Google Octane browser benchmark - Galaxy Note 10.1 General

This is a new Google browser benchmark to measure JavaScript engine’s performance.
Details here: https://developers.google.com/octane/benchmark
You can run the benchmark here:
http://octane-benchmark.googlecode.com/svn/latest/index.html
Please post your results for Note 10.1 and other devices who might have.
From what I see, mobile SoCs still has a long way to go before they can match desktop processors -- nothing surprising considering power efficiency requirements of mobile SoC.

1565 on Note 10.1 in Google Chrome, 1802 (but one test failed) in original browser.
6516 on i7 laptop.
4900 on X2 AMD desktop (but some test failed to run).
Some test got very low note which resulted in such differnce - Splay for example only 495 while i7 have got 10'700. But on original browser it has got 1200 so it was quite random...
Still, I think 4-5 slower than i7 is still very good result.
I'll try to test TF101 too, but its out of order now (because I tried to install JellyBean on it and WiFi doesn't work).

Related

Transformer beats Samsung Tab in all performance tests

and every other Tablet for good measure... so much for an additional $100
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Samsung-Galaxy-Tab-101-Review-Android-31-Tablet/?page=4
To be fair, they did mention the fact that the Galaxy Tab is running HC 3.0
Real World Performance is What Really Matters But This is Still Surprising. Asus just needs to fix typing and browser lags and all is gravy for me. Oh Also Samsung 10.1 Doesn't have 3.1 yet so that might boost its quadrant scores.
HorsexD said:
Real World Performance is What Really Matters But This is Still Surprising. Asus just needs to fix typing and browser lags and all is gravy for me. Oh Also Samsung 10.1 Doesn't have 3.1 yet so that might boost its quadrant scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure the 10.1 is now shipping with (or being upgraded to) 3.1
http://www.infosyncworld.com/reviews/internet-tablets/samsung-galaxy-tab-10.1-review/12086.html
Nice results for the G-Tablet. Not bad for a $250 tablet.
S4F4M said:
To be fair, they did mention the fact that the Galaxy Tab is running HC 3.0
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not fair to mention at all, since TF101 ALL benchmarks went down not up after 3.1 update.
I hope someone can figure out why it's getting such poor performance results. What makes this really odd is that most reviews site its snappy performance when web browsing and its ability to play back 1080p movies very well.
nothing odd about it - simulated benchmarks are useless because they can never properly simulate real world usage or properly simulate the differences in hardware and software on the devices being benchmarked.
For instance 1080p video playback has absolutely nothing todo with the instructions being simulated in benchmarks like these, videoplayback are handled by a hardware codec and the abilities of this codec has nothing todo with the rest of the cpu, or weather the cpu are 600mhz or 1.2ghz, single core or dual core etc.
Quadrant scores etc. tells nothing about how optimized the software on the device is - like how smooth the device feels in normal operations. Example, the same device will score the same quadrant score no matter which launcher is used, and no matter how smooth or how laggy this launcher operates when swiping homescreens. It will score the same result no matter how laggy a device may feel because of wrong memory management configuration and so on, it will score the same result no matter if the device has 512mb or 1gb ram, despite the device with 1gb will feel smoother in operations because it can store more open applications in ram. Etc. etc.
Quadrant score shows nothing except how good a device can run Quadrant, and this may differ depending on how Quadrant are optimised for the specific chipset/cpu.
It wont show anything else, it wont show how good the device can run specific games because this depends on the individual game and how this is optimised for the specific cpu/gpu, it wont show how smooth the device feels in general operation handling the gui or different applications because this depends on so many other things which cant be simulated, it wont show how good it can handle different video because this also depends on other things which cant be simulated.
Quadrant scores and other test scores like it are good for only one thing
They are tools for "big boys" that needs to compare "**** sizes"
- but since you cant go around showing pictures of your ****, you can allways show a screenshot of a quadrant score and go "mines bigger than yours"
spawndk said:
Quadrant scores and other test scores like it are good for only one thing
They are tools for "big boys" that needs to compare "**** sizes"
- but since you cant go around showing pictures of your ****, you can allways show a screenshot of a quadrant score and go "mines bigger than yours"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great description of Quadrant. There's a t-shirt in there somewhere
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using XDA Premium App
spawndk said:
nothing odd about it - simulated benchmarks are useless because they can never properly simulate real world usage or properly simulate the differences in hardware and software on the devices being benchmarked.
For instance 1080p video playback has absolutely nothing todo with the instructions being simulated in benchmarks like these, videoplayback are handled by a hardware codec and the abilities of this codec has nothing todo with the rest of the cpu, or weather the cpu are 600mhz or 1.2ghz, single core or dual core etc.
Quadrant scores etc. tells nothing about how optimized the software on the device is - like how smooth the device feels in normal operations. Example, the same device will score the same quadrant score no matter which launcher is used, and no matter how smooth or how laggy this launcher operates when swiping homescreens. It will score the same result no matter how laggy a device may feel because of wrong memory management configuration and so on, it will score the same result no matter if the device has 512mb or 1gb ram, despite the device with 1gb will feel smoother in operations because it can store more open applications in ram. Etc. etc.
Quadrant score shows nothing except how good a device can run Quadrant, and this may differ depending on how Quadrant are optimised for the specific chipset/cpu.
It wont show anything else, it wont show how good the device can run specific games because this depends on the individual game and how this is optimised for the specific cpu/gpu, it wont show how smooth the device feels in general operation handling the gui or different applications because this depends on so many other things which cant be simulated, it wont show how good it can handle different video because this also depends on other things which cant be simulated.
Quadrant scores and other test scores like it are good for only one thing
They are tools for "big boys" that needs to compare "**** sizes"
- but since you cant go around showing pictures of your ****, you can allways show a screenshot of a quadrant score and go "mines bigger than yours"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Quadrant Envy?
Honestly the benchmarks results are the more relevant part of that review. Obviously that review was either paid for or the writer is devout samsung fanboy. I'm not going to to defend the benchmarks(which do have value), however to write a review where the reviewed device loses is almost every category and then summarize that the benchamrks you yourself chose to run are meaningless and that the reviewed device is obviously superior to the other devices is amazing. Rings of many ipad reviews.

Nexus 7 tech specs query from buyer

Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
gino_76ph said:
Hi there!
I am in the hunt for a 7"-8" Android 4/4.1 tablet. Currently my choices are the new Acer Iconia A110 (because of a microSD card slot), the Motorola Xoom 2 Media Edition (because of the bigger screen, excellent build and virtual surround sound), the Samsung Galaxy Tab 7.7 (again with a slightly bigger screen, a microSD card slot and an excellent AMOLED screen) and the top dog Google Nexus 7. But i am more interested with the Nexus 7 in terms of "Is it worth the investment" even on a small screen?. I will be using the thing mainly for checking email/news/weather, the usual Youtube, WIkipedia, Twitter, watching movies and also gaming. So, i'd like to ask:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
3. Aside from connecting a mice or keyboard what other stuff can the Bluetooth 3.0 standard do?
4. Is it capable of wireless file transfer to & from a Macbook?
5. I'm aware that it doesn't have Flash but can i still install them via the Google Play?
6. Are they stereo speakers? Capable of surround sound? (some sound issues in some models i heard)
Please advice. Thanks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Its either dual or quad I think clocked at 450 or something(can be over clocked)
2. Underclocked I think(prime has same CPU but at 1.5)
3. Don't know
4. There's a few apps that do this
5. No you have to sideload
6. Stereo and don't know about surround sound
Sent from my Jelly Nexus S
Would it matter if a tablet has dual or single channel GPU? Does it matter if the wifi is dual or single band? WIll it actually help make the graphics "better" and surfing the net faster?
Would you trust Acer when it comes to build quality of its tablets compared to say samsung or Motorola?
1. Not sure(I think I heard about it being overclocked somewhere)
2. Default is 1.2ghz, can be overclocked up to 1.5ghz.
3. For example: File transfer. If you root you can also use it as a PlayStation controller with BluePutDroid.
4. There are a number of ways to do this, I would recommend AirDroid.
5. To get flash(no root required):
A. Go to settings->security and enable unknown sources.
B. Download and install the flash apk on your device from here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1763805
C. Get a browser that supports flash like boat browser(from play store).
6. Stereo, probably not surround sound.
(Second post)
Not sure what dual channel GPU means to tell you the truth.
I believe the nexus 7 has dual channel WiFi, using speed test app the speed reaches or goes above my maximum speed from the other end of the house.
gino_76ph said:
1, Is the actual GPU dual or single channel? And what's the frequency? Does it matter?
2. Is the 1.3Ghz the base CPU speed? Or is it underclocked like what Apple is doing with its tabs?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no such thing as a single or dual channel GPU. Channels refers to the RAM. It is a 12 core GPU.
1.3ghz is the maximum clock speed of the specific CPU used, the T30L. It is not underclocked.
this is the truth after reading some ****.no single or dual gpu.12 core has.channel intended only for the ram.this is the minor tegra3 out there,less freq. clock but high clocked ram and not the same as t30 packed.begginnning with the fact the clock cpu freq. is overcloccable without problems,the ram packed on n7 is IMHO better than ad example tf201 or htconex one's
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
gino_76ph said:
Are you guys certain there is no such thing as single or dual channel CPU?
And If the GPU clocked speed is 1.3Ghz would it mean that there is 1.3Ghz on each of the 12 cores?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no you are wrong man.the CPU(4cores) is clocked at 1.3 ghz (4 cores running) and 1.5 (or 1.4 i don't remeber)in single mode (1 core running)
the GPU (12cores)is clocked at 416 mhz by default
apart them,if you flash a custom kernel,this Soc can reach (depending on tab,they aren't exactly the same chips)1.8\2.0 ghz for the CPU,and 484\520\600\650\700\750 with the GPU (here depending on tab as well)
I see. So, it is fast?
As a side question would it be practical to buy a new or latest tablet like the Nexus 7 than an older (and equally good in its own) say Galaxy Tab 7.7 or the Xoom 2 Media Edition? What i'm trying to ask here is the "problem" of compatibility with apps and games if a tab has an older GPU in them.
Would that be an issue or not?
yes,sure it's fast!a little bit faster than others with same chip.i do you an example regards the last question.
there are peoples with old gpus,that continue playing hd games with these old gpu without problems (not all games working,but many of them!).an example is the galaxy nexus that i own,it 's packed with a good cpu and a old gpu,that we found also on galaxy s,nexus s ecc,but honestly i never found a game that doesn't work for the odl gpu.i have also tegra2 devices,no prob with games,surely a tegra3 is more powerfull and you can play games with full effect enabled without problems.all apps works,not depending to gpu,but only the version of OS at least.
The Tegra 3 SoC only has a single channel memory. Specs are 1GB RAM of DDR3L -1333 MHz (Low Voltage) giving a total memory bandwidth of 5.3 GB/s, is this super fast, no, but it is more than than sufficient for the Nexus 7 display resolution.
To the OP, don't get stressed about specs, especially if you're 100% sure what they actually mean. The important part is user experience of the Nexus 7, due in part to Android Jelly Bean, it is smooth and enjoyable, it can play all the latest games well, I also run Playstation & N64 emulators on it without issue.
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
If you can manage to find a Nexus 7 used on Craigs or Ebay, I would do it. I got my perfect condition barely used 16gb for $160 from a buyer's remorse user on Craigslist. For this price I find the tablet to be very good. I would have a harder time paying the $250 plus tax in store for the same unit. Not that it's not worth the $250 but already owning a Galaxy S3 phone, it's too much of the same at the end of the day, much like I experienced when I had a iPhone and iPad together.
The Nexus7 for me is a great grab and go device for quick browsing, game playing, weather checking, etc.
If you've got to have the latest and fastest specs, the Tegra3 is getting dated already and you'd want to find something with a Qualcomm S4 chip (even this isn't really faster than Tegra3). Supposedly the OMAP 4470 in the bigger Fire HD and the Nook HD+ might be a little faster for more money.
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
sert00 said:
i doubt 4470 it's faster than tegra3 (all 3 variant)..it's basically a 4460 with a bit more clock freq.,same 45nm tecnology and with a faster gpu (with dedicated 2d hw chipset).they claim it's up to 2 times more faster than sgx540.if it's true,i think that tegra3 is better (not for the quad).Anyway i have to agree with all the things sad in previous posts.OP don't care about spec,a nexus device is fast for many others things that i don't write,already sad,and also if tegra3 it's becoming an "old" chipset compared to new out this days,it performs very well with an optimized OS.wait for the 32gb version and never ever think only about cpu\gpu specs :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Turbotab said:
A full fat OMAP 4470 is faster than the Tegra 3. I read a review of the Archos 101 XS which runs an OMAP 4470 @ 1.5 GHz (GPU 384 MHz)
In the ultra demanding GL Benchmark 2.5 - Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p)
Nexus 7 = 8.9 FPS
Archos = 11 FPS
Transformer Infinity = 11 FPS
There is scope for the 4470 to run at 1.8 GHz, but that is probably only for larger devices like Windows RT tablet, Amazon apparently have clocked it at 1.5 GHz. Overall in a tough benchmark the N7 is slower, however the Transformer Infinity is the same speed, which is basically as fast as an easily overclocked Nexus. As the OMAP is a dual-core, in theory a game developed specially for our Nexus (Tegra Zone?) could be faster or more feature packed in terms of physics etc, if it use all 4 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
sert00 said:
months ago the 4470 was supposed to run at 1.7 ghz.i remember when i bought the gnex in november 2011 that 4430 is at 1.2\4460 at 1.5\4470 at 1.7.theese number was in the official omap site and guide line referments.only after being out the fact of the 4460 bug (major part of them,wasn't capable of 1.5 ghz,and this Soc it isn't a downclocked one,from 1.5 to 1.2 by google.it's a 1.2 cpu.)they change also in the site some numbers.now the 4460 is at 1.2 and the 4470 there's write 1.3+,in this case of the archos 1.5.what a strange thing from omap!i saw same anandtech reviwe like you sad times ago,but honestly i think that in the total of bench that regularly they do,there are some in favor of 4470,and some in favor of tegra3,at least depending also if referred to cpu or gpu.with 4460 they did a good job,i really like it,but after have a look at 4460\70 documentation,seems that in term of cpu,there aren't so much differences.if i clock my 4460 at 1.5\16,do a bench and compare with a same bench do with a 4470,i think that the most differences are gpu related..and when i compare my bench with n7 and gnex,in term of cpu and both ultra-tweaked i see a big gap in scores...it's for that i continue to think in the total user exp and bench scores as well tegra3 remain more powerfull.but certainly the differences aren't visible by end user..but with bench at least and in th end what really count it's how's the user experience,not bench
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
An area the 4470 does hold a significant advantage over Tegra 3 is memory bandwidth, as it utilises dual-channel memory, hopefully Tegra 4 will sort out that deficiency. Ultimately the OMAP's GPU is not powerful enough to be bandwidth limited anyway, overall I like the Tegra 3 from a UX perspective, looking forward to a Tegra 4 in the next Nexus 7 v2:good:
Using a nexus 7 now. Very happy with the money I paid for it. In terms of spec? This beast will last you for awhile. Even if they are pushing specs already to the next level, it'll be a long time until a quad core 1 gb ram machine will be considered slow.
Simply put, at this price and quality, anyone can buy it and everyone should.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using xda app-developers app
Turbotab said:
Finally, The Nexus 7 is fully unlockable, so it has great developer support on XDA and other forums, which is 50% of the device's appeal in my eyes. If you can wait a few weeks, the rumour is a 32 GB model will replace the current 16 GB version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
phillip1953 said:
The 32 gig will be replacing the 8 gig model. Two versions will be available by Christmas: a 16 gig model and a 32 gig model. The 16 will be priced at (or below) $200.00. The 32 will be at (or below) $250.00.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have a link confirming that, or is that inside knowledge
It's the logic step for Google. The 32 gig is already being sold and nobody really wants the 8 gig model. To compete with the "other" tablets and to make up for the lack of an SD card slot, it only makes sense.
IOW.....my speculation from 40 years of computer use....starting with the Heathkit H8.
Posted via my Amiga 3000, EVO 3D , or Nexus 7

TF810 - performance and efficiency vs Atom 330

Hi,
perhaps you will be able to help me "imagine" what to expect from TF810 and its Atom SoC.
A while ago I had Asus 1201N (http://uk.asus.com/Eee/Eee_PC/Eee_PC_1201N_Seashell/#specifications) with 2GB of RAM and Atom 330 (http://ark.intel.com/products/35641/Intel-Atom-Processor-330-1M-Cache-1_60-GHz-533-MHz-FSB) on board.
System belonged to Nevidia ION platform - meaning it had dedicated graphics card on board (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_Ion#Ion_.28first-generation_Nvidia_Ion.29).
In terms of performance, video playback and every day usability I was totally satisfied with this system.
Its only problem was heat - lots and lots of it, even when netbook was hardly doing anything.
How can TF810 compare to 1201N?
Will it work in a assimilable way?
I understand that CPU itself should be more powerful than 1st gen of Atom... but how will this strange graphic card built in this SOC stuck up against Nvidia ION?
What can I expect?
Stack up in terms of what? it plays video perfectly fine, though I haven't tried more than 1080p mkv's on it.
The TF810C has the POWER VR SGX545 built into the Atom Z2760. It's above the iPad 3 SGX543 and below iPad 4 SGX554, but considering the absurd resolution of the iPad chances are it's more than on par with iPad 4.
It should also outperform the Tegra 3 and Mali 400 without breaking a sweat.
Speaking the PC language the SGX545 positions itself between the GMA 3600 (400mhz) and 3650 (640mhz) at 533mhz but Intel is likely to have optimized the chip further. The results are modest either way 260-285/420-440 points in 3D Mark 2006. However the technologies for full HD video playback have been much improved.
Depending on the drivers you could expect +200 points fluctuations. Others have noticed better performance with the HP drivers but have gotten screen flickering instead. Asus has not yet released updated drivers, mine are stock.
The ION you had was the 9400M which according to notebookckeck is outperformed by the desktop 9300ION.
The ION (9400M) scores in 3Dmark '06 1100 to 2200 points. In a notebook that was burning up you probably got the lower clock speed so it's doubtfull any netebook ever went far past 1100 points.
On such low scores 600 points barely make a difference. A small difference is something like 2000 points and it wouldn't justify a video card update. However I listed a few nice games that will work on the TF810C and in most cases they look far better than today's tablet ARM games: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2117486
On the CPU side you can expect improved performance but not much. From 330's 1600mhz you will get to 1800mhz on the Z2760. The boost will be 200mhz fair and square. What will matter the most is windows 8 that IMHO is the fastest and most fluid windows ever made.
You shouldn't worry much about the cpu, because the bottleneck is the eMMC that is about as fast as any 5400 RPM HDD. By no means does it achieve SSD like speeds, not without a SATA or USB 3.0 controller that is.
Regarding heat, we're talking more than ten times (10x) less wsted heat. The 330 had an 8W TDP while the nVidia ION 12W TDP. Well, you're in for a shock, the Atom Z2760 does everything better for 1.7W TDP!:cyclops:
Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerVR
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Mobile-Processors-Benchmarklist.2436.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9400M-G.11949.0.html
Bec07 said:
The TF810C has the POWER VR SGX545 built into the Atom Z2760. It's above the iPad 3 SGX543 and below iPad 4
[...]
On the CPU side you can expect improved performance but not much. From 330's 1600mhz you will get to 1800mhz on the Z2760. The boost will be 200mhz fair and square. What will matter the most is windows 8 that IMHO is the fastest and most fluid windows ever made.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks! All that sounds quite optimistic.
Especially that I still own Samsung NC-10 and got access over the weekends to Nokia Booklet 3g. Both run first gen of Atom (same chip I had in Asus 1201N but just one of then - single core) - and performance is terrible .
Video playback is almost non existent, any operation (start Chrome, Control Panel, etc) takes ages, scrolling through web sites is difficult.
But from what I have seen W8 + new Atom = completely different (as it should be! ) experience ,
| just wanted to make sure I am not wrong here...
For me this will not be gaming device (previous was not as well) - so as long as I can browse in peace (and comfort), use Wordpress (impossible on the ipad) with few tabs open, Office , some 720p videos (+ Netflix and finally HULU for free!!! [with W8 device I can ditch Hulu Plus subscription!]) and perhaps Fruit Ninja from time to time.... I am more than happy!

My new SM-P900 lags a lot!

Hi, I'm new in this forum. I need help. I bought a Galaxy Note Pro 12.2 (SM-P900). I know it has two quadcores (one of 1.9 GHz and another of 1.3 GHz) but I think it only use one of them, because it lags a lot when I run games and another apps like chrome. Also when I run benchmarks, they only recognize the 1.9 GHz one. I tested Asphalt 8 and it runs at 20 fps or less. Also it lags when I pass pages in S Note. There's a way to speed up and take advantage of both CPUs? Thanks!
S Note always seems to lag (I don't use it, but others report it.) The app isn't optimized for 12.2". Try Lecture Notes.
Benchmarks see only one CPU because that's their limitation. They couldn't detect the second one even of it was running laps around the first.
Cores don't stack. So even if you have 4 1.9Ghz cores, it doesn't become 7.6Ghz. This is why the amount of Ghz matters so much for gaming and heavy apps. The Exynos is designed for multitasking, not heavy processing(games). That's what Snapdragon is for.
Next is the Mali GPU. It's weaker than the Adreno and doesn't handle 2K very well. Particularly in heavy games. Oh it does Candy Crush just fine , but it's like Intel HD vs Nvidia in terms of the more serious work.
If gaming was a priority, you should've gone for the P905 with the Snapdragon 800 & Adreno GPU.
You can try to get rid of most of the bloatware, that should at least speed it up a bit. Also replace the launcher with Nova or Apex, they use less system resources. (60MB RAM vs 800MB.) You can also try a factory reset, see if that helps.
Maybe someone else with a p900 can tell us if they, too, have the same framerate issue. (I've got the P905.)
The Note 3 N9005 and N900 editions have the same hardware as the P905 and P900 respectively. The N900 with the same Exynos/Mali has the same issues with lag in Gaming as the P900 does.
S Note can't be helped, that's Samsung's fault, bad coding.
Sent from my SM-N9005 using Tapatalk 2
Root it and pick one of the stock based roms because they are the only ones with kernel development. I'm on CM 11 because I love aosp but I'm living with the built in kernel. That's the best you're going to get as far as I can see, but there are a lot of really smart folks around here.
Thanks for replying. Your answers helped me
Asphalt 8 has graphics settings where you can change the level of detail. Change the settings to low (which still looks good) and play is completely smooth.
Regarding optimizing general performance, I'd stick with Samsung stock roms as the gpu driver is better than cm based roms. Change the kernel and overclock the cpu and gpu to 2GHz and 667MHz respectively. Use the synapse app to undervolt the cpu and gpu at the highest frequency steps, necessary to avoid thermal limits which drops the clock speeds. With these settings I get 41000 on Antutu and 996/3000+ on Geekbench 3. Very smooth performance for my tablet.
hi guys new to the forum hope you can help..im about to buy the wifi version but because of the lag im tempted with the lte now..my question is a do a lot of art work .sketching etc and recently artrage was released for android..would you say the snapdragon would be better than the exynos version for brush lag etc .I cant seem to get a good answer to this question ..the note 12.2 is a great size and much lighter than a laptop and reat battery life..
sorry wrong forum

[Q] Spoof program CPU check?

I've got a windows 8 razer edge pro in my house that I was attempting to get dying light to run on, and it seems the game doesn't like the base CPU speed(1.9GHz). Unfortunately, instead of letting me test and see for myself it enforces some minimum specs to even launch the main page, but I'm quite confident the game will run fine on the tablet, and would like to get the chance to fail for myself instead of being immediately shut down. Does anyone know of any method I can use to block or spoof a program's hardware check so I can test run the game?
not sure about spoofing hardware spec
sure you can run this game ok?
your CPU doesnt meet even the minimum requirements and your GPU isnt supported either. not played the game myself but read that this game doesnt run that well even on a decent pc.
from my experience of pc gaming, even the minimum requirements isnt enough for a enjoyable, playable experience
i agree though. Id prefer to test it and see for myself that its unplayable than the game just asuming the specs arent good enough.
I've heard it's pretty unoptimized CPU-wise, so I'm not entirely certain. However, I've been playing the game on my desktop, which is quite old. The benchmark scores on the desktop's Nvidia 450 GTS are roughly similar to the edge's mobile video card(about a 10% higher benchmark, but it runs very well without minimizing every setting), and both cards support DX11.
The CPU might be an issue, but it does support 3 GHz turbo, and is an i7. My desktop runs a similar generation i3 at 3.2GHz, which also has a similar benchmark to the 1.9GHz i7 in the tablet even without turbo, so I'm just tempted to test everything. I just find it unfortunate I'm being prevented from doing so, and became interested in the longterm ability to spoof past an application's checks. I'm a bit worried these mandatory checks may become more common.
I appreciate the reply, steam posts seem to be full of "Get better hardware lol" style replies instead of solutions.

Categories

Resources