Evo 4g/Evo 3D

[gTen]

Originally Posted by BlackDynamite

The Sensation "could have" been an international version with no bloatware? lol. Try again man. The correct way to say it is, "The Galaxy S 2 absolutely WAS an international version with no bloatware, and the Sensation may or may not have been." And your assesment of RAM is not correct. If there is enough RAM to run the process, sure, it will run. If the level of RAM drops below a certain level, other processes will not run. This is how HTC Sense works. Heck, that's how Android works in general.

Typo on my part..I meant to say no bloatware from the carrier..not manufacturer..hence my alluding to it not being t-mobile..

That is not entirely accurate. If you run something else that takes up more RAM, the first app is terminated. HTC Sense is no different. HTC Sense could easily take up all the RAM on a phone if it did everything it is capable of doing at the same time. But it doesn't work like that. It uses only a percentage of what is available and dynamically reallocates more or less memory for certain functions. There is absolutely no debating that more RAM would lead to better bench scores on any HTC Sense device, especially the latest Sense version running on the Sensation, and even more so on the Sensation running the latest (and most bloated) version of sense, and also a bloated Stock ROM.

It wont terminate a process thats running front end...in the background yes..not on your screen..that gets full allocation attention..both the evo 3d and sensation have new sense...there will be no difference between benchmarks of evo 3d and sensation..this has been proven by HTC Incredible and the Evo having virtual the same benchmarks...

Again, I disagree. If you have an Evo, you have probably ran ROMs with the new version of sense ported over. You saw how it affected performance before the cooks cleaned it up. Even though we never totally ran out of RAM on our Evo's (which are just as close to the sensation in RAM as the Sensation is to the Evo 3D). There is no doubt that any device running Sense will perform better with more RAM. And it's absolutely ridiculous to even try to debate this. Put a Sense 3 ROM on your Evo. Now put one on your Hero. Tell me there is no difference.

Um...hero is a REALLY bad example..its not even a cortex A8 phone...again sense does effect performance..but the effect is equal throughout both phones..on a benchmark that only takes up 1.3mb it has no effect...when comparing sensation to the Evo 3d..

No idea what any of that has to do with an Evo 3D. You are speculating that the Evo 3D's resolution may or may not be factored into a benchmark result based on a test ran on 2 seperate and totally unrelated phones, that have different specs from each other and neither has the same specs as the Evo 3D.

I am basing this on available data..I am not putting this up as a FACT..mearly an educated guess...

Any test you run, anything you do, will run faster at a lower resolution. That's why you turn down the resolution on games on older computers. It's common sense- can I render 10 pixels faster or 1 pixel faster?

This is normally the case yes..but as I said there are 2 senarios that are also possible:

1) Smartbench takes into account resolution when doing its calculation

or

2) Tegra 2 really renders at a higher resolution then qHD then rescales it down to a lower resolution.

There are more to this then even resolution..there is also dithering for example...Tegra 2 and previous snapdragon dithered at 16bit, while hummingbird dithered at 24bit..

Also keep in mind that the Gaming score was calculated on the SGS2 while being limited to 60fps...

And just so we are clear, your not disputing the Productivity score? correct?

[BlackDynamite]

[QUOTE=gTen;2112395]

Originally Posted by gTen

It wont terminate a process thats running front end...in the background yes..not on your screen..that gets full allocation attention..both the evo 3d and sensation have new sense...there will be no difference between benchmarks of evo 3d and sensation..this has been proven by HTC Incredible and the Evo having virtual the same benchmarks...

The Thunderbolt benches higher than the Evo. And there will absolutely be a difference in the Sensation and Evo 3D. It's unbelievable that you would try to dispute this.

Originally Posted by gTen

Um...hero is a REALLY bad example..its not even a cortex A8 phone...again sense does effect performance..but the effect is equal throughout both phones..on a benchmark that only takes up 1.3mb it has no effect...when comparing sensation to the Evo 3d..

You keep missing the point. That 1.3 MB test is NOT the only process running. Run that test on a Sense phone that only has 5 MB of RAM. Now run that same 1.3 MB test on a Sense phone that has 512 MB of RAM. Try to explain to me why the results would be even remotely similar. They wouldn't be. And a phone with 25% more RAM will run it faster too.

Originally Posted by gTen

I am basing this on available data..I am not putting this up as a FACT..mearly an educated guess...

And my educated guess is none of those tests mean anything yet. For one thing, like I posted, I saw a test that actually scored the Galaxy S2 higher even though it took longer to run the test. And for another thing, the Evo 3D will absolutely bench better than the Sensation anyway.

Originally Posted by gTen

This is normally the case yes..but as I said there are 2 senarios that are also possible:

1) Smartbench takes into account resolution when doing its calculation

or

2) Tegra 2 really renders at a higher resolution then qHD then rescales it down to a lower resolution.

There is also a 3rd option- the phones had other differing factors that influenced the tests. You act like just because they both had a Tegra 2 that everything else was identical with the only difference being the resolution.

Originally Posted by gTen

There are more to this then even resolution..there is also dithering for example...Tegra 2 and previous snapdragon dithered at 16bit, while hummingbird dithered at 24bit..

Also keep in mind that the Gaming score was calculated on the SGS2 while being limited to 60fps...

Again- resolution is every bit as big a factor as fps, and dithering. We kNOW the Sensation is running at a significantly higher resolution. This is not an educated guess, but a documented fact. So common sense tells us that you will have less fps at qhd than you will at wvga.

Originally Posted by gTen

And just so we are clear, your not disputing the Productivity score? correct?

Yes I am disputing all of those tests at this point. Unless you have 2 identical phones, then the tests lose value for each difference. Like I said, common sense tells us that qhd rendering will have a lower fps than wvga rendering. And if the OS and test aren't utilizing the dual cores, then it loses even more value. And even then, the Evo 3D was not even the phone in the test. It was a Sensation that has lower specs, and likely a worse bench than the Evo 3D. When these phones are released I'm sure we'll start to see some tests that more accurately put them against each other. But when I see a phone finish the test significantly faster, yet score significantly worse, I am not going to trust that test.

[gTen]

[QUOTE=BlackDynamite;2112397]

Originally Posted by gTen

The Thunderbolt benches higher than the Evo. And there will absolutely be a difference in the Sensation and Evo 3D. It's unbelievable that you would try to dispute this.

Wait..are you trying to compare a 2nd gen 1.2ghz snapdragon with an adreno 205 to a 1st gen 1ghz snapdragon with an Adreno 200 and call it a ram thing?

You keep missing the point. That 1.3 MB test is NOT the only process running. Run that test on a Sense phone that only has 5 MB of RAM. Now run that same 1.3 MB test on a Sense phone that has 512 MB of RAM. Try to explain to me why the results would be even remotely similar. They wouldn't be. And a phone with 25% more RAM will run it faster too.

its obvious 1.3mb is not the only process running..but other processes running only bottle neck the benchmark by utilizing the CPU/GPU or accessing the ram..the quantity of ram is irrelevant as long as enough is free to run the app and the necessary android processes.

And my educated guess is none of those tests mean anything yet. For one thing, like I posted, I saw a test that actually scored the Galaxy S2 higher even though it took longer to run the test. And for another thing, the Evo 3D will absolutely bench better than the Sensation anyway.

I showed you that video..the reason for what you saw was Quadrant..what happens is the video was skipping frames hence finished faster...it didnt render all the frames..and got a lower score because it couldnt match the sgs 2 on its 60fps...and sensation and evo 3d will bench around the same +/- margin of error.

[QUOTE]
There is also a 3rd option- the phones had other differing factors that influenced the tests. You act like just because they both had a Tegra 2 that everything else was identical with the only difference being the resolution.
[QUOTE]

They werent the same...I only presented preliminary date of my research..that said Tegra 2 is a SoC similar to the snapdragon..aka they msot liekly had same motherboards, same processor and etc...the benchmark results were just too close accross multiple devices to call it a coincidence..anyways..if you want we can drop this point..as I said before its preliminary data..

Again- resolution is every bit as big a factor as fps, and dithering. We kNOW the Sensation is running at a significantly higher resolution. This is not an educated guess, but a documented fact. So common sense tells us that you will have less fps at qhd than you will at wvga.

I am not arguing with that..I am arguing about smartbenches ability as a benchmark to account for that...my goal originally was to od a calculation of % wise the difference between a qhd and a wvga using the same SoC and used the Tegra 2 as its only one atm that fits the bill and found results similar..

Yes I am disputing all of those tests at this point. Unless you have 2 identical phones, then the tests lose value for each difference. Like I said, common sense tells us that qhd rendering will have a lower fps than wvga rendering. And if the OS and test aren't utilizing the dual cores, then it loses even more value. And even then, the Evo 3D was not even the phone in the test. It was a Sensation that has lower specs, and likely a worse bench than the Evo 3D. When these phones are released I'm sure we'll start to see some tests that more accurately put them against each other. But when I see a phone finish the test significantly faster, yet score significantly worse, I am not going to trust that test.

Your talking about quadrant and linpack..in comparison smartbench is a much better benchmark...smartbench unlike quadrant uses both cores, wvga and qhd has no effect on productivity score, thats gaming score...again sensation will benchmark the same..look up htc incredible and htc evo and you will see..

We can wait till it comes out I dont mind, but the results will be the same..you cant change reality with delusion..

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by gTen

Wait..are you trying to compare a 2nd gen 1.2ghz snapdragon with an adreno 205 to a 1st gen 1ghz snapdragon with an Adreno 200 and call it a ram thing?

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?

Originally Posted by gTen

its obvious 1.3mb is not the only process running..but other processes running only bottle neck the benchmark by utilizing the CPU/GPU or accessing the ram..the quantity of ram is irrelevant as long as enough is free to run the app and the necessary android processes.

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.

Originally Posted by gTen

I showed you that video..the reason for what you saw was Quadrant..what happens is the video was skipping frames hence finished faster...it didnt render all the frames..and got a lower score because it couldnt match the sgs 2 on its 60fps...and sensation and evo 3d will bench around the same +/- margin of error.

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.

Originally Posted by gTen

They werent the same...I only presented preliminary date of my research..that said Tegra 2 is a SoC similar to the snapdragon..aka they msot liekly had same motherboards, same processor and etc...the benchmark results were just too close accross multiple devices to call it a coincidence..anyways..if you want we can drop this point..as I said before its preliminary data..

Well it was never a valid point in the first place so yes, feel free to drop it. You can't possibly describe the performance of an Evo 3D based on how a totally different phone compared to yet another totally different phone.

Originally Posted by gTen

I am not arguing with that..I am arguing about smartbenches ability as a benchmark to account for that...my goal originally was to od a calculation of % wise the difference between a qhd and a wvga using the same SoC and used the Tegra 2 as its only one atm that fits the bill and found results similar..

Then your entire point is invalid. If you agree that the higher resolution of the Evo 3D will absolutely influence the results, then these tests can be thrown right out the window. I don't care what a Tegra 2 phone did. Neither of these phones is a Tegra 2 phone so it has absolutely no bearing on what we can expect from an Evo 3D or a Samsung Galaxy S 2.

Originally Posted by gTen

Your talking about quadrant and linpack..in comparison smartbench is a much better benchmark...smartbench unlike quadrant uses both cores, wvga and qhd has no effect on productivity score, thats gaming score...again sensation will benchmark the same..look up htc incredible and htc evo and you will see..

HTC Incredible and Evo 4G both have 512MB of RAM. Yes, I would assume that with identical processor, RAM, resolution, and software, benches should be similar. Not sure what that has to do with the Evo 3D, the Sensation, and the galaxy S 2 though.

Originally Posted by gTen

We can wait till it comes out I dont mind, but the results will be the same..you cant change reality with delusion..

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

[gTen]

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...

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..

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...

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...

[BlackDynamite]

Originally Posted by gTen

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...

I will skip all the BS about how the bench marks of a Sensation with lower specs should be considered valid. You can say it as many times as you want, it doesn't make it true. the fact is, the Evo 3D WILL bench higher than the Sensation. Period. And another thing, it's not fair to bench a stock Sense ROM. You want accurate bench tests, the absolute LEAST you can do is bench the actual phone you're trying to compare. Not some lesser phone and then try to lie and say the bench will be the same. And in addition to that, use an AOSP ROM, not a freaking stock, bloated ROM.

Now, onto your spec comparison:
Screen: Evo 3D wins in a landslide. Not only is it a much higher resolution, but it's glasses free 3D. To say this is a tie is flat out BS.
Processor: Your BS bench marks aside, we don't know which processor is better. The OS they are running on has never supported dual cores. We'll see hwo they do on an OS made to support them.
Camera: Evo 3D in a landslide. It shoots 3D videos and pictures. To say this is a tie is more BS.
LED: Evo 3D has dual.
FFC: Funny how you said the back camera was unknown, even though the Evo has 2 of them and does 3D, but you call the FFC a win for the Galaxy S 2. This one is the true unknown.
Weight: Galaxy S 2 but who cares. A few grams difference won't be anything you notice.
Battery: Evo 3D in a landslide.
Wifi: Evo 3D does 5Ghz Wifi. You putingt this as a win for the Galaxy S2 is more BS.
Thickness: galaxy S2 but who cares. A couple mm isn't something you will notice.
NFC: Galaxy S2. Who cares? Nobody uses NFC right now anyway, and if you want it you can get an SD card.
Hardware encryption: The Evo 3D has hardware encryption. More BS that you put this as a win for the Galaxy S2.
Codecs: Again, more BS that you would put codecs as an advantage. You can install whatever codec you want on the Evo 3D.

So cutting through all of your BS and false claims, the real numbers (on the stuff you posted) would be Evo 3D: 4, Galaxy S2: 3 (and that is counting NFC, which can be added to the Evo 3D), Unknown or tie: 4

Now, lets talk about the full HDMI device output, the HTC Watch movie service, and the youtube 3D app.

[gTen]

Originally Posted by BlackDynamite

I will skip all the BS about how the bench marks of a Sensation with lower specs should be considered valid. You can say it as many times as you want, it doesn't make it true. the fact is, the Evo 3D WILL bench higher than the Sensation. Period. And another thing, it's not fair to bench a stock Sense ROM. You want accurate bench tests, the absolute LEAST you can do is bench the actual phone you're trying to compare. Not some lesser phone and then try to lie and say the bench will be the same. And in addition to that, use an AOSP ROM, not a freaking stock, bloated ROM.

The SGS2 has TW4.0 and I am sure bloat as well..an ASOP to ASOP will provide a better result yes..but does not justify such high distinction.

As for Evo 3d vs Sensation..as someone who majored in Computer engineering..what your speaking of is IMPOSSIBLE..its not how ram works...it is possible in SSDs as having larger SSD size means more speed. But for RAM what you speak of is not possible...are you going to tell me next that HTC figured out how to defy the laws physics?

Screen: Evo 3D wins in a landslide. Not only is it a much higher resolution, but it's glasses free 3D. To say this is a tie is flat out BS.

I have seen both in CES2011 and I wont call it a win by a landslide...Super AMOLED Plus is better..but I gave it a tie as it boils down to preference...

Processor: Your BS bench marks aside, we don't know which processor is better. The OS they are running on has never supported dual cores. We'll see hwo they do on an OS made to support them.

For 10th time..smart bench supports dual cores..

Camera: Evo 3D in a landslide. It shoots 3D videos and pictures. To say this is a tie is more BS.

Ok let me put it to you this way..do you think anyone wil actually take 3d photos? most ppl take photos for facebook and etc..3d becomes useless for that..and as far as video..its a fun thing to play around with but end of the day we both know you and me will be shooting 1080p video over 720p in 3d any day...to date galaxy s 2 has one of the best cellphone cameras..

LED: Evo 3D has dual.

to note I left this as an advantage to the Evo3d but its irrelevant..

FFC: Funny how you said the back camera was unknown, even though the Evo has 2 of them and does 3D, but you call the FFC a win for the Galaxy S 2. This one is the true unknown.

um..ok...galaxy s2 has a 2mp camera thats been used before...Evo3d has same old 1.3mp camera..whats unkown here.. please explain?

Weight: Galaxy S 2 but who cares. A few grams difference won't be anything you notice.

its almost half the weight...

Wifi: Evo 3D does 5Ghz Wifi. You putingt this as a win for the Galaxy S2 is more BS.

since when? I found 0 inidcations of Evo3d having 5ghz and sensation doesnt either..so where do you base this from? you also didnt argue with it when i posted it originally as evo3d having only 2.4ghz..why now?

Thickness: galaxy S2 but who cares. A couple mm isn't something you will notice.

its a pretty big difference..and thin is all the rave these days...I personally dont care..I mean I use a kb phone..but A LOT of people do care..

NFC: Galaxy S2. Who cares? Nobody uses NFC right now anyway, and if you want it you can get an SD card.

a lot do..in NY our public transportation has NFC support and a lot of places do too...as for SD approach..it only works if its not in a metal sd cover aka all phones are in metal sd covers..and will you really put your credit card to a Chinese based company?

Hardware encryption: The Evo 3D has hardware encryption. More BS that you put this as a win for the Galaxy S2.

I have not found info to support this..I asked you earlier if you can and you didnt..until you can provide me proof that it does it doesnt have it for records sake..

Codecs: Again, more BS that you would put codecs as an advantage. You can install whatever codec you want on the Evo 3D.

you do realize we were talking about hardware..not software right? aka this is HARDWARE decode of codecs..not software decode...BIG difference..

So cutting through all of your BS and false claims, the real numbers (on the stuff you posted) would be Evo 3D: 4, Galaxy S2: 3 (and that is counting NFC, which can be added to the Evo 3D), Unknown or tie: 4

um..you just made up half the stuff with no evidence to support it..

to make it easier ill sow you where I got my claims..so you have to provide equivalents..k?

Samsung GALAXY S II
Samsung GALAXY S II
Samsung Galaxy S II hits the FCC, potentially ready for AT&T 3G -- Engadget
http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/

I have accounted for all the specs..

Now, lets talk about the full HDMI device output, the HTC Watch movie service, and the youtube 3D app.

both have the MHL port...or you want to do a software comparison?