Evo 4g/Evo 3D

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by orangekid

except that their stock ROMs suck hard and they cripple it with crapware and limitations.

Yep. Agreed 100%. That's why they need to unlock their bootloaders. But if they did unlock the bootloaders, imagine what could be done with devices like the Atrix and the laptop dock.

[orangekid]

Originally Posted by BlackDynamite

Yep. Agreed 100%. That's why they need to unlock their bootloaders. But if they did unlock the bootloaders, imagine what could be done with devices like the Atrix and the laptop dock.

probably wonders, but that's why I'm never getting a Motorola device. I'd take a Nexus S over an Atrix ANY day of the week and twice on Tuesday.

[gTen]

Didn't motorola say they plan to unlock phones later this year?

Also by the looks of that video posted by KarlE, smartchbench as I figured accounted for the higher resolution by running the test in a lower resolution.(being wvga) hence being a fair comparison unlike Quadrant which ran them all at native resolutions.

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by gTen

Didn't motorola say they plan to unlock phones later this year?

Also by the looks of that video posted by KarlE, smartchbench as I figured accounted for the higher resolution by running the test in a lower resolution.(being wvga) hence being a fair comparison unlike Quadrant which ran them all at native resolutions.

Motorola did say that a while back, but they also confirmed the Photon is locked. So who knows what they really plan to do. If they really start unlocking and selling unlocked phones, then I will consider buying one of their devices. Not before then though.

As for those tests, it was pretty much what I have been saying all along. The Sensation finished the test faster and still had a lower score. I can't take any benchmark seriously if the slower device scores better.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DM6sP...e_gdata_player

In that video, the Sensation finishes the Quadrant significantly faster yet somehow scores lower, and the Sensation scores better than the Galaxy S 2 on the Linpack.

Smartbench running at a lower res isn't any better. The device still has a qhd screen. The app may only be filling so many of those pixels, but the device is still doing something with those pixels. And the Evo 3D will score even better than the Sensation.

[gTen]

As I said earlier, Quadrant and Linpack are defective benchmarks.

Quadrant is defective because without the pro version you cant exactly see whats going on and even with the pro version it sometimes inflates values. The higher score though is due to the higher FPS the video was playing on the SGS2 while the sensation was frame skipping, hence why it finished faster. Either way people should really stop using Quadrant altogether, there are better benchmarks.

Linpack is also a failed benchmark. Its only use is for benching same devices. Simply because snapdragon phones cheat this benchmark, Linpack works by calculating Floating points. Snapdragon has this thing called VFP, aka Vector Floating Point,its a chip designed specifically for doing floating points.

ARM architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which kinda defeats the purpose of Linpack..I am unsure whether or not the Exynos has a VFP too or not, I know the previous hummingbird did not, but either way this benchmark is just a measurement of how fast the VFP works for those phones that ave it, not how fast the CPU works as intended.


Smartbench on the other-hand is a decent benchmark. the extra pixels is irrelevant, its not down-scaling, most likely it works similar to the density apps where it tricks the phone to think its WVGA. As I said, considering Smartbench did this, most likely its correct and even comparison, they are the pros at this and know better then both of us in the very least on this subject. (smartbench is made by a team on xda)

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by gTen

As I said earlier, Quadrant and Linpack are defective benchmarks.

Quadrant is defective because without the pro version you cant exactly see whats going on and even with the pro version it sometimes inflates values. The higher score though is due to the higher FPS the video was playing on the SGS2 while the sensation was frame skipping, hence why it finished faster. Either way people should really stop using Quadrant altogether, there are better benchmarks.

Linpack is also a failed benchmark. Its only use is for benching same devices. Simply because snapdragon phones cheat this benchmark, Linpack works by calculating Floating points. Snapdragon has this thing called VFP, aka Vector Floating Point,its a chip designed specifically for doing floating points.

ARM architecture - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Which kinda defeats the purpose of Linpack..I am unsure whether or not the Exynos has a VFP too or not, I know the previous hummingbird did not, but either way this benchmark is just a measurement of how fast the VFP works for those phones that ave it, not how fast the CPU works as intended.


Smartbench on the other-hand is a decent benchmark. the extra pixels is irrelevant, its not down-scaling, most likely it works similar to the density apps where it tricks the phone to think its WVGA. As I said, considering Smartbench did this, most likely its correct and even comparison, they are the pros at this and know better then both of us in the very least on this subject. (smartbench is made by a team on xda)

Smartbench is no better than linpack. Smartbench runs at a resolution not compatible with qhd devices. Period. Whatever has to be done to make the Sensation think it's only wvga, does not have to be done on the Galaxy S 2. Period. There is no debating this and it's funny that you keep trying. Also it's no coincidence that this is the one benchmark where the Galaxy S 2 is faster, and it's the only one you give any credence. I don't see any reason why smartbench is any better than linpack. I don't put much stock in either of them, but at least linpack is running at the proper resolution on both devices.

[gTen]

Originally Posted by BlackDynamite

Smartbench is no better than linpack. Smartbench runs at a resolution not compatible with qhd devices. Period. Whatever has to be done to make the Sensation think it's only wvga, does not have to be done on the Galaxy S 2. Period. There is no debating this and it's funny that you keep trying. Also it's no coincidence that this is the one benchmark where the Galaxy S 2 is faster, and it's the only one you give any credence. I don't see any reason why smartbench is any better than linpack. I don't put much stock in either of them, but at least linpack is running at the proper resolution on both devices.

um..what?!?!?! linpack isn't running at any resolution..it doesn't measure the GPU, it measures the CPU...CPU benchmarks do not matter on the resolution, in linpacks case its a floating point math. (read up on how linpack works)

I did not only give credit to Smartbench, I also gave credit to GLbenchmark..and so you know I have been advocating Smartbench and GL Benchmark back in the day when they first came out.

Linpack went faulty on the 2.2 update and Quadrant was faulty since day 1. Notice I constantly was telling you Quadrant is flawed even though it shows SGS 2 completely destroying the sensation?

Smartbench enforces resolutions on both phones...you don't notice this on wvga as its wvga but both are effected. Think of gaming benchmarks done on a PC, they try out different resolutions to see which performs better. Smartbench benched them both in same resolution as you would on a PC, which seems fair.


If you feel smartbench is incorrect, feel free to contact the developer of smartbench at xda (username: Acei ), he is always willing to work with people to improve his benchmark, smartbench has been a community effort to improve upon tested on many devices.

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by gTen

um..what?!?!?! linpack isn't running at any resolution..it doesn't measure the GPU, it measures the CPU...CPU benchmarks do not matter on the resolution, in linpacks case its a floating point math. (read up on how linpack works)

I did not only give credit to Smartbench, I also gave credit to GLbenchmark..and so you know I have been advocating Smartbench and GL Benchmark back in the day when they first came out.

Linpack went faulty on the 2.2 update and Quadrant was faulty since day 1. Notice I constantly was telling you Quadrant is flawed even though it shows SGS 2 completely destroying the sensation?

Smartbench enforces resolutions on both phones...you don't notice this on wvga as its wvga but both are effected. Think of gaming benchmarks done on a PC, they try out different resolutions to see which performs better. Smartbench benched them both in same resolution as you would on a PC, which seems fair.


If you feel smartbench is incorrect, feel free to contact the developer of smartbench at xda (username: Acei ), he is always willing to work with people to improve his benchmark, smartbench has been a community effort to improve upon tested on many devices.

man, yes, Linpack absolutely DOES run at some resolution. Anything running on the display is running at SOME resolution. So get your "facts" straight.

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.

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. 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.

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).

[gTen]

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.

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.

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...

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...

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...