Android vs Windows Phone 7?

Forums › Android › Android vs Windows Phone 7?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#533551 14-Oct-2011 23:27

This is the second time I have seen you spreading mis-information in this thread.

billgates:
why add a dual core CPU to a device when it's not needed for number of reasons.

1. OS is not optimized for multiple cores and this includes Android too.

Rubbish. Modern versions of android use dual core processors well. Even older versions handle it adequately.

2. It's only going to push the cost of hardware up for OEM's and will result in more expensive phone for consumers.

You want the best, you pay. Price will be half what it started out as after 6 months anyway.

3. The more cores, the more battery the phone is going to suck.

MORE rubbish. Dual core processors use LESS power than single cores due to optimization in the data pipeline and intelligent handling of halt states, etc. For example, the Samsung Galaxy SII lasts at least a day longer than does the S1, making it one of the best performing battery savers out there - it is also the most impressive of ANY smartphone available today.

Oh, and furthermore: you claim android needs 'task killers'; not only is this outright WRONG, but it is also firmly recommended AGAINST using them. That they are available in the android market means nothing more than poetry books also being available there.

Anyway: I respectfully invite you to stop talking crap to people making serious requests for information. Take your fan-boyism away. Thanks. Feels better already.

RealityClash

192 posts

Master Geek

#533554 14-Oct-2011 23:41

Brendan although you're right that was a little harsh :P
As for the idea of task killers, I'm skeptical. It is likely different on more powerful phones but with my little old Wildfire a task killer is essential. Especially when I want to play games, I always use my task killer first as if I don't first do this, games can quite often become very laggy. Even with just general use if I have recently been using several different apps (i.e music, then internet, then messages) my phone can slow down a bit and a quick tap of the task killer button usually gets rid of any problems I'm having.

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#533560 15-Oct-2011 00:04

RealityClash: Brendan although you're right that was a little harsh :P

Ok, I didn't think so... Apologies if that's how it seemed.

As for the idea of task killers, I'm skeptical. It is likely different on more powerful phones but with my little old Wildfire a task killer is essential. Especially when I want to play games, I always use my task killer first as if I don't first do this, games can quite often become very laggy. Even with just general use if I have recently been using several different apps (i.e music, then internet, then messages) my phone can slow down a bit and a quick tap of the task killer button usually gets rid of any problems I'm having.

Your wildfire may be running an older version of android and may also lack ram. Older versions were that much less efficient at ram management, so if you can root it and upgrade, i suggest you try that.

When I first came to android (HTC Desire) (from windows mobile 6.5), I experimented a long time with task killers. This was on android 2.1 (several generations behind the latest). I found a task killer to be useful, but not essential. It would sometimes add a bit of speed, but sometimes foul something else up.

When i upgraded to 2.2 and moreso with 2.3, I never ever used a task killer. For two or three generations of android, a task killer has had no place on my smartphone, and indeed android explicitly discourages them. "Billgates's" claim that they are needed is woefully inadequate and qualifies as mis-information. He did not qualify it at all. Infact - I do not think he even KNOWS what he is talking about.

Anyway, back to your wildfire: Sense is well known to be a resource hog and turn any phone laggy. I suggest you try MIUI or Cyanogenmod. If available. I always found sense to be over hyped.

Happy hunting! lol.

RealityClash

192 posts

Master Geek

#533825 15-Oct-2011 20:34

Thanks for the tips, you may well be right :)
I don't think I'll bother rooting my Wildfire though if I'm looking at selling it in another few weeks seeing as it still has around 10 months left on the warranty.

Oh and that reminds me, if anyone is interested in buying a mint condition HTC Wildfire in the next few weeks let me know, I can upload photos and give more details about where it was purchased and the warranty etc of course if anyone is interested :)

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#533834 15-Oct-2011 21:25

Brendan: This is the second time I have seen you spreading mis-information in this thread.

billgates:
why add a dual core CPU to a device when it's not needed for number of reasons.

1. OS is not optimized for multiple cores and this includes Android too.

Rubbish. Modern versions of android use dual core processors well. Even older versions handle it adequately.

2. It's only going to push the cost of hardware up for OEM's and will result in more expensive phone for consumers.

You want the best, you pay. Price will be half what it started out as after 6 months anyway.

3. The more cores, the more battery the phone is going to suck.

MORE rubbish. Dual core processors use LESS power than single cores due to optimization in the data pipeline and intelligent handling of halt states, etc. For example, the Samsung Galaxy SII lasts at least a day longer than does the S1, making it one of the best performing battery savers out there - it is also the most impressive of ANY smartphone available today.

Oh, and furthermore: you claim android needs 'task killers'; not only is this outright WRONG, but it is also firmly recommended AGAINST using them. That they are available in the android market means nothing more than poetry books also being available there.

Anyway: I respectfully invite you to stop talking crap to people making serious requests for information. Take your fan-boyism away. Thanks. Feels better already.

http://www.tested.com/news/dual-core-vs-single-core-arm-what-does-an-extra-core-really-get-you/2337/

Explains my *rubbish* statement about dual core CPU Optimization on Android and battery life with dual cores in general.

I respectfully decline your invitation of stopping to talk *crap*. I don't take cheap shots in arguments you see regardless of me being incorrect or the person I am quoting.

As of now, the only version of Android that truly supports dual-core systems on a chip (SoC), is Honeycomb. That means that even phones running the newest version of the operating system available are not going to see the real benefits from that next generation SoC.
In Android 2.2 Froyo, there are no dual-core optimizations at all. The system just sees a fast SoC, but Is unable to thread processes effectively. Even in the newer Gingerbread build of Android, there is virtually no support for dual-core SoCs. The ext4 file systemadded to Android 2.3 sill see a modest boost in the area of I/O performance, but that's about it. Right now, Android on phones does not understand dual-core chips.

We've all heard stories about how the highly optimized architecture for these new chips will reduce power consumption, but you can't get something for nothing. Dual-core chips, while fairly efficient, are still going to use more power under many circumstances. There is a reason the Motorola Atrix has a massive 1930mAh battery.

The Atrix is a little bit bigger and a little bit thicker than it would have otherwise needed to be. The Galaxy SIImanages to make better use of engineering and ends up being very slim. Still, Samsung crammed a 1650mAh battery in. This device uses the Exynos dual-core SoC, so we gather it has better optimization than Tegra in many cases. Reviews have reported the Galaxy SII as having solid battery life. Maybe the lesson here is that not all dual-core SoCs are created equal?

and to honour one of Steve Jobs finest Archetypal, "One more thing"

Really shows that how well *optimized* the OS on the 1.2GHz dual core CPU on Galaxy SII is in comparison to the 800MHz dual core CPU on the iPhone 4S.

Do whatever you want to do man.

Linuxluver

5828 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Subscriber

#533837 15-Oct-2011 21:38

Brendan: This is the second time I have seen you spreading mis-information in this thread.

billgates:
why add a dual core CPU to a device when it's not needed for number of reasons.

1. OS is not optimized for multiple cores and this includes Android too.

Rubbish. Modern versions of android use dual core processors well. Even older versions handle it adequately.

2. It's only going to push the cost of hardware up for OEM's and will result in more expensive phone for consumers.

You want the best, you pay. Price will be half what it started out as after 6 months anyway.

3. The more cores, the more battery the phone is going to suck.

MORE rubbish. Dual core processors use LESS power than single cores due to optimization in the data pipeline and intelligent handling of halt states, etc. For example, the Samsung Galaxy SII lasts at least a day longer than does the S1, making it one of the best performing battery savers out there - it is also the most impressive of ANY smartphone available today.

Oh, and furthermore: you claim android needs 'task killers'; not only is this outright WRONG, but it is also firmly recommended AGAINST using them. That they are available in the android market means nothing more than poetry books also being available there.

Anyway: I respectfully invite you to stop talking crap to people making serious requests for information. Take your fan-boyism away. Thanks. Feels better already.

Android is Linux and Linux has been doing multi-cores for ages.

The mutli-core CPUs, if anything, are easier on power....not heavier. It's the big 4.x" screens that chew up power. My three dual-core phones (SGSII, HTC Senesation and LG Optimus 3D) have all been cheaper than my original HTC Magic, released just over 2 years ago.

I bought an external power bank and can charge / recharge my phone any time I want. I have no battery issues and I thrash my phone all day long.

_____________________________________________________________________

I've been on Geekzone over 16 years..... Time flies....

paulspain

417 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#533846 15-Oct-2011 22:12

The most important thing though is to try both - then select the platform you prefer. Only problem is that Windows Phone 7 doesn't really 'light up' until you link it to your contacts and social media feeds, etc. When you've done that (with Windows Phone 7.5 Mango software loaded) it's pretty hard to beat in my opinion. But the best thing is to try if for yourself.

If you have an interest in Windows Phone my suggestion is to wait a few weeks - or grab a bargain priced HTC Trophy. Vodafone's HTC Trophy is down from original $899 price to $499. Though they're hard to get your hands on - except apparently The Warehouse have some left.

But next month I expect to see new handsets starting to come out. But I expect they will be more expensive than $499...

As others point out there is a big difference in battery life between most Windows Phones and similar spec'd Android handsets. But if you love Android that may not worry you... it's possible to carry a spare battery or portable charger.

Paul Spain
Founder: Gorilla Technology, NZ Tech Podcast

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Brendan

716 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#533880 16-Oct-2011 02:13

billgates:
http://www.tested.com/news/dual-core-vs-single-core-arm-what-does-an-extra-core-really-get-you/2337/

Explains my *rubbish* statement about dual core CPU Optimization on Android and battery life with dual cores in general.

I respectfully decline your invitation of stopping to talk *crap*. I don't take cheap shots in arguments you see regardless of me being incorrect or the person I am quoting.

I read that article - and people should be aware it is an opinion piece from May this year, and the site seems to be quite negative towards android on average.

Given the many other positive reviews of android on dual core processors FROM REPUTABLE SITES, I think we have a case of bias here... AnandTech - Samsung Galaxy S 2 (International) Review - The Best, Redefined.

The Atrix is a little bit bigger and a little bit thicker than it would have otherwise needed to be. The Galaxy SIImanages to make better use of engineering and ends up being very slim. Still, Samsung crammed a 1650mAh battery in. This device uses the Exynos dual-core SoC, so we gather it has better optimization than Tegra in many cases. Reviews have reported the Galaxy SII as having solid battery life.

Most windows phone 7 devices use similar sized batteries for similar sized talk-times. This is what I mean when I say they are biased, even in the face of such easily checked facts. They then go on to question your own assertion:

Maybe the lesson here is that not all dual-core SoCs are created equal?

On to your carefully chosen Anandtech charts:

and to honour one of Steve Jobs finest Archetypal, "One more thing"

And what does the above prove except for different javascript implementations? At which it seems Android is faster anyway.

Really shows that how well *optimized* the OS on the 1.2GHz dual core CPU on Galaxy SII is in comparison to the 800MHz dual core CPU on the iPhone 4S.

No, what it really shows is the different advantages of the 3D graphics processor in each device; it says nothing about optimizations nor dual core cpu's. As you would know if you actually read the articles.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

SunSpider Javascript Benchmark 0.9

Sorry it's a bit big. Here's another:

WiFi Web Browsing Battery Life

Anyway, and in conclusion: one of your main complaints was that dual core cpu's on smartphones are un-necessary and use more power.

The truth is they provide about the same talk time as contemporary and comparable smartphones and this fact is available on dozens of reviews. I reject your opinion piece linked at top.

Your other objections about android - that it needs 'process killers', etc, have already been dismissed or are outdated.

Why you try to prove dual core cpu's are bad by showing me 3d benchmarks - which use the GPU - is beyond me. Likewise when you compare cutting edge javascript engines in web browsers to prove dual cores use more battery - or what?? Wasn't clear sorry.

So: Thanks for the entertainment, but I'm not really interested. I simply wanted any potential readers to understand your views are not universally accepted.

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#533969 16-Oct-2011 16:25

Brendan:

I read that article - and people should be aware it is an opinion piece from May this year, and the site seems to be quite negative towards android on average.

Most windows phone 7 devices use similar sized batteries for similar sized talk-times. This is what I mean when I say they are biased, even in the face of such easily checked facts. They then go on to question your own assertion:

And what does the above prove except for different javascript implementations? At which it seems Android is faster anyway.

No, what it really shows is the different advantages of the 3D graphics processor in each device; it says nothing about optimizations nor dual core cpu's. As you would know if you actually read the articles.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

Sorry it's a bit big. Here's another:

Anyway, and in conclusion: one of your main complaints was that dual core cpu's on smartphones are un-necessary and use more power.

The truth is they provide about the same talk time as contemporary and comparable smartphones and this fact is available on dozens of reviews. I reject your opinion piece linked at top.

Your other objections about android - that it needs 'process killers', etc, have already been dismissed or are outdated.

Why you try to prove dual core cpu's are bad by showing me 3d benchmarks - which use the GPU - is beyond me. Likewise when you compare cutting edge javascript engines in web browsers to prove dual cores use more battery - or what?? Wasn't clear sorry.

So: Thanks for the entertainment, but I'm not really interested. I simply wanted any potential readers to understand your views are not universally accepted.

Few LOL's from me.

1. So tested.com link which proved you wrong is also incorrect according to you (surprise surprise) because it's an anti-android website.

2. Then you went to say that Android is at top of the Javascript test regardless but failed to explain that why is iPhone 4S with only a 800MHz dual core CPU smoking the 1.2GHz dual core CPU on the Galaxy SII. It's an android tablet at top of that table, not a smartphone. Optimisation comes to my mind when I see the iPhone 4S right at the top of the table.

3. iPhone 4S then smokes the Galaxy SII in the GPU tests as well. Optimisation come to my mind again.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

4. Either you are now blatantly lying thinking I will not notice it or you just copied and pasted this from anadtech without even noticing that what you are really copying and pasting. You say that what you have posted is only 2 days old unlike my graphs which is only at tops only 2 weeks old because that's when iPhone 4S was given to the reviewer but to you that's old.

Well here is your first blatant lie I caught. You said the graphs what you are posting are dated couple of days ago? OH REALLY? How about exactly 1 year old? Sounds about right I think. 16/10/2011. Mango was not even out then and the IE mobile browser had 0% HTML5 support. Your 2nd Wi-Fi image is also from 16th October 2010. Anyone can right click on your image in your post and click on properties to find out the date.

So my final words with you. You do not need a dual core CPU is the OS does not require it. Depending on the SoC, it may or it may not use more power than a single core CPU. Of course the newer gen SoC will almost always be better than the last gen one's. It's all about the software. It always has been.

Do whatever you want to do man.

lokhor

2858 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#533981 16-Oct-2011 16:45

billgates:
Brendan:

I read that article - and people should be aware it is an opinion piece from May this year, and the site seems to be quite negative towards android on average.

Most windows phone 7 devices use similar sized batteries for similar sized talk-times. This is what I mean when I say they are biased, even in the face of such easily checked facts. They then go on to question your own assertion:

And what does the above prove except for different javascript implementations? At which it seems Android is faster anyway.

No, what it really shows is the different advantages of the 3D graphics processor in each device; it says nothing about optimizations nor dual core cpu's. As you would know if you actually read the articles.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

Sorry it's a bit big. Here's another:

Anyway, and in conclusion: one of your main complaints was that dual core cpu's on smartphones are un-necessary and use more power.

The truth is they provide about the same talk time as contemporary and comparable smartphones and this fact is available on dozens of reviews. I reject your opinion piece linked at top.

Your other objections about android - that it needs 'process killers', etc, have already been dismissed or are outdated.

Why you try to prove dual core cpu's are bad by showing me 3d benchmarks - which use the GPU - is beyond me. Likewise when you compare cutting edge javascript engines in web browsers to prove dual cores use more battery - or what?? Wasn't clear sorry.

So: Thanks for the entertainment, but I'm not really interested. I simply wanted any potential readers to understand your views are not universally accepted.

Few LOL's from me.

1. So tested.com link which proved you wrong is also incorrect according to you (surprise surprise) because it's an anti-android website.

2. Then you went to say that Android is at top of the Javascript test regardless but failed to explain that why is iPhone 4S with only a 800MHz dual core CPU smoking the 1.2GHz dual core CPU on the Galaxy SII. It's an android tablet at top of that table, not a smartphone. Optimisation comes to my mind when I see the iPhone 4S right at the top of the table.

3. iPhone 4S then smokes the Galaxy SII in the GPU tests as well. Optimisation come to my mind again.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

4. Either you are now blatantly lying thinking I will not notice it or you just copied and pasted this from anadtech without even noticing that what you are really copying and pasting. You say that what you have posted is only 2 days old unlike my graphs which is only at tops only 2 weeks old because that's when iPhone 4S was given to the reviewer but to you that's old.

Well here is your first blatant lie I caught. You said the graphs what you are posting are dated couple of days ago? OH REALLY? How about exactly 1 year old? Sounds about right I think. 16/10/2011. Mango was not even out then and the IE mobile browser had 0% HTML5 support. Your 2nd Wi-Fi image is also from 16th October 2010. Anyone can right click on your image in your post and click on properties to find out the date.

So my final words with you. You do not need a dual core CPU is the OS does not require it. Depending on the SoC, it may or it may not use more power than a single core CPU. Of course the newer gen SoC will almost always be better than the last gen one's. It's all about the software. It always has been.

You are unobservant - 16/10/2011 is today, the image properties obviously don't show when the article was posted.

All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.

billgates

4705 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#533982 16-Oct-2011 16:49

lokhor:
billgates:
Brendan:

I read that article - and people should be aware it is an opinion piece from May this year, and the site seems to be quite negative towards android on average.

Most windows phone 7 devices use similar sized batteries for similar sized talk-times. This is what I mean when I say they are biased, even in the face of such easily checked facts. They then go on to question your own assertion:

And what does the above prove except for different javascript implementations? At which it seems Android is faster anyway.

No, what it really shows is the different advantages of the 3D graphics processor in each device; it says nothing about optimizations nor dual core cpu's. As you would know if you actually read the articles.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

Sorry it's a bit big. Here's another:

Anyway, and in conclusion: one of your main complaints was that dual core cpu's on smartphones are un-necessary and use more power.

The truth is they provide about the same talk time as contemporary and comparable smartphones and this fact is available on dozens of reviews. I reject your opinion piece linked at top.

Your other objections about android - that it needs 'process killers', etc, have already been dismissed or are outdated.

Why you try to prove dual core cpu's are bad by showing me 3d benchmarks - which use the GPU - is beyond me. Likewise when you compare cutting edge javascript engines in web browsers to prove dual cores use more battery - or what?? Wasn't clear sorry.

So: Thanks for the entertainment, but I'm not really interested. I simply wanted any potential readers to understand your views are not universally accepted.

Few LOL's from me.

1. So tested.com link which proved you wrong is also incorrect according to you (surprise surprise) because it's an anti-android website.

2. Then you went to say that Android is at top of the Javascript test regardless but failed to explain that why is iPhone 4S with only a 800MHz dual core CPU smoking the 1.2GHz dual core CPU on the Galaxy SII. It's an android tablet at top of that table, not a smartphone. Optimisation comes to my mind when I see the iPhone 4S right at the top of the table.

3. iPhone 4S then smokes the Galaxy SII in the GPU tests as well. Optimisation come to my mind again.

Notably absent are any windows Phone 7 devices. Why is that? Aren't they your preferred? I thought you'd like some graphs on one of them - dated a couple of days ago unlike yours:

4. Either you are now blatantly lying thinking I will not notice it or you just copied and pasted this from anadtech without even noticing that what you are really copying and pasting. You say that what you have posted is only 2 days old unlike my graphs which is only at tops only 2 weeks old because that's when iPhone 4S was given to the reviewer but to you that's old.

Well here is your first blatant lie I caught. You said the graphs what you are posting are dated couple of days ago? OH REALLY? How about exactly 1 year old? Sounds about right I think. 16/10/2011. Mango was not even out then and the IE mobile browser had 0% HTML5 support. Your 2nd Wi-Fi image is also from 16th October 2010. Anyone can right click on your image in your post and click on properties to find out the date.

So my final words with you. You do not need a dual core CPU is the OS does not require it. Depending on the SoC, it may or it may not use more power than a single core CPU. Of course the newer gen SoC will almost always be better than the last gen one's. It's all about the software. It always has been.

You are a moron - 16/10/2011 is today

He copied and pasted the image from wherever without even realising how old that image actually is. The image is from last year.

And I have reported your post.

Edit - Here is the link to the original article with the image.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4015/htc-surround-review-pocket-boombox/9

Date - 13/11/2010

Do whatever you want to do man.

P1n3apqlExpr3ss

853 posts

Ultimate Geek

#533984 16-Oct-2011 16:51

Just to add to you guys argument I ran this on my Mango-fied HTC 7 Trophy and got 9655ms, beating out the iPhone 4

There is no doubt iOS and WP7 are better optimised then Android. There is no way in hell Android has been optimised FULLY for every chipset out there either by Google or HTC/Samsung etc (Qualcomm MSM7XXX, three series of QSD8s, OMAP 3 and 4, Tegra 2, Exynos, other samsung chipsets and ive probably missed some out.) While iOS and WP7 have 3 chipsets to optimise hardware for and theyre ALL based on the same underlying ARM architecture (or near enough, not entirely sure.)

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Smartphone/236

Looking at that, that kinda disproves half the above paragraph... Android is and has been optimised.. individual optimisation is different, the Nexus One is scoring slightly better than the Nexus S, that shows a lack of optimisation for clearly stronger hardware specs.

tl;dr Optimising iOS and WP7 is easier than Android

lokhor

2858 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#533988 16-Oct-2011 17:02

P1n3apqlExpr3ss: Just to add to you guys argument I ran this on my Mango-fied HTC 7 Trophy and got 9655ms, beating out the iPhone 4

There is no doubt iOS and WP7 are better optimised then Android. There is no way in hell Android has been optimised FULLY for every chipset out there either by Google or HTC/Samsung etc (Qualcomm MSM7XXX, three series of QSD8s, OMAP 3 and 4, Tegra 2, Exynos, other samsung chipsets and ive probably missed some out.) While iOS and WP7 have 3 chipsets to optimise hardware for and theyre ALL based on the same underlying ARM architecture (or near enough, not entirely sure.)

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Smartphone/236

Looking at that, that kinda disproves half the above paragraph... Android is and has been optimised.. individual optimisation is different, the Nexus One is scoring slightly better than the Nexus S, that shows a lack of optimisation for clearly stronger hardware specs.

tl;dr Optimising iOS and WP7 is easier than Android

I honestly don't think that's true. So far it's been up to the individual manufacturers to optimise the firmware for their Android devices. However with the upcoming Ice Cream Sandwich they are going to add hardware acceleration across all devices.

It might be a good idea for some people here to decide on a series of tests and post their results on here. I'd be willing to post results from an HTC Sensation and a Samsung Galaxy SII

All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.

P1n3apqlExpr3ss

853 posts

Ultimate Geek

#534005 16-Oct-2011 17:25

lokhor:
I honestly don't think that's true. So far it's been up to the individual manufacturers to optimise the firmware for their Android devices. However with the upcoming Ice Cream Sandwich they are going to add hardware acceleration across all devices.

It might be a good idea for some people here to decide on a series of tests and post their results on here. I'd be willing to post results from an HTC Sensation and a Samsung Galaxy SII

Which part exactly? I probably contradicted myself at least once or twice in that post..

I'd be willing to, I have a HTC Trophy and should be getting an Xperia Active in the next couple days. Any ideas for benchmarks? Sunspider javascript, linpack, any other popular readily available global OS benches?

edit: this would probably be worthy of a new thread as well

lokhor

2858 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#534013 16-Oct-2011 17:35

P1n3apqlExpr3ss:
lokhor:
I honestly don't think that's true. So far it's been up to the individual manufacturers to optimise the firmware for their Android devices. However with the upcoming Ice Cream Sandwich they are going to add hardware acceleration across all devices.

It might be a good idea for some people here to decide on a series of tests and post their results on here. I'd be willing to post results from an HTC Sensation and a Samsung Galaxy SII

Which part exactly? I probably contradicted myself at least once or twice in that post..

I'd be willing to, I have a HTC Trophy and should be getting an Xperia Active in the next couple days. Any ideas for benchmarks? Sunspider javascript, linpack, any other popular readily available global OS benches?

I think Sunspider is ok, I prefer Browsermark as it actually shows real animations occuring as opposed to calculations running in the background. I don't think Linpack is accurate across multiple platforms. If we want to compare 3D performance then the only real option is GLBench 2.0

For another web browser performance benchmark we can try PeaceKeeper

For those of us using Android, we can compare using CF Bench, Nenamark, Nenamark2 and Antutu.

I think battery life arguments are somewhat invalid as it really depends on how you use your phone. I have known people who get a week out of their Android phone because they barely use it. As a power user I have to charge daily however. To get a really good picture comparing WP7 to Android we would need not only a large pool of users, but also very accurate accounts of what applications they use and how much of the time they had the screen on etc

All comments are my own opinion, and not that of my employer unless explicitly stated.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4