Database Users

Galaxy S SGX540 GPU. Any details up 'till now?

Hi everyone
For quite a long time i've been thinking about the whole "galaxy s can do 90mpolys per second" thing.
It sounds like total bull****.
So, after many, many hours of googling, and some unanswered mails to imgtec, i'd like to know-
Can ANYONE provide any concrete info about the SGX540?
From one side i see declerations that the SGX540 can do 90 million polygons per second, and from the other side i see stuff like "Twice the performance of SGX530".
...but twice the performance of SGX530 is EXACTLY what the SGX535 has.
So is the 540 a rebrand of the 535? that can't be, so WHAT THE HELL is going on?
I'm seriously confused, and would be glad if anyone could pour light on the matter.

I asked a Samsung rep what the difference was and this is what I got:
Q: The Samsung Galaxy S uses the SGX540 vs the iPhone using the SGx535. The only data I can find seems like these two GPU's are very similar. Could you please highlight some of the differences between the SGX535 and the SGX540?
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
I also tried getting in contact with ImgTec to find out an answer, but I haven't received a reply back. It's been two weeks now.
Also, the chip is obviously faster than snapdragon with the adreno 200 gpu. I don't know if Adreno supports TBDR, I just know it's a modified Xenon core. Also, Galaxy S uses LPDDR2 ram. So throughput is quite a bit faster, even though it's not *as* necessary with all the memory efficiencies between the Cortex A8 and TBDR on the SGX540.

thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think that is the cue, for cost saving for Samsung
besides who will need a 2D Accelerator, with a CPU as fast as it's already.
The HTC Athena (HTC Advantage) failed miserably at adding the ATI 2D Accelerator which no programmers were able to take advantage of, in the end the CPU did all the work.

I'd imagine its a 535 at 45nm. Just a guess, the cpu is also 45nm

Having tried a few phones the speed in games is far better, much better fps though there is a problem that we might have to wait for any games to really test its power as most are made to run on all phones.
This was the same problem with the xbox and ps2, the xbox had more power but the ps2 was king and so games were made with its hardware in mind which held back the xbox, only now and then did a xbox only game come out that really made use of its power....years later xbox changed places which saw 360 hold the ps3 back (dont start on which is better lol) and the ps3 has to make do with 360 ports but when it has a game made just for it you really get to see what it can do...anywayits nice to know galaxy is future proof game wise and cannot wait to see what it can do in future or what someone can port on to it.
On a side note I did read that the videos run through the graphics chip which is causing blocking in dark movies (not hd...lower rips) something about it not reading the difference between shades of black, one guy found a way to turn the chip off and movies were all good, guess rest of us have to wait for firmware to sort this.

thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
smart move sammy

voodoochild2008-
I wouldn't say we'd have to wait so much.
Even today, snapdragon devices don't do very well in games, since their fillrate is so low (133Mpixels)
Even the motorola droid (SGX530 at 110mhz, about 9~ Mpoly's and 280~ Mpixels with that freq) fares MUCH better in games, and actually, runs pretty much everything.
So i guess the best hardware is not yet at stake, but weaker devices should be hitting the limit soon.
bl4ckdr4g00n- Why the hell should we care? I don't see any problem with 2D content and/or videos, everything flies at lightspeed.

well I can live in hope, and I guess apples mess (aka the iphone4) will help now as firms are heading more towards android, I did read about one big firm in usa dropping marketing for apple and heading to android, and well thats what you get when you try to sell old ideas...always made me laugh when the first iphone did like 1meg photo when others were on 3meg, then it had no video when most others did, then they hype it when it moves to a 3meg cam and it does video.....omg, ok I am going to stop as it makes my blood boil that people buy into apple, yes they started the ball rolling and good on them for that but then they just sat back and started to count the money as others moved on.................oh and when I bought my galaxy the website did say "able to run games as powerfull as the xbox (old one) so is HALO too much to ask for lol

wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??

The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby

he 535 is a downgrade from the 540. 540 is the latest and greatest from the PowerVR line.
Samsung did not cost cut, they've in fact spent MORE to get this chip on their Galaxy S line. No one else has the 540 besides Samsung.

Like i said, its probably just a process shrink which means our gpu uses less power and is possibly higher clocked.
p.s. desktop gfx haven't had 2d acceleration for years removing it saves transistors for more 3d / power!

This worries me as well... Seems like it might not be as great as what we thought. HOWEVER again, this is a new device that might be fixed in firmware updates. Because obviously the hardware is stellar, there's something holding it back
Pika007 said:
The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.slashgear.com/droid-x-review-0793011/
"We benchmarked the DROID X using Quadrant, which measures processor, memory, I/O and 2D/3D graphics and combines them into a single numerical score. In Battery Saver mode, the DROID X scored 819, in Performance mode it scored 1,204, and in Smart mode it scored 963. In contrast, the Samsung Galaxy S running Android 2.1 – using Samsung’s own 1GHz Hummingbird CPU – scored 874, while a Google Nexus One running Android 2.2 – using Qualcomm’s 1GHz Snapdragon – scored 1,434. "
The N1's performance can be explained by the fact it's 2.2...
But the Droid X, even with the "inferior" GPU, outscored the Galaxy S? Why?

gdfnr123 said:
wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. I want to know which one is has the better performance as well.
Besides that. Does anyone know which CPU is better between Dorid X and Galaxy S?
I knew that OMAP chip on the original Droid can overclock to 1.2Ghz from what, 550Mhz?
How about the CPU on Droid X and Galaxy S? Did anyone do the comparison between those chips? Which can overclock to a higher clock and which one is better overall?
Sorry about the poor English. Hope you guys can understand.

The CPU in the DroidX is a stock Cortex A8 running at 1GHz. The Samsung Hummingbird is a specialized version of the Cortex A8 designed by Intrinsity running at 1Ghz.
Even Qualcomm does a complete redesign of the Cortex A8 in the snapdragon cpu at 1GHz. But while the original A8 could only be clocked at 600Mhz with a reasonable power drain, the striped down versions of the A8 could be clocked higher while maintaining better power.
An untouched Cortex A8 can do more at the same frequencies compared to a specialized stripped down A8.
If anything the Samsung Galaxy S is better balanced, leveraging the SGX 540 as a video decoder as well. However, the Droid X should be quite snappy in most uses.
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.

TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.

Pika007 said:
TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SGS might be falling behind in I/O speeds... It is well known that all the app data is stored in a slower internal SD-card partition... Has anyone tried the benchmarks with the lag fix?
Also, if only android made use of the GPU's to help render the UI's... It's such a shame that the GPU only goes to use in games...

Using the GPU to render the UI would take tons of battery power.
I preffer it being a bit less snappy, but a whole lot easier on the battery.

thephawx said:
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.

TexUs said:
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think so. The battery will be the biggest issue for the smart phone in the future if it just remain 1500mAh or even less.
The dual-core CPU could be fast but power aggressive as well.

[OFFTOPIC] Ipad2 Dual Core CPU made by Samsung

Apple's A5 CPU in iPad 2 confirms manufacturing by Samsung
source: http://www.appleinsider.com/article...ipad_2_confirms_manufacturing_by_samsung.html
That was quite a funny thing to read for the morning breakfast
Ipad2 Dual core CPUs are made by Samsung.
In a way we can expect really good CPUs for our next phone upgrade from Samsung
I wouldn't be surprised if the CPU used on the upcoming SGS2 is the same dual core CPU as the one found in Ipad2

The same was the case in the iPhone 4, original iPad, and the Samsung Galaxy S series of phones.
I'm actually kind of curious what kind of agreements the two have now. The A4/Hummingbird chip was originally created by Intrinsity and Samsung, then Apple acquired Intrinsity. I they probably had shared IP the whole time and are continuing the relationship to bring the same basic chip design to both Apple and Samsung. The chips aren't identical, but they are pretty close. The CPU is the same I believe, but being that it's a SOC, the GPUs and other components aren't necessarily the same.

Are there any detailed information? I wonder if iPad 2 uses Exynos...

d3sm0nd said:
Are there any detailed information? I wonder if iPad 2 uses Exynos...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I doubt it. Exynos is the name of the SoC. They are likely using a similar Cortex A9 CPU, but the SoC is likely customized depending on the application. Apple would have had little reason to acquire Intrinsity if they were going to use Samsung's whole package. That's how the A4 and Hummingbird were.
To add a little further proof, Apple is said to be using the SGX543MP GPU in the A5, while we know that the Orion (Exynos 4210) SoC that the SGS 2 will be using is using the Mali 400 GPU.
I'm not sure what Apple's intentions are exactly. They may just be interested in customizing their packages to their specific needs, but get the major parts (CPU, GPU, etc) built by someone else, or they may be in a learning process to completely design their own chips in the future. They certainly have the money to do something like that, but I don't know that they have the interest.
At least that's how I see it all. If anyone else has further insight please let us know.

The SGX543MP4 (used in the sony NGP) is wayyyyyyy better than the mali 400, but you get what you get
Now, the interesting part about the PowerVR is that it is a true MIMD [Multiple Instruction-Multiple Data http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MIMD ] architecture. In their press releases, ImgTech is bragging about the capabilities of the "GP-GPU", but even if we take a look at the specifications with the cold head, a lot of surprises are in store. The multi-core design is available in dual, quad, octal and sedec-core variants [SGX543MP2, SGX543MP4, SGX543MP8, SGX543MP16], and they're by no means slouches.
For instance, a quad-core version SGX543MP4 at only 200 MHz frequency delivers 133 million polygons per second and offers fill-rate of four billion pixels per second [4GPixel/s], in the range of GeForce 8600 cards. For that matter, 4GPixel/s runs 40nm GeForce GT210 [2.5 GPixel/s] into the ground. Given that GeForce GT210 runs at 589 MHz for the core and 1.4 GHz for shaders. Since PowerVR SGX543 targets handheld devices, there is no saying what the performance plateau is.
An eight core SGX543MP8 at 200 MHz delivers 266 million polygons and eight billion pixels per second, while faster clocked version, for instance, at 400 MHz would deliver 532 million polygons and 16 billion pixels per second. 16 billion pixels per second equal GeForce GTX 260-216, for instance.
After analyzing the performance at hand, it is no wonder that Sony chose to go with PowerVR for the next-generation PlayStation Portable. While the exact details of the SoC are still in question, our take is that Sony could go with quad-core setup at 400MHz [8GPixel/s], paired with a dual-core CPU based on ARM Cortex architecture. This would put Sony direct in line against Tegra-powered Nintendo DS2, PowerVR-based Apple's iPhone 4G and Palm Pre2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

ryude said:
The SGX543MP4 (used in the sony NGP) is wayyyyyyy better than the mali 400, but you get what you get
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The source of this is information is what exactly...?

martino2k6 said:
The source of this is information is what exactly...?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The mali 400 specs and performance figures have already been revealed, as well as the SGX543MP4. Benchmarks also favor the PowerVR.

Strange, so I guess that this disproves the other articles that have stated that Apple has had the Taiwanese company TSMC develop the chips for them.
Sent from my Nexus S

Carne_Asada_Fries said:
Strange, so I guess that this disproves the other articles that have stated that Apple has had the Taiwanese company TSMC develop the chips for them.
Sent from my Nexus S
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The proof is solid and indeed disproves those other articles.

d3sm0nd said:
Are there any detailed information? I wonder if iPad 2 uses Exynos...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The GPU is different in Ipad 2, Ipad 2 has PowerVR SGX543MP2 (I think MP2 means 2 cores) according to Anandtech.
http://www.anandtech.com/Show/Index...rmance-explored-powervr-sgx543mp2-benchmarked

ryude said:
The mali 400 specs and performance figures have already been revealed, as well as the SGX543MP4. Benchmarks also favor the PowerVR.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iPad has the MP2 variant, which has two cores. The Mali-400 has 4 cores. I mean, this doesn't mean much but personally I think it's still in the air until someone does proper benchmarks with optimised drivers on a final release model.

martino2k6 said:
iPad has the MP2 variant, which has two cores. The Mali-400 has 4 cores. I mean, this doesn't mean much but personally I think it's still in the air until someone does proper benchmarks with optimised drivers on a final release model.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll definitely be interested since I just got the iPad 2 and tentatively plan on getting the SGS2. Biggest thing about Android though is that it's so hard to get apps that actually utilize the GPU to it's fullest extent. Apps don't get updated for one top of the line phone while most can't handle it, so in that sense I think we'll see better performance out of the iPad 2. It'll be interesting to see if the Tegra games run on the SGS2 and if they are optimized enough to make good use out of the GPU.

Wouldn't it be possible, with an ipad that is jailbroken to allow dual booting into android since the processor will match that of samsungs mobiles? Generally doesn't the Chooser/firmware discrepancy usually disallow this? If this gap is now filled it would seem doable.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

crossfire2500 said:
Wouldn't it be possible, with an ipad that is jailbroken to allow dual booting into android since the processor will match that of samsungs mobiles? Generally doesn't the Chooser/firmware discrepancy usually disallow this? If this gap is now filled it would seem doable.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And why would you want to do that? People buy iDevices for the UX which iOS gives, mainly the multitude of apps and ease of use that it provides. Furthermore, Steve Jobs would chop your head off...

crossfire2500 said:
Wouldn't it be possible, with an ipad that is jailbroken to allow dual booting into android since the processor will match that of samsungs mobiles? Generally doesn't the Chooser/firmware discrepancy usually disallow this? If this gap is now filled it would seem doable.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The CPU is probably the easiest part. As long as you're an ARM CPU, you can compile support for it. It's the drivers for every other piece of hardware that would be important.

Tegra 2 faster than a5, Exynos, Dual-core Snapdragon

I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"

Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
rex-tc said:
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

****ty deal... I wonder how much software it will take to make it speedy gonzales
Sent from my Xoom using XDA App

dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ouch well put??? lol

dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.

Nado85 said:
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both the Ipad2 and the Odroid run at higher resolutions than the Atrix, that should make them worse, not better off.
The Xoom is ~30% larger than the ipad2, but that is not enough to explain why the ipad2 is 4 times better
The Odroid is again larger than the Xoom, and that performes 3 times better than the Xoom.

dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you know what this points out? That people are VERY stupid and care too much about upcoming technology! Everything people buy ends up being obsolete in about a week or two. Its REALLY sad to see this because these software developers put a lot of time for something that will only be hot for a few weeks and then its yesterdays news. That's why software is getting choppier, and there is no quality backing anymore.
Aside from my *****ing...i do like how that Samsung platform works..quite impressive, i'd like to see what Nvidia will do next. These new technologies have been pushed mad crazy this last year. I think quality and reliability will take a hit quite hard due to the silicon being pushed to the limit of its threshold...we're not too far from that.

Mafisometal said:
... I think quality and reliability will take a hit quite hard due to the silicon being pushed to the limit of its threshold...we're not too far from that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Silicone has a long way to go before it max'es out. The good news is Nvidia has years of quality GPU fabbing and they've got loads of tricks up their sleeves yet.
What Samsung and Qualcomm dont have right now is games & software optimised for their chipsets. This is where the Tegra II is a step a head of the rest..
So don't stress peoples!

tadjiik said:
Both the Ipad2 and the Odroid run at higher resolutions than the Atrix, that should make them worse, not better off..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, the Atrix is also running Android 2.2, where as the Odroid is on 2.3 which is optimised for dual core CPU's.....
We will all see a big difference when Moto release 2.3 / 2.4 for the Atrix.

I can confirm the SGX540 (iphone 4 graphics processor) beast tegra 2. i know the resolution is lower, however the smoothness and especially quick scrolling on jam packed websites like non moble youtube for example show its smoother.
i have not done a bench yet. i am more than happy with my atrix. actaully i just got an amd zacate fusion e350 and its on part with my atrix dual core yet eats 18watts. actaully, the atrix plays less choppy than the zacate.
however, its not as fast 'yet' as the sxg540 and OMG i bet the SGX543 is awesome.

The iPhone 5 had a higher resolution then the atrix, yet scored 15-16 fps in tests where the atrix gets 48-50. The tegra 2 I'd very future proof for s few.months especially considering that man manufacturers are still making single core phones.
To see what optimization can do. Download fruit slice, and compare it to fruit ninja tegra HD.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App

Techcruncher said:
The iPhone 5 had a higher resolution then the atrix, yet scored 15-16 fps in tests where the atrix gets 48-50. The tegra 2 I'd very future proof for s few.months especially considering that man manufacturers are still making single core phones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you refering to the iphone4 here? That has a SGX535, which is worse than Tegra2, that is correct. But it is still not beating SGX540 (Samsung galaxy s), they seem to be about on par, according to glbenchmark.com. If you were refering to the ipad2, that beats tegra2 in just about anything.
To see what optimization can do. Download fruit slice, and compare it to fruit ninja tegra HD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And what proof do you have that those games are not able to play on non-tegra phones or (more likely) could be optimized just as well or better for non-tegra phones? Throwing up a game that has not really been tested on non-tegra phones does not prove anything.
To throw the ball back, if you want to see what optimizations can do for Exynos do a search for "engadget exynos gdc", which has a 1080p 3D demo @60 fps (I am unable to post links...)

lol nice try.
oh and "your devices"? I like how you assume I'm an apple fanboy when I'm actually a die-hard android user... i HAVE an atrix, a nexus S, a nexus one. What phones do you have? and the benchmark scores I posted were all between android devices so I'm not sure where you're seeing these "awesome scores" for the ipad?
come back when you actually have something to contribute.
Nado85 said:
Are you freaking kidding me?! You're an idiot mate.
All these devices have different resolutions so obviously your devices with **** resolutions (ie ipad) will have awesome scores.
Dude seriously poor effort.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

rex-tc said:
I am sick of everyone thinking the upcoming dual-core devices will blow away tegra 2.
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core A5 (Ipad 2)
A lot of talk about Andntech OpenGL benchmark trumping Tegra 2, but what about Stockfish and Benchit Pi where A5 got slaughtered (PC Magazine)? With half the RAM and lower clock I don't see this thing smoking Tegra 2 in all benchmarks, or real life CPU situations.
Tegra 2 vs Exynos (Some Galaxy S2)
Lower benchmarks in Smartbench Gaming. Plus there is early benchmarks of Quadrant scores of 2100 tablets running the Exynos 4210. There is a reason why Samsung Galaxy S2 is including Tegra 2 in some regions.
Androidevolution.."One negative surprise on the S2 so far has been the level of GPU performance. So far, most of the early benchmark shows that Exynos 4210 isn’t up to par when it comes to the GPU performance. This is strange given that Samsung was leading the market when they introduced the previous generation SoC ...... Smartbench 2011 GPU numbers are once again, very disappointing"
Tegra 2 vs Dual Core-Snapdragon (HTC Pyramid)
This thing got smoked in Smartbench with gaming and productivity.
" Their tests confirm that the Pyramid indeed houses a dual-core chip, but the popular Smarbench 2011 shows a CPU and GPU that simply don’t hold up to the Tegra 2 chip found in the LG Optimus 2X and Motorola Atrix 4G"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You really need to wait for benchmarks on the EVO 3D to come out.
And you really need to see a finalized and optimized (Driver wise) S2.
To make a fair comparison.

dinan said:
Yea you're comparing pre-release builds of phones (S2 and Pyramid) with a Tegra 2 which has been out for months? Also, it's sad how poor the Tegra 2 platforms perform compared to the SGX540 which has been out for half a year already and still gets outscored in most benchmarks.
Oh and if you look at the most recent GLBenchmark 2.0 Egypt... Samsung's Exynos scores around 4000 compared to the Xoom's 1300 and Atrix's 2000. Even the original Galaxy S scores higher... around 2400.
Odroid-A Tablet which runs Exynos: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Hardkernel
Xoom and Atrix: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...4&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Motorola
Original Galaxy S: http://www.glbenchmark.com/result.j...=0&version=all&certified_only=2&brand=Samsung
And don't even bring up the Ipad 2. That thing has a dual core SGX543 which even in the single core version outperforms the SGX540, which the Tegra 2 can't even beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best. The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2. Which means higher res textures and with the better CPU better physics with PhysX. SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces. When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail. Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.

in the paper,,tegra 2 should be the weakest among them..
in fact, on the test, tegra 2 is not fall behind.
i still think exynos, a5, c2 snapdragon's performance will be better than tegra2, just the matter of time.
well, tegra2 is good enough. but tegra3 and tegra4 are the ones that take the lead.

Well until those "CPU centric" games you're talking about actually come out, the only thing we can compare it to is what's out there right now. If you want to see the Tegra 2 get shamed by the iPad 2's SGX543... http://www.anandtech.com/show/4216/...rmance-explored-powervr-sgx543mp2-benchmarked
rex-tc said:
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best. The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2. Which means higher res textures and with the better CPU better physics with PhysX. SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces. When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail. Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

rex-tc said:
Again more OpenGL benchmarks that prove nothing, nothing more than a fillrate test at best.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tests are comprehensive and test different parts of the chip/driver. There is a few "real-life" tests, as well as a bunch of synthetic tests.
The Tegra 2 has already proven to be better at productivity and a has twice the RAM as the ipad 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wait, so the "productivity" tests do prove something Well, I belive the ipad is clocked somewhat lower than T2, so no real surprise there. Trying to differentiate between different Dual-A9 cores might be hard, though, since they are all based on the same design. The only thing I could see Tegra2 had donewas the inclusion of a hardware JPEG decoder on the Tegra2, that might skew the productivity tests a little. On the other hand, they are not including NEON, so for tests that include that, they might be at a loss.
SGX is nothing but a tile renderer that fakes what a true T&L engine produces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you even know what a tile renderer is? It is not "faking" what a true "T&L engine" produces, it is about not doing rasterization and fragment processing until frames are swapped, thus enabling the use of only a small render buffer (a tile). The only thing it "fakes" is that overdrawn pixels are not fragment processed - but this is also done on non-tilebased to a lesser degree (with early-Z).
By the way, "T&L engine"? There is no hardware "T&L engine" anymore - all is done through shaders nowadays.
When you start having more CPU centric games with high res textures we will see who will prevail.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If we are talking CPU centric, then Tegra2 will be at a loss because of its lack of NEON (which I belive Exynos supports). I am not sure if the Apple has it, but that is still comparing apples and oranges (different OS) when it comes to benchmarks.
Plus the toolset of NVIDIA is MULTIPLE times better and we are already seeing straight PC ports.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you point me to the toolset? When I googled "tegra2 toolset", this post was the first...
Are we seeing PC ports? Could you mention some names/examples? Any reason why they will not run on non-tegra2?

SlimJ87D said:
You really need to wait for benchmarks on the EVO 3D to come out.
And you really need to see a finalized and optimized (Driver wise) S2.
To make a fair comparison.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no no it's important to cherry-pick and declare victory as soon as possible.

I think people need to wait for release of the actual phones before comparing, I mean htc havnt even announced the pyramid an people think its crap because of its in development benchmark, of course scores are going to be crap if its still in development?
Sent from my thumbs

Possible EVO 3D successors CPU?

Next Snapdragon CPU: 2.5GHz, 75% Less Power
Samsung made headlines last week when it promised a 2GHz smartphone CPU for 2012. It wasn’t long ago that such a thing didn’t even seem possible, and the news sparked plenty of conversations about how fast the industry is moving. However, it seems Samsung’s lofty promise has already been outdone by Qualcomm, which is planning new single, dual and quad core Snapdragons that will reach clock speeds 2.5GHz.
A leaked Qualcomm presentation details the company’s plans for its next-generation Snapdragon processors, the MSM8270, MSM8930 and MSM8960 processors, and the APQ8064. Electronista reports that these chips are expected to be as much as five times faster than their predecessors in raw CPU power with four times faster graphics and "console quality gaming." The slides, first posted by MobileTechWorld, also detail 1080p video playback on tablets and other large display devices, stereoscopic 3D capture and playback, and support for 7.1 Dolby, and a 20-megapixel camera.
All of the CPUs are expected to sample before the end of the year but don’t expect to see any products until 2012 at the earliest.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since both the EVO 4G and 3D are using the same brand of processor I think its safe to assume it will also use this next gen processor. I suppose this is good news for those who can't upgrade to the EVO3D this year. There is always something better around the bend.
I would love to see video game benchmark videos for this cpu.
source

the quad cores are a long ways away, but these new Dual cores, possibly running at 2.0 Ghz are going to be insane. The "console gaming" graphics are probably being a little overrated when described that way...
Anyways your in the wrong section, someone move this to Evo 3D discussion

Samzebian said:
the quad cores are a long ways away, but these new Dual cores, possibly running at 2.0 Ghz are going to be insane. The "console gaming" graphics are probably being a little overrated when described that way...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is with newest Adreno on the EVO3D
Samzebian said:
Anyways your in the wrong section, someone move this to Evo 3D discussion
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I made this thread to be read by those who still have the EVO4G that are not eligible for the upgrade when the EVO3D is released.

Funny cause my laptop has a 1.6 GHz.

I wonder how long the gap between Desktop CPUs and Phone CPUs will close.

Zabalba said:
I wonder how long the gap between Desktop CPUs and Phone CPUs will close.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A while. Even though the numbers may be similar the architecture is no where near the same.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App

Samzebian said:
the quad cores are a long ways away, but these new Dual cores, possibly running at 2.0 Ghz are going to be insane. The "console gaming" graphics are probably being a little overrated when described that way...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Um, not all that far off...

Atrix has an 8 core GPU

Yep so I just found out that the atrix has an 8 core GPU thanks to the forum members below.
This seems amazing considering the SGSII has a quad core GPU

Check this out:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html

bigdog_nick said:
Check this out:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OMG 8 cores?
So it is better than the SGS2

8 core GPU

Seems like so. From what i'm reading just now, the SGSII has a Mali-400MP4 which is only a quad core. Wow, Nvidia you outdid yourself. lol

Why dont they advertise the 8 core GPU?

RacecarBMW said:
Why dont they advertise the 8 core GPU?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably cause not many people know or even care what it is and moto and att didnt see it as a selling point

Dang, and to think I was always of the opinion that the Galaxy S phones had more GPU power than my Atrix.. Damn you AT&T.

not surprised as it's a geforce core

brian2220 said:
probably cause not many people know or even care what it is and moto and att didnt see it as a selling point
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well they advertise the dual core CPU

Says it supports 12mp primary camera?

The next tegra is a quad core cpu, 12 core gpu. Its going to be a monster.

RacecarBMW said:
well they advertise the dual core CPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that is always a big selling point in todays market

RacecarBMW said:
OMG 8 cores?
So it is better than the SGS2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy Moly. 8 core GPU?
And the SGSII only has 4 core GPU?
The Atrix wins overall. No question about it.
[/s]

Extra cores do not necessarily translate to win. Tegra is awesome, but has its limits, which are far more apparent than in the new Galaxy 2, which appears to be the most powerful Android phone to date.

YAY! 8 CORE GPU! what ever that means? lol

as far as i know. the SGS2 oxynes or whatever its called is more powerful than tegra 2.
not my much tho.
however Nvidia has an advantage of Tegra zone. games specific to take advantages of the Tegra 2.
and that alone is way better than playing the same game the nexus S plays well only smoother.
this makes Tegra 2 a better GPU imho hands down. but not the most powerful.

jivemaster said:
Extra cores do not necessarily translate to win. Tegra is awesome, but has its limits, which are far more apparent than in the new Galaxy 2, which appears to be the most powerful Android phone to date.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What drugs are you on? SGS II? The most powerful to date? No ways Laydee
The Atrix hasn't even shown its true colours yet. Wait till Gingerbread is released. This will be the REAL test.
Only then will it be clear whether Atrix or SGS II is the better handset.

ll_l_x_l_ll said:
as far as i know. the SGS2 oxynes or whatever its called is more powerful than tegra 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its called Exynos, and NO, the reports out there peg the Tegra 2 to be better clock for clock.
Why do you think Samsung overclocked the Exynos to 1.2Ghz? To be competitive, because at 1Ghz it wasn't.
Samsung has won the Quadrant war for the moment, but lets see what the Tegra 2 overclocked to 1.2Ghz (unlock that bootloader damit!) and with AOS 2.3.3 can do. And the hardware war can't be won on just a SAMOLED+ screen thats still can't be viewed in direct sunlight, and is heavily pixelated at 4.3" & 800x480 resolution (I certainly prefer qHD).

The Geforce ULV GPU in the Tegra 2 SoC is based on the Nvidia Geforce 6 series GPU architecture from 2004.
Computer GPU's at the time where still using "pipelines" before introduction of "unified shaders" (those are easier to be called multi-core) with the release of the nvidia G80 GPU in late 2006.
Piplines architecture has dedicated instructions shaders (nvidia like to call them cores for marketing reasons and to piss off Intel!) for each of pixel and vertex processing tasks. A GPU of this kind can't help itself if the load was heavier at one side of those tasks.
Where in "unified shaders" architecture those shaders can morph to handle any instructions tasks based on the load.
So it's more correctly to say the nvidia GPU in the Atrix has 8 shaders, But and it's a big BUT.. 4 of them must be preserved for the pixel processing and the other 4 must be preserved for vertex processing.