2D Performance quite crappy

[Guest Ixipoyas]

Hi.

Before purchasing my Blade I had an Optimus Boston (though it has like a dozen names that's the most common one alongside Orange Boston and Commtiva Z71). Specs with Blade are quite simmilar, you can check a comparison in gsmarena in here: http://www.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?idPho...p;idPhone2=3391 . Overall the most significant differences are the lack of FM Radio on the Boston, a smaller screen (3.2") and half the ram the Blade has (256 mb, 80 free with android 2.1 and 50 with 2.2), whereas all other the specs are almost identical, being the same processor and the same GPU. Running Quadrant on both phones proved that all the scores obtained were quite simmilar. Well, not all. 2D score of the blade is always the half or lower than Boston's score (between 250-330 on the Boston and 100 or less on the Blade).

Boston, on froyo 2.2 (on CM7 scores are the same). And on the right Blade, on Ginger Stir Fry 5 (must point out that same quadrant on Swedish Springs had worse 2D and 3D scores. I presume that, given the fact on planet and hallway tests the blade fails on loading any texture, making the FPS go higuer and thus a better score)

Those runs are only for showing my point, cause it might be related. Use of the Boston is extreeeeeemely smoother than Blade's. No lag on menú scrolling, almost no lag while internet browsing, no lag never (unless you do an exhaustive use of the phone where the low RAM will make you cry). A good example would be Angry Birds, while lag difference is huge in some levels (almost unplayable on Blade and perfectly fine on Boston).

So, all of this comes to one simple question? If both phones have same processor and same gpu why exists such difference?

PS: some greek guy did a video comparisson on youtube and you can check this out

[Guest Simon O]

Quadrant gives lower scores on Gingerbread than Froyo, and all the Blade Froyo ROMs have problems with the media libraries giving incorrect scores.

Honestly, Quadrant scores should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Also I'll say that the Boston has a smaller screen with less pixels to push around. Of course graphic performanc is going to be better. It's like running a PC game at 800x600 rather than 1280x1024.

[Guest Victor von Zeppelin]

Quadrant gives lower scores on Gingerbread than Froyo, and all the Blade Froyo ROMs have problems with the media libraries giving incorrect scores.

Honestly, Quadrant scores should be taken with a pinch of salt.

Also I'll say that the Boston has a smaller screen with less pixels to push around. Of course graphic performanc is going to be better. It's like running a PC game at 800x600 rather than 1280x1024.

You'd need the entire Pacific Ocean worth of salt to quantify Quadrant scores.

But yes, notice on a gingerbread ROM that something like ADW is very slow, as is an old version of Launcher Pro. Now look at current Launcher Pro, and it's a lot faster. I'd assume it's not that Gingerbread is slower, it just does it differently, and Quadrant isn't optimised for it.

[Guest Foordy]

what did you use to do this test?

[Guest Ixipoyas]

Yes, I know quadrant scores don't show day-to-day usage. I've just used them only to show differences that might be between both phones on a daily basis.

I had Official 2.2, Swedish Springs later, and finally I am in Ginger Stir Fry. On official 2.2 3d and 2d scores were worse than in GSF. You are stating otherwise. And overall performance in GST is quite better than in 2.2.

I would like to add something else. Both phones are officially supported by cyanogen. So the same nightly works flawlessly on Boston, and quite choppy on Blade. If it's only resolution's fault then i will shut up but difference is so high i think there might be something else. Maybe bad code quality.

[Guest slitz]

Your other device has a smaller resolution, less processing power is required in such a case so the performance will be better on paper even if the specifications are similar.

Like on a computer you can run a game at a lower resolution and it'll run better than at a higher resolution as there is less to render therefore less processing power required.