Video suggests Tegra 3 HTC One X is faster than the S4 version

52. Hunt3rj2 posted on 26 Apr 2012, 18:17 0 0

That's correct:http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1609878

This is the Rogers version of the AT&T One X with SHIPPING firmware. 7000 Antutu. Not great, but Antutu seems to assign more weight to having more cores.

Too bad in many other benchmarks the One XL/AT&T One X blows away Tegra 3.

6. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:02 3 2

Right - this test is with the dual-core S4, not Krait. With the smaller die process I don't think anyone doubts the power of Krait. The main reason this is more interesting than the average benchmark video is that HTC/AT&T decided to change the CPU in the same phone model, so if it turns out that one model significantly outperforms the other, it calls into question that decisions (and how consumers will response).

But until PA can verify the results on a production phone and control the testing procedure, this is just preliminary data at best.

8. crankyd00d posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:12 10 1

Umm S4 IS Krait

16. Scott_H posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:51 4 1

Right, but we are comparing a dual-core S4 to a quad-core Tegra 3.../snip

Edit: Oops, I see! I meant to write "this test is with the dual-core S4, not _the quad-core_ Krait".

That's what happens when you try to squeeze in responses between articles. Carry on!

• This comment is posted in response to #8 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #8 Hide

22. remixfa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 14:50 4 4

correct, but your also comparing a quadcore A9 on 40nm wafers vs a self proclaimed "A15 equivilant" on 28nm wafers. If the s4 was nearly as fast as it tries to compare itself to, it would wipe the floor with the T3 chip.
What screen is on the oneX again? 720p or Qhd?

Heck, the quad A9 exynos 4212 will destroy both of them.

• This comment is posted in response to #16 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #16 Hide

29. Dr.Phil posted on 25 Apr 2012, 16:03 0 0

If you go over to droid-life, they just posted the Antutu benchmarks for the "supposed" GSIII. It apparently has a dual-core 4212 Exynos processor instead of a quad-core (I still think its the GSII plus). It scored higher than the Transformer Prime.

http://www.droid-life.com/2012/04/25/samsung-galaxy-siii-shows-up-in-antutu-benchmark-tops-all-devices-and-lists-full-specs/

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

31. crankyd00d posted on 25 Apr 2012, 16:57 1 0

I get all hot inside when I think of a future Cortex A15 based quad core Exynos lol...hurry up Samsung pls k thx

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

36. barondebxl posted on 25 Apr 2012, 18:37 2 0

Remixfa you're truly an exynos whore.

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

37. cepcamba posted on 25 Apr 2012, 18:52 0 0

Yeah, I agree. Quads on 32nm will beat the crap out of Quads on 40nm and Duals on 28nm. I was wondering why Qualcomm released Krait so early, they could have waited for their Quad-Krait and that will be at par or even better than the Quad-core Exynos.

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

42. corrifa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:07 1 0

Its 720p S-LCD2 if you're being serious. And still even if the exynos 4212 is super fast, if apps arent made to support the higher multithreading, there will be no point and the S4 probably would win in some circumstances. Then again, Samsung makes a meannn processor...

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

47. E34V8 posted on 26 Apr 2012, 01:08 0 0

The 40nm huawei k3v2 outperforms both chipsets (using 64 bit memory is a great advantage), specially in 3D. I can only imagine what will the 32nm Exynos do. I'm not a 100% sure, but i think it also uses a 64 bit memory.

And when the A15 chips from ARM and Samsung arive they wil be on another level.

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

50. Hunt3rj2 posted on 26 Apr 2012, 11:12 0 0

4 Cortex A9s at 1.5 GHz vs 4 Cortex A9s at 1.5 GHz.

Yes, tell me more about how the Exynos 4412, not the 4212 which is dual core at 1.8 GHz, is supposed to beat a Tegra 3 in CPU when they have the same architecture at the same clockspeed.

The only thing that the Exynos will definitively beat the Tegra 3 on is GPU and bandwidth.

• This comment is posted in response to #22 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #22 Hide

11. KingKurogiii posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:14 4 2

the 4th Generation Snapdragon uses Krait Architecture.

39. cepcamba posted on 25 Apr 2012, 20:14 0 0

Well these techy geeks are looking for the most powerful device out there. Not necessarily the most useful though. :p

It's like in cars, some people 'wants' to have a car with a V8 engine that can run at 200mph though they'll probably never get to flex it's muscles in their lifetime. But still, it's fun to have a powerhouse :p

I had a very old Sony Ericsson P990i while it was in it's prime and I loved it :p It was powerful then, only beat by it's bigger brother, the half qwerty half nightmare P1.

40. ph00ny posted on 25 Apr 2012, 20:27 0 0

You obviously didn't use tegra2 based devices

It couldn't even play high profile video clips recorded in other dual core devices

41. KingKurogiii posted on 25 Apr 2012, 20:32 0 0

you must mean the Crapdragon because the OMAP4 has support for more formats than the Tegra II.

43. corrifa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:11 0 0

I doubt the version of the benchmark or the small amount of bloatware would affect it that much.
AnTutu is optimized four quad core cpus so it can take advantage of all of T3's a9 cores.
-Most (all) other benchmarks arent.
---if they arent optimized, the T3 will only use the number of cores that the app is designed for
--------------------- Core vs Core, the S4 is faster then the T3.. More apps will get optimized though for quad core,.

12. josephnero posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:22 1 1

internal memory

14. jdot104 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:36 1 1

Gotcha

24. jaytai0106 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:02 0 0

If you go to 4:23 in the video, CPU frequency says 1296 Mhz (third line up from the bottom). The international version does say 1500 Mhz. I wonder if has anything to do with AT&T version of OS. That bothers me now, too. :/

17. sorcio46 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 13:59 4 1

HTC fast boot can beat even a macbook air with SSD fanboy buy a Win-Bain (before it does BSOD) !

20. TROLL posted on 25 Apr 2012, 14:16 4 1

Well what do u expect, it take's 370 mb
of ram to run Android, wher as windows
require around 130 to run half baked OS!

46. eaxvac posted on 25 Apr 2012, 23:51 0 1

lol another excuse when they all do the same. fandroid

33. crankyd00d posted on 25 Apr 2012, 17:09 2 0

It's either 4 OR 1 working, not 4+1=5, that's just marketing and very wrong if you are talking about how the processor works, which is when "1" is working "4" is/are sleeping, or the other way around.
Also you can't compare a fully featured OS like Android against WP7, at least not yet, Android is way heavier to lift, and WP7 is very well optimized, that's the one thing Microsoft did right

26. Berzerk000 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:47 0 1

They did that because in order for the Tegra 3 to have LTE it needs a separate LTE radio. S4 has one built in. And the S4 is more or less an equivalent to the Tegra 3 in performance, it's just there were differences between those 2 devices in the video regarding software, not the processor, that made it seem like the Tegra 3 was faster. But if it really means that much to you, the quad-core Exynos chip should have LTE capabilities. If not, then it's most likely gonna run the S4, which will be less powerful than the Exynos because the new Exynos always beats the competition, and holds the title for a long while. But still, the S4 is plenty powerful, there will probably be virtually no lag, unless the user or AT&T does something software wise to mess it up.

27. Berzerk000 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:49 1 1

Yeah, I noticed that too. The AT&T brand isn't on the phone line it should be. I think this is a bogus video

23. remixfa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 14:51 3 5

yup. yup yup..
haters gonna hate, but that doesnt make you less right :)

25. kshell1 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:12 0 2

agreed lol. Lets see samsung conquered A-9 single core, A-9 dual core, and who can guess whats next? A-15 dual-core and A-9 Quad-core kings.

28. jabberwocky posted on 25 Apr 2012, 15:55 4 2

You guys are something else. When benches show your favorite processors losing anything, you claim that benches don't translate into real-world performance. When you win, you claim failure by the competition.

A15 is an architecture, not process size, clockspeed, number of cores, or even paired graphics solutions - or even benchmarks. Qualcomm based it off of their license of the A15 instruction set, and they may or may not be the fastest of the A15 variations, but it doesn't mean it's any less A15.

You can complain about the performance (out of both sides of your mouth if you prefer) all day long, but suggesting that it is not A15 architecture is a bit absurd.

32. biophone posted on 25 Apr 2012, 16:58 0 1

Its not a15 its krait but they claim its an a15 equivalent. Clearly not. Also im basing it off of the the actual phone wuth t3 clearly outpreforming the s4.

34. remixfa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 17:37 1 2

i think you need to read up on your chips before reprimanding people. Qualcomm makes their own designs. They call them "equivalents" to compare them to ARM, but they are not ARM chips. They licence ARM for compatibility reasons, but they do not make ARM.

Honestly, they should have just called them "A9+".. because they are not up to A15 snuff.

35. kshell1 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 18:25 0 1

remixa i found info on the sgs3 posted recently on engadget.http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/25/antutu-purportedly-reveals-galaxy-s-iii-specs/
A15 dual core here we come.

• This comment is posted in response to #34 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #34 Hide

44. corrifa posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:14 0 1

On a performance level I would say the S4 is closer to A15 rather then A9.
Maybe an A-12 ? ;)

• This comment is posted in response to #34 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #34 Hide

45. biophone posted on 25 Apr 2012, 21:52 0 1

No such thing. Its krait anyway not arm.

• This comment is posted in response to #44 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #44 Hide

48. Hunt3rj2 posted on 26 Apr 2012, 11:04 0 0

Your understanding of architectures and licensing of them is bad and you should feel bad for spreading misinformation.

• This comment is posted in response to #45 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #45 Hide

49. Hunt3rj2 posted on 26 Apr 2012, 11:09 0 1

They don't "license ARM", they make processors that run code written for ARM chips. They can be relatively compared in terms of performance levels, which is why people talk about Scorpion cores being a better Cortex A8, or Krait as being a Cortex A15. It's a valid comparison and you are a random person on the internet who doesn't have access to Cortex A15 anyway, so I'd rather take insider sources at their word.

Please kindly stop being so misinformed, Krait is only slightly slower than A15 clock for clock with more emphasis on power consumption.

• This comment is posted in response to #34 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #34 Hide

51. KingKurogiii posted on 26 Apr 2012, 13:15 0 0

are you just trying to argue for the sake of arguing? just what do you think it IS when one company uses code from another company? just think that over real quick and get back to us when you're ready. :P

• This comment is posted in response to #49 Show
• This comment is posted in response to #49 Hide

38. Berzerk000 posted on 25 Apr 2012, 19:36 0 1

Considering this video is fake, and that the S4 is the highest performing dual-core out on any smartphone right now (without being overclocked) I really don't see why you are giving Qualcomm so much grief about this.