LG Optimus 3D's OMAP 4 benchmarked

[Silversurfer]

By Sean Hollister posted Feb 15th 2011 9:29PM



Which dual-core 1GHz ARM Cortex A9 system-on-a-chip rules the roost? It's probably too early to tell, but if you're looking for a preliminary verdict, AnandTech has benchmarked all three of them now. Texas Instruments' OMAP 4430, NVIDIA's Tegra 2 and Samsung's Exynos 4210 went head to head in a gauntlet of browser and graphical benchmarks, and it looks like the LG Optimus 3D's OMAP 4 came out on top, boasting minor but significant improvements practically across the board. Good news for the BlackBerry PlayBook, no? Oh, and if you're wondering why the iPhone 4 and Atrix 4G fall behind their older brethren in the image above, remember that they both have to render images at a higher screen resolution. More graphs at our source link below.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/02/15/lg-o ... os-and-te/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[cybereality]

Wow, the iPhone sucks!

[tritosine5G]

I heard they (nv) demo'd tegra3 with 2560*1440 screen .


I dunno if that screen was handheld, but sounded like it .

[Fredz]

Wow, the iPhone sucks!

The iPhone 3GS has been released 1 year and 9 months ago, the iPhone 4 has been released 9 months ago and the Optimus 3D has not been released yet. It has been announced for the 25th of April 2011, which means almost 2 years after the 3GS and 1 year after the iPhone 4. What did you expect, that newer generation mobiles would be less powerful than older ones ?

And this test doesn't take into account the resolution of the devices, which is complete nonsense. When you compare two GPUs on a PC do you use a 1280x720 resolution for one of them and 1920x1080 for the other ? That would be stupid.

If you only consider frames per second at the native resolution, here are the percentages compared to the fastest device :
- Optimus 3D : 55.3 fps -> 100%
- iPhone 3GS : 24.5 fps -> 44.3%
- iPhone 4 : 16.2 fps -> 29.3%

But if you take the resolution into account, you obtain these results :
- Optimus 3D : 55.3 fps -> 480x800 (384,000) -> 21,235,200 pixels/s -> 100%
- iPhone 4 : 16.2 fps -> 960x640 (614,400) -> 9,953,280 pixels/s -> 46.9%
- iPhone 3GS : 24.5 fps -> 480x320 (153,600) -> 3,763,200 pixels/s -> 17.7%

So with these corrected values, you can see that the iPhone 4 is more powerful than the 3GS (the opposite would have been particulary surprising), and that it's only approx half as slow as the Optimus 3D.

That's not that bad considering there is one year between the two devices, and if the iPhone 4 is fill-limited on this benchmark, the results could have been better because its resolution is twice the one of the Optimus 3D.

Also, in stereo 3D I expect the Optimus 3D to take an average 50% hit in rendering, so it would be quite equivalent to the iPhone 4 in mono 3D.

[cybereality]

Well I was speaking more to the fact that the iPhone 4 got lower marks than 3GS, but now that you mention the resolution it makes sense.