x PhoneArena is hiring! Reviewer in the USA
  • Options
    Close






Tegra 4 vs Snapdragon 800: who will be the dominant player on the chipset market this year

0. phoneArena 14 Jan 2013, 04:15 posted on

CES 2013 was the show of mobile chipsets. First, it was Nvidia that announced its next-gen processor, the Tegra 4, followed by Qualcomm and its new Snapdragon line. Finally, Samsung joined the party with its Exynos 5 Octa, but all in all we're more concerned with the Tegra 4 and Snapdragon 800, as those end up used by multiple manufacturers and in multiple phones, whereas Samsung's Exynos is mostly reserved for Samsung's own high-end devices...

This is a discussion for a news. To read the whole news, click here

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 08:32 2

31. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Bufff, you did so many mistakes that I don't even know where to start correcting....
Exynons is not really "octa", it's a LITTLE.big architecture, so actually it should be around as powerful as Tegra4 (both have quad cores A15, but the exynos has 4 A7 against 1 A7 in the Tegra for battery savings)

The Krait 400 will be 75% over S4 with speed included, while A15 is 30% over Krait at the SAME clock, so your math is completey messed up. The expectation is that Krait 400 will be a bit short of A15 cores at the same speed, but it will made up to it by using higher clock speeds (Tegra will use 1.9 GHz and Exynos octa 1.8 GHz, while Snapdragon 800 will use 2.3 GHz instead).
So it will be also tight in CPU performance.

I won't even try to fix your complete post... Too tyring.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 13:44

51. Berzerk000 (Posts: 4275; Member since: 26 Jun 2011)


I shouldn't write in the morning. I just end up shaking my head when reading it in the afternoon.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 14:27

54. CanYouSeeTheLight (Posts: 1116; Member since: 05 Jul 2012)


Actually the Tegra 4 has 1 A15 core for power saving and not an A7.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 15:52

56. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Right, I double checked. A7 was only my assumption, I actually didnĀ“t have information about it.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 05:54

67. vinsterdamus (Posts: 58; Member since: 20 Feb 2010)


i think you are 100% wrong about the exynos having 2x the cores of the same architecture. the octa will feature 4 A15 cores and for battery conservation 4 A9 chips.. so just 4 chips of the same architecture therefor in a performance test it will be 4 cores against 4 cores of tegra 4 and snadragon 800. I think we need to wait for benchmark because without them we can't say anything about the actual power of the chips. one thing is for sure with 8 cores the octa wil be the biggest one and most likely the hottest so samsung will have problems turning up the power on the A15 chips

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 04:30 3

60. IHateApple (banned) (Posts: 122; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


According to Anandtech, Qualcomm S4 Krait = 3.3 DMIPS/MHz per core (Dhrystone Million Instructions Per Second). Since Krait 400 is an improvement over Krait, it should do at least 3.5 DMIPS/MHz per core.

According to Wikipedia, Cortex A15 does 4.01 DMIPS/MHz per core.

So in Qualcomm 800 total CPU performance should be = 3.5 DMIPS/MHz per core * 4 Cores * 2.3 GHz = 32,200 DMIPS.

And in Tegra 4 total CPU performance should be = 4.01 DMIPS/MHz per core * 4 Cores * 1.9 GHz = 30,476 DMIPS.

According to Wikipedia, Exynos 5 Octa has 4 A15s at 1.8 GHz. So its CPU performance should be = 4.01 DMIPS/MHz per core * 4 Cores * 1.8 GHz = 28,872 DMIPS per second

So according to my calculation Qualcomm 800 should perform about 5% faster than Tegra 4 and 11% faster than Exynos 5 Octa.

Holy Cow. It's gonna be a tough race to the top.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 04:41

62. IHateApple (banned) (Posts: 122; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


Ever if Krait 400 is not an improvement over S4 Krait. Qualcomm 800 should do 30,360 DMIPS, which makes it equal to Tegra 4 and 5% faster than Exynos 5 Octa.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 04:55 1

65. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Those calculations look much better than the math Berzerk000 did and are in line with the theoretical expected performances.
Still I would rather wait for the benchmarks before assuring anything.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 05:28 1

66. IHateApple (banned) (Posts: 122; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


Actually my calculations about assuming Krait 400 to be 3.5 DMIPS/MHz are wrong. If Qualcomm is saying the truth that Krait 400 at 2.3 GHz is 75% faster than S4 Krait at 1.5 GHz, Krait 400 should be 3.76 DMIPS/MHz which would make total CPU performance 34,650 DMIPS. This would theoretically make it a lot faster than both Exynos and Tegra.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 06:47 2

68. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Yes, but 20% is not that big margin if we take into account that krait 800 will not be available till later this year.
I worry more about the GPUs, it seems the first results for the Tegra 4 have been dissapointing. Around the same power than the Mali-604:
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/3D-Leistung-Tegra-4-unterliegt-der-GPU-im-iPad-4-1780135.html?view=zoom;zoom=2

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 07:27 1

69. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


..I think that is the leaked benchmark supposedly done with an early silicon build

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6666/the-tegra-4-gpu-nvidia-claims-better-performance-than-ipad-4

"The leaked GLBenchmark results are apparently from a much older silicon revision running no where near final GPU clocks."

posted on 17 Jan 2013, 15:11

74. AppleHateBoy (unregistered)


Leave performance. I am more worried about power consumption. Optimus G and Nexus 4 both face a lot of overheating problems making the phone uncomfortable to hold. As long as the power consumption is low on Tegra 4 and Qualcomm 800, I am good.

BTW I didn't mention Exynos 5 Octa because we should be able to force the SoC to use only the Cortex A7 Cluster and turn off the Cortex A15 cluster. This will significantly reduce the power consumption of the SoC.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 07:41 1

70. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


..plus if the Exynos Octa is indeed having a SGX 544MP3 GPU, (~51GFLOPS), looks like Samsung will lose the processing edge and benchmark king bragging rights with the S4!

Not that it will matter in practical use because all those chips should perform so fast it will be really hard to notice a difference.
The power efficiency will be more important, though, and there Samsung could hold the advantage.

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 08:30 1

72. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


This year seems to be seriously difficult to guess which one is going to be the best SoC, it may end up being a race where one has the best GPU, other the best CPU and the third the power efficiency.
If they are near one to the other I would go the one that offers better battery life, as for my daily usage any of the new chips provides good enough perfomance.
Thanks for the link, I hadn't read that one.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 05:13 2

14. thunderising (Posts: 232; Member since: 25 Nov 2011)


Snapdragon 800 with a 75% increase will DOMINATE the field.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 05:29 1

15. RaKithAPeiRiZ (Posts: 1488; Member since: 29 Dec 2011)


its not about power ...Snapdragons have more smartphone customers , tablets will usually go for tegra 4

posted on 15 Jan 2013, 04:41

63. IHateApple (banned) (Posts: 122; Member since: 26 Sep 2012)


see my above done calculation.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 06:24

18. BadAssAbe (Posts: 456; Member since: 22 Apr 2011)


I wonder if these highend chips perform better then low end PC chips?
Like intels celadon or amd e300

Maybe im the only who thinks of this

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 08:14 2

29. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


That's not even possible, as the OLD GENERATION of quad cores A9/krait already performs better than those chipsets you mention.
Probably you are coming from the PC world and still thinks that the mobile socs are not performers, but here you have a comparison AMD-E300 vs Exynos 4412
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/1532004/1526419
The mobile chip destroys the AMD one in performance (and I didn't choose the Qualcomm S4 or the Galaxy Note 2 not to abuse)
The new generation with A15 cores should be over the intel Core 2 Duo and in the range of the i3 (bein quad cores A15 against dual cores i3)

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 08:42 1

34. amansingal14 (Posts: 309; Member since: 08 Sep 2012)


HAHAHA, dude, Intel Atom in K900 outperforms quad A9/Krait processor with 2x power. (See Benchmarks of K900 prototype.)

Search for Lenovo k900 in Phonearena search and view the one with the name 'Intel Atom Powered Lenovo IdeaPhone K900 Bechmarks..."

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 08:52 1

35. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


So? I read that article, and what's your point?
The guy was mentioning some old and weak PC chips that are less powerful than the Atom Z2850. Moreover, as you mention, that's just a prototype, which can have the real results or somthing completely messed up.
Let's wait for real devices to check if all that is true... and how they compare with the new A15 cores.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 09:15

37. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


That Atom will go against the announced mobile chips -and end up smashed.
Krait 400 should go well over 30000 in Antutu, for example

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 09:28

38. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Holly s**t.. this just goes to show how behind the times cheap laptops are. Wow.
Thanks for the link.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 09:40

39. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


You are welcome, but don't get confuse either. Those chips aren't used in laptops (well, may be the really cheap ones) but they are designed for netbooks instead.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 09:50

40. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


I just downloaded geekbench and ran it.
My stock S3 result - 1782

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 10:02 1

41. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Okay, this is the third result I got:

http://i45.tinypic.com/kbdbwp.png

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 10:07

42. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Oh, and that Toshiba is obviously a cheap laptop, not a netbook

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 10:43

44. TylerGrunter (Posts: 1533; Member since: 16 Feb 2012)


Yes, that's more ore less the results you get on the geekbench for a S3, normally a bit over 1700 and sometimes 1800.
I thought the Toshiba was some netbook as those chips were mostly used in netbooks and are really underpowered. Anyway a really cheap laptop as I suggested in my comment ;)
Thanks for the correction.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 06:28 2

19. ahomad (Posts: 175; Member since: 15 May 2012)


"although it's somehow unimpressive when we have in mind that the new mobile GeForce in the Tegra 4 promises to increase the performance in graphics-oriented tasks by up to 6 times" this is non-professional criticism

330 is 2x 320 while T4 is 6x T3. but already 320 is alot more powerful than T3. T3 is comparable to 225 and we know that 320 is 4x 225.

to make it clear, not how many x is important but you need to look what you are comparing with. 330 is 8x 225 while T4 is 6x T3. so again T4 and 330 will be comparable in term of power.

posted on 14 Jan 2013, 06:38 2

20. darac (Posts: 2156; Member since: 17 Oct 2011)


Actually T3 is comparable to Adreno 220, and the 320 absolutely crushes it in every way (about 3-5 x across the field)

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories