My point has nothing to do with Android, sure I own a Shield or I should say my son now owns one as he is the gamer in the family, my comments are about the current crop of ARM chips and how well games perform on them.
As you could have gathered from the article, the discussion is not about which GPU is the best. It's which maker is currently pairing the best components with software to deliver a functional product. The point got summed up early on: Samsung is making poor engineering choices resulting in buzzword compliant, spec-heavy devices that perform poorly but cost the same.
If the Samsung Exynos chip found in the Note 4 was also used in the iPhone 6 there wouldn't be a single game it couldn't handle and handle extremely well.
This is absolutely nonsense. Apple would lose all sorts of optimizations if it went with a stock ARM design built (with a history of flaws) by Samsung. Look at the numbers: it's only capable of getting close in benchmarks with a higher clock and multiple cores, and it throttles power early to avoid overheating. But yeah, if you could put that in an iPhone you could run a benchmark. Or maybe even most games! What does that even mean? Nothing.
... for playing games I would defiantly prefer the Shield, not just for the built in HDMI with 4K out, but as I already have an Nvidia K1 development board, just preordered a Lenovo 4K monitor that also has a built in K1 CPU running Android, my son has a Shield and I will defiantly buy a K1 Denver development board plus a Nexus 9, that's five nodes with 960 CUDA cores that I can utilize the power for rendering, encoding and half a dozen other GPU computational projects I'm currently working on.
Yeah because if you have a $4000 4K display, you want to play games off of a portable Android device that can play a bunch of IAP titles in really high resolution (but not top titles that make any special use of the fast GPU). What? Oh and yeah, running an HDMI cable between your shield and your 4K HDTV is also brilliant. Just excellent.
Everything you say is more absurd than the last, and fully contradicts it as well.
Your comments are like Samsung product introductions.
It's not a myth we're holding onto. It's a tiny lens.
But go ahead and retrofit a Galaxy S5 with that Canon lens and knock yerself out.
Sorry I was referring the the meme used when discussing DSLRs not phones. That said if you need to crop more data from a picture in a small device then more high quality data is always a good thing. Digital Zoom with video is one area for example, a 1080p video can be at 3x magnification without pixel doubling on a sensor that's in the 18-20MP range and is therefore as good as an optical zoom assuming the sensor is up to it.
BTW .. I'd only thing I'd fit to a Galaxy S5 with a weight, before throwing it overboard.
... Like GarageBand and iMovie, which are free for ios and unmatchable at any price for android.
Spot on. Add to it iWork, iPhoto, etc. The non-Apple world has simply no clue. I've always felt that Apple should create Windows and Android versions of these, to sell at a premium price.
The Apple Watch had better beat the Gear in the all-important Call of Duty benchmark or I'm not buying it.
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
The Apple Watch had better beat the Gear in the all-important Call of Duty benchmark or I'm not buying it.
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
Someday, when computing is ubiquitous, perhaps we'll transcend the reductionist focus on processor speed benchmarks as a linear measure of "better" and focus on the qualities of the entire product such as features and experience. Apple achieved this with the iPod Nano (who even cares what chipset it uses?), and I hope the Apple Watch will sit on the same side of sanity. But as long as tech websites continue to treat smart watches as nothing but another touchscreen device strapped to your wrist, the focus on benchmarks will continue.
Relic- lovely shot. If you shot it in RAW and have all 40MP I'd enjoy seeing a 1:1 crop of the detail.
All I'm saying is more does not ALWAYS equal better. Better equals better, and if more is better, then it's better. There's dynamic range, contrast, focus speed, white balance, color space and accuracy, noise, the glass resolution and speed, CA / Purple fringing, Dark corners, flare, optical stabilization tech... No doubt the next 41MP Nokia camera will be even more better-er. I think they'd be better served going around 12MP with huge sensels and good glass.
If you have time to setup the shot, and time between shots, yes the 1020 has better images. For most users, it has too many compromises to be anywhere close to a mainstream product. Hence why it is a niche product.
Relic- lovely shot. If you shot it in RAW and have all 40MP I'd enjoy seeing a 1:1 crop of the detail.
All I'm saying is more does not ALWAYS equal better. Better equals better, and if more is better, then it's better. There's dynamic range, contrast, focus speed, white balance, color space and accuracy, noise, the glass resolution and speed, CA / Purple fringing, Dark corners, flare, optical stabilization tech... No doubt the next 41MP Nokia camera will be even more better-er. I think they'd be better served going around 12MP with huge sensels and good glass.
Apple already jumped to PowerVR Series 6XT, with Series 7 Imminent and promises of increased Cadence Apple will leap forward. Samsung could have licenced Rogue but instead went for cheap Mali graphics which are vastly inferior.
Well this article was a waste of energy since a majority of major markets get the snapdragon 805 chipset. This articles benchmarks are based on the Exnyos chipset. As you can see the galaxy S5 with snapdragon 801 (slower chipset than note 4) has numbers MUCH closer to the iPhone 6. I expect the note 4 with snapdragon 805 to be very similar to the iPhone 6 :-/ nice try though.
The premise of the article stands, Samsung are hopeless at making their own chip designs and are reliant on off the shelf chips from others.
I do wish people would stop cherrypicking to suit their agenda.
Oh for goodness sakes, I have no love for Samsung but there isn't a game on the market right now that the Note 4 couldn't play, these graphics chips in the current line of mobiles are going to waste. What exactly does this article prove, it's a business phone for goodness sakes. Once the new line of 64bit chips come and if one happens to be faster then the A8, there is a good chance that a few will be, the same comments I just made about the Note 4 will be said here about the iPhone. This is just a silly pissing contest at this point, the current range of chips are fast enough for pretty much anything that you could possibly through at them.
That article didn't even mention throttling, which occurs MORE in the Samsung Note 4, so its performance really do suck in some games (unless your sayng that a FPS at 10 frame per second or less! is AOK).
If you look carefully, you can see that the table has results of the last iteration of the Note 3 running the Snapdragon CPU. It does quite well against the just-released iPhone 6 Plus, seemingly even beating it in a couple of the tests. It also outperforms the Note 4 shown here. As if Samsung is going to release a Note 4 which is slower than its predecessor.
Nearly everyone reading this is going to see/buy the Note 4 using the Snapdragon, not the benchmarked octa-core Samsung CPU. Considering the new Snapdragon CPU is both faster and more powerful than then Note 3, I think the Qualcomm Note 4 benchmarks will be much closer to the iPhone than shown in this article. Heaven forbid, the Samsung may beat it. Obviously the author gets a lot of pleasure from the superior performance of the Apple CPU, but I think the 'opponent' is a straw-man: Samsung will not take this octa-core CPU to major markets.
So I wouldn't be counting chickens just yet.
This relates to Samsung being not very good at making their own chips in what way?
You make a good point that without off the shelf components from others, Samsung is not competitive.
Yes, the table is clear, I missed it. Although my suspicions were correct. It is also clear from the Note 3 comparison that the Snapdragon CPU, which is what Samsung sells nearly everywhere, is dramatically faster than the octacore experiment. Now that I look more clearly, it seems that the Note 4 Octacore is hardly any improvement from the Note 3 octacore; there is but a tiny bump in clock speed.
However, the mass-market Note 4 has a next-generation snapdragon 805 clocked at 2.7GHz, which should be a significant boost on the Note 3 Snapdragon. Considering that the Note 3 is fairly close to the new iPhone, and actually superior in a couple of these benchmarks, testing based on the mass-market Note 4 should show a narrow gap. Maybe the real Note 4 will even be a match. Or better.
Both of these expensive, flagship devices will perform at such a level that I doubt anyone will complain. People will probably make buying decisions where the differences are larger: OLED vs LCD screen, stylus, OS, apps, battery capacity, thinness, ruggedness.
Yep, Samsung is bad at designing and making their own chips, just as the article states.
As I read through the thread I wonder how many more Samsung apologists will back themselves into this same corner.
Hey Tallest, Infinity Blade is only for iOS, I'm sure if it was available for Android though, the Note 4 would have no problem running it. I think I would probably use my Nvidia Shield for a game like that, so I could hook it up to a 4K TV or monitor. Do you have any other games I could test, thanx.
Try the Zen Garden demo using the Unreal 4 engine in 64 bit.
Comments
My point has nothing to do with Android, sure I own a Shield or I should say my son now owns one as he is the gamer in the family, my comments are about the current crop of ARM chips and how well games perform on them.
Everything you say is more absurd than the last, and fully contradicts it as well.
Your comments are like Samsung product introductions.
Sorry I was referring the the meme used when discussing DSLRs not phones. That said if you need to crop more data from a picture in a small device then more high quality data is always a good thing. Digital Zoom with video is one area for example, a 1080p video can be at 3x magnification without pixel doubling on a sensor that's in the 18-20MP range and is therefore as good as an optical zoom assuming the sensor is up to it.
BTW .. I'd only thing I'd fit to a Galaxy S5 with a weight, before throwing it overboard.
Spot on. Add to it iWork, iPhoto, etc. The non-Apple world has simply no clue. I've always felt that Apple should create Windows and Android versions of these, to sell at a premium price.
I love the pictures my Nokia 1020 take;
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
What's a 'Nokia'? Is it a European camera?
I am assuming the "/s" was implied?
Most definitely.
At least about it being important.
For those that missed the reference.
Apparently the Samsung watch runs Windows 95, which I think is really the most important benchmark to consider when evaluating wearable computing devices.
Someday, when computing is ubiquitous, perhaps we'll transcend the reductionist focus on processor speed benchmarks as a linear measure of "better" and focus on the qualities of the entire product such as features and experience. Apple achieved this with the iPod Nano (who even cares what chipset it uses?), and I hope the Apple Watch will sit on the same side of sanity. But as long as tech websites continue to treat smart watches as nothing but another touchscreen device strapped to your wrist, the focus on benchmarks will continue.
Nokia 1020.
Exactly. Looks like the 1020 scored a 74 on the DxoMark site... and how physically large is that 40MP sensor? Why not get 5MP pix out of all those pixels? http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Nokia-Lumia-1020-overview-Has-the-best-got-better
Relic- lovely shot. If you shot it in RAW and have all 40MP I'd enjoy seeing a 1:1 crop of the detail.
All I'm saying is more does not ALWAYS equal better. Better equals better, and if more is better, then it's better. There's dynamic range, contrast, focus speed, white balance, color space and accuracy, noise, the glass resolution and speed, CA / Purple fringing, Dark corners, flare, optical stabilization tech... No doubt the next 41MP Nokia camera will be even more better-er. I think they'd be better served going around 12MP with huge sensels and good glass.
Nokia 1020.
If you have time to setup the shot, and time between shots, yes the 1020 has better images. For most users, it has too many compromises to be anywhere close to a mainstream product. Hence why it is a niche product.
Now there might be improvement with some optimization but currently I would Apple is way ahead.
[/SIZE]
Exactly. Looks like the 1020 scored a 74 on the DxoMark site... and how physically large is that 40MP sensor? Why not get 5MP pix out of all those pixels? http://www.dxomark.com/Mobiles/Nokia-Lumia-1020-overview-Has-the-best-got-better
Relic- lovely shot. If you shot it in RAW and have all 40MP I'd enjoy seeing a 1:1 crop of the detail.
All I'm saying is more does not ALWAYS equal better. Better equals better, and if more is better, then it's better. There's dynamic range, contrast, focus speed, white balance, color space and accuracy, noise, the glass resolution and speed, CA / Purple fringing, Dark corners, flare, optical stabilization tech... No doubt the next 41MP Nokia camera will be even more better-er. I think they'd be better served going around 12MP with huge sensels and good glass.
Hmmm, let me see, I'll need to look for some large ones but here is a small serious of flowers that are pretty. https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=9117381FE9E7ABEB!30446&authkey=!AFDbY433NyV17kY&ithint=folder,
If you view the page with desktop mode you will get the shot info.
Well this article was a waste of energy since a majority of major markets get the snapdragon 805 chipset. This articles benchmarks are based on the Exnyos chipset. As you can see the galaxy S5 with snapdragon 801 (slower chipset than note 4) has numbers MUCH closer to the iPhone 6. I expect the note 4 with snapdragon 805 to be very similar to the iPhone 6 :-/ nice try though.
The premise of the article stands, Samsung are hopeless at making their own chip designs and are reliant on off the shelf chips from others.
I do wish people would stop cherrypicking to suit their agenda.
Oh for goodness sakes, I have no love for Samsung but there isn't a game on the market right now that the Note 4 couldn't play, these graphics chips in the current line of mobiles are going to waste. What exactly does this article prove, it's a business phone for goodness sakes. Once the new line of 64bit chips come and if one happens to be faster then the A8, there is a good chance that a few will be, the same comments I just made about the Note 4 will be said here about the iPhone. This is just a silly pissing contest at this point, the current range of chips are fast enough for pretty much anything that you could possibly through at them.
That article didn't even mention throttling, which occurs MORE in the Samsung Note 4, so its performance really do suck in some games (unless your sayng that a FPS at 10 frame per second or less! is AOK).
If you look carefully, you can see that the table has results of the last iteration of the Note 3 running the Snapdragon CPU. It does quite well against the just-released iPhone 6 Plus, seemingly even beating it in a couple of the tests. It also outperforms the Note 4 shown here. As if Samsung is going to release a Note 4 which is slower than its predecessor.
Nearly everyone reading this is going to see/buy the Note 4 using the Snapdragon, not the benchmarked octa-core Samsung CPU. Considering the new Snapdragon CPU is both faster and more powerful than then Note 3, I think the Qualcomm Note 4 benchmarks will be much closer to the iPhone than shown in this article. Heaven forbid, the Samsung may beat it. Obviously the author gets a lot of pleasure from the superior performance of the Apple CPU, but I think the 'opponent' is a straw-man: Samsung will not take this octa-core CPU to major markets.
So I wouldn't be counting chickens just yet.
This relates to Samsung being not very good at making their own chips in what way?
You make a good point that without off the shelf components from others, Samsung is not competitive.
Yes, the table is clear, I missed it. Although my suspicions were correct. It is also clear from the Note 3 comparison that the Snapdragon CPU, which is what Samsung sells nearly everywhere, is dramatically faster than the octacore experiment. Now that I look more clearly, it seems that the Note 4 Octacore is hardly any improvement from the Note 3 octacore; there is but a tiny bump in clock speed.
However, the mass-market Note 4 has a next-generation snapdragon 805 clocked at 2.7GHz, which should be a significant boost on the Note 3 Snapdragon. Considering that the Note 3 is fairly close to the new iPhone, and actually superior in a couple of these benchmarks, testing based on the mass-market Note 4 should show a narrow gap. Maybe the real Note 4 will even be a match. Or better.
Both of these expensive, flagship devices will perform at such a level that I doubt anyone will complain. People will probably make buying decisions where the differences are larger: OLED vs LCD screen, stylus, OS, apps, battery capacity, thinness, ruggedness.
Yep, Samsung is bad at designing and making their own chips, just as the article states.
As I read through the thread I wonder how many more Samsung apologists will back themselves into this same corner.
Without Qualcomm Samsung are hopeless.
Hey Tallest, Infinity Blade is only for iOS, I'm sure if it was available for Android though, the Note 4 would have no problem running it. I think I would probably use my Nvidia Shield for a game like that, so I could hook it up to a 4K TV or monitor. Do you have any other games I could test, thanx.
Try the Zen Garden demo using the Unreal 4 engine in 64 bit.