Slashdot Mirror
Nvidia Tegra 4 Benchmark Results
adeelarshad82 writes "Needless to say, the march of processor speeds always continues. However, Nvidia Tegra 4's benchmark results are off the charts. Comparing the results against several other phones, it was evident that Tegra 4 will make for the fastest mobile phones yet. For instance when benchmarked against iPhone 5, results showed 1640 on Geekbench and 27 fps on GLBenchmark's Egypt HD offscreen benchmark. Whereas the Tegra 4 scores 4148 on Geekbench and 57 fps on the Egypt HD. Of course, the competition isn't standing still, either. Qualcomm is countering the Tegra 4 with its Snapdragon 800, which the company claims is even faster than the Tegra 4. And at the same time Samsung is readying the Exynos 5 Octa."
When providing a point of comparison, choose one which the largest number of people will have had experience with.
I didn't even know Lenovo made phones.
I didn't even know Finland made an OS :P This is news for nerds, or at least, it used to be.
No one cares about the #1 and #2 highest selling phones in the world last quarter??
Could these recent mobile phone processors be adapted to the desktop?
It's tempting to compare the speed of GPU/CPU on the smartphone, but as we all know, most of the apps out there have yet to tap out the power of quad-core CPU/GPU
On the other hand, what really counts is the staying power, ie., how long the battery can last
You can have the fastest phone there is, if it won't give the user hours and hours of usage without a recharging, that phone is next to useless
My suggestion, hence, is that next time they want to compare how good such-and-such phone is, or how fast this phone versus that, please include how long can one single full-charge of the battery can power at the top-most speed rating
Thank you !!
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I think it's 57fps at 1080 res. Terga 4 has a 72 core gpu. And yeah, I'm interested in the battery life too.
Hasn't tablet performance been "good enough" for a while now ? I know there are a few that use tablets for FPS gaming or content creation, but that's probably around 10% of the buyers ? The rest of us are more interested in creature comforts (good screen, good sound, reliability...), because running a browser, email, and facebook, even office apps, really doesn't take that much ?
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
No one cares about the #1 and #2 highest selling phones in the world last quarter??
The Windows camp used to make the same argument about Windows95. It was a lame counterpoint then. It's still a lame counterpoint now.
And Windows is still, by a wide margin, the most used desktop operating system in the world. Sounds like people cared about Windows 15 years ago and still do today.
Could these recent mobile phone processors be adapted to the desktop?
You can find Cortex A15 processors in the Samsung Chromebook. According to anandtech ( http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/samsung-chromebook-xe303-review-testing-arms-cortex-a15/6 ):
"The Cortex A15 is fast. Across the board we're seeing a 40 - 65% increase in performance over a dual-core Atom. Although it's not clear how performance will be impacted as companies work to stick Cortex A15 based SoCs in smartphones with tighter power/thermal budgets, in notebooks (and perhaps even tablets) the Cortex A15 looks capable of delivering a good 1 - 2 generation boost over Intel's original Atom core.
The IE10 browser tests tend to agree with our JavaScript performance tests, although the CSS Maze Solver benchmark shows a huge advantage for ARM over Intel's Atom here."
So what? The Tegra has always had impressive benchmarks yet they consistently fail to impress when in an actual product. Is this one finally something more than a paper tiger?
And how many of those people chose Windows versus had it installed by the OEM and didn't know how to switch? I'm not really sure that people care so much as they don't care enough to switch.
So many sites are so Javascript heavy that it only takes about 3 months after the release of whatever the latest iPad is for it to start feeling slower.
It almost feels like the site developers were like "finally, more CPU, I can throw more JS into iPad web sessions."
When using a site like NYTimes.Com and writing a comment to a story was almost undoable on the iPad 1 due to massive lag between keystroke entry and the letter showing on the screen. When I upgraded to the 3 it was usable, but less so if I was using the onsceen keyboard instead of a bluetooth keyboard.
Lately it seems to be getting slower, so I can only assume it's the level of Jscript on the site doing it as they bias towards iPad 4 and mini.
There are 2 different "Tegra4" chips. The Tegra4i is the only one that will ever end up in your smartphone, and it only includes Cortex A9 derived CPU cores and a GPU that, while quite good, includes far few processing units than the big-brother Tegra 4.
So basically: Of course the full-blown Tegra 4 beats smartphone chips. Guess what: So does Haswell, but you won't be seeing Haswell in smartphones either. There's a price to all that performance and Nvidia is targeting the heavy-weight version of Tegra 4 at tablets because the power draw won't fly in a smaller smartphone platform, where the Tegra4i will be Nvidia's offering.
AntiFA: An abbreviation for Anti First Amendment.
>> AAPL.... I care about.... not their stupid stock price :))
Yeah, it seems you don't care abouit stock at all... so why do you say "AAPL" ???
aaaaaaa
and only ever use it to text and make phone calls with no data plan, then it actually has pretty decent battery life. My dad has an LG Optimus L7 with no data plan. Using it for just voice/text it easily goes for multiple days on a charge.
The problem is that typically we do way more on a smartphone than we used to on feature phones, then we moan about how the battery doesn't last.
Think about it...part of the benefits of a smartphone is that you can do push email, RSS feeds, location-based reminders, mapping, etc. All this stuff takes extra radio/cpu power (and hence drains the battery). And that nice big screen is a huge battery hog.
Summary: pathetic vs a real processor, buy a real computer.
Tegra 4 will not be a phone part (at least not in any phoe that values battery life). Those A15 cores suck down batter life like vampires.
Like Tegra 3, Tegra 4 uses far too much power for mobile phones. The plan this time is to produce two products:
Tegra 4: 4 + 1 Coretex A15 + 72 shaders, several watts power consumption, aimed at tablets.
Tegra 4i: 4 + 1 tweaked Coretex A9 + 60 shaders + integrated LTE, much lower power. Aimed at phones.
Nobody has committed to a Smartphone platform using the A15 precisely because the power consumption is too high. It may be tweaked over time, but right out the gate the power is just not there. This is why Apple went their own way with the A6.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
I thought the mobile version was the slower Tegra4i. Why are they comparing it with the iPhone5 then and not iPad4?
Apple could have chosen to release OS X to OEM's too. I'm not saying they should have, but they could have.
They're only useful when they fit the socket of my n900.
"The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
Wake me up when the processors are so fast that they can warp the space time continuum...