Related
Which one is better? Some sites say droid some sites say nexus one..i dont know what to believe :/
how about me vs both of them, I'll take 'em both on!
resinous said:
how about me vs both of them, I'll take 'em both on!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
im talking about "graphics processing unit"
not "greatest penis usage"
The GPU in the Droid is the same as the one in the iPhone 3GS and the iPod touch third-gen (PowerVR SGX 535), and it is marginally faster and more capable than the one in the Nexus, from what I gather. The Nexus makes up for it by crushing the TI OMAP CPU with its Snapdragon.
There are a few graphics benchmarking sites and apps around. The Qualcomm-specific app that lots of people use will give you 35FPS on a Nexus and around 23 on a Droid / Milestone, all at stock clocks, with no JIT. however, that app is NOT written for the OMAP architecture, and, for example, a ROM'd Hero will also apparently beat a Droid / Milestone, scoring about 25, from what I've heard.
That last point is important - any app written / compiled specifically for a certain architecture, and then ported or forced onto another will typically show much better performance on one or the other, regardless of which processor is "faster". Just look at console gaming. Some games are better on the XBox 360, some are better on the PS3 (more and more, they are better on PS3 as devs are exploiting the BluRay advantage and the 6/7 core CPU, but I digress...).
From what I've read, the new Samsung architecture is meant to be much better than both, however, you are stuck with Sammy's dev and support history. Ugh.
Nexus One processes 22 million triangles/sec.
Droid processes 7 millions triangles/sec.
iPhone 3gs processes 28 million triangles/sec.
Samsung Galaxy S processes 90 million triangles/sec.
This is what I read somewhere....
Asphalt 5 runs smooth on the droid, and laggy on the nexus.
For games (opengl) i'd say droid is better. For general use it's the nexus. Maybe if theres gonna be an update for asphalt it runs smooth on the nexus, but untill that it doesn't
cypher21 said:
Asphalt 5 runs smooth on the droid, and laggy on the nexus.
For games (opengl) i'd say droid is better. For general use it's the nexus. Maybe if theres gonna be an update for asphalt it runs smooth on the nexus, but untill that it doesn't
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone
bobdude5 said:
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but afaik asphalt 5 is the first OpenGL 2.0 ES game for android.
bobdude5 said:
but what about all the other 3d games that run smooth on the nexus like raging thunder 2 and exzeus? they have the same if not better graphics..i really think that game was optimized for the droid because gameloft makes their stuff for the phone that has the most potential buyers..and the droid is the number one most sold android iphone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The nexus has very poor fillrate. Just displaying a 2D image of it's screen size uses 75% of graphics processing power hence lagging in most 3D games. Raging thunder 2 and exzeus does not have better graphics and perhaps "sh1t" graphics compared to asphalt 5. PowerVR on the droid can do 14million/polyi but underclocked so it does 7million/poly and 250m/fill rate. The fill rate is already 2 times more than Adreno 200 on paper hence Asphalt 5 running much smoother on Adreno 205, PowerVR 530/535 and 540.
My galaxy s has PowerVR SGX 540 with 40million/poly with 1000m/fill rate. I underclocked the CPU to 400mhz and game still ran smoothly. This proves nexus one was lagging in asphalt 5 because fill rate was poor on the GPU
It's known that the GPU on Nexus is sub-par, as it is a weak point of 8x50 Snapdragon. All the newer device families, based on 8x55 and above, don't suffer from that weakness. You didn't have to revive almost 2 year old thread to say that
Jack_R1 said:
It's known that the GPU on Nexus is sub-par, as it is a weak point of 8x50 Snapdragon. All the newer device families, based on 8x55 and above, don't suffer from that weakness. You didn't have to revive almost 2 year old thread to say that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A weakness in it's package , 8*55 has twice the fill rate
MrAndroid12 said:
A weakness in it's package , 8*55 has twice the fill rate
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And 4 times the polygons rendered per frame.
Have an evo but I'm getting a Verizon dealer line. Is it worth it I'm a big gamer and will be getting an evo 3d to replace my evo. However I'm worried that the lack of good hardware will make the phone obsolete pretty quick..... thinking of getting a Droid x2 just for the tegra..... but not sure what advantages it would have. I'm also kind of worried about Sony portinhg enough stuff over to make it worth it.
Tho being able to run Rome on the built in emulator would be Perth awesome.
If I'm a huge gamer is it worth it. I really just want opinions on the device so any comments would be great.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
thorpe24 said:
Have an evo but I'm getting a Verizon dealer line. Is it worth it I'm a big gamer and will be getting an evo 3d to replace my evo. However I'm worried that the lack of good hardware will make the phone obsolete pretty quick..... thinking of getting a Droid x2 just for the tegra..... but not sure what advantages it would have. I'm also kind of worried about Sony portinhg enough stuff over to make it worth it.
Tho being able to run Rome on the built in emulator would be Perth awesome.
If I'm a huge gamer is it worth it. I really just want opinions on the device so any comments would be great.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The evo 3Ds bootloader, recovery and kernel are locked down and signed, devs have said theres no way to get past it either lol so get a play
Sent from my R800i using Tapatalk
Like games. Get a play. Simple.
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
Thanks for the replies. I'm going to have two phones and figure the evo 3d would be pretty cool for some stuff. Hopefully I can use it to tether.... if not ill just use the play.
How well do the touchpads work?
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
matknny said:
Like games. Get a play. Simple.
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. This thing is Awesome and I'm so glad I moved from my iPhone to the X Play. Playing the old PSX games as well as the new games like the Spiderman is a lot better with the buttons.
thorpe24 said:
How well do the touchpads work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They take some getting use to but they work well.
thorpe24 said:
Thanks for the replies. I'm going to have two phones and figure the evo 3d would be pretty cool for some stuff. Hopefully I can use it to tether.... if not ill just use the play.
How well do the touchpads work?
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
surprisingly they work a lot better than i thought.
thorpe24 said:
However I'm worried that the lack of good hardware will make the phone obsolete pretty quick..... thinking of getting a Droid x2 just for the tegra..... but not sure what advantages it would have.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think the hardware will be obsolete quick. With the controls alone you can play thousands of roms on emulators. Even if sony laggs on releases. FPSE works fine.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=20Uc10kZABg
Sony Ericsson Xperia Arc vs LG Optimus 2x "Face Off". With the play and the arc being similiar id say its probably not to far off. The processor obviously would kick the plays arse. But at the moment dual core is not needed, only a few apps and games are tailored for it. What the point of all that power with nothing to use it.
Trust me the processor in the xperia play is amazing. It is currently the fastest single core CPU on android. Also the Xperia play has a GPU much more powerful than the one in tegra devices. Its even faster than the ipad2 GPU.
Hardware wise it is pretty advanced.
RacecarBMW said:
Trust me the processor in the xperia play is amazing. It is currently the fastest single core CPU on android. Also the Xperia play has a GPU much more powerful than the one in tegra devices. Its even faster than the ipad2 GPU.
Hardware wise it is pretty advanced.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I totally agree with this. Just because it doesn't do well in benchmarks doesn't mean it's not faster in real world applications. My DroidX will smoke the Play in Quadrant. But if I were to do a side-by-side comparison on Dungeon Defenders, or load times, the Play will destroy it.
So for current processors, the Play has a very nice one indeed. Tegra is over-hyped in my book.
Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
RacecarBMW said:
Trust me the processor in the xperia play is amazing. It is currently the fastest single core CPU on android. Also the Xperia play has a GPU much more powerful than the one in tegra devices. Its even faster than the ipad2 GPU.
Hardware wise it is pretty advanced.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What?! how is the Adreno 205 (single core) more powerful than a dual/quad core Tegra 2? its no where near and as for being more powerful than the gpu in the ipad 2, not a chance lol.
I love my Play but let's not get carried away with false claims
It can hold it's own against the rest of the mid range phones (iphone 4, galaxy s, desire hd etc) at the moment but it isn't in the same league hardware wise compared to the high end devices appearing now.
And yup, the cpu is one of the best single cores around but that's not saying much when the rest of the competition have moved on to dual core cpu's (and quad core by the end of the year) now....
FK1983 said:
What?! how is the Adreno 205 (single core) more powerful than a dual/quad core Tegra 2? its no where near and as for being more powerful than the gpu in the ipad 2, not a chance lol.
I love my Play but let's not get carried away with false claims
And yup, the cpu is one of the best single cores around but that's not saying much when the rest of the competition have moved on to dual core cpu's (and quad core by the end of the year) now....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah but its all about optimization.
Lets look at my PC vs a PS2 for example.
PS2 Specs: 32mb RAM, CPU 300mhz EE, GPU GS 4mb
My PC: 12gb Trichannel RAM, CPU i7 4 cores, 2 threads each @ 2.7ghz, GPU ATi 5870 1gb GDDR5
^My PC spanks the HELL out of those specs, but guess what? Through emulation my PC can not even play all games smoothly.
The Xperia Play hardware and the chip sets mentioned above have a MUCH less difference.
Meaning...
Any games and software designed around the Xperia Play will look vastly superior and play vastly superior on the Play vs those other chip sets, and believe me being the only phone on the market that is ALSO a dedicated gaming platform means that the system will see games that are much much better than those other chip sets. The Play basically owns the gaming market by default right now, the support is going to be insane.
Im wanting one to i hope i can afford it
Sent from my Arc using XDA premium App
FK1983 said:
What?! how is the Adreno 205 (single core) more powerful than a dual/quad core Tegra 2? its no where near and as for being more powerful than the gpu in the ipad 2, not a chance lol.
I love my Play but let's not get carried away with false claims
It can hold it's own against the rest of the mid range phones (iphone 4, galaxy s, desire hd etc) at the moment but it isn't in the same league hardware wise compared to the high end devices appearing now.
And yup, the cpu is one of the best single cores around but that's not saying much when the rest of the competition have moved on to dual core cpu's (and quad core by the end of the year) now....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra is nothing special you know, it's total clock speed is only 1ghz just like ours, just because is dual core dosent make it super amazing. and as have been proven by chainfire, the GPU is not much better than ours. anyway imo the play is not a mid range device, it is quite easy in the high end category
gunstar3035 said:
Yeah but its all about optimization.
Any games and software designed around the Xperia Play will look vastly superior and play vastly superior on the Play vs those other chip sets, and believe me being the only phone on the market that is ALSO a dedicated gaming platform means that the system will see games that are much much better than those other chip sets. The Play basically owns the gaming market by default right now, the support is going to be insane.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can say that about any device though, if a game is made for the samsung galaxy s 2 and is optimized for that devices hardware (the better cpu/gpu and ram) it would wipe the floor with the play version, same as ipad 2, atrix, lg optimus 2 etc.
And yes, the play has the gaming pad which hopefully will expand the life a bit of the device and mean we do get some decent support (I hope) but obviously it depends how the Play sells (not sounding great at the moment tbh)
AndroHero said:
Tegra is nothing special you know, it's total clock speed is only 1ghz just like ours, just because is dual core dosent make it super amazing. and as have been proven by chainfire, the GPU is not much better than ours. anyway imo the play is not a mid range device, it is quite easy in the high end category
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The play is NOT a high end device lol, it sits slap bang in the mid range hardware wise, check all the review sites, all of them class this device as a mid range device,
CNET UK:
All indications seem to be that the Play is a good mid-range smartphone. Whether you should choose it over any other phone will hinge entirely on how often you think you will want to play games on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Single core 1ghz cpu (classed as mid range), adreno 205 gpu (while good still classed as mid range), ram is 512mb but has 378mb usable (classed as mid range, the desire s and desire hd even beat it with 768mb of ram), internal storage is 400mb (mid range), the screen is standard lcd (and not S-LCD or AMOLED etc) so is also mid range,
I knew the Xperia Play was a mid range device before I bought it, I have no issues about that, but it does make me laugh when people try and say it is high end when its nowhere near, check the reviews, check the specs, check the benchmarks, they ALL scream mid range!
And yes, the Play can play the recent Tegra 2 games using chainfire but remember those games are 1st generation Tegra 2 games, give it a few months and none of the Tegra 2 games will work on the Adreno 205 gpu, and theres games on tegra 2 already that won't even run on the Play due to the inferior gpu and ram on the Play (monster madness and bang bang racing for example) even with chainfire.
The X-Play is great the controls feel great minus the analogs they get a bit getting used to, at first I thought they were just broken. I had been having a few problems with the power button getting stuck when pressed but I just used a razor blade to shave the sides of the cover and it works just fine. The auto bright feature is just annoying due to it constantly changing hope an update will allow to turn off auto bright. Gaming on it is enjoyable especially at work when nothing is going on. Battery life last me about 6 hours of gaming it could be better but once r800x model can be rooted to uninstall verizon's bloatware and auto bright disabled battery life just be greatly extended.
I am interested in how the graphics compare to the iphone 4S in real life. Like, is it that noticable?
I know the iPhones have optimization and all but with the Mali 400MP will i notice much difference compared 2 the iPhone 4S graphics? Iv seen all the benchmarks and i know iphone 4s is up to 2x faster then Mali 400 but will it be noticable??
It's not really noticeable, but the iPhone 4S is the first phone to have a dual-core graphics chip (gpu) so it can handle any game thrown at it. In my opinion playing games on the S2 is much more enjoyable because of the bigger screen and because of Super Amoled Plus. However if your buying a smartphone for games... then something is wrong with you haha
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
actually i think the samsungs were the first 2 have a dual core gpu... and alot of people buy a smartphone for games.. its tasken over DS and PSP in market share for handheld gaming...cant argue with statistics
Technically, the A5 chip is better for graphics. However the most important factor here is that games are better on iOS. If you want to play on mobile, go iOS no questions asked. Since the GS2 screen is bigger, it's more comfortable to play, but games are late to release on Android.
freemini said:
Technically, the A5 chip is better for graphics. However the most important factor here is that games are better on iOS. If you want to play on mobile, go iOS no questions asked. Since the GS2 screen is bigger, it's more comfortable to play, but games are late to release on Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, i can wait for the games to release but i just want 2 know how much noticably worse the graphics will be, if at all?
and iphone 4s only ha 512mb of RAM.. will that matter?
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM -- otherwise iPhone 5 wouldn't have any selling point.
As for GPU performance, despite being newer the A5 is hardly better: http://www.glbenchmark.com/compare....Apple iPhone 4S&D2=Samsung GT-i9100 Galaxy S2
The next generation A6 and Mali are most likely to double the performance.
The mali-400 use a quad-core configuration.
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.php
peterdan1506 said:
yeah, i can wait for the games to release but i just want 2 know how much noticably worse the graphics will be, if at all?
and iphone 4s only ha 512mb of RAM.. will that matter?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i have a iphone 4 and galaxy s2 as my main phones, i like playing games a lot and for that i use the iphone, games are smoother, better optimised , better looking ( on retina) and get updated faster if there are problems, that has a simple answer, developers have to develop for 5 hardware versions with are very similar anyway not like on android wich has hundreds of hardware versions, and games are can not be tested on all of them.
Check ShadowGun for Galaxy S2 and judge it for your self
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
ephraim033 said:
Check ShadowGun for Galaxy S2 and judge it for your self
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol i got this yesterday - sick as f***
Bulletstorm vs gears of war.
Also Riptide GP has super graphics too!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Shadowgun's available for ios too but I bet the developer spent an lot less time on it than the Android versions
peterdan1506 said:
I am interested in how the graphics compare to the iphone 4S in real life. Like, is it that noticable?
I know the iPhones have optimization and all but with the Mali 400MP will i notice much difference compared 2 the iPhone 4S graphics? Iv seen all the benchmarks and i know iphone 4s is up to 2x faster then Mali 400 but will it be noticable??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
IMO it's very noticeable. My wife has the i4S so I've spent a good bit of time comparing. Gaming is on a whole other level with the i4S. Not sure if it's because the apps are better optimized or the gpu is just that much better. Asphalt 6, shadow gun, dead space all have a richer gameplay experience from graphics, to character control etc. Then you have games like Modern Combat 3 and Real Racing and atm there's just nothing on the android platform that's comparable.
One of the bad things for the Mali MP400(Or in that context the way it's implemented in the Galaxy S II) is its clocking mechanism(It's in no way a mechanism,I know,but I try to simplify things a lot).The GPU's clock must be 800MHz divided by an integer.So the next two options are 400MHz(800/2) and then 267MHz(800/3).So,because 400Mhz is a 50% overclocked state so to speak,Sammy had to stick with 267Mhz.If I remember well,the Tegra 2's Geforce ULP runs at 333Mhz(and still gets pretty much raped) and the overclocked to death version of the PowerVR SGX540 in the RAZR runs at 384MHz and STILL is worse.That's because we are all comparing stock handsets.My SGS2 with 400MHz GPU kicks the crap of all the aformentioned phones.
As for talks about dual-core GPU,it's a little more complex than that.GPUs are from their nature multi-core devices,but not in the way CPUs are.They use pixel shader cores,vertex shader cores and so on.In that manner,the Mali MP400 is quad-core and the GeForce ULP is octa-core.The SGX545 in the iPhone 4S is more like dual GPU.Still,we don't know how it's clocked.Plus,the SII is 6 months older.So,if we also take into consideration that last year's Desire HD with its relatively crappy(Compared to new ones) GPU plays all graphics intensive games smoothly,no,the SII won't suck for a long time.
Long post but for some it may be a worth read.
Bec07 said:
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM -- otherwise iPhone 5 wouldn't have any selling point.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nonsense. It's a stupid little mobile phone - if twice as much RAM as a PS3 can't do it, the programmers really should find another job.
MoWa22 said:
Nonsense. It's a stupid little mobile phone - if twice as much RAM as a PS3 can't do it, the programmers really should find another job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't just talk out of your gut like that.
There's so much to consider in to account. Firstly being the PS3 has a harddrive to compensate for the ram. So that's the hardware dilemma covered.
And the second; there are more console gaming developers than there are mobile gaming developers due to mobile gaming being a new generation and developers would rather go for the easy option than spend hours and resources thinking about what they can fit on a 3.7 inch screen.
The third among many reasons; target audience for consoles are broad. You don't have 5 year olds owning a 4S. Hence momentum on gaming market for consoles is still in it's peak. And if you ask me, playing MW3 or BF3 on an iPhone would be suicidal.
danielsf said:
The mali-400 use a quad-core configuration.
http://www.arm.com/products/multimedia/mali-graphics-hardware/mali-400-mp.php
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, the Mali 400 uses 1 vertex unit and 4 pixel units. Having 4 pixel units lead it to be called quad-core (probably for marketing purposes), but it is not true quad core. Hence the reason why the iPhone 4s' true dual-core still outperforms it.
Bec07 said:
Only 512 mb of ram will matter in the long run. Even if the games this time next year would be playable thanks to the GPU, they will lag due to the lack of RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PS3 has 512MB total RAM. It's not the amount that matters, it's how you use it
What I mean is, developers will be optimizing their games for what resources they have. Hence, I don't think there will be any performance problems next year.
Actually I thought that sgs2 kicked iphone 4s' ass...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
No matter what people here might say, i might get flamed for this but...
If you want to play games, get an iphone 4s, Simple as that. Specs aside (yes GPU wise the a5 is faster than mali400 anyway), iOs is much better for gaming, more games. and higher quality games. not to mention games usually arrive on ios faster than they make it to android.
/flame shield on.
you both terribly wrong ;-)
1/ the ps3 has good cpus/gpus despite the age
2/ the ps3 only runs the game and optimized for gaming (including the dev tools and the apis)
3/the phone runs a lot of other things that the ps3 doesn't even have hardware for (starting by: how do you think the phone receives calls and messages even thus ur playing a game?)
4/the phones also have a runtime on top
5/phones have non voltile memory too
and please realize that ram has nothing to do with raw power, its just a fast access memory. means the more stuff you run the more ram you need.
eventually, ram is used to compensate loading times or how much data you can process at once, but that's not always as relevent
I assume that the S4 Pro is MUCH faster than anything used in the xbox and ps2. I assume its faster than the 360 and ps3. Is that really the case though? The games look like crap on the current gen consoles and many mobile games are catching up. From a purely specs perspective is the Adreno 320/S4 Pro superior?
I would seriously doubt that but i don't know enough to say that for sure. Sure mobile CPUs are pretty good but they are limited by their thermal envelopes.
Compared to the PS3? NO. the cell processor is very advanced even if it's partly locked down. (there are 2-3 cells that aren't used)
Sent from my PG06100 using Tapatalk 2
Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.
Eric-1987 said:
Very advanced for 7 years ago. This is 2013 and the S4 Pro has more cores/ram/gpu cores. The PS3 games cant even run in 720p. Most games are upscaled from 960x540.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can't be more wrong. It hasn't got more CPU and GPU cores. It has more RAM but the PS3 doesn't have to run Android. Also, very few PS3 games run at qHD res. One game is Black Ops, but it does this because it runs 60 FPS. Most games nowadays render at 720p or near it.
Also, I have yet to see a mobile game that comes even close to PS3 games nowadays. Maybe some mobile games look better than some PS3 release titles, but that's it.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Does it really even matter? If you bought your phone as an alternative to a gaming console or handheld gaming device you bought it for the wrong reason.
Also if you want to compare specs, compare a PS3 or XBox 360 to a phone that came out 7 years ago.
Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a single PPE and 8 SPE-s. One SPE is used by the OS and one is locked.
Yes, it does run a form of Linux, but what I originally meant was that its footprint is very small, it only consumes 20-30 MB of RAM compared to Android which needs several hundred MB-s and also CPU power to run background services.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Eric-1987 said:
Yes it does. The PS3 cell processor is single core. The 360 CPU is tri core. And the PS3 runs a form of Linux.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly all this.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
shotta35 said:
Umm i thought the Cell processor was a "7" core device at 3.2Ghz to boot. Not that clock speed is everything but it puts out 218 G-FLOPS while the 550Mhz GPU (RSX) puts oput 1.8 T-Flops. The Adreno 225 does 12.8 G-FLOPS.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6330/the-iphone-5-review/11
According to the that page, the iPhone 5 GPU is similar to the Adreno 320 and that does 19.2 G-FLOPS. WAAAAY less than the 1.8 (or read 1800 ) T-FLOPS of the RSX.
VRAM data rates are ~20GB/s vs 8GB/s
So yeah, guess we can say that's done for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.
Eric-1987 said:
So if thats the case then mobile technology isn't ANYWHERE CLOSE to desktop PC's. My PC DESTROYS a PS3 without even thinking twice. Its like an ant vs my boot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Pretty sure it's more powerful than either the PS2 or Xbox, but there's no way it would ever emulate them if that's what you're getting at there
Not to mention, the Android OS uses a lot of resources, unlike a simpler console such as those
No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.
Eric-1987 said:
The N4 is more powerful than a PS2/Xbox though right? My old SGS4G could play PS1 games without flinching.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Give it up already. On paper the N4 is great and all for what it is, but it can't compete with a gaming console. Try hooking up your phone to a big screen hdtv and see how it compares graphics wise to a gaming console if you have one. After all, the SGS4G doesn't have a disc drive on it so I don't know how you could play a PS1 game one it. You must only be playing pirated games via a 3 or 4 inch screen to come to the assumption that a cell phone comes close to any of the current gaming consoles graphics wise. Afterall, there is a reason they make cell phones, dvd/bluray players, video game consoles, tvs, etc... They each have their own benefits.
Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.
Venekor said:
No way does the RSX put out 1.8 Tflops....
It's basically 6800SLI which gets nowhere near that, the 580 doesn't even get that lol.
The Cell is an overhyped CPU that failed to deliver and in reality CPUs like the 360s Xeon and the I7s we have today are so much better for gaming. Developers just complain about the amount of code the Cell needs compared to conventional CPUs and how it takes too much time. Doesn't matter what you say about it in theory, in practice it costs too much money to develop on and it cost Sony the console war. Fact is we've not see the PS3 out perform the 360, the GPU inside the 360 can push more pixels, has access to more memory too. Games like uncharted use so much trickery to make them look good, I don't understand why people make a big deal out of it, have you seen the obviously jpeg like skyboxes all over it?
Graphics wise the phones are already there, what they lack in power they make up for in memory and new shaders and features to make the games look better. Mobile GPUs also push games at higher framerates and use AA which consoles lack most of the time due to memory constraints. Instead their games use post processing effects which blur everything out and make it look ****. Also mobile games run at 60FPS where as most console games are around 30fps or even lower.
CPU wise mobiles are getting there but still far off, we see the next gen of Arm chips getting close to the I3.
The biggest constraint of the Mobiles though is battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/
biffsmash said:
Lets be honest, PS3 games are absolutely shocking. They have so much screen tear, not to mention the actual graphics are completely and utterly awful. It takes an age to load, even it's own dashboard. Xbox 360 is better but still, consoles we have today are absolutely light years behind PC's and even the processors we have in our phones outshine them.
You can quote all the nonsense giga flop teraflop data you want, you would be all talking out your behinds because consoles struggle with the games they have, and with skyrim as an example, are completely and utterly chopped down to run, when compared to the unlocked PC versions with the proper textures.
I have yet to find a PS3 game to run in 1080p which is what it should be coping with, and the 720p games are awful both performance wise, and graphics wise.
As for mobiles on a big screen tv, the LG optimus 3G hooked up to 40 inch hd tv gaming is absolutely brilliant, look it up.
Xbox 360 is much much faster than the PS3 and actually does have better graphics it can handle and probably gives the Nexus a beating on the graphics side, but loading and general useage as a pc and it'd be useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually PS3 has v-sync enabled for lots of games which means no screen tear.
And no, the Xbox doesn't have better graphics. If Uncharted wasn't enough, take a look at Heavy Rain or The Last of Us.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
---------- Post added at 03:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:04 PM ----------
noname81 said:
Regarding GPU power: Nowadays it's still ~ a factor of 10. It is a really rough number but I often measured something like this when comparing GPU performance of iOS/Android devices and consoles/mid PC systems. Modern games still do a lot more than mobile games regarding rendering (shadows, global illumination, screen scape effects like SSAO, etc, etc). But mobile GPUs will get better and better. See e.g. the roadmap from NVIDIA and the comparison with current console generation:
http://www.androidpolice.com/2012/0...el-performance-from-mobile-gpus-in-2013-2014/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Got to agree with this. Mobile games often have just a lot of pointless effects which make them look beautiful.
Sent from my LG-P990 using xda app-developers app
Hi, guys. I am interested in N10,but I am very curious about performance of N10. I know Samsung use an dual core based at ARM15, but its screen has a high resolution 2560x1400. Is its dual core really capable of such a high resolution? How about the performance of multiple tasking? Any lag? My current cellphone is Galaxy Note 2 that has a quad core chip, but it is not as fast as what I thought until I flash 4.4.2 ROM. Tell me your experience of using N10. Your comment would really help me make a good decision. By the way, the main purpose is to internet bowersing and watch movies which store on portable HDD. Thanks
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Free mobile app
I have been running the Nexus 10 since it came out. No complaints here. I watch allot of Youtube video, news and sports videos, etc. Even runs better when I tether it off my 4G. Been testing latest 4.4.3 Roms available here at XDA. Not much difference over 4.4.2, runs good with either.
Good luck.
The cpu doesnt primarily drive the screen so it handles the big resolution screen very well. With browsing and watching movies its just fast. This thing is a beast when it comes to gaming because it has a kick ass gpu..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app
Alexsandra said:
Hi, guys. I am interested in N10,but I am very curious about performance of N10. I know Samsung use an dual core based at ARM15, but its screen has a high resolution 2560x1400. Is its dual core really capable of such a high resolution? How about the performance of multiple tasking? Any lag? My current cellphone is Galaxy Note 2 that has a quad core chip, but it is not as fast as what I thought until I flash 4.4.2 ROM. Tell me your experience of using N10. Your comment would really help me make a good decision. By the way, the main purpose is to internet bowersing and watch movies which store on portable HDD. Thanks
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with the two posts above mine. I've had this tablet for a few months, and never once has it felt slow or sluggish with anything I've thrown at it. This ain't your typical dual core. It's on par with my Nexus 5 and Nexus 7 (2013).
mrgnex said:
The cpu doesnt primarily drive the screen so it handles the big resolution screen very well. With browsing and watching movies its just fast. This thing is a beast when it comes to gaming because it has a kick ass gpu..
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great!
Hi,
Not only what the guys said above, to power the screen resolution, the GPU has 1GB allocated to it since 4.3 if I'm not wrong. So it's quite capable, just be careful when using many apps, the RAM is limited to only 1GB due to it. Even though I'm able to play many games and watch full HD videos with ease and comfort .
~Lord
Alexsandra said:
Great!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As usual, the correct answer would be: "It depends!"
The Nexus 10 is the best Samsung could do at the time it came out.
Somehow both Google and Samsung felt compelled at the time to deliver something that would beat Apple at least on paper.
Truth is, it's a somewhat unbalanced device by today's standards.
A typical competitor today would probably have a Qualcom Snapdragon 800 or better and you'd notice the difference!
Generally CPU performance is still quite ok: More than 2 cores rarely make sense and these ARM 15 cores tend to have enough oomph for the sort of things you'd run on a tablet CPU. And the Exynos seems to be a close match to the Snapdragon, core by core.
So there, for all practical purposes, it won't feel much slower than a modern devices.
But the GPU can't quite deal with the resolution and even if it could, DRAM bandwidth would be the next barrier. So when you look for 3D game performance, the Nexus 10 can't quite keep up with what is out there these days.
Depending on your benchmark it may feel like a dog, but good games tailer themselves to what's available and even some 3D ones are actually ok.
Mine's most used for reading books, surfing, perhaps even some video, I'm also doing some writing (with BT keyboard/mouse) on it and that's all more than ok, especially when you want to flip forth and back between lots of web-sites and programs.
I'd say when you can get the Nexus 10 for cheap it's still pretty good, when you're ready to pay prime dollar, you'll find better even from Samsung.
abufrejoval said:
As usual, the correct answer would be: "It depends!"
The Nexus 10 is the best Samsung could do at the time it came out.
Somehow both Google and Samsung felt compelled at the time to deliver something that would beat Apple at least on paper.
Truth is, it's a somewhat unbalanced device by today's standards.
A typical competitor today would probably have a Qualcom Snapdragon 800 or better and you'd notice the difference!
Generally CPU performance is still quite ok: More than 2 cores rarely make sense and these ARM 15 cores tend to have enough oomph for the sort of things you'd run on a tablet CPU. And the Exynos seems to be a close match to the Snapdragon, core by core.
So there, for all practical purposes, it won't feel much slower than a modern devices.
But the GPU can't quite deal with the resolution and even if it could, DRAM bandwidth would be the next barrier. So when you look for 3D game performance, the Nexus 10 can't quite keep up with what is out there these days.
Depending on your benchmark it may feel like a dog, but good games tailer themselves to what's available and even some 3D ones are actually ok.
Mine's most used for reading books, surfing, perhaps even some video, I'm also doing some writing (with BT keyboard/mouse) on it and that's all more than ok, especially when you want to flip forth and back between lots of web-sites and programs.
I'd say when you can get the Nexus 10 for cheap it's still pretty good, when you're ready to pay prime dollar, you'll find better even from Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say this is a pretty fair assessment. GPU struggles with some modern apps such as Google maps, and even now Chrome isn't the best. I still use browser because its much smoother, and I also use the 'performance' CPU governor which locks the tablet to 1.7ghz and really helps responsiveness.
That being said, its still a really really nice tablet generally. If you're getting it for a good price you should be happy enough. I still love using mine nearly 2 years after buying it, and I'm comparing it to my snap 800 powered XZU. Its still a really nice screen, really nice design. Quick enough and battery life is not too bad these days either! (6 hours SOT easy with brightness at 35℅)