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."
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 !
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."
Nonsense. You can never have too much processing power. It would definately be nice on tablets, or a next-gen Raspberry Pi. Or low power desktop computers. My TV has a CPU that is barely adequate for what it does. I'd love to see the netflix app really run smoothly.
But what I really want for my phone is better battery life. I'm completely happy with the performance of everything I do on my phone. I just miss the good old days when my flip phone could go 10 days on a charge.
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.
For iOS, yes, non-gaming performance is just fine. Navigating and scrolling is perfectly smooth. In Android, there's still some stutter, but small enough to be merely a visual distraction rather than a performance issue.
In gaming performance, Tegra 3 is impressive, allowing graphics comparable to budget titles on today's console. The main problem with mobile games isn't being throttled by hardware, they're being throttled by their pay model. They can make a good game, but since they need to make money by constantly badgering you for money, they engineer game balance to make the experience garbage unless you're feeding it money regularly.
I'd rather just pay money up front and get a well balanced game, but that's just not the market we have today. I'm happy when I find games that don't sink to this level, but the overwhelming majority are glorified vending machines where the only way to get something out of the game is to keep feeding more money in. The kinds of games we see are still far behind the days of NES and SNES because of this pay model handicap on their design. The hardware certainly isn't holding them back in this regard.
But this pay model is dominant because that's what people want. I guess the place this would need to be fixed is in the hearts of the buyers.
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?