Dolphin emulator performance on Exynos - Samsung Galaxy Note 9 Questions & Answers

Hey guys.
Can someone with an Exynos Note9 test out Dolphin's performance?
As far as I can make out, previous phones with Exynos were missing important OpenGL drivers, or the kernel was out of date, or something. This caused Dolphin to really struggle.
The Snapdragon variants of devices never had this problem.
Samsung is making a big deal out of having Vulkan support, so does this improve Dolphin's performance?

Yeah some one try.
The Mali GPU has less benchmark school than even SD835 which came Last year thought.

can you answer this question about dolphin on exynos please ?

Related

[Q] Galaxy S CPU Performance

I've been reading a lot of discussion on this and would love to hear some opinions and see some benchmarks.
I currently own a Nexus One & where I live they are priced about $150 dollars more for a Nexus than a Galaxy S (It's my understanding Nexus are regarded as cheaper phones in America?) So basically I can sell my 4 month old Nexus One & buy a brand new 16GB Galaxy S for no extra cost. Here is what I am wondering...
I know the Galaxy S has an amazing GPU, it facerolls the Nexus One & even seems to stomp the Droid X with its improved GPU so that is great.
The CPU however seems to under perform in every benchmark I can find versus the Nexus/Droid2 & many more current high end Androids.
I realise these devices are running Android 2.2 with JIT. I've seen Linpacks of 2.2 running Galaxy S devices and JIT enabled ROMs that still don't compare with these other devices.
Question 1
What I'm wondering is the difference we can see in CPU benchmarks going to be surpassed with the addition of a proper 2.2 JIT rom on our devices or is simply that the Snapdragons & other Qualcomm CPU are actually better than our Hummingbird.
Question 2
My Nexus One is Linkpacking 30 MFlops atm, I think with OC etc I can get it higher too. Does anyone have any evidence of a Galaxy S phone (running 2.2, JIT, lagfix or anything) that competes (or even comes close to competing) with this? I have been unable to find anything.
Question 3
Is the current Quadrant scores that I'm seeing people reporting in the Lag Fix threads (2000+) actually representative of speed or are these (as Cyanogen & others seem to be claiming) distorted?
(I realise a lot of people are reporting lag fixed.. what I'm asking is the number represented there (x2 N1 Froyo's score) actually accurate. I don't understand the mechanics behind the I/O benchmark so I don't understand if the lagfix is distoring the reported results from it.)
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes. That's what lag fixes help. Cpu wise we eat snapdragons for breakfast, lunch and tea.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
andrewluecke said:
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what he said ^^^
regards
ickyboo said:
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
andrewluecke said:
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Croak said:
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, that was a really insightful post.
So basically even though our processor should outperform or ATLEAST match the snapdragons. Due to the mass optimization of 2.2 JIT for Snapdragon devices it's likely we'll never see the same performance. Unless Samsung gets really keen to do some optimization themselves.
I searched all over the internet to see why the CPU scores in Quadrant and other benchmarks are waaaay lower then the Nexus ones, but still I can't find anything.
Does Samsung disable the JIT in their Froyo ROMs? Because both Snapdragon and Hummingbird are still based on the same Cortex A8 cores
"It's clear that FroYo's JIT compiler currently only delivers significant performance gains for Snapdragon CPUs with the Scorpion core. This in turn explains why, so far, only a beta version of Android 2.2 is available for the Cortex-A8-based Samsung Galaxy S — the JIT compiler is the outstanding feature of FroYo. For the widespread Cortex-A8 cores, used in many high-end Android smartphones, the JIT compiler needs to be optimised. A Cortex-A8 core will still be slower than a Scorpion core at the same clock speed, but the Scorpion's advantage may not be as much 260 percent."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://androidforums.com/samsung-ca...ant-scores-why-humming-bird-doing-so-bad.html
There are multiple reasons, not optimised jit, slow memory for caching and more. Most of them are solved in the CM roms (it performs on par with the N1), and i can tell you that when Gingerbread comes it will blow the snapdragons away.
Which custom ROM provides CPU performance close to Snapdragon?
[ignore this post please]
Still the 1Ghz humming bird out performs the 1Ghz snap in real world performance
Even the LG Optimus One ARM11 600MHz Core scores better than Galaxy S. I still believe it's a software problem.
http://lgoptimusonep500.blogspot.com/2011/01/custom-rom-for-lg-optimus-one-p500.html#more
Another benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-n8-review-/7
...where the Nexus S proves that the Hummingbird can do more than it currrently does in Galaxy S.

Galaxy Note Using Mali-400MP GPU (Outdated GPU)?

hello guys..i heard that galaxy note and other samsung device are using an outdated GPU (Mali-400MP GPU)...so is it a little "fail" for our note to have an outdated GPU?plss give ur opinion.. thanks guys
..u can read the review about the GPU--> Here
It's so much faster than the sgx540 in the nexus it's ridiculous and since my choice was between those two I'm very happy with it.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
Check out the real world performances. Mali 400 outclasses Adreno 220 easily.
The weakpoint of Mali is geometry performance, but it does not matter much with mobiles until now as mobile games are not geometry heavy.
On the other hand, the OpenGL ES 2.x performance and real world performance of Mali is excellent.
With the clock speed of exynos in Note which actually gives much better real world performance with Mali 400 than even SGS2, it runs circles around Adreno 220 powered devices like sensation and even SGX540 powered devices.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
The above review is of SGS2. And mind you the performance of note is much better than SGS2. It is one of the most balanced GPUs on market with great gaming as well as multimedia performance (which actually matters more to someone like me.)
Funkym0nkey said:
Check out the real world performances. Mali 400 outclasses Adreno 220 easily.
The weakpoint of Mali is geometry performance, but it does not matter much with mobiles until now as mobile games are not geometry heavy.
On the other hand, the OpenGL ES 2.x performance and real world performance of Mali is excellent.
With the clock speed of exynos in Note which actually gives much better real world performance with Mali 400 than even SGS2, it runs circles around Adreno 220 powered devices like sensation and even SGX540 powered devices.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4686/samsung-galaxy-s-2-international-review-the-best-redefined/17
The above review is of SGS2. And mind you the performance of note is much better than SGS2. It is one of the most balanced GPUs on market with great gaming as well as multimedia performance (which actually matters more to someone like me.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for this info sir
although mali has been here for a very long time, it was well ahead of its time. and it still is i guess
anjath said:
although mali has been here for a very long time, it was well ahead of its time. and it still is i guess
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah well Scott Adams is wayyyyyyy past his heyday (heck, even being relevant).... haven't read him since 2007 or so, when he started dabbling in intelligent design woo and sexist claptrap...
for being a heavy mobile gamer
i can assure you that the mali 400 on the note does very well with the latest games (asphalt7, dead trigger to name a few) despite having to compute for a much higher resolution display than other phones...
and with a little overclocking (tegrak app or gl notecore kernel) gpu performance can get sky high.
best phone i ever got :victory:
GAME ON said:
hello guys..i heard that galaxy note and other samsung device are using an outdated GPU (Mali-400MP GPU)...so is it a little "fail" for our note to have an outdated GPU?plss give ur opinion.. thanks guys
..u can read the review about the GPU--> Here
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The note was released ten months ago but still its gpu is better than all the others except sgs3 and and maybe one x..
Btw do you even own a note?? Did you every notice any lag in any game??
Whiskeyjack4855 said:
The note was released ten months ago but still its gpu is better than all the others except sgs3 and and maybe one x..
Btw do you even own a note?? Did you every notice any lag in any game??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The NOTE's and SGS3's GPU are the same.
However, the S3 is built on a smaller 32nm die-size, so it means it uses less space and less power for same performance. Samsung uses this advantage to clock the frequency much higher than the NOTE (which is built on a 45nm die).
Also, the S3 implements a new, updated driver for the gpu and squeezes more performance out. This was a same move Samsung made with the SGX540, which is also a very fast gpu. The original SGS was clocked real-low and had outdated drivers... after stealing the driver sources from the LG with OMAP 4440 SoC, the SGS (with 4.0.3) was performing in the same league as the 2011/2012 devices.
Kangal said:
The NOTE's and SGS3's GPU are the same.
However, the S3 is built on a smaller 32nm die-size, so it means it uses less space and less power for same performance. Samsung uses this advantage to clock the frequency much higher than the NOTE (which is built on a 45nm die).
Also, the S3 implements a new, updated driver for the gpu and squeezes more performance out. This was a same move Samsung made with the SGX540, which is also a very fast gpu. The original SGS was clocked real-low and had outdated drivers... after stealing the driver sources from the LG with OMAP 4440 SoC, the SGS (with 4.0.3) was performing in the same league as the 2011/2012 devices.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know that that both the note and sgs3 has same gpu.. But the one in sgs3 its more powerful cause you said it's overclocked and has better drivers..
Btw do you know why the mali in sgs3 gets so high benchmark scores even wih the 720p screen? I mean is it all due to oc and better drivers?
Whiskeyjack4855 said:
I know that that both the note and sgs3 has same gpu.. But the one in sgs3 its more powerful cause you said it's overclocked and has better drivers..
Btw do you know why the mali in sgs3 gets so high benchmark scores even wih the 720p screen? I mean is it all due to oc and better drivers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
An easier way to understand is to look at the new RIM PlayBook.
It's got the same processor as the Gnex (Galaxy Nexus) however its much much faster, especially in browsing. It decimates it. It even decimates the ASUS Transformer Prime Infinity (O'C Tegra3 + ICS).... or the Nexus7 (U'C Tegra3 + JBean).
You are only as fast as your slowest component. In the case of Android, its the high-level (slow) implemented software.
= Getting a faster soc with more cores and more ram doesn't really increase performance that much.
Some serious thread necromancy going on here!
Regards,
Dave
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Kangal said:
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By toe to toe with the one x do you mean benchmarks or real life perfomance..
Hey one thing more..aren't you a engadget reader?
Whiskeyjack4855 said:
By toe to toe with the one x do you mean benchmarks or real life perfomance..
Hey one thing more..aren't you a engadget reader?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Both.
But I don't live by the benchmarks. I mean have you tried some of the HD Apps from TegraZone. On stock TouchWizz, the NOTE really struggles. With a custom setup, I don't get much/any problems.
Yeah, I do frequent engadget... also on heaps of other sites.
Kangal said:
Both.
But I don't live by the benchmarks. I mean have you tried some of the HD Apps from TegraZone. On stock TouchWizz, the NOTE really struggles. With a custom setup, I don't get much/any problems.
Yeah, I do frequent engadget... also on heaps of other sites.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Would you be kind enough to educate me about your setup?
Kangal said:
Better drivers + a little O'C makes the overwhelming difference.
I mean the NOTE comes with *only* 2 cores and *slow* gpu... after I customized it, its running toe-to-toe with the HTC One X (Tegra3).
An easier way to understand is to look at the new RIM PlayBook.
It's got the same processor as the Gnex (Galaxy Nexus) however its much much faster, especially in browsing. It decimates it. It even decimates the ASUS Transformer Prime Infinity (O'C Tegra3 + ICS).... or the Nexus7 (U'C Tegra3 + JBean).
You are only as fast as your slowest component. In the case of Android, its the high-level (slow) implemented software.
= Getting a faster soc with more cores and more ram doesn't really increase performance that much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. Even though the Playbook has its many flaws (owned two both with screen/USB issues) it was a powerhouse. Multimedia was outstanding and web surfing was by far the fastest.
But the OS, QNX, is to thank for that. If the Playbook was running android it would be nothing out of the ordinary. As much as I love Android it really is not as efficiant as QNX
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda app-developers app
anything on market today is outdated tommorow
Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk 2
Recently I had a doubt about if it's possible to unlock the 2 locked remaining cores in the Galaxy Note N7000? Because I realize that the Note only uses 2 of the 4 GPU cores... It's there a possibility to do this? How?
i think mali 400 is a good GPU because Note1 and Note2 using it. and really nice GPU for gaming

Exynos Octa SM-G900H Benchmark, Geat, and Battery Life

There is still little information about the octa variant. No review about score and battery life.
So I was able to install antutu on demo unit. The score is high and the phone is not heating. All 8 cores can run together but Antutu reports the freq is 500-1300MHz and not recognize the cpu model name.
Please post your benchmark and battery life.
dragon135 said:
There is still little information about the octa variant. No review about score and battery life.
So I was able to install antutu on demo unit. The score is high and the phone is not heating. All 8 cores can run together but Antutu reports the freq is 500-1300MHz and not recognize the cpu model name.
Please post your benchmark and battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Damn. Exynos is consistently higher than the Snapdragon 801 in Antutu.
Only disappointment is the lack of LTE though(and ROMs too).
The new Exynos version come with new kind of fine-grained power management, overheating should be of the past and impossible.
Here's a benchmark video of the Exynos version.
It scores a chart topping 39029 on Antutu, that too without all the benchmark boosting involved!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P67kWKA4Lso&feature=youtube_gdata_player
AndreiLux said:
The new Exynos version come with new kind of fine-grained power management, overheating should be of the past and impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hi @AndreiLux,
Nice to see your comment, Do you confirm the S5 Exynos version? I mean we forget S4 I9500 problems and this new version has no problem? Thanks.
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
AndreiLux said:
The new Exynos version come with new kind of fine-grained power management, overheating should be of the past and impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung advertises "True Octa Core" capabilities with this device and this certainly means that Samsung is shipping the device with HMP enabled.
Does HMP offer better battery management over the previous implementations?
system.img said:
Samsung advertises "True Octa Core" capabilities with this device and this certainly means that Samsung is shipping the device with HMP enabled.
Does HMP offer better battery management over the previous implementations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It comes with HMP but that's not what I'm talking about.
The device comes with something called ARM Intelligent Power Allocation (IPA) which is basically a very fine-grained power tracking and estimation thermal framework to control DVFS. The device is capped at 3.5W TDP between all CPUs and GPU, so it should never cause a heating overrun. And it seems that it doesn't affect performance given the videos.
Galaxy s3 + galaxy s4 = galaxy s5
Amazing power
AndreiLux said:
It comes with HMP but that's not what I'm talking about.
The device comes with something called ARM Intelligent Power Allocation (IPA) which is basically a very fine-grained power tracking and estimation thermal framework to control DVFS. The device is capped at 3.5W TDP between all CPUs and GPU, so it should never cause a heating overrun. And it seems that it doesn't affect performance given the videos.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I didn't mean that you mentioned about HMP in your earlier post. I just had a question about the battery performance of HMP.
Can you comment on that?
Thanks for this info. :beer:
@Andrei So is this exynos 4422 in S5?
What is the difference then with the new exynos 4430?
Won't you buy S5 Octa?
Sent from GT-I9500
AndreiLux said:
The new Exynos version come with new kind of fine-grained power management, overheating should be of the past and impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is still Andrei it is still
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
leoaudio13 said:
It is still Andrei it is still
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've read the opposite from other people such as the OP. All depends on firmware you had on your version. We'll see when somebody actually bothers to properly test it. I'm just stating what I see in the code.
@dragon135
The 5430 has a HEVC decoder, dedicated clock domain on the display interface, higher clocks in general, GPU at 600MHz (no info on core count but improvement is a possibility), and a new dedicated A5 co-processor for audio decoding and encoding called "Siren". The HEVC decoder alone is worth it imho since it provides good future-proofing of the device.
AndreiLux said:
I've read the opposite from other people such as the OP. All depends on firmware you had on your version. We'll see when somebody actually bothers to properly test it. I'm just stating what I see in the code.
@dragon135
The 5430 has a HEVC decoder, dedicated clock domain on the display interface, higher clocks in general, GPU at 600MHz (no info on core count but improvement is a possibility), and a new dedicated A5 co-processor for audio decoding and encoding called "Siren". The HEVC decoder alone is worth it imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
5430???? :what::what::what::what::what::what::what::what::what:
AndreiLux said:
I've read the opposite from other people such as the OP. All depends on firmware you had on your version. We'll see when somebody actually bothers to properly test it. I'm just stating what I see in the code.
@dragon135
The 5430 has a HEVC decoder, dedicated clock domain on the display interface, higher clocks in general, GPU at 600MHz (no info on core count but improvement is a possibility), and a new dedicated A5 co-processor for audio decoding and encoding called "Siren". The HEVC decoder alone is worth it imho since it provides good future-proofing of the device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 900H I tested ( i made a vid on that ) was hot as hell after 2 or 3 antutubench. Not sure as if it was the final version but my first impression on the Octa was really really impressed with fluidity and speed. However, if watch closely to my vid, u can see the octa will slightly slow down and get hot after a period of hesvy tasks. I wouldnt say it might be at that overheated but I can feel the temp while holding 2 different variants in hands. Well, let see how the octa performs in the future. I might get 1 final H version to test to but I want to get the M8 to test as too many guys claiming the M8 is way better than the S5 hehe.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
---------- Post added at 01:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:56 AM ----------
Btw, the octa performed quite low in graphic test in my vid. I thought Mali would have performed way better than Snap version :/ kinda confused
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
leoaudio13 said:
Btw, the octa performed quite low in graphic test in my vid. I thought Mali would have performed way better than Snap version :/ kinda confused
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Adreno 330 is too fat. ARM promises performance improvements via drivers but we'll see if that'll happen or not.
iba21 said:
5430???? :what::what::what::what::what::what::what::what::what:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what "what" ? Samsung Exynos 5430
Pako7 said:
what "what" ? Samsung Exynos 5430
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well.. it's my first time witch i read something about 5430.. for me the "last" was the 5422
it means, 5422 is only another unusefull chip til a better soc.. in this case the 5430..
AndreiLux said:
and a new dedicated A5 co-processor for audio decoding and encoding called "Siren".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Andrei.. may be "SEIREN" ?
And how do you know about the frequency of the GPU?
iba21 said:
Well.. it's my first time witch i read something about 5430.. for me the "last" was the 5422
it means, 5422 is only another unusefull chip til a better soc.. in this case the 5430..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well.. but about 5430 known since the beginning of the year .. but there is still 5440
Pako7 said:
Andrei.. may be "SEIREN" ?
---------- Post added at 12:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:09 AM ----------
well.. but about 5430 known since the beginning of the year .. but there is still 5440
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Im eagerly waiting for the 64 bits Exynos cant wait to get hands on it haha
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk
Yep but.. there are a lot of rumors about socs.. the 5430 was rumored as 64bit cpu.. and it was a rumor outed when there weren't infos about 5420 soc..
5440 is in kernel sources.. never ever umderstood it..

Where are the Note 4 benchmarks?

Are any in depth Galaxy Note 4 benchmarks. We all saw early benchmarks on GSM Arena, but I haven't found any Antutu, Geekbench, or Quadrant scores, to name a few. I know that benchmarks aren't everything, but as a Note 3 owner I'm excited to see performance enhancements brought to us by the Snapdragon 805 with the Adreno 420.
CorruptionDee said:
Are any in depth Galaxy Note 4 benchmarks. We all saw early benchmarks on GSM Arena, but I haven't found any Antutu, Geekbench, or Quadrant scores, to name a few. I know that benchmarks aren't everything, but as a Note 3 owner I'm excited to see performance enhancements brought to us by the Snapdragon 805 with the Adreno 420.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better to wait for the actual reviews, as benchmarks and performance can still be tweaked for the final software version.
Knowing Samsung the first firmware might be a bit laggy. I remember worrying about Note 10.1 because in reviews it was slow as hell - first update fixed all that.
That makes sense. The Korean model will be released relatively soon, so I expect some more info. I'm almost certain that the software the showroom floor was fully optimized.
As for the Note 10.1 2014, I still have mine and can confirm that it has gotten better with every update. I'm running Hyperdrive, and it runs as smooth as butter. The benchmarks reflect that as well, with numbers only slightly lower than my Note 3.

Differences in use between T800 and T805

Hello, I bought a month ago a galaxy tab s LTE T805, but I saw that chrome, which is the browser that I use on my Note3 with satisfaction, lags a lot, so to be inutilizabile with this browser.
while with the stock browser, the situation is almost good, but I miss being able to use chrome.
I also saw that many other browsers have performance problem with this tablet, (dolphin, firefox maxton etc). The only other decent is UCbrowser HD.
I wanted to know if this poor performance is due to a lack of optimization in the LTE version that has a Exynos CPU, or even in the version T800 Wifi only with the most popular snapdragon 800, performance with chrome are very scarce.
thanks
Wifi version has exynos as well.
Performance issuese are due to premature SW. Get an update, and debloat.
pibach said:
Wifi version has exynos as well.
Performance issuese are due to premature SW. Get an update, and debloat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have the latest update already. However CPU - Z said it T805 tablet is the exynos and not the snapdragon
Which version? There are probably newer around (different countries). Or use a custom Rom. I got a t705 and use Selamba Rom, skyhigh kernel, and performance is just fine.
Anyway, its not a HW problem. Exynos is pretty fast and on par with Snapdragon.
sorry but you are diverting the conversation.
I want to know if there are differences in usability with chrome between the tablet with Exynos, and the one with the snapdragon.
kernel, rom variants countries not interest me at the moment.

Categories

Resources