Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Android Handhelds Stats Hardware Technology

NVIDIA's Tegra 3 Outruns Apple's A5 In First Benchmarks 390

Posted by timothy
from the no-processor-left-behind dept.
MojoKid writes "NVIDIA's new Tegra 3 SoC (System on a Chip) has recently been released for performance reviews in the Asus Eee Pad Transformer Prime Android tablet. Tegra 3 is comprised of a quad-core primary CPU complex with a 5th companion core for lower-end processing requirements and power management. The chip can scale up to 1.4GHz on a single core and 1.3GHz on up to four of its cores, while the companion core operates at 500MHz. It makes for a fairly impressive new tablet platform and offers performance that bests Apple's A5 dual-core processor in more than a few tests. The Asus Eee Pad Transformer Prime with optional keyboard dock and NVIDIA's Tegra 3 is set to be available in volume sometime around December 19th."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NVIDIA's Tegra 3 Outruns Apple's A5 In First Benchmarks

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:26AM (#38226212)

    *sigh*

    Tegra 3 is faster than the A5? Whoopty-doo. You know why Apple is winning the tablet and phone market? Here's a hint: It's not about specs anymore. When it comes to tablets, people don't care about benchmarks or who's got the fastest RAM. We (Slashdot geeks) might, but the rest of the world couldn't give a flying fuck. It's about user experience. And Apple's got that all wrapped up in a pretty little bow. Whereas none of their competitors do (HP came close, and we'll see about Ice Cream Sandwich but my educated guess is "probably not good enough for the average person").

    So yeah, run all the benchmarks you want NVIDIA, but when it comes down to actual concrete sales, Apple's still going to eat you for breakfast.

  • News just in: (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:26AM (#38226214)

    New, unreleased processor faster than old, widely available processor.

  • by gmhowell (26755) <gmhowell@gmail.com> on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:26AM (#38226216) Homepage Journal

    Really? Comparing benchmarks? All this time, and you people still don't get it.

  • by danbob999 (2490674) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:29AM (#38226240)

    Apple is currently ahead in the tablet market. They also had the best performing tablet when it came out. The Prime might be better but it's about 9 months after the iPad2.
    Apple is currently being outsold by almost 2:1 by Android phones. Android phones are also the best performing phones out there.

    If Apple's user experience was that much better, and specs didn't matter anymore, then why isn't Apple winning the phone race too?

  • by thisnamestoolong (1584383) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:38AM (#38226354)
    Seriously? This is on the front page? First of all, should that really be a surprise that a brand new, quad core chip can beat a 9 month old, slower, dual core? Secondly, Apple's success has NEVER been due to its high performance, it has always been about the shiny factor and the intuitive software design. I am personally excited about the arms race we are seeing in tablets, and hope to see high end Android tablets gain more traction, but this is just silly.
  • by Totenglocke (1291680) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:43AM (#38226400)

    Apple is "winning" the tablet war for two reasons:

    1) They had a good year lead in entering the market (actually more since the first Android tablets weren't designed to be tablets and were released against Google's recommendation).

    2) They have a cult of fanboys who would literally buy anything with the Apple logo on it and those people then pressure other people to get Apple products to "be cool".

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:51AM (#38226494)

    Better headline: "Tegra 3 CPU on-par with a year-old processor; GPU woefully inadequate."

  • by danbob999 (2490674) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @11:53AM (#38226524)

    What is irrelevant, from a user perspective, is the amount of profit that a company makes. In fact, if the company I buy a phone from loose money on every sale, it probably means that I made a better deal. If on the other hand they make a 50% profit, I probably got screwed. I never understood how Apple users could be proud of Apple making such a high profit. I never saw anyone proud of buying oil from ExxonMobile because they make more profit than the competition.
    I don't care if there a 1 or 200 companies selling phones for a platform. What I cares about is the popularity of that platform since it gives a good indication of upcoming support (by application developers). I wouldn't buy a WP7 or a WebOS device even if I liked the OS because of that. Those platform don't have a guaranteed future. But most importantly what matters the most is who makes the best phone for my needs. I don't care who makes it.

  • True performance (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:00PM (#38226600)

    I own the Samsung Galaxy tablet. At launch it had high specs and all.. But yet, the experience is laggy with occasionnal freezes.. is hardware the real performance, or it's the actual responsiveness that matters most?

    I'd rather have lower specs but smoother response....

  • by DrgnDancer (137700) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:05PM (#38226658) Homepage

    It's not cheating, but it's (non-deliberately) deceptive when it comes to the measures that matter to companies. "Android" is not a model of phone any more than "Windows" is a model of computer. Even with only 5-7% of the computer market, Apple has been one of the more profitable computer manufacturers for the last decade or so. Compare Windows to OSX and Apple is clearly "losing". Compare Mac sales to Dell sales or HP sales and Apple is doing almost phenomenally well. Similarly with phones. iOS is "losing" to Android by a lot of measures, but Apple is doing better than any other vendor of smartphones. Apple is "winning in the phone market" because they consistently make and sell more phones than any one other vendor (and probably make more money per phone to boot). They aren't necessarily winning in the phone OS market, but that's OK.

  • by Pope (17780) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:07PM (#38226696)

    Open a handful of apps. Switch between them. Now lock it and put it away for a couple of hours. Now unlock it: quick, where does "Back" take you?

    Double-click on the iOS home button and you get the application switcher, so you can get back to any other running app, exactly in the state you left it.

  • by spire3661 (1038968) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:13PM (#38226768) Journal
    I fucking hate people like you who let their hatred blind them. No matter how you feel about the company, they make WORLD CLASS systems. To totally disparage the technical merits of what they do because of how they market is childish. If Apple made products that didnt work very well, we wouldnt really talk about them on slashdot.
  • by Karlt1 (231423) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:18PM (#38226844)

    The fact that Microsoft is winning the PC OS war and that Google is winning the phone OS war

    How is Google "winning" when 66% of Google searches on mobile come from iOS device:

    http://www.gadgetvenue.com/google-mobile-searches-made-up-of-66-ios-09223009/ [gadgetvenue.com]

    And after spending billions on development, buying MMI, and patents they still only make $6 dollars per phone?

    Especially when the most popular Android tablet (the Amazon Fire) uses no Google services?

  • by ICLKennyG (899257) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:36PM (#38227028)
    If that's true, why can I buy 100,000 battery cradles, camera add ons, cases, credit card readers, sushi makers and personal massager extensions for my iphone but there are barely any Android specific accessories besides a few cases and some carrier marketed dash/desk mounts. I'll tell you why. The Samsung Galaxy S II HD Prime XD Touch SDHC AMOLED+ Carbon Fibre Edition (tm) doesn't use the same peripherals as the Nexus Prime Squared Factorial 4. The iPhone 4 and 4s have given accessories manufacturers essentially 1 shape/interface with which to build an accessory for a potential market of 100m+ users.

    Great Android selling phones do about 10% of a single iPhone model. There are 3 significant iPhone models still in the wild and 2 of them and 90+% of the volume are the same form factor. Is there a Moto Droid RAZR Deli Slicer 7.1 Kevlar port in your car? No, but my Elantra came with an iPhone dock (as does about 70% of US automobiles.)


    If we can actually get to TFA! Shocker that a chip that has only been available in engineering samples is outpacing a chip that shipped in a device in March. So in other news, chips get faster over time? Shocked. Even if this were important (and it isn't) this is not a fair fight. All it does is give Apple a benchmark/target to aim for with the A6 or what ever it will be that they ship in the iPad 3 in about 3-4 months, which oh by the way, will be showing up about the same time that a device with this chip in it makes it to market too.

    It's not just about chip speed. It's about battery life, user experience, polish, and efficiency. The quicker the Android licensees stops marketing their phones like they are hocking graphics cards in 2004 the sooner one of them will have an individual hit.
  • by bryan1945 (301828) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:53PM (#38227228) Journal

    I find it interesting that Apple users are a cult, while rabid Android supporters are just fine.
    No, I don't have Apple stuff.

  • by fishtorte (1117491) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:54PM (#38227252)

    Apple doesn't need the fastest hardware—it only needs hardware that will run its OS fast enough. Because the only thing that matters is if the machine feels responsive enough. If it does, then it works.

  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:54PM (#38227256)
    Well it is relevant if as a user you (1) want the manufacturer to support the phone after you buy it and (2) want the manufacturer to keeps making that particular model. Why do you think many Android phones have such inconsistent update history and support? Because they make so little money off some models that they don't care. If you buy a new iPhone you get about 2 years of software updates and you can walk into any Apple store and get support in the 1st year. Apple can do that because of the profit they made. Now the average Slashdot user thinks he can root the phone and fix any issue but your average consumer doesn't know Xwindows from xfs.
  • by Mr Bubble (14652) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:57PM (#38227298)

    2) They have a cult of fanboys who would literally buy anything with the Apple logo on it and those people then pressure other people to get Apple products to "be cool".

    I keep hearing this, but it is not borne out by reality. There would have to be an awfully large number of cult fanboys to sustain the kind of numbers Apple is posting. At what number do cult fanboys turn into satisfied customers?

  • Is it really 2011? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:58PM (#38227312)

    The fact that anyone is even making ePenis comparisons like this shows how embarrassingly out of touch the "nerd" (versus "geek") population has become. None of this matters. It hasn't mattered for years. To cling to it as some basis for decision making, as if the ultimate Asperger's-addled answer to any question is to overlay a rational conceit even if it doesn't make any sense, is absurd.

    None of this is relevant, as much as those of you who fear the evolution in the technology market would like to believe otherwise. The more you cling to this as a basis for building products, the more you'll lose in terms of influence. We've worked too hard to have a seat at the table -- do you really want to be shoved back in the server closet again? I don't know, maybe some of you would.

  • by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Thursday December 01, 2011 @12:58PM (#38227320) Homepage

    It's times like this I wish I had mod points.

    Scratch that, it's times like this I wish I ran my own Slash site so I could invite you over.

    It's not just about accessories. The Android software platform is as fractured as it gets, with a bazillion different versions, different hardware that simply cannot be trusted or relied upon. Some are great phones like the Samsung Galaxy line, and then a neverending stream of shit phones like, well, Huawei, Motorola, Alcatel... half-assed sweatshop garbage.

    As a developer, even though Apple's walled garden is quite frustrating to navigate, I have less to worry about when developing iPhone apps vs Android or Blackberry, as if an app works on my iPhone, it's a pretty safe bet that it'll work on all of them. It's much like writing for a gaming console. There are only a few minor gotchas, that are trivially resolved during testing with the various simulators.

    With Android, about half of my the bug reports I get must be replied with "I'm sorry, but your phone does not support rotation. Yes, the epileptic shimmering is normal on a Motorola. No, our app isn't slow, it's your goddamned korean knockoff phone. Congratulations, your device supports flash. Too bad it only has a 2.77 mhz processor without H.264 acceleration."

  • by symbolset (646467) * on Thursday December 01, 2011 @01:19PM (#38227642) Journal
    It's not that the Androids are cheap. It's that like the tablets they offer more choices. iPhone is great if it's what you want. But if you want a keyboard, removable battery, microSDHC, dualSIM, HDMI 1080p outputs, a different camera, a flip phone, a cheaper phone, a phone that comes in red... you're getting an Android.
  • by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Thursday December 01, 2011 @01:31PM (#38227864) Homepage

    I'm a 99-percenter, and even *I* think you're just spouting bizarro communist tripe. You say that profit is irrelevant, but then go into some masturbatory rant about how screwing the company into taking a loss equates to a "better deal" for you. It's not a better deal if you drive that company into bankruptcy and your device becomes unsupported 6 months down the road.

    There is a very important distinction between profit and greed. Deriving pleasure from screwing someone over the deal, that's greed. I don't consider Apple a greedy company. They sell products people want, so they charge a premium for premium products. You get what you pay for. I think that's quite fair. Sure, the iPhone costs a bit more than an Android phone... so what ? If you're broke or cheap, get the Android. If instead, you're the type of person who doesn't mind spending a little more for something better, get the iPhone. End of story. It's not a political debate, it's a value dilemma.

    I like my $1000 LCDs with retina-frying intensity and color fidelity. You might be perfectly content with the $199 LCDs that I gave away, because to me they were eyesores. I know their new owner is super happy with them. You have the freedom of choice, use it. And for the love of jebus, respect other people's freedom of choice too.

    As for your second argument, WP7 and WebOS are doomed because everyone already knows they suck even worse than Blackberry. Android sucks less, which is why it's sticking around. It's close enough to IOS (relatively speaking), to justify its own existence. And frankly, a lot of people don't care about thier phone's OS, they just want a phone that can play Angry Birds.

  • by billcopc (196330) <vrillco@yahoo.com> on Thursday December 01, 2011 @01:57PM (#38228456) Homepage

    As the saying goes, only the rich can afford to buy cheap things.

    I'd rather buy something nice that will last, than keep buying cheap crap that breaks and fails and makes my pressure rise every time I look at it. Just the few hours I've wasted fussing with my wife's Android have exceeded the small difference in sticker price vs my iPhone. You can buy more gadgets, but you can't buy time.

  • by Coward Anonymous (110649) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @02:59PM (#38229560)

    The back button is a design mistake. Having a dedicated back button does not fit all scenarios and leads to ambiguous choices the user can't resolve without having to tap it to see what happens or suboptimal app behavior. A good example is Android's camera camera roll switching which is/was (I haven't looked at ICS) fundamentally broken and not user friendly. Stepping back a bit and thinking about it, it's pretty clear the culprit is the back button and the UI flow that it forces.

  • by scot4875 (542869) on Thursday December 01, 2011 @04:39PM (#38231026) Homepage

    Android is not a company. It's completely irrelevant if 200 companies combined can outsell one (1) company if that single company outsells each of them individually. Just because Motorola and Samsung makes Android phones doesn't mean they are BFFs. Every single Android phone maker competes with all the other Android vendors. Apple makes 52% of all the whole phone profits. All the other 200 phone maker have to share the remaining 48%.

    Here's what most Apple fans fail to understand: most of the rest of us don't give a shit about *any* company. I don't care if Apple or Motorola or HTC or Samsung have the largest marketshare; all I care about is having choices. Apple's ecosystem gives you *no* choice -- if you want an iOS device, it comes from Apple. If you buy accessories, they will *only* work with Apple hardware. If you buy software, it will *only* work with Apple hardware. If at some point in the future you don't want Apple hardware, you're also throwing away all of the rest of your investments.

    In the Android ecosystem, there are a multitude of choices in terms of manufacturer and price point. If I buy an HTC device now, when I'm later looking to upgrade I'm not locked into buying from HTC again, because my software will work on a Samsung phone. My accessories will work with any device that supports a USB interface. I'm not stuck with a single manufacturer to make use of all of my older stuff.

    I'm willing to have some stuff that doesn't "just work" if it means I get more choices out of the deal -- the funny thing being that Apple does not and has never had stuff that always "just works," so I'm really not making much of a sacrifice there. Every consumer computing device ever has had at least a few bugs, and you learn to work around them (or, in the case of Apple fanbois, deny them).

    --Jeremy

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 02, 2011 @12:08AM (#38234470)

    Perhaps I should have expanded on what I meant by "Apple Phenomena" better. What I am referring to is the mass market, keeping up with the joneses, easily manipulated social consumer mentality that has pervaded first world culture. The entire notion of marketing a device in such a way as to make it a status symbol rather than a functional device leads to people overspending because of how our culture has been programmed to respond to marketing and spend. Apple is one of the most successful companies at capitalizing on this culture. So I did not intend it to be something specific to Apple, but certainly it can be observed the most directly in the way Apple does business and they are certainly the most successful at it.

    You're blinded by your snobbish desire to look down upon Apple users as mere sheep, idiots who aren't as smart as you because they chose something different than you did.

    How do I know this? I pay minimal attention to how Apple actually markets things, so I know your complaints about how Apple presents itself to the world are bullshit. The original TV commercials for iPhone were just a hand, holding a phone against a dark background, showing how easy it was to do basic tasks on the phone (surf a website, send a mail, etc). Zero appeal to status, it was all about functionality. It continues to this very day with iPhone 4S commercials which consist of nothing but people using Siri. Yes, now that the camera frame includes more than just a hand, they're people dressed stylishly and so forth, but this is [i]not[/i] status symbol marketing first, functionality second. The focus of the commercials is [i]always[/i] "This is a great device, and here's why", showing off whatever Apple thinks is the most important signature function.

    And then there's typical Droid commercials. These are almost invariably what you claim to hate about Apple. A recent one features a criminal stealing the new Droid Razr from a moving truck in a TOTALLY RAD action sequence. He then places it in a vice with razor sharp jaws and looks at it with awe. There is zero focus on functionality in that commercial. It is nothing but a naked appeal to testosterone and status. "Buy this and you will have the most bragworthy phone on the market."

    You are a poster child for how people let prejudices taint their views of the world without even being aware of it.

It's time to boot, do your boot ROMs know where your disk controllers are?

Working...