Galaxy Nexus Benchmarked, Beats iPhone 4S in Browsing

[watcha]

Just to be clear, I mean that the Galaxy Nexus chose not to use the fastest GPU, not Samsung

 

[Netherscourge]

I'll give up a couple milliseconds of browser speed for SIRI any day of the week.

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]Android fanbois sucks[/nom]Why when Android loss in an area, their fan boy can say its not critical. but when other OS loss to Android in certain area, they are not allow to say its not critical by Android fan boi??[/citation]

Good point! When iPhone does something well, it's downplayed. Growth of game sales on iOS and Android are huge. What's even more funny is most of you are gamers so GPU is always important.

Just like when Apple said to Adobe fix flash or let it die- All of the Android fanbois were up in arms about being able to use flash - GUESS WHAT - Apple was right - Adobe is killing mobile flash. LOL

TEGRA 3 (Kal-El) is not going to perform as expected - Read it and weep

More suprised this article was up on another site on November 9th and Tom's still hasn't posted such horrible news to it's Android fan-base.

BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]um... do you not understand the difference in gpu and such? it would be like looking at the specs of an nvidia card and an ati card and saying how the ati card isnt 400% faster than the nvidia (cuda cores to stream processers)also to some extent you have to take in that ios is one device, while android is multipul... you cant say "if the ios was XXXX it would beat android" because the fact is it isnt, and android is. nowtake a look at the fps... 30fps on a mobile device is more than good enough.and to the above quote... you can do that, who does that, and whats the purpose, when games on those plat forms are touch based, you have to look at the tablet, and when they arent touch based, the controls are so bad that the games are border line unplayable.[/citation]

BULL SH*T - Performance/GHZ - it's owned buy the A5 in graphics performance *period* and for Sunspider - it should be faster with 4 cores and 400 more MHz! I would expect a quad core A5 architecture to smoke it at 1.2 GHz...

The Nexus architecture is clocked higher 1.2GHz vs the A5 800MHz to perform better - It would be nice to see battery benchmarks as well to make it even. Apple under clocks to provide better battery life and Android clocks higher to provide better performance but at the cost of battery.

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]um... do you not understand the difference in gpu and such? it would be like looking at the specs of an nvidia card and an ati card and saying how the ati card isnt 400% faster than the nvidia (cuda cores to stream processers)also to some extent you have to take in that ios is one device, while android is multipul... you cant say "if the ios was XXXX it would beat android" because the fact is it isnt, and android is. nowtake a look at the fps... 30fps on a mobile device is more than good enough.and to the above quote... you can do that, who does that, and whats the purpose, when games on those plat forms are touch based, you have to look at the tablet, and when they arent touch based, the controls are so bad that the games are border line unplayable.[/citation]

PSSSTTTTT TEGRA 3 ain't performing the way NVIDIA is hoping - http/semiaccurate.com/2011/11/09/tegra-3-missed-performance-goals-by-wide-margins/

Which is why they have to clock it at 1.2 GHz with 4 cores to beat a dual core at 800MHz...

Nvidia will hopefully have their game on by the time they start making their Cortex-A15 cored chips.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]Good point! When iPhone does something well, it's downplayed. Growth of game sales on iOS and Android are huge. What's even more funny is most of you are gamers so GPU is always important.Just like when Apple said to Adobe fix flash or let it die- All of the Android fanbois were up in arms about being able to use flash - GUESS WHAT - Apple was right - Adobe is killing mobile flash. LOLTEGRA 3 (Kal-El) is not going to perform as expected - Read it and weepMore suprised this article was up on another site on November 9th and Tom's still hasn't posted such horrible news to it's Android fan-base.BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA[/citation]
So your proof that the tegra 3 is bad comes from a web site that has a strong bias against nVidia and it also doesn't post any proof.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]BULL SH*T - Performance/GHZ - it's owned buy the A5 in graphics performance *period* and for Sunspider - it should be faster with 4 cores and 400 more MHz! I would expect a quad core A5 architecture to smoke it at 1.2 GHz... The Nexus architecture is clocked higher 1.2GHz vs the A5 800MHz to perform better - It would be nice to see battery benchmarks as well to make it even. Apple under clocks to provide better battery life and Android clocks higher to provide better performance but at the cost of battery.[/citation]
Could you please tell me how you reached the 800MHz clock speed of the A5 on the iPhone 4S, or did you choose a number at random that was lower than 1GHz?

 

[Vladislaus]

I can't say this result shocks me. It's faster than the iPhone 4s in browsing, that is something to be expected since it has a higher clock rate. It's slower than the iPhone 4S and Galaxy S II when 3d rendering, again nothing that wasn't expected since it has an inferior GPU when compared to the other two.

 

[gidgiddonihah]

OK, i decided to skip all of the fan-boy comments and jump in and state my thoughts. I am very curious to see how the Samsung Galaxy SII Skyrocket does as it has 300MHz on the normal SII that was benched. Especially with the 1 cent deal at amazon....

Another point... Why was the iPad included? Its a tablet not a phone, and only for iOS... Why not include a Tegra 2 Honeycomb tablet for additional comparison?

 

[gidgiddonihah]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Could you please tell me how you reached the 800MHz clock speed of the A5 on the iPhone 4S, or did you choose a number at random that was lower than 1GHz?[/citation]

800 MHz is the 'estimated' clock rate according to Amazons official comparison between the top Android and iOS phones. Just thought I would jump in there

 

[alidan]

[citation][nom]watcha[/nom]1 - Yes, it is like looking at Nvidia and ATI. The iPhone 4s is clocked lower but performs better. Which is why it's bad if people just look at mhz.2 - 'ios is one device, while android is multipul' - interesting spelling aside, we're comparing the BEST Android phone to the iPhone. So I don't see a problem.3 - 30 FPS? Enough? Switch from 30 to 60 and see if you'll notice the difference. Hint - it's very different. Not only that but on more detailed more modern releases you wont get anywhere near 30 fps if it's been designed to run at that speed on the iPhone 4S. 4 - You can wirelessly stream to your TV with iPhone 4S, and you can plug in a game controller on Android, so it's very relevant.The bottom line is that GPU performance is the most limiting factor in phones, particularly as resolutions get higher - so this is a big with for Apple.Sorry, but it's obviously an Apple vs Android 'thing'. Apple chose to put the fastest GPU of any mobile phone in their phone. Samsung didn't. Samsung's choice, Samsung' failure - and as the biggest representative of Android handsets, Android's loss.Who cares about iOS vs Android with the same CPU/GPU combination, given that they never have the same CPU / GPU in real life. People care about the devices and how they actually perform, not how much better their hardware would perform if it were possible to install either on a single device.[/citation]

we are talking about a mobile device here, i'm well aware that 60fps is a goal to strive toward in setting up a game, but honestly, 30fps for me is a bare minimum for any action game, and 15fps for an mmo style rpg, though that is coming from someone who played everquest luclin on a pc that was half as good as the minimum specs. so take it for what it is.

now on an fps, that i will dumb graphics down to the 60+ mark, usualy till its playing so fast that even the lowest spikes are over 60fps if i can, but on a game like... lets say skyrim, ill pump the graphics till they are in the 30fps range, only thing i ever leave out is shadows due to how much extra they seam to take to have good.

but im a bit off topic there.

do the phones upscale games to the tv? as in if the tv is 720 or 1080p they run at 1080 or 720p or is it just an upscale of what ever resolution the phone is.

and also, can you list some of the games that do this, and take external controllers? not because i don't believe you, i want to see what they are like.

[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]PSSSTTTTT TEGRA 3 ain't performing the way NVIDIA is hoping - http/semiaccurate.com/2011/11/09 [...] e-margins/Which is why they have to clock it at 1.2 GHz with 4 cores to beat a dual core at 800MHz...Nvidia will hopefully have their game on by the time they start making their Cortex-A15 cored chips.[/citation]

lets say that it is all true.

take a look at... well... lets go a game with physx, mafia 2.

take a look at it with physx on with an nvidia and an ati card.

thats kind of what the difference is here. iphone can make the os around the hardware and can pull more form it, while android is built like windows, and fits multipul hardware configs.

thats why im saying that just looking at the clocks is a moot point,

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Could you please tell me how you reached the 800MHz clock speed of the A5 on the iPhone 4S, or did you choose a number at random that was lower than 1GHz?[/citation]
Why would I pull a number like 800GHz out of my a$$?
Google it, Wikipedia, scroll up to the top of this article and look at the chart. It's stated in many places on the web.

Honestly, I want Nvidia to do better because it puts pressure on Apple and others to do better.

a 4 core 1.2GHz chip should toast a dual core 0.8GHz chip unless it's poorly designed comparatively.

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]So your proof that the tegra 3 is bad comes from a web site that has a strong bias against nVidia and it also doesn't post any proof.[/citation]

How are they anti Nvidia? The article is full of details proving their point.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]gidgiddonihah[/nom]800 MHz is the 'estimated' clock rate according to Amazons official comparison between the top Android and iOS phones. Just thought I would jump in there[/citation]
It's an estimate not a certainty.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]Why would I pull a number like 800GHz out of my a$$? Google it, Wikipedia, scroll up to the top of this article and look at the chart. It's stated in many places on the web.Honestly, I want Nvidia to do better because it puts pressure on Apple and others to do better.a 4 core 1.2GHz chip should toast a dual core 0.8GHz chip unless it's poorly designed comparatively.[/citation]
Like I stated 800 MHz is an estimate. Only the guys at Cupertino knows what clock is the iPhone running.

Also the chip isn't out yet when the first devices are out we'll see how it will perform.

 

[halcyon]

Do Android phones really need quad cores? The latest batch of dual core devices are plenty fast yet battery-life challenged. I can't imagine a quad-core would help that scenario.

 

[Vladislaus]

[citation][nom]sundragon[/nom]How are they anti Nvidia? The article is full of details proving their point.[/citation]
No the article is full of rumors and speculation, like any other nVidia article that came from SemiAccurate. I've yet to read a single article from there that praises nVidia.

 

[DaveUK]

Funny how you lead with the headline of the Nexus beating the iPhone 4S by just 16% in a Javascript benchmark, rather than the fact that the iPhone 4S 16GB beat it by a whopping 249% in the gaming benchmark.

I'm a telecommunications consultant, not an Apple fanboy, and I find that really disappointing from Toms. Surely you'd make more of a fuss of the more sensational benchmark result?

Not to mention that the Nexus is clocked much higher, so less efficient.

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]Vladislaus[/nom]Like I stated 800 MHz is an estimate. Only the guys at Cupertino knows what clock is the iPhone running.Also the chip isn't out yet when the first devices are out we'll see how it will perform.[/citation]

So what you're saying is Wikipedia, and all the tech sites that use 800MHz are wrong...

...and you're trying to speculate that it's 1.2 GHz or higher?

I don't understand your argument, so please elaborate.

If you look at the benchmarks vs the iPad 2 with the same processor at 1GHz - 800MHz in the iPhone4S fits. It can't be higher speed and score lower than the iPad 2...

TDP is handled better in the iPad 2 chassis vs the iPhone so that also makes 800 MHz makes even more sense.

Again, I state: A newer 4 core, 1.2 Ghz chip should TOAST the iPhone's A5 2 core chip at a lower speed - how about 820MHz? Does that make you better?

 

[sundragon]

[citation][nom]DaveUK[/nom]Funny how you lead with the headline of the Nexus beating the iPhone 4S by just 16% in a Javascript benchmark, rather than the fact that the iPhone 4S 16GB beat it by a whopping 249% in the gaming benchmark.I'm a telecommunications consultant, not an Apple fanboy, and I find that really disappointing from Toms. Surely you'd make more of a fuss of the more sensational benchmark result?Not to mention that the Nexus is clocked much higher, so less efficient.[/citation]

This site has a lot of Android fans (if you read the forums you'll see that) and a news headline, much less a news post, that the iPhone does anything well would incite a lot of negative responses... You drop the name "Apple" and you get 20 thumbs down unless it says something negative. A little like saying "Obama" in a group of Tea Partiers...