Looking at CPU/GPU Benchmark Optimizations in Galaxy S 4(anandtech.com)
anandtech.com
Looking at CPU/GPU Benchmark Optimizations in Galaxy S 4
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7187/looking-at-cpugpu-benchmark-optimizations-galaxy-s-4
14 comments
Pretty much all major hardware vendors selling into a performance space get caught in this kind of game. This certainly isn't new behavior, though it's the first time I've seen a handset vendor try it.
But as far as why people keep buying the products: sadly it's because they're better. I'm looking at the GS4 (i9505, not the Exynos one) right now vs. the HTC One and Xperia Z. On paper, they're all basically the same phone (2G quad core snapdragons with 1920x1080 screens). But all the tiebreakers (really, all of them) go to the Samsung phone. The GS4 is slightly smaller, thinner, and lighter yet its screen is slightly larger. It's CPU is clocked higher and its battery is larger. It's cameras are better (much more so than the HTC, slightly more so than the Sony). It has a removable battery where the others don't. It has a sdcard slot where the HTC doesn't. It supports the "T-Mobile" HSPA+-on-AWS-band frequencies. It has a thermometer, hygrometer and barometer built-in.
It's just a better phone on everything quantifiable. Not so much so as to kill the competition, but to anyone paying attention and recommending hardware to their friends, they're doing an awful lot right.
But as far as why people keep buying the products: sadly it's because they're better. I'm looking at the GS4 (i9505, not the Exynos one) right now vs. the HTC One and Xperia Z. On paper, they're all basically the same phone (2G quad core snapdragons with 1920x1080 screens). But all the tiebreakers (really, all of them) go to the Samsung phone. The GS4 is slightly smaller, thinner, and lighter yet its screen is slightly larger. It's CPU is clocked higher and its battery is larger. It's cameras are better (much more so than the HTC, slightly more so than the Sony). It has a removable battery where the others don't. It has a sdcard slot where the HTC doesn't. It supports the "T-Mobile" HSPA+-on-AWS-band frequencies. It has a thermometer, hygrometer and barometer built-in.
It's just a better phone on everything quantifiable. Not so much so as to kill the competition, but to anyone paying attention and recommending hardware to their friends, they're doing an awful lot right.
HTC One's camera isn't bad at all. It was built that way for a purpose. You're doing the straight up Megapixel comparison between the phones.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/4
Every phone has its features. It's just at a point where a simple chart-by-chart comparison won't work for most people anymore. Practically every reviewer likes the One despite the fact that on paper it's a downgrade to the S4 in every way. Basically, it is like you said, the devil is in the details, but bigger is not necessarily better.
Personally, out of those three phones, I'd rather go with the HTC One only because I like the aluminum body chassis (along with how the screen looks) and the fact that their stock Android version is 50 dollars cheaper than Samsung's. The decently sized front speakers are also a plus. I very much dislike the look of the GS4 and TouchWiz which, in comparison with HTC's Sense, has less cooler whistles and doodads IMO. But ultimately I like stock Android the best.
The beats audio chip on the One is a con for me though (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdbn_pmxFic).
I haven't given the Xperia Z much of a chance, but aside from the fact that it looks aesthetically pleasing to me and I can use it while showering, I don't see much of an advantage. The GS4 came out with a water and dust resistant version, but it's slightly bigger and the audio jack is off so it won't fit most S4 cases. The Z's overlay is much more stock Android (GS4 version is TouchWiz only). So I'll pick it over Samsung because of that.
Basically, I really don't like TouchWiz. For the most part it just feels cluttered and half baked and a pain to use.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/4
Every phone has its features. It's just at a point where a simple chart-by-chart comparison won't work for most people anymore. Practically every reviewer likes the One despite the fact that on paper it's a downgrade to the S4 in every way. Basically, it is like you said, the devil is in the details, but bigger is not necessarily better.
Personally, out of those three phones, I'd rather go with the HTC One only because I like the aluminum body chassis (along with how the screen looks) and the fact that their stock Android version is 50 dollars cheaper than Samsung's. The decently sized front speakers are also a plus. I very much dislike the look of the GS4 and TouchWiz which, in comparison with HTC's Sense, has less cooler whistles and doodads IMO. But ultimately I like stock Android the best.
The beats audio chip on the One is a con for me though (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cdbn_pmxFic).
I haven't given the Xperia Z much of a chance, but aside from the fact that it looks aesthetically pleasing to me and I can use it while showering, I don't see much of an advantage. The GS4 came out with a water and dust resistant version, but it's slightly bigger and the audio jack is off so it won't fit most S4 cases. The Z's overlay is much more stock Android (GS4 version is TouchWiz only). So I'll pick it over Samsung because of that.
Basically, I really don't like TouchWiz. For the most part it just feels cluttered and half baked and a pain to use.
All that is true. But "I like these other phones for personal taste reasons" is hardly a refutation to "people buy Samsung phones because they have features they want" either.
I'm not saying you couldn't possibly decide to buy an non-Samsung phone. I'm responding to a poster who claimed incredulity that someone could.
I'm not saying you couldn't possibly decide to buy an non-Samsung phone. I'm responding to a poster who claimed incredulity that someone could.
The poster you responded to said:
> I don't understand why people keep buying this company's god damn products. I mean, holy shit.
And you responeded that the SG4 had some better metrics than it's competition, but did no consider what made a better phone. Benchmark apps are one of those metrics that people consider, and has now shown to be misleading.
Even the higher CPU freq doesn't mean app performance is better, or even that general user experience is better.
Stop it with the metrics!
> I don't understand why people keep buying this company's god damn products. I mean, holy shit.
And you responeded that the SG4 had some better metrics than it's competition, but did no consider what made a better phone. Benchmark apps are one of those metrics that people consider, and has now shown to be misleading.
Even the higher CPU freq doesn't mean app performance is better, or even that general user experience is better.
Stop it with the metrics!
I wonder if Samsung will lie about the waterproofing of the s4 ?
http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1j8xsk/a_warning_to...
It is only a better phone if you print out the specs and compare them side by side.
If you go by that method than the iPhone can also never win. But in reality the S4 is a horrible phone (in my opinion of course). I've got one here for development along side the Nexus 4 and HTC One. Out of the branded phones the HTC One is definitely the best. It does the things most people want out of a device very well. The S4 is a mishmash of poorly designed applications and features. Full of gimmicks and awful design decisions.
But in reality the S4 is a horrible phone
Could you elaborate on that? Is it just the visual part that you don't like? I'm planning to get one soon, just seen one in a shop. The screen is beautiful and specs seem to be quite promising too. Can't wait to get my hands on it and code up some experiments.
Could you elaborate on that? Is it just the visual part that you don't like? I'm planning to get one soon, just seen one in a shop. The screen is beautiful and specs seem to be quite promising too. Can't wait to get my hands on it and code up some experiments.
The screen is a disgusting piece of shit. Colors are inaccurate, brightness is low, scrolling leaves artifacts because of Pentile subpixel arrangement.
Every other thing about this phone is also terrible. The way the phone sits on your hand, the material, the interface etc.
Every other thing about this phone is also terrible. The way the phone sits on your hand, the material, the interface etc.
Woah. I have an S4, and I wouldn't say the screen is a piece of shit at all. The colors are very slightly off sometimes, but the brightness certainly isn't low and I keep my screen at a very very low brightness level. I haven't noticed any artifacts.
Yeah, I spent about 2 weeks trying to decide between the iPhone 5, HTC One and S4.
Ultimately, the closed ecosystem of the iPhone with a lot of random up charges for things like a second charger $30+, lockin through iTunes, lack of compatibility with PC and a much smaller screen steered me a way from the iPhone.
When it came down to the HTC One vs S4, the choice was pretty clear. I grabbed a waterproof S4 which is about the same size as the HTC one and the S4 has a replaceable battery.
To be honest, each phone has major pluses and minuses, and there is no perfect phone anymore. There are days I wish I had the iPhone, but, overall the S4 is a dramatic improvement over the S2 which is a dramatic improvement over the BlackBerry Torch, which is a dramatic improvement over the Windows Treo which is a dramatic improvement over the pocket PC (Don't even get me started about the pocket PC).
I think we can all be glad phone technology has gotten this good. Its really amazing. Any top of the line phone bought today is dramatically better than any phone bought even 3 years ago.
[added] For the comment below, I have been swimming with mine twice, I also like to take it out while I'm drinking and drop it in my beer to watch people's reactions. Doing so does make the bottom buttons stick for a few days, but the phone works.
Sealing it is difficult. You need to take about 2 min to make sure the back is on properly and it takes a bit more force than you are use to.
But, yes, mine is waterproof. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some defective models. Its not like people are writing reddit posts about all the cool stuff they do with their S4 actives.
Ultimately, the closed ecosystem of the iPhone with a lot of random up charges for things like a second charger $30+, lockin through iTunes, lack of compatibility with PC and a much smaller screen steered me a way from the iPhone.
When it came down to the HTC One vs S4, the choice was pretty clear. I grabbed a waterproof S4 which is about the same size as the HTC one and the S4 has a replaceable battery.
To be honest, each phone has major pluses and minuses, and there is no perfect phone anymore. There are days I wish I had the iPhone, but, overall the S4 is a dramatic improvement over the S2 which is a dramatic improvement over the BlackBerry Torch, which is a dramatic improvement over the Windows Treo which is a dramatic improvement over the pocket PC (Don't even get me started about the pocket PC).
I think we can all be glad phone technology has gotten this good. Its really amazing. Any top of the line phone bought today is dramatically better than any phone bought even 3 years ago.
[added] For the comment below, I have been swimming with mine twice, I also like to take it out while I'm drinking and drop it in my beer to watch people's reactions. Doing so does make the bottom buttons stick for a few days, but the phone works.
Sealing it is difficult. You need to take about 2 min to make sure the back is on properly and it takes a bit more force than you are use to.
But, yes, mine is waterproof. I wouldn't be surprised if there are some defective models. Its not like people are writing reddit posts about all the cool stuff they do with their S4 actives.
There is no 'waterproof' S4 http://www.reddit.com/r/Android/comments/1j8xsk/a_warning_to...
>>lack of compatibility with PC
Huh? There is nothing about the iPhone that is incompatible with PCs. iTunes runs a little slow on Windows but that's pretty much it.
Huh? There is nothing about the iPhone that is incompatible with PCs. iTunes runs a little slow on Windows but that's pretty much it.
You are right, and then it comes android over it, more of the same for them all, now for the average user that makes the business profitable, this means nothing... (so I'm with you)
so still why? advertizing .... average user would look to the numbers and buy it (as somehow people have started to realize are the same...)
so still why? advertizing .... average user would look to the numbers and buy it (as somehow people have started to realize are the same...)
You're a marketers dream. So easily convinced by some "specs"
Right. Because a desire for a replaceable battery, removable sdcard or a slightly smaller enclosure is completely insane and something no one would ever make a product decision on.
And why would anyone choose a phone they could get coverage on from multiple carriers in the US? That's just "marketing" gibberish, right?
And why would anyone choose a phone they could get coverage on from multiple carriers in the US? That's just "marketing" gibberish, right?
[deleted]
Why? Because they spend a fortune on advertising.
Anyone who's used a S3/S4 knows most of the S-"features" are pure gimmicks that a fairly competent engineer could implement in less than a week. HTC phones are much more sturdy and better designed, IMO.
I was vacationing in Hong Kong earlier this month, and the subway stations were just completely plastered with various 15-foot tall Galaxy posters. Some of the features they were promoting were just laughable - simultaneous photos with the front and back camera composed into a picture-in-picture result? Really?
Anyone who's used a S3/S4 knows most of the S-"features" are pure gimmicks that a fairly competent engineer could implement in less than a week. HTC phones are much more sturdy and better designed, IMO.
I was vacationing in Hong Kong earlier this month, and the subway stations were just completely plastered with various 15-foot tall Galaxy posters. Some of the features they were promoting were just laughable - simultaneous photos with the front and back camera composed into a picture-in-picture result? Really?
Who cares about the gimmicks?
Samsung galaxy s phones have generally good hardware compared to the competition as well as a few really important hardware features which their competitors don't have (all of the features at once, that is): 4g lte support, a removable battery, and (for me the deal(maker||breaker)) an SD card slot. Those aren't just gimmicks. They're real differences. Many people like me really care.
I couldn't care less about the default software - there are a wide range of roms which address most (unfortunately not all for super picky people like myself) issues you might have.
Samsung galaxy s phones have generally good hardware compared to the competition as well as a few really important hardware features which their competitors don't have (all of the features at once, that is): 4g lte support, a removable battery, and (for me the deal(maker||breaker)) an SD card slot. Those aren't just gimmicks. They're real differences. Many people like me really care.
I couldn't care less about the default software - there are a wide range of roms which address most (unfortunately not all for super picky people like myself) issues you might have.
>> simultaneous photos with the front and back camera composed into a picture-in-picture result?
I really wanted this feature for a long time and wondered why phones that had 2 cameras did not allow it.
It was specially useful when taking photos of my 1 year old daughter. It helps capture our emotions at the same time we were capturing her. So now you can see photos where she is trying to learn walking and at the same time see my face that is at times smiling (when she walks couple of steps) and at times scared (when she is about to fall) in the photos.
I really wanted this feature for a long time and wondered why phones that had 2 cameras did not allow it.
It was specially useful when taking photos of my 1 year old daughter. It helps capture our emotions at the same time we were capturing her. So now you can see photos where she is trying to learn walking and at the same time see my face that is at times smiling (when she walks couple of steps) and at times scared (when she is about to fall) in the photos.
While I agree that Samsung phones have quite a mishmash of features just for the heck of it, I think the picture in picture feature is quite nice and is something the competition (especially Apple) would heavily advertise had they come up with it themselves.
S-Voice. lol. It almost feels like they had a handwritten rules-based speech to text.
> I don't understand why people keep buying this company's god damn products. I mean, holy shit.
Hyperbole much?
Because they make very decent phones that can easily be made to run alternative Android operating systems that allow me to do whatever I like with my phone.
For example, you can't plug a USB Software Defined Radio (SDR) module into an iPhone to monitor and decode spectrum.
Hyperbole much?
Because they make very decent phones that can easily be made to run alternative Android operating systems that allow me to do whatever I like with my phone.
For example, you can't plug a USB Software Defined Radio (SDR) module into an iPhone to monitor and decode spectrum.
Well you can but you would have to jailbreak the iPhone first, but then its the same for the S4 too, isn't it? (That was an honest question, I don't follow the state of Samsung phones too closely)
samsung hardware has a mode designed for loading custom firmware.
> disgusting lie
Is a little extreme. This is what companies do in the computer biz. Nvidia, ATI have been doing this BS for decades now. As cscheid said it's quack.exe all over again.
If they just gave the user the option to enable this performance tweak for games, I wouldn't mind. The problem is it's only enabled for benchmarks.
Is a little extreme. This is what companies do in the computer biz. Nvidia, ATI have been doing this BS for decades now. As cscheid said it's quack.exe all over again.
If they just gave the user the option to enable this performance tweak for games, I wouldn't mind. The problem is it's only enabled for benchmarks.
You talk like Samsung.
Others also do cannot justify anything.
Others also do cannot justify anything.
Their marketing division might be shady, but they also make very solid devices. I've had my s3 for awhile and haven't felt the need to upgrade at all since it still performs super well.
As an Android developer I really appreciate what Samsung did in raising the bar for Android devices, and really bringing them to the mass market. High quality Android devices have been around for awhile, but it was far more common to see most people walking around with the low-mid tier Android phones. Samsung made it "cool" to own an S3, and now you can release and know that many of your users will actually own a solid Android device.
As an Android developer I really appreciate what Samsung did in raising the bar for Android devices, and really bringing them to the mass market. High quality Android devices have been around for awhile, but it was far more common to see most people walking around with the low-mid tier Android phones. Samsung made it "cool" to own an S3, and now you can release and know that many of your users will actually own a solid Android device.
I promised myself not to buy samsung phone after they forked me with Omnia HD i8910 - the flagship phone they made on a Symbian which they abandoned after couple of months, without a single bugfix. But then, I also promised not to buy anything from Motorola after they abandoned a flagship XT720 (xenon flash, full HD video) without bigfixes, withou upgrades (stuck on Android 2.1 forever with washed out photos, jerky 720p and half the RAM (all reviewers said it had 512 to be unlocked with upgrade) and locked bootloader. THE ISSUE - as much as I would like to buy Nexus 7 2013, it is not sold in my country by Goog, it is coming maybe in October, November, and xda forums are full of people who exchanged theirs 2-3 times to find unit without dead pixels, erratic touch, random reboots or light bleed. So, I may have no other option, but to buy tab from Sammy, because I can touch it in any shop, exchange or return, etc... EndOfRant.
I don't condone lying in any sense, but I don't really care about the phone's benchmarks, and neither do most phone buyers.
In an era where patent trolling is rampant, an exaggerated benchmark of this nature is sadly, child's play. And it certainly would not have stopped me from buying the product if I was in market.
In an era where patent trolling is rampant, an exaggerated benchmark of this nature is sadly, child's play. And it certainly would not have stopped me from buying the product if I was in market.
In the big scheme of corporate misbehavior, posting fake user reviews barely even registers. Which is depressing, but still.
I don't understand why is Samsung so hellbend on doing such things. Copying designs, faking reviews, faking benchmarks... Its not like they are at the bottom of the barrel, infact they are the best in mobile space right now. Are they getting too greedy?
Copying and faking is the only thing Samsung can do. They're not good or creative, but also not stupid. They know what they can do and cannot, and where they are exceptional and sucks. So they're just keep doing what they're best - copying and faking.
Do you really think they can change suddenly? I don't think so. Copying and faking is internal system and philosophy of Samsung, can it won't be changed.
Do you really think they can change suddenly? I don't think so. Copying and faking is internal system and philosophy of Samsung, can it won't be changed.
A lot of this stuff, copying designs, they,did to get popular. They are, and always have been a dirty company, willing to do what it takes to win.
@drivebyacct2: You're hellbanned.
It's Quack3 all over again! http://techreport.com/review/5226/further-nvidia-optimizatio...
Man, can't believe this was 12 years ago.. History repeats itself
It's so sad to see this kind of stuff. It's not like the Galaxy S4 is a slow device. It reminds me of Nokia used a fake video [1] to sell the Lumia 920, which was supposed to have a pretty good camera. It just ends up being an unfortunate distraction that causes people to mistrust you.
Ars is right that this isn't new. I remember ATI being caught in the Quake/Quack thing [2] a dozen years ago.
[1] - http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads...
[2] - http://www.hardocp.com/article/2001/10/23/optimizing_or_chea...
Ars is right that this isn't new. I remember ATI being caught in the Quake/Quack thing [2] a dozen years ago.
[1] - http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/5/3294545/nokias-pureview-ads...
[2] - http://www.hardocp.com/article/2001/10/23/optimizing_or_chea...
Even worse - when Microsoft ran Xbox One demos using high end NVIDIA PC's...
At least those weren't benchmarks that were part of reviews, where people are making decisions based on 1-1 comparisons...
That reminds me of when NT first came out. They had a demo where they'd show bar charts of CPU utilisation for multiple processors and show them ramping up and down exactly in sync as they ran more software on the box. Except the demo was a fake. It was actually showing CPU utilisation for one CPU on both bars. I actually saw someone from Microsoft show this at a trade show and I did a lot of work with Sun multicore boxes and it looked weird how the bars were exactly in step, like far too perfect to be a real world demo, but I figured they were just using a demo app that was rigged to use exactly the same cycles on both CPUs or something, not that the whole thing was a lie.
Boy that dates me, apart from the fact this was NT maybe 3.5 or so, what happened to PC trade shows?
Boy that dates me, apart from the fact this was NT maybe 3.5 or so, what happened to PC trade shows?
Samsung has responded that the higher GPU speeds are also available certain other applications that run in full screen. (browser, camera app, video app - which are all apps that are used frequently)
If that is the case, then I fail to see anything immoral. Bad engineering - yes - but there's nothing immoral in arbitrarily boosting the GPU to run the browser or the camera smoother. (and once you regularly do this for some standard apps, it would also be appropriate to run benchmarks with the fastest speed)
Link: http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/31/4574210/samsung-benchmark-...
Edit: I also don't understand why anyone would investigate with a hex editor. (like Anandtech does)
Samsung is quite open with its Android devices, and regularly releases the source code (Link: http://opensource.samsung.com/) It also would be quite strange to cheat, and then release the source code so everyone can see.
If that is the case, then I fail to see anything immoral. Bad engineering - yes - but there's nothing immoral in arbitrarily boosting the GPU to run the browser or the camera smoother. (and once you regularly do this for some standard apps, it would also be appropriate to run benchmarks with the fastest speed)
Link: http://www.theverge.com/2013/7/31/4574210/samsung-benchmark-...
Edit: I also don't understand why anyone would investigate with a hex editor. (like Anandtech does)
Samsung is quite open with its Android devices, and regularly releases the source code (Link: http://opensource.samsung.com/) It also would be quite strange to cheat, and then release the source code so everyone can see.
> I also don't understand why anyone would investigate with a hex editor. (like Anandtech does)
The binaries were on the device, but the source code was not, so the binaries are a natural place to begin the investigation.
Is it ever clear which source from http://opensource.samsung.com/ is on the device Brian was investigating?
The binaries were on the device, but the source code was not, so the binaries are a natural place to begin the investigation.
Is it ever clear which source from http://opensource.samsung.com/ is on the device Brian was investigating?
It is absolutely clear which source is on the device because you can look up Kernel version, Baseband version and the Build number in Settings->About Phone.
Anyways, what I would have liked to see in this article is if the Intent they are referring to (the one that triggers the increase of the GPU clock) is only used for cheating on benchmarks, or actually a feature that is used on many apps - not just speculation/baseless accusation.
Anyways, what I would have liked to see in this article is if the Intent they are referring to (the one that triggers the increase of the GPU clock) is only used for cheating on benchmarks, or actually a feature that is used on many apps - not just speculation/baseless accusation.
> not just speculation/baseless accusation.
Having read the article, it is clear that it is not baseless speculation.
Two benchmarks running the same code, but with a different name. One runs faster than the other. The one that runs faster has it's name hardcoded in the samsung binaries.
You are right that the source code could show a fuller picture, but I'd say this is an example of good reporting and not speculation.
Having read the article, it is clear that it is not baseless speculation.
Two benchmarks running the same code, but with a different name. One runs faster than the other. The one that runs faster has it's name hardcoded in the samsung binaries.
You are right that the source code could show a fuller picture, but I'd say this is an example of good reporting and not speculation.
If the higher clock speeds are truly never used for anything but benchmarks then that's downright dishonest. But is that established to be the case? Perhaps those speeds are available for extremely heavy loads under specific circumstances (wired power, etc) that are rare but can actually occur. If they are, then this does seem like a fairly reasonable thing to do. Still mildly shady, but no more so than the norm when it comes to benchmark optimization.
The AnandTech link in the article says they found the string "BenchmarkBooster" in the apk alongside the class names of several well-known benchmarks.
http://anandtech.com/show/7187/looking-at-cpugpu-benchmark-o...
http://anandtech.com/show/7187/looking-at-cpugpu-benchmark-o...
The fact that they found a code path that ensures particular programs get the full hardware speed does not mean that no other code path enables that performance level. I'm asking whether it is established that there is no other way that performance level is activated, as it does not seem clear to me from the article that that is the case.
>The fact that they found a code path that ensures particular programs get the full hardware speed does not mean that no other code path enables that performance level.
When those particular programs are benchmarks and the path is coded specifically to boost performance on a unique set of said benchmarks in contrast to the most common use cases, that's an issue regardless of whether or not you can imagine an outlier real-world scenario that utilizes a code path that tweaks the performance.
You have to bend over backwards to see that as anything other than dishonest.
When those particular programs are benchmarks and the path is coded specifically to boost performance on a unique set of said benchmarks in contrast to the most common use cases, that's an issue regardless of whether or not you can imagine an outlier real-world scenario that utilizes a code path that tweaks the performance.
You have to bend over backwards to see that as anything other than dishonest.
> You have to bend over backwards to see that as anything other than dishonest.
"Our new hot device has this awesome performance mode but those benchmarks aren't aware for it and it won't be utilized in the device reviews. So let's make sure it's used in these benchmark applications."
If they just flip the switches available to every developer/application it's not necessarily dishonest just tech marketing.
"Our new hot device has this awesome performance mode but those benchmarks aren't aware for it and it won't be utilized in the device reviews. So let's make sure it's used in these benchmark applications."
If they just flip the switches available to every developer/application it's not necessarily dishonest just tech marketing.
1. If this awesome performance mode is turned on automatically when the app needs it. Then it must have turn on automatically for the benchmark without actually checking the application name, right?
2. Otherwise, if it require the application to be aware to utilize this feature, then why hasn't Samsung announce this "mode" to developer to utilize it yet?
2. Otherwise, if it require the application to be aware to utilize this feature, then why hasn't Samsung announce this "mode" to developer to utilize it yet?
A high-performant mode would be a feature that would be marketed and lauded by the OEM, not something hidden from view and hardcoded only to benchmark testers.
Also, benchmarks are designed to compare apples to apples, so if, as you suggest, the high-performant mode wouldn't be triggered by benchmark use-cases normally, then hard coding the exception is dishonest, as the only explanation is turning your apple into an orange.
Also, benchmarks are designed to compare apples to apples, so if, as you suggest, the high-performant mode wouldn't be triggered by benchmark use-cases normally, then hard coding the exception is dishonest, as the only explanation is turning your apple into an orange.
It's pretty obvious that, at the very least, these specific benchmarking apps are given a hugely unfair advantage, and probably only based on internal app ID strings. Apparently the frequencies were boosted for one of the benchmarking apps even if it was just sitting idly showing a menu or something.
Yea, that much is clear. And the AnandTech article (which probably should be the one on the HN front page if it hasn't popped up there since I last looked) is clearer about some of the things they ran to establish that 480 MHz is the norm. I still wasn't sure from that article, though, whether the games and such were run with the device connected to power, whether there are other user-tunable power saving settings that could affect it, etc.
My only point is that I personally feel that more investigation is needed in that direction before I'll feel very negatively about the story. If it's a rarely used but possible mode, it seems like it's on the same level as disabling power saving mode when running a recognized benchmark. I kinda expect benchmarks to represent the peak attainable performance, even if it's not the typical performance.
My only point is that I personally feel that more investigation is needed in that direction before I'll feel very negatively about the story. If it's a rarely used but possible mode, it seems like it's on the same level as disabling power saving mode when running a recognized benchmark. I kinda expect benchmarks to represent the peak attainable performance, even if it's not the typical performance.
I find it extremely shady to read that "glbenchmark 2.7" is unable to exceed 480mhz while "glbenchmark 2.5.1" goes into 532mhz even when idle.
My reading of the AnandTech article was that the CPU was boosted to max speed for the benchmarks, but the GPU was over-clocked past what normal apps had access to.
The processor/GPUs do absolutely scale by load, however in this case they're scaling for specific apps, presumably because scaling that high for any other use (even where the throughput would be beneficial) would yield too hot of a device/kill battery.
It is incredibly dishonest, and there is simply no rationalizing it -- they are cheating, and everyone involved with this is kind of a scumbag.
It is incredibly dishonest, and there is simply no rationalizing it -- they are cheating, and everyone involved with this is kind of a scumbag.
You can certainly try to dig your head into the sand.
[deleted]
This is a minor point, but I'm really glad the article title uses "allegedly". Even if it's quite probable Samsung is guilty here, I'm glad the article doesn't adjudicate the way so many news articles do.
It comes off to me like these sites are scared of Samsung, they are a big player now, with a lot of pull.
AnandTech is not one of those sites:
> Today, we are large enough to avoid these petty discussions of withholding review samples. Most manufacturers know that one way or another we'll get our hands on a product for review and don't try to play these sorts of games. Rarely we are faced with a manufacturer or advertiser who is looking to influence our content. We have a firm internal policy in place to deliver honest, balanced reviews to the best of our ability - regardless of external pressures. Fortunately, as I mentioned earlier, we have been around long enough and are large enough to avoid this being an issue in the vast majority of situations.
http://www.anandtech.com/home/about
> Today, we are large enough to avoid these petty discussions of withholding review samples. Most manufacturers know that one way or another we'll get our hands on a product for review and don't try to play these sorts of games. Rarely we are faced with a manufacturer or advertiser who is looking to influence our content. We have a firm internal policy in place to deliver honest, balanced reviews to the best of our ability - regardless of external pressures. Fortunately, as I mentioned earlier, we have been around long enough and are large enough to avoid this being an issue in the vast majority of situations.
http://www.anandtech.com/home/about
Note to self: Make sure to use "com.antutu.ABenchMark" as the internal app name for my next android game.
You probably wouldn't want to, even if you needed the extra performance. You'd get complaints from users about battery life, device heat, and similar things that people running benchmarks often don't check for.
Maybe it could be an option in the settings?
[checkbox] Enable "High performance option"? Caution: will drain battery life and may cause device to overheat!!
[checkbox] Enable "High performance option"? Caution: will drain battery life and may cause device to overheat!!
You can change tha app's name from within the app?
Samsung is merely being retro: http://blogs.msdn.com/b/oldnewthing/archive/2012/04/30/10298...
On mobile devices it would seem sensible to also run your benchmark until the battery is "flat", it might be a crude heuristic but it probably the best you can do with product devices where you can't easily break out power rails and the like.
You should treat benchmarks with a heavy pinch of salt, simply because it's caught up in the bullshit messaging world of marketing where the aim is just to produce the bigger or smaller number where appropriate.
The necessity to satisfy marketing ignores a lot of things. Benchmarks often translate poorly to real use.
Does GLbenchmark 2.7 provide any useful insight into the performance of the top fifty games in the Android mobile market? Probably not with a few 3d heavy exceptions.
Some benchmarks will never die, you'll still see Dhrystone trotted out to this day. http://www.eejournal.com/archives/articles/20090602_coremark...
And then you hit a grey area where software can behave badly on one piece of hardware versus the other because of implementation. So if the benchmark hits this area, is it a hardware problem or a benchmark software problem?
You should treat benchmarks with a heavy pinch of salt, simply because it's caught up in the bullshit messaging world of marketing where the aim is just to produce the bigger or smaller number where appropriate.
The necessity to satisfy marketing ignores a lot of things. Benchmarks often translate poorly to real use.
Does GLbenchmark 2.7 provide any useful insight into the performance of the top fifty games in the Android mobile market? Probably not with a few 3d heavy exceptions.
Some benchmarks will never die, you'll still see Dhrystone trotted out to this day. http://www.eejournal.com/archives/articles/20090602_coremark...
And then you hit a grey area where software can behave badly on one piece of hardware versus the other because of implementation. So if the benchmark hits this area, is it a hardware problem or a benchmark software problem?
From an EE perspective, benchmark tests should include power consumption and thermal profile measured by third party, calibrated equipment.
There are some errors induced through the act of measuring, but power consumption and thermal profile checks would cut down on the amount of CPU/GPU benchmark tampering.
There are some errors induced through the act of measuring, but power consumption and thermal profile checks would cut down on the amount of CPU/GPU benchmark tampering.
Stay classy Samsung
Reminds me about Nvidia with their fake benchmark several years ago
I wonder the extend to which we can trust performance benchmark results about other closed source software like web browsers, operating systems, servers etc.
Anyone know if iPhone or any other phone does this kind of stuff? Downright disgusting.
Huawei's K3v2...
Since when has Apple relied on spec checklists to sell a product
Every iPhone release is a sea of specs: Number of GPU cores, pixel density, thinnest, lightest, made of raw holistic unobtanium, number of apps in the App Store, display metrics, etc.
Despite the truly ridiculous claims to the contrary, the iPhone has always been about specs, where in many cases it is the leader (such as having the perennial market leading GPUs)
Despite the truly ridiculous claims to the contrary, the iPhone has always been about specs, where in many cases it is the leader (such as having the perennial market leading GPUs)
http://www.techspot.com/news/52274-samsung-admits-to-posting...
I don't understand why people keep buying this company's god damn products. I mean, holy shit.