Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackDynamite
No, I thought you said the Thunderbolt and Evo benched the same despite their RAM differences. I now see that you said the Incredible. I'm wondering what you were talking about since both have 512 MB of RAM?
|
Ok after looking into it apparently it does have 512mb ram...early on there was some sort of bug that made it only use 256mb ram and many tech sites reported it as 256mb ram...
Quote:
|
Man if you could hear yourself... So the quantity of RAm is irrelevant as long as there is enough to make it not relevant. lol I will say this again. the Evo 3D will bench higher than the Sensation, because RAM absolutely DOES matter, especially on a Sense ROM, with all the stock bloatware.
|
Look..if I take any form of pc and install 1 ram chip of 256mb and another 512mb..and run a benchmark and they both have the same exact stuff installed and have enough free mem to run the benchmark..within the margin of error and aside from accounting manufacturer defects they would bench virtually the same...this has ALWAYS been the case..I dont see how this is any different...
If you dont believe me..ask in the Evo3d forum whether or not it would bench faster then the sensation based on more ram..
Quote:
|
Again, it is common sense that qhd will have a lower fps than wvga. What next, you tell me that a 13 inch 1080p tv has a higher pixel density than a 65 inch 1080p tv? Don't point to a test that is based on fps as evidence of a higher bench. Maybe I care more about the resolution- which the Galaxy S 2 isn't even in the same ballpark as the Evo 3D in that regard. Just like I care more about the size of a 65 inch tv than I do about the pixel density on a 13 inch tv.
|
Your not listening to what I am saying..I am not denying that fitting in a higher resolution would cause lower FPS..put quadrant results aside..we are talking about smartbench..quadrant is pointless as its a defective benchmark...
Quote:
|
Says the guy posting all kinds of BS claims all through this thread. Remember- you are the one who Samsung always has the best specs on their phones. When I pointed out the Evo 3D is better than any Samsung phone even announced, you said the Galaxy S 2 was equal or better in every spec. You also said HTC was merely catching up to what every other manufacturer had done several years ago. And when I called you on all this BS, all I got was a bunch of excuses, a bunch of blatantly false claims, and plenty of subject changes. You are here telling me RAM doesn't make a difference in performance, lol. And you cite as evidence two nearly identical phones having similar performance. lol
|
um ok then lets review based on our spec comparison.
Screen:
Tie as one has qhd and 3d while the other is super amoled plus
Processor:
SGS2 as higher productivity score
GPU:
Ill give it a tie for now due to disputed resolution debate
ROM:
SGS2 as more rom
Camera:
Unkown as for camera the sensor is most important and we have no way of comparing until both devices hit the street
LED:
Evo as dual LED
FFC:
SGS2 as 2mp
Weight:
SGS2 as lighter
Battery:
Evo3d as bigger battery
wifi:
SGS2 as 5ghz support
Thickness:
SGS2 as thinner
NFC:
SGS2 as actually has one
Hardware encryption:
SGS2 as has encryption
Codecs:
SGS2 as more codecs
So the red is Evo 3d wins, blue is SGS 2 wins and green is ties..purple is unkown factors..by these results SGS 2 has better hardware specs..
Look you have to understand this..samsung has the advantage...while HTC has to spend time with the manufacturer samples to build their devices..Samsung can skip the 3-6month R&D and already start designing a phone...so all the components samsung gets will be 3-6 month ahead of HTC in newness...