Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackDynamite
man, yes, Linpack absolutely DOES run at some resolution. Anything running on the display is running at SOME resolution. So get your "facts" straight.
|
no it doesn't...math has no resolution..your assuming that all things must have a display, that is not how programming works. In programming everything has no resolution, its just code, then that code is sent to the display driver and rendered at set resolution. Linpack has none of that...its a pure CPU benchmark, it even exists outside of cellphones and strictly measures CPU.
Quote:
|
Smartbench is clearly tinkering with the resolution and the way the qhd device interprets that resolution. The same is NOT being done on the wvga device. Period. This is not debatable. Watching the video will clearly show you video proof of this.
|
It tinkers with resolution on both..its similar to using the "depth app" or setting resolution on your pc desktop...display is irrelevant, whats most important is at what resolution its rendered at.
Quote:
|
And, again, get your "facts" strait. The Galaxy S 2 did not "destroy" the Sensation in the Quadrant. The Sensation finished the test considerably faster, yet somehow rated lower. Morons who only looked at the final score assumed this meant the Galaxy S 2 was faster (which is what the bench is supposedly testing) but anyone who watched it saw the Sensation complete the test significantly faster.
|
First of all you have to realize that they are using Quadrant, not Quadrant Pro...the score from Quadrant is an overall score...things that go into Quadrant score is CPU, memory, GPU 2D, GPU 3D....
Second of all the SGS 2 hanged on the I/O which caused it to start later then the Sensation on the GPU test.
Third of all, finish faster is pointless unless it achieves it at the same FPS, if it finishes faster at a lower FPS means its frame skipping..and if you look at the video, frame skipping is apparent...tats why I even looked at the FPS in the first place, because I saw frame skipping...
Quote:
|
Yes, you have a bunch of excuses, like FPS. But the bottom line is the Sensation was running at a higher resolution, so lower fps is expected. And it finished the test significantly faster.
|
and what your saying is not an excuse? can we just call it a day and say Quadrant is flawed..its a well known fact...
Quote:
|
I don't care to contact the makers of any bench tests. I saw the sensation clearly finish the quadrant faster, and clearly score higher on the only test that didn't use the resolution at all. You chose to say that isn't valid in your own opinion, and I chose to say no other bench is any more valid, in my opinion. at the end of the day, there is NOT this clear evidence that the Galaxy S 2 has a better processor, or a better performance. When you claimed that was the case, you were either mistaken or just making crap up. Because looking at the time it took each device to finish the quadrant, and the score of each device on the linpack, both indicates the Sensation is the faster device (even with less RAM).
|
Ok..so you want to play it like that..then we can both agree that the GPU in the Evo3d and Sensation is "too weak" as it was not able to achieve 60 fps....it is irrelevant which one has higher resolution or lower resolution because when you are playing a game or using your GPU it has to perform at 60fps to get a smooth lag free experience...
or we can agree that Quadrant is flawed..your call...