmarks?
DarkAgent said:
Okay so I ran Nenamark on both my Vibrant and Nexus S. To my surprise, Nexus S scored 39.5 FPS while the Vibrant scored 51.8 FPS.
Anyone know what GPU is in the Nexus S? I was under the impression it would be the same as the SGS line; there doesn't seem to be a definite answer either on the forums.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*sigh* these benchmarks are so unscientific
There is some suspicious stuff in the kernel sources that refers to the PowerVR SGX 535 chip. Hope Samsung isn't trying to pull a fast one on us by using a 535 and making it look like a 540 to apps. Interestingly, when trying to boot the Nexus S kernel on a Galaxy S, supercurio ran into display driver failures. Maybe because it's trying to use 535 drivers with a 540?
Something is definitely up... it makes no sense that with the same hardware Nexus S scores less than Vibrant.
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/7h7r8b
And a Google employee confirmed the same GPU
slowz3r said:
http://www.twitlonger.com/show/7h7r8b
And a Google employee confirmed the same GPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I already edited the OP to state that Nenamark reads both as a 540. Now the question why are they benchmarking so differently.
DarkAgent said:
I already edited the OP to state that Nenamark reads both as a 540. Now the question why are they benchmarking so differently.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh sorry, didnt read the edit
Hmmm, Maybe Touchwiz does add some good lol
Idk though
Galaxy s/ vibrant only scores over 50 FPS on nenamark if you're OC
but yea score seems kind of low score 47 on my vibrant noticed some stuttering and not as smooth on NS scored 42
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9792903&postcount=33
demo23019 said:
galaxy s/ vibrant only scores over 50 FPS on nenamark if you're OC
but yea score seems kind of low
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=9792903&postcount=33
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not OC'ed though :-( I am running completely stock, minus a few bloatware apps on the Vibrant.
Now that you mention it, though, I don't recall my Vibrant ever hitting 50 FPS on nenamark before. This is odd...
I wouldn't worry good things will come with the great developers here im sure it will be tweaked
also neocore bench is pretty much the same as my vibrant 55.6
The "old" Vibrant Froyo leaks performed worse on 3d rendering than the original eclair believe it or not. Not MUCH worse, but a bit worse. Don't know about the latest leaks. Not noticeable enough to care.
If there is any remaining doubt. Here's the iFixit teardown of the Nexus S:
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nexus-S-Teardown/4365/2
Note the CPU: S5PC110A01
Google that up, it's a 540.
maybe the nexus S has the gpu clocked lower?
demo23019 said:
I wouldn't worry good things will come with the great developers here im sure it will be tweaked
also neocore bench is pretty much the same as my vibrant 55.6
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but any half decent GPU hits 55ish on Neocore.
DarkAgent said:
Yeah but any half decent GPU hits 55ish on Neocore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Only one ive seen that's currently available is Adreno 205 that can keep up in neocore
DebauchedSloth said:
If there is any remaining doubt. Here's the iFixit teardown of the Nexus S:
http://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/Nexus-S-Teardown/4365/2
Note the CPU: S5PC110A01
Google that up, it's a 540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Case closed
DarkAgent said:
Yeah but any half decent GPU hits 55ish on Neocore.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which ones
jasonyump said:
maybe the nexus S has the gpu clocked lower?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
someone should give you a cookie. yes this makes sense but it also could have something to do with more tasks moved to the gpu, a different driver, or the changes in gingerbread 3d api that the benchmarks arnt written for
Hmm that's odd. I think it's a problem with Gingerbread and not so much the actual hardware. Quadrant standard runs terribly on the Nexus S and now Nenamark is giving unusual scores. These developers really need to update these benchmarks, seriously. Quadrant hasn't been updated in so long so undoubtedly that will have problems with the new framework from Gingerbread.
I agree with Arcadia310 I believe its also a software issue not a hardware and like he said the apps needed updating.
You guys are probably right, although it seems weird apps wouldn't work on 2.3 seeing as it isn't as big of a update as 2.1 -> 2.2 was.
Yesterday I installed nenamark on my nexus one and ran my first benchmark, and I swear I got 30.1 fps. I specifically noted that it was spot on with movie frame rates.
Every subsequent test I've run I only get around 16fps. Perhaps 30 is way too high for the nexus one's hardware. But did I just imagine my original score or did I actually get that high? What's the highest score we've seen on the nexus one?
Why not just open it again and on the main screen it says what the highest recorded score it...
That'll tell you what your best score it. Also i maxed out on 16.2FPS :-/
Yeah my best run says 17 so I guess I imagined it. But I could have sworn I saw it. Oh well...
It was allllll just a dream ;p
Share your drugs
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
42.8 fps nenamark
Galaxy S Captivate
Couldn't using one of these newer kernels with updated GPU drivers be helping?
I got 17.5 fps. Not bad for a year old 1 GHz superphone
Sent from my Nexus One using XDA App
I just got a 22f p s yesterday if you believe it. Same exact kernel and all and it shows up in my high score at least.
My one is 22.3fps, without any tweaks, cleans e.t.c
Miui + wildmonks kernel.
16.4 on the N1 (CM 6.1.1), 36.5 on the galaxy tab
Edit: Remembered I'd underclocked my CPU, ramped it up to 1113Mhz and got 22.9fps. (Which I can't duplicate, can only hit 22.3fps now)
Tell you what, 22 isn't too bad considering this hardware.
My question is how does windows phone 7 devices, that all use the same CPU combo as the nexus one, get silky smooth scrolling thru the entire OS, including very large web pages etc. Do they just use that much better drivers? It definitely shows its possible and the potential.
whilst running Quadrant, there were a few issues that occured to me, The TF is supposed to have a superior GPU so why has Asus capped the frames per second in the graphics benchmark my Xperia X8 which is far less superior than the TF can reach around 50 FPS on the moon orbiting sun graphics, while the TF can only do about 30-35, i was just wondering if this should be an issue
Resolution
rilot said:
Resolution
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
very straightforward answer man.
Nenamark1 => 35fps
Nenamark2 => 18fps
Quadrant => 2528 avg
Smartbench 2011 = 3232
Running Roach's Prime 1.4 (HC 3.1)
Terrible FPS scores in comparison to other inferior devices. The Smartbench scores show it's pretty close to other 1.0ghz HC Tegra2 devices.... but still not great....