Related
Looks like HTC has done it again and delivered a phone that should run crazy fast on paper BUT the actual performance is sub-par compared to other phones:
HTC Nexus One (FAILphone):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvzxZ8tOBcQ
HTC Magic and HTC Liquid Benchmark:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O36LA6EhZg4
I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.
Do you work for Apple?
How does it do on PiBenchmark? That would provide more relevant results with its Snapdragon processor.
andythefan said:
I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
doesn't the liquid come with an underclocked snapdragon?
I have a Magic that is rooted and tweaked to all hell and have played with the nexus. There is no doubt that the Google phone out performs any other phone that HTC has released. Ive seen it first hand. Its very fast and can handle so many things going on at the same time it makes my tummy tickle.
You are an idiot. Get your panties out of a bunch because you are pissed at the price and that it has no AT&T 3G. Should we all be pissed that the Droid only works on Verizon? Should we all be pissed that the iPhone only has AT&T 3G? The Nexus One is designed to be on T-Mobile. Sure, it will technically work on any GSM provider, but that isn't what it was intended to do. Google must have some deal with T-Mobile since they offers the most android phones.
And about the performance, that only shows video performance, and we dont know for sure what the N1 and A1 have in terms of a GPU
staulkor said:
And about the performance, that only shows video performance, and we dont know for sure what the N1 and A1 have in terms of a GPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought neocore tested the graphics chip with 3d benchamarking?
andythefan said:
I don't think that Neocore benchmarks the entire system, maybe more on the graphics chip. I don't know any specifics on the N1's graphics capabilities, but the 1 ghz snapdragon cpu is a definite boost from its predecessors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's called system on a chip.
and the telling comparison is the Acer Liquid with its ~750MHz Snapdragon CPU (underclocked) vs. the Nexus One with its 1GHz Snapdragon CPU.
Looks like HTC screwed up again.
Ohhh. The other posters are pissed because their Messiah phone is a big FAIL?
What are you, 15 years old? Get off of mommy's computer and stop *****ing because you can't use the N1 on your network and get 3G.
Im guessing the benchmark isnt accurate. It goes beyond common senese that the fps are the same as the magic.
Maedhros said:
Im guessing the benchmark isnt accurate. It goes beyond common senese that the fps are the same as the magic.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually ... it goes nicely with HTC's track record of under-performing hardware.
We have too many variables that makes comparing these results difficult. The HTC Magic and Liquid are running 1.6, while the Nexus is running 2.1. There are dramatically different levels of overhead on different Android system versions. There could be way more overhead on Android 2.1 than on 1.6. Additionally, you forgot to mention that the Nexus One is running at a resolution 2.5 times that of the HTC Magic.
Just because you're not going to buy the Nexus (because you recently purchased another handset and are trying to justify your purchase, or because it doesn't support your carrier's 3G frequencies, or otherwise) doesn't mean you are obliged to spam these forums with "OMG THIS PHONE IS FAIL"
the resolution used on the n1 is far higher than on the older devices remember
coolVariable said:
It's called system on a chip.
and the telling comparison is the Acer Liquid with its ~750MHz Snapdragon CPU (underclocked) vs. the Nexus One with its 1GHz Snapdragon CPU.
Looks like HTC screwed up again.
Ohhh. The other posters are pissed because their Messiah phone is a big FAIL?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only FAIL here are your posts. You sound like a Droid owner, pissed that your phone is about to lose top dog status. Just crawl back into your parents basement, fire up your xbox, and shoot some 12 year olds. It will help you get over the fact that you are a huge FAIL.
lol @semantics now thats funny man
I have had this phone for three weeks now and one thing its not is SLOW. Its way faster than my 3GS and my Mytouch.
I got 27.4 FPS on my G1.
I'm pretty sure the N1 isn't slower then the G1. That would be stupid.
I don't give a damn, I'm buying this joint day 1!! LOL
my theory:
1. Neocore is designed to work with android 1.6 and Open GL ES 1.1
2. The Liquid A1 has the same processor (albeit underclocked) and the same screen resolution as the N1 so you would expect them to perform similarliy. They dont perfrom the same so you must look at the differences between the phones. The biggest to me is the fact that the Liquid A1 has Android 1.6 and Open GL ES 1.1, the sweet spot for Neocore.
3. The N1 had Android 2.1 and Open GL ES 2.0, specs that are not supported by Neocore. How can Neocore accurately test the N1 when it does not support its specifications? The slowness is not due to poor hardware, rather it is due to old software trying to run on the latest hardware.
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.
I know A free one is in development.but I cannot find any other information on it. Any idea when more info will be released?
Sent from my eris
Not psx4droid right?
Sent from my Eris using XDA App
I know one is out, but don't expect it to work on the eris. Its going to need a decent gpu.
Yeah, it doesn't work well on the Eris a little laggy-- but i just tried it with Chrono Cross maybe different games have better frame rates? Hope this helps!
They say they might be coming out with dual core snapdragons in the near future. I can't wait! DS games on my phone might be cool.
This will be a million times better with a dual core processor.
Processor doesn't make a phone though. GPU's in phones need to come a long way to really see the affects of 2gHz processors. Honestly I don't care if you have 4 gHz in your phone, if you have the ram of an Eris it won't be that much speedier then an Eris. All things need to be improved or else it is just a bottle-neck.
Well this is almost certainly like computer emulation where it's nearly 100% based on CPU and the GPU does virtually nothing. The threads just aren't sent through the GPU on an emulator because it's way too complication. So two cores will in fact have a very large thread on multithreaded emulation.
Yeah, I see where you're coming from there. I read online that if you had hardware 10x the original, you could emulate a device perfectly. Technically that makes the DS an ok candidate for a snapdragon phone. The DS has two processors that clock at 67 and 33 mHz. That makes it having 100mHz of processor. (I was surprised how little of a processor it actually has.) Do the math. If a snapdragon clocks at 1024mHz (1gHz) then 1000mHz would emulate it fine. That's all hypothetically speaking though. Games would probably still lag on a Droid X or Incredible. Could happen. I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
PSX, maybe that could be nice, but when my phone can emulate Gamecube and Xbox1, times will be good.
The issue is that dual core processors are exponentially faster than single core. A dual core 500 mhz processor does not equate a single core 1ghz processor in fact it's much closer to a 2ghz processor in benchmark scores if not higher.
I thought the complete opposite. Dual 1.5gHz vs. 3gHz, 3 gets the win for me. My lappy is a dual 2.13gHz and it doesn't seem like 4.26. Just my thoughts, I haven't actually run tests to verify this. Computing wise, a lot of applications only use one core. There in lies the problem with dual core. Plus, why do you call that an issue?
Well it's simply an issue at the moment because of the fact that phones only have one core is all.
And dual cores will always outpower single cores because of the increase in L3 cache size, which literally does not exist on a single core processor. The L3 Cache increases the speed of a dual or multi core processor by quite a lot.
edit: And a lot of emulators utilize multicores, if not all.
Just saying, this is a huge step forward though. It's just a matter of splitting the threads.
CPCookieMan said:
I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best solution for this would be using another controller with bluetooth. I know most of the iphone (and a few of the android) emulators can sync with a wiimote to avoid awful on-screen buttons.
First the G2, now the Lexicon:
http://phandroid.com/2010/09/20/htc-lexikon-looks-to-be-next-verizon-droid/
Sure the clock speed is lower, but reports are saying that the processor is actually faster. And the battery usage will probably be a lot better too.
I'm a sucker for performance and have always said I'd stick with the N1 until the next CPUs come out. Finally... Has the next era in mobile CPU's finally begun?
Next era, no. 1.5+single cores, then dual core.
Paul22000 said:
First the G2, now the Lexicon:
http://phandroid.com/2010/09/20/htc-lexikon-looks-to-be-next-verizon-droid/
Sure the clock speed is lower, but reports are saying that the processor is actually faster. And the battery usage will probably be a lot better too.
I'm a sucker for performance and have always said I'd stick with the N1 until the next CPUs come out. Finally... Has the next era in mobile CPU's finally begun?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's faster 'cause the gpu is a logically separate device. I expect linpacks to be somewhat slower, but quadrants to be faster. How's it going?
"Next era"? No. 7x30 isn't a direct successor to 8x50, having the same CPU but different GPU and some other internal differences (for example, LPDDR2 support appears on Github). Just read Qualcomm's own product description:
http://www.qualcomm.com/products_services/chipsets/snapdragon.html
It's called "second generation" because of HSPA+, much better GPU, 45nm process, additional video codecs support, newer GPS, and some other bits and pieces. It's an overall better device. But if you count only the CPU area - it loses to Nexus. Same CPU, clocked lower. 8x55 is equal in CPU power.
If you're looking for the real next generation in power - look for 3rd generation devices, with dual core CPUs.
Jack_R1 said:
"Next era"? No. 7x30 isn't a direct successor to 8x50, having the same CPU but different GPU and some other internal differences (for example, LPDDR2 support appears on Github). Just read Qualcomm's own product description:
http://www.qualcomm.com/products_services/chipsets/snapdragon.html
It's called "second generation" because of HSPA+, much better GPU, 45nm process, additional video codecs support, newer GPS, and some other bits and pieces. It's an overall better device. But if you count only the CPU area - it loses to Nexus. Same CPU, clocked lower. 8x55 is equal in CPU power.
If you're looking for the real next generation in power - look for 3rd generation devices, with dual core CPUs.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1. I concur 100% with what he said.
keep in mind that pure clock speed does not mean something is faster... the 45nm die shrink also means they increased efficiency in a lot of areas and have allowed for more cache on the die...
think of it this way, i built a dual core PC back in 2006 that ran at 2.8ghz but it was like 90nm tech... if i buy a new dual core today, with a 45nm tech but same speed it would blow the old proc out of the water...
I really doubt dual core procs in phones will make a huge leap like everyone is expecting... I mean, how often do you run 4-5 apps simultaneously that are all very stressful on the CPU? the two most stressful things you prolly do on your phone is watch a movie (encoding video is stressful) or play a video game like on your PSX emulator... do you ever watch a movie and play a game at the same time? Stupid question right... the basic everyday performances are not going to see any huge improvements like everyone expects...
if they want to improve phones they should stick to single core and have a dedicated gpu or go dual and prioritize one of the cores to graphical processing...
oh i forgot to mention the only way you will see strong software performance improvements from dual core is if Google rewrites virtually the entire code for Android to make use of multiple cores... so while your phone might be dual core, your OS wont care since it virtually cannot use it correctly... better pray the manufacturer updates the OS for you cuz the N1 is single core and guess whos getting all the updates for the next year or so?
Pure clock speed on exactly the same CPU is directly correlated with CPU speed. Yes, there are some things that impact benchmarks like memory bandwidth etc, but we're not talking about them - and even if we did, the difference still wouldn't cover. 65nm vs 45nm means NOTHING - it doesn't matter, what process the CPU was built on, it matters how it functions. We're talking about EXACTLY THE SAME CPU, can you keep that in mind, please? Thanks. CPU cache almost doesn't matter, since L1 is limited anyway, and L2 is big enough anyway, the increases add a bare couple of percents to CPU speed, which is nothing compared to 20% speed loss due to clocking.
Thanks for your smart suggestions on "improving phones". I guess you might be one of the VPs at Qualcomm. Or maybe you aren't. I'll skip your even smarter comments about "dedicated GPU" etc. I guess you probably need to google the word "SoC" first and see what it means.
And you should probably educate yourself about multi-threaded applications, and also remember that Linux kernel (which is running on Android) is built to support multiple cores, and Dalvik VM (which is running the apps) might very well be multi-threaded too.
Adding a second core with load balancing OS results in ~35-40% performance increase (depends on some things). And ironically, when you compare "your old 90nm core" and "newer 45nm cores", saying that the newer cores clocked similarly "would blow the old out of the water", you're actually comparing multi-core vs single-core CPUs (with some internal speed-ups, too, but the most significant performance boost comes from additional cores).
Jack_R1 said:
65nm vs 45nm means NOTHING
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct me if I'm wrong, but won't the 45nm process at least have better efficiency due to smaller gates?
Hello all, just a quick question about the general performance of the D2...
I currently have an Evo, and i seem to get fairly consistently decent Linpack scores (35-40) even in Sense roms (OC'd to 1152). I also typically have around 200mb free memory after running a task killer.
I have been considering switching to VZW for a variety reasons, so I went and tried out a D2 at the Verizon store. Ran Linpack a few times and got nothing better than 10-12, which came as quite a surprise to me. Also could barely eek out 120mb free memory after running task killer.
So what id like to know is...what kind of numbers are you seeing on your D2 (Linpack, Quadrant, free memory, etc). Additionally, are you getting these numbers with a blur rom or vanilla?
Thank you very much for your input.
theshade89 said:
Hello all, just a quick question about the general performance of the D2...
I currently have an Evo, and i seem to get fairly consistently decent Linpack scores (35-40) even in Sense roms (OC'd to 1152). I also typically have around 200mb free memory after running a task killer.
I have been considering switching to VZW for a variety reasons, so I went and tried out a D2 at the Verizon store. Ran Linpack a few times and got nothing better than 10-12, which came as quite a surprise to me. Also could barely eek out 120mb free memory after running task killer.
So what id like to know is...what kind of numbers are you seeing on your D2 (Linpack, Quadrant, free memory, etc). Additionally, are you getting these numbers with a blur rom or vanilla?
Thank you very much for your input.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just remember that benchmarks are only just that... much of the performance is just everyday feel. But in my opinion, the Evo is the smoothest android out there right now
linpack is faster on snapdragon cores (evo 4g) because of a 128bit SIMD vs the droid 2's OMAP cores 64bit SIMD.
the two processors are pretty much the same, except the GPU is faster in the Droid 2 and the droid2 will have better battery life due to having a 45nm CPU vs the 65nm in the evo 4g snapdragon...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3908/motorola-droid-2-review-rebooting-the-droid
droid2andyou said:
linpack is faster on snapdragon cores (evo 4g) because of a 128bit SIMD vs the droid 2's OMAP cores 64bit SIMD.
the two processors are pretty much the same, except the GPU is faster in the Droid 2 and the droid2 will have better battery life due to having a 45nm CPU vs the 65nm in the evo 4g snapdragon...
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3908/motorola-droid-2-review-rebooting-the-droid
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HTC GPU's are bad, but I'd give up graphics for overall performance that HTC offers. Just my 3 cents
Droid 2 omap is faster than the scorpion cpu used in the evo 4g
Sent from my DROID2 using XDA App
Benchmarks are the stupidest thing one could base performance on. Instead of actually using the phone to see how it performs, you were too worried about benchmark numbers, and how much free ram the phone has after killing its tasks? If all you care about are those two things, why bother asking here? You already tested the phone with what matters to you.
I've heard that by design linpack does not score well on OMAP processors. If you are getting scores around 16 then you are doing well, but again it's just a benchmark