| Author |
w900's graphic engine |
(sc)chronos
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 163
From: tartarus
PM |
did anybody benchmarked the w900, how does its nvidia graphics engine(or chip?) affect the phone's performance? does SE think of putting it into their next phone? |
|
|
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
From what I have read at gsmarena (have a look for yourself) it doesn't seem to help the w900 when running games and according to jBenchmark tests, the w900 has slower Java application than previous Sony Ericsson models. It seems that the phone's hardware finds it difficult to manage the increased amount of pixels on the display.
|
Dan_Aykroyd
Joined: Sep 13, 2005
Posts: > 500
PM |
So... the only advantage would be the 30 FPS video recording?
|
etaab
Joined: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK - South Yorkshire
PM |
Remember the phone is very new. The benchmark results will be poorer than older SE phones like the K750i because it has early firmware.
Im sure in the coming months the phone will speed up dramatically when SE release firmware with better Java implementation (like with all their phones). 
Check me out on Instagram ! search for etaab ! |
(sc)chronos
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 163
From: tartarus
PM |
i hope 3d games which make good use of this engine will be announced soon. |
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
marlonski, you're just a bit off the mark about w900i jbenchmark scores, are we visiting the same site?!
w900i is a close third fastest phone for JBenchmark HD:
http://www.jbenchmark.com/result.jsp?benchmark=hd
and it's 9th HQ and 1st LQ for JBenchmark 3D.
The 2D and software 3D scores are lower than the k750/w800 due to the higher resolution, it's more or less twice the number of pixels to update for each frame (76800 versus 38720). Also the java menu creation speed is really crippled, maybe a firmware bug. 
|
(sc)chronos
Joined: Feb 07, 2004
Posts: 163
From: tartarus
PM |
@mysh
yeah i saw some scores compared to a k750i an hour ago and in 3d section w900's score is 4 times bigger than k750i. but in 2d rendering k750i is better. |
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
Quote:
|
On 2006-02-03 23:09:04, mysh wrote:
The 2D and software 3D scores are lower than the k750/w800 due to the higher resolution, it's more or less twice the number of pixels to update for each frame (76800 versus 38720). Also the java menu creation speed is really crippled, maybe a firmware bug.
|
|
Isn't that what I was suggesting ?
Way off mark ?? I didn't actually mention any benchmarking scores as I didn't feel the need to. The link I posted confirmed as you also have that the overall 2D and 3D performance could be better and is let down by the higher resolution screen
It seems the nvidia isn't making a big impression in the 2D and 3D stakes at the moment, which was one of (sc)chronos original questions.
For the record I'm not bothered at all whether my w800 outperforms the w900 or not.
I think the point here is that even with great benchmark scores the w900 still isn't doing anything special which is a shame considering the fact that it has nvidia on board.
Sure from a performance point of view it's the nads, but IMHO unless the programmers can sort out a way of ustilising the hardware to optimise performance and or improve the firmware, (if there is in fact a problem with it) the higher resolution screen will continue to hinder the performance.
|
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
Well, i do some opengl programming, and play games on my pc. It's a general rule that higher resolutions are slower, because of the higher number of pixels drawn.
It's hard to say the high res screen is a hinderance, i've yet to play a game that runs slow on my w900i. You just get a clearer picture. It's like on the computer, playing a game at 1024x768 with 60fps, or 1600x1200 with 40fps. The 1600x1200 is preferable in terms of quality. The higher res is only a problem when it actually makes games lag.
I'm pretty sure there is a bug in the w900's 2D java menu performance, as it scores a lot less than half the k750/w800. Whereas the rest of the 2D scores seem about right.
The 3D chip is underused currently, because hardware 3D is a new thing for mobiles, and so nearly all current 3D java games use software based rendering, on the cpu. Afaik there's a new java api used to render in hardware, which older phones support through software emulation.
The only real world dissapointment with the w900i's java implementation, is that it can't upsample older games to 240x320, so part of the screen is unused and you have to squint a bit.
Anyway, i said you were way off the mark, because the OP asked if anyone had benchmarked the nvidia graphics engine, and you said it didn't help the w900i, and it was slower than previous models.
In actual fact it helps the w900i a lot, performing on average a lot faster than half the speed the speed of previous models, for double the workload (pixels). In any reasonable comparision, that makes the graphics engine faster than previous phones, on a per pixel basis. The OP asked if it would benefit other new phones by SE, and it would, the same chip powering a 176x220 screen would be even faster.
For a fairer comparison, contrast the s700i benchmark results to the w900i, as they're both SE platform 320x240 phones. The w900i is a great deal faster, ergo, the nvidia chip makes a big diffference. |
SKIBBE
Joined: Dec 29, 2005
Posts: > 500
From: Sweden, Sk�vde
PM, WWW
|
251 with the JBenchmark HD, tried it my self just now =D |
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
@mysh I don't dissagree with what your saying at all.
If you read my original post properly your answer may have been different, which is what I picked up on. I said that "from what I had read at gsmarena" (as well as posting the link) that it doesn't "seem" to help.
Way off mark, I don't think so, perhaps my source material but as already said we have been through the performance figures and you have already confirmed results that favour the k750 and W800 in some areas although you have also pointed out that based on the higher resolution the nvidia is doing a pretty good job.
I appreciate that the w900 is out performing other models but even so there are still issues. I'm a games consul user and have been since the sega megadrive and NES. I have witnessed improvements in programming as people learn to program more efficiently. Unless specifically programmed for the w900 we may end up with games that do not harness the full potential of the phone. This has been the case with some pc games that have to be able to be used on a varying level of hardware.
Now if I were to dissagree to my original post I would have gone about it a different way and would have said that I dissagreed and felt that the source information was flawed and then explained why I felt that. I would have been happy with that
_________________
 = 
[ This Message was edited by: marlonski on 2006-02-04 20:36 ] |
mysh
Joined: Dec 04, 2005
Posts: 176
PM |
hehe ok, i guess we do essentially agree, and i'm sorry if i came across saying you personally made wrong conclusions, when really it was your source for the info.
I don't trust much i see on gsmarena, their reviews are a bit light technically. And a lot of the user comments there are a comedy goldmine of misinformation!
About the w900i getting good programming support to get the most out of it, it should be ok. The API to access hardware accellerated 3D rendering is a java standard (JSR-?? i forget), plus it's using a popular nvidia mobile chip; nvidia get involved to see their chips are supported well by software.
anyway, you are right, i didn't read your first post properly, i just assumed your jbenchmark info came from the jbenchmark results site. I'll be more careful in future. |
marlonski
Joined: Oct 16, 2004
Posts: > 500
From: UK
PM |
@mysh no worries, thanks for your reply
|
|
|
Posted: 2006-02-03 17:55
