This means nothing. The Exynos is only clocked at 1.2GHz while the Snapdragon is clocked at 1.5GHz. Quadrant has no support for dual core, so I would have to see Linpack and NenaMark 2 benchmarks in order to conclude anything.
androidrules, 07 Oct 2011Well, this ain't nothing special really; after all, the Exynos does run at a lower clock speed... moreMakes sense.. But I think I know why they didnt go with Exynos. It's because of T-mobile's cellular network. I think Exynos can only do 14.4Mbps down.. Qualcomm has better support for T-mobile's network which is probably why they opted to go with it. In truth, Qualcomm has a great chipset if you look at it from the macro level. Where its weaknesses lie however is in its GPU performance particularly. They make VERY good CPU's but their GPU's suffer when compared to something like SGX540/543 or Mali400 (which makes sense cause their new to the GPU game).
If they get a good GPU they could quite suddenly usurp the competition..
For now though, their chipset can't really compete with Exynos graphically speaking at least...
I dont get it , isn't it the same procesor inside the HTC Sensation ?
If you check out qualcom's website they say that you can find Snapdragon S3 mobile processors in the HTC EVO 3D, HTC Sensation 4G, T-Mobile myTouch 4G smar
tphones and the HP TouchPad tablet.
So can someone expalin why the sensation xe scores lower in quadrant than this version of sgs2?
Well, this ain't nothing special really; after all, the Exynos does run at a lower clock speed... Besides, the international GSII is the only phone I've seen so far to have been able to handle 1080p Flash in the browser. And the Exynos would outpace it at 1.5 GHz; the Galaxy Note does close to 3900 (the lowest score I've seen on it at least) with a 1.4 GHz clock, which is still lower, AND most importantly, it runs at WXGA resolution (above 720p), and as far as I know, the Quadrant benchmark does include a graphics test, right? This version of the GSII has less than half that resolution... So it is obvious the Exynos is still beter, and they should have used it (maybe even at 1.5 GHz :D)
Tom-Helge, 07 Oct 2011Now, try to run CF-Bench and see what kind of score it will give. My default score is 6790 ... moreYou might be right. Quadrant naturally tests better with certain chipsets. Exynos outpaces even Nvidia's chip in my estimation. I'm not sure how trustworthy those scores are until we get a proper benchmarking tool that works well with most if not all the current chipsets available.. This is in my experience though, i'm no expert..
what is the sound chip.. does it have the same crap audio performace and the euro sgs ii
Now, try to run CF-Bench and see what kind of score it will give.
My default score is 6790 points and 8945 points with the CPU overclocked to 1.6 GHZ on the Galaxy S II (with the 1.2 GHz Dual Core Exynos CPU).
Quadrant is old and outdated.
And also, i got a default score (with no overclock) of 4022 in Quadrant on my Galaxy S II.
arbon knight, 07 Oct 2011hey. Gsm arena plxx tell me how to find out benchmarks on android phonesGet it in Android market for free.
arbon knight, 07 Oct 2011hey. Gsm arena plxx tell me how to find out benchmarks on android phonessearch "quadrant" in android market.
Download quadrants standard edition
hey. Gsm arena plxx tell me how to find out benchmarks on android phones
Can you guys stop using meaningless tests like quadrant? Actually use something like cf bench.
it's about resolution not it's sized.
I'm not surprised at the results come out like this.
keen, 07 Oct 2011A phone with crown looks ugly.It is a visual hyperbolic metaphor, not a senior picture.
42mbps... 4.52" screen... works on T-Mobile & AT&T... and blazing fast? Now, THAT'S what I'm talkin'bout!