In Quadrant, the Galaxy Note 8.0 scored 6,848 overall, with a CPU score of 14,608, memory score of 5,386, I/O of 11,035, and 2D/3D of 1,000/2,211. That’s actually more impressive in all but the CPU category than the Galaxy Note 10.1, running Samsung’s 1.4GHz Exynos quadcore, though the 8-inch tablet’s software is likely to get a last-minute polish before it ships.

Turning to SunSpider, the JavaScript benchmark of browser performance, the new Galaxy Note completed the test in 1,021.7ms. Faster is better in SunSpider; in contrast, the iPad mini completed it in 1,698.9ms.

In practical terms, we had no trouble multitasking on the Galaxy Note 8.0, even when using Samsung’s window-in-window system which allows you to view two apps on-screen simultaneously. The most pressing test, of course, relates to digital inking: if the experience of writing and drawing on-screen isn’t smooth and accurate, then the pen becomes near-worthless.

Samsung Galaxy Note 8.0 hands-on:

Happily Samsung got that right too, and it’s the same clean ink-flow as we’ve seen on the Galaxy Note II, simply with more space to take advantage of. That could be the best argument for the 8-inch model overall, in fact; the Note II is pocketable, but arguably not quite large enough to replace a typical notebook, something the Note 8.0 is far closer in size to.

We’ve more on the Galaxy Note 8.0 in our full hands-on.

Comparing the individual markers inside the total you’ll find a CPU score of 37,304, Memory at 10,922, and I/O at a staggering 10,566. Those are massive scores, on all accounts. The Nexus 4 comes in at CPU: 10,687, Mem: 7,612, and I/O: 4,340 if you’d like to know. With the HTC One’s combination of four Krait 300 CPU cores at 1.7GHz, an Adreno 320 GPU, and a performance boost well over the Snapdragon S4 Pro, this will very likely be the most impressive smartphone processor-wise you’ll have ever experienced.

We’ve also had a look at Sunspider working with the standard web browser on the device. Here we get a lovely 1195.2ms as a final result, this compared with the HTC One X+ (1215.4ms) and the Samsung Galaxy S III (1082.2ms) shows that web browsing is pretty much the same as it’s been over the past year. Then again – as above – this is not final software and anything could happen before the HTC One is released inside March, 2013. It should also be noted that the speed of the rendering on the HTC One (as well as the others here) were done at different times and under different conditions – so take it all with a bit of straw.

Also have a peek at our timeline below filled with hands-on experiences with the HTC One, complete with details from each of this device’s new features. With the HTC One, the company may well be entering a new age. One in which a single device really, truly is the hero – could it possibly be?

The benchmark isn’t much to look at, but the specs are interesting nonetheless. The handset displayed is the Samsung SCH-I545, which features a 1.9GHz processor (possibly a quad-core Snapdragon) and Qualcomm Adreno 320 graphics. The display is listed as a full HD 1920 x 1080 panel, and the handset runs Android 4.2 Jelly Bean.

While rumor originally had it that Samsung’s soon-to-be-launched flagship would be announced this month, new rumors surfaced in January tipping the device unveiling for March 22, with the launch following shortly after in April. If the rumor is to be believed, Samsung will unveil the device at a press event in the US.

The specs in the benchmark match the specs we’ve seen in various rumors that have been circulating since late last year. Early last month, a render of what is said to be the Galaxy S IV surfaced showing a lack of on-screen buttons. You can check out more information on the Galaxy S IV in the timeline below, and stay tuned as we find out more information on the handset leading up to its unveiling later this year.

We’ll start with the oddball, the GT-I9150, which features a 1.2GHz BCM28155 Broadcom processor, as well as a VideoCore IV GPU and a qHD display (960 x 540). The handset is listed as running Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean, and includes the 9152 model. This is followed by the Galaxy Pocket 2, which features an 850MHz Broadcom processor, a VideoCore IV GPU, and a 320 x 240 VGA display. The handset runs Android 4.1.2.

The next three models, the Star, Young, and Frame, are all Android 4.1.2 Jelly Bean devices. The Star is shown as running a Speadtrum CPU and Mail-300 graphics, and also bearing a 320 x 240 VGA display. The Young is a tad higher on the specs list, with a 1GHz Qualcomm and Adreno 200 GPU, as well as a 480 x 320 HVGA display.

Next up is the Galaxy Frame, which runs a 1GHz Broadcom CPU and VideoCore IV graphics, and likewise bearing an HVGA 480 x 320 display. The big difference with this model over the others is that it is listed in two iterations, one of which includes NFC technology. No other information is available at this time.

[via Android Community]

The benchmarks focus on the 21.5-inch models, since the 27-inch versions aren’t shipping for a couple more weeks, and the benchmarks show that the latest high-end 21.5-inch model scores nearly 25% higher than the 2011 model. Plus, the same version even beats last year’s high-end 27-inch model by nearly 10%.

Primate Labs also compares benchmarks between the new iMacs and the Mac mini line, as well as the Mac Pro line. Obviously, the iMac wins overall against the Mac mini, but it’s helpful to see exactly how much faster the iMacs are compared to Apple’s other computer products. However, the comparison to the Mac mini shows that the mid-range iMac performs about the same as a high-end Mac mini.

Also, while you would think that the Mac Pro is way faster than any iMac, the benchmarks shows that the new iMac is now on par with all the Mac Pro models except for the high-end 12-core Mac Pro. Obviously, this is thanks to the lack of current-gen processors in the Mac Pros, which gives the new iMacs a slight advantage.

The size of the display isn’t known, but with that 1080p resolution, our friends at Android Community guess that it might come in at 5-inches by the time everything is said and done. Couple that with what’s suspected to be a quad-core Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 processor clocked at 1.5Ghz and you’ve got a smartphone worthy of the high-end title. The handset is also running Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, so you won’t have worry about getting stuck with Ice Cream Sandwich (though it would be great to see Android 4.2 running on the F240K).

Keep in mind that a GLBenchmark result is hardly proof of existence, but it is a pretty good start. It seems that LG is working on something for the high-end, though we’re not likely to get an official announcement for a little while yet. In any case, since no one can keep a secret in the smartphone world, we should be seeing some F240K-related leaks popping up before long.

LG is only one of the companies looking to give HTC a run for its money in the 1080p smartphone market. We’re also expecting to see entries from Samsung and Sony at some point down the road, so the future is looking bright for 1080p smartphones. Keep it tuned here to SlashGear, as we’ll update you if we hear anything new about this mysterious smartphone!

[via Phone Arena]

The fourth-generation iPad runs off of Apple’s newest A6X processor, which now has quad-core graphics in order to run the tablet’s 2048×1536 Retina display more efficiently. It also appears to be clocked at 1.4 GHz compared to the third-generation iPad’s A5X clocked at 1 GHz, but it comes with the same 1GB of RAM as the previous model.

The chart above that compares Apple’s newest products, such as the iPhone 5, third-gen iPad, and the iPad 2, really puts into perspective not only how powerful the fourth-generation iPad is, but how much more powerful the iPhone 5 is compared to the third-gen iPad, which is most likely thanks to the A6 chip running at 1.3 GHz.

We would’ve liked to have seen the iPhone 4S in the benchmarks considering they had the older iPad 2 in the mix, just to round out the comparison a bit more, but we can’t complain. Either way, this should help out those who might be thinking about upgrading to the fourth-gen model. Most people will upgrade solely because of the performance boost, but the slightly upgraded camera, WiFi, and the new Lightning connector might also entice a few prospective upgraders as well.

[via Primate Labs]

Hardware and Design

Side by side, the two Retina-class notebooks are almost identical in their thickness. The 13-inch model is actually slightly thicker – we’re talking a millimeter’s difference, mind – but the disparity in weight (3.57 pounds versus 4.46 pounds), width (12.35 inches versus 14.14 inches), and depth (8.62 inches versus 9.73 inches) are the most noticeable changes. If the original Retina MacBook Pro is a long, thin slice of computer, then the smaller model is a tiny powerhouse that can easily be dropped into a bag without demanding the sort of performance compromise of, say, a MacBook Air. Next to the old-style 13-inch, meanwhile, the differences are considerably more obvious. The new Retina model is thinner, lighter, narrower, and even less deep.

Still, there are some compromises to be made for reducing bulk (and for starting $500 less) from the 15-inch Retina Pro. The 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina loses the discrete graphics option of its 15-inch sibling, making do with Intel HD Graphics 4000, though you can still power two external displays – via a combination of the two Thunderbolt ports and the single HDMI – and run the notebook’s own display simultaneously.

Storage starts off at 128GB of flash, with 256GB, 512GB, and 768GB options; the default processor is a 2.5GHz Core i5 dualcore, whereas the 15-inch model heads straight to Core i7 quadcores. You can pay extra for a Core i7 chip on the 13-inch, but it’s the dualcore, not the quad. Memory is a fixed 8GB of 1600MHz DDR3L, with no option to change that.

13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina: Hands-on and comparisons:

All the ports, wireless connectivity, and 720p webcam are the same as we saw on the 15-inch, as is the backlit keyboard and sizable trackpad. That means you get a pair of Thunderbolt connectors (which can double as Mini DisplayPort), two USB 3.0, a headphone jack, SDXC memory card slot, and an HDMI output. Inside there’s WiFi a/b/g/n and Bluetooth 4.0, and a pair of microphones are on the left edge.

Apple’s industrial design continues its gradual evolution toward thinner, pared-back computing, and the new MacBook Pro is no different. From the side, it’s like the old model but flatter; you can also glimpse the new “side gill” vents which are part of the reworked cooling system. In use, it’s quiet, with the fans only rising to a concentrated hum during the heavier moments of our benchmarking. The compromise to be made is one of repairability and room for improvement: the memory is soldered to the logic board, so as to shave away bulk, as is the processor, and the flash storage uses a proprietary connector so it’s sensible to buy the biggest drive you can afford initially.

Display

The 13-inch MacBook Pro Retina display is, at 2560 x 1600, slightly lower than the 2880 x 1800 of the 15-inch, but because of the smaller size its pixel density is even higher: 227 ppi compared to 220 ppi. With both in front of you, though, you don’t see any difference – the whole point, after all, is that the pixels aren’t supposed to be individually identifiable – only the mesmerizing detail and smoothness of the graphics that leave other notebook displays, no matter how bright or colorful, looking crunchy and jagged. Viewing angles are broad enough that you might have to worry about those next to you on the plane glancing over and seeing what you’re working on.

As before true Retina mode on the MacBook Pro doesn’t actually give you 2560 x 1600 resolution. Instead, you get a simulated lower resolution which is smoother all round, since each pixel is in fact a cluster of smaller pixels.Yyou can optionally switch out of Retina mode and pick a higher effective resolution, though the 13-inch misses out on the 1920 x 1200 of the larger machine; instead, the maximum is 1680 x 1050, still impressive (and impressively detailed) for a relatively small notebook. Third party applications are available which will force the display resolution even higher, though are not officially supported by Apple.

Apple is quoting a 75-percent reduction in glare from its new Retina display, versus the previous MacBook Pro 13. In practice, there’s certainly fewer reflections, which adds up to more flexibility in where you can use the notebook. It’s not a true matte finish, mind, though by ramping up the brightness you can use it outdoors and still see what’s going on.

Performance

We actually have two new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina models on our test bench: the 2.5GHz Core i5-3210M dualcore (3MB L3 cache) and the 2.9GHz Core i7-3520M dualcore (4MB L3 cache). Each has 8GB of memory and supports Intel Turbo Boost, up to 3.1GHz and 3.6GHz respectively, and is running Mac OS 10.8.2.

We started with Geekbench, a synthetic test of processor and memory performance. The Core i5 machine scored 6507 overall, while the Core i7 pushed that to 8238. It’s worth noting that the increases weren’t solely in the processor categories: the Core i7 model also recorded better memory scores, suggesting that it makes better use of the 8GB it has. Still, each is a fair step behind the 15-inch Retina model, which scored 12,970 with its 2.6GHz quadcore Core i7-3720QM and 8GB of memory. Performance was roughly on a par with the mid-2012 13-inch MacBook Air.

MacBook Pro 13 with Retina – Core i5 – Geekbench:

MacBook Pro 13 with Retina – Core i7 – Geekbench:

We then turned to Cinebench, which benchmarks processor and graphics performance with a mixture of 3D rendering and OpenGL testing. It’s a good way of examining how a system will handle intensive tasks such as video processing, or gaming.

The Core i5 model scored 2.12 CPU points, while the Core i7 scored 2.81 CPU points, or roughly half the result you’d expect from a quadcore processor. Unsurprisingly, with no discrete GPU, graphics performance showed the biggest hit, with the Core i5 managing 14.81fps and the Core i7 squeezing out 19.69fps.

By way of comparison, the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina’s NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M GPU saw it record a score of 34.30fps in the same category. The MacBook Air managed 16.41fps.

If you’re planning use your new Mac for serious graphics or video editing, our suggestion would be to stick to the larger Pro, as the standalone GPU pays dividends. Of course, it also requires more power, though it includes the same Intel HD Graphics 4000 chip for more everyday use.

Battery

While the battery in the MacBook Pro 13 Retina may be smaller than before – 74-watt-hour, or versus the 95-watt-hour of the 15-inch – the fact it’s driving a smaller screen and less extreme components means Apple rates it for the same runtime: up to seven hours of wireless web browsing, or 30 days standby. However, the 60-watt MagSafe 2 power adapter is slightly smaller and thus continues the theme of the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina being easier to transport.

In practice, with a mixture of web browsing over WiFi, some music playback, a couple of YouTube videos and some emailing, and the display set to a usable half brightness, the Pro lasted just over six hours. Scaling that back to solely browsing and we broke past Apple’s seven hour estimate by a couple of minutes. In contrast, a more ambitious use of the notebook for video playback and some brief video processing in iMovie saw the battery expire in around four hours.

Wrap-Up

The $2,000 mark is an important mental barrier, and the 15-inch MacBook Pro with Retina’s $2,199 starting price put it out of consideration for many. In contrast, the 13-inch version starts at $1,699 with the 128GB flash drive, rising to $1,999 for the 256GB model.

Increasing storage isn’t cheap – you can boost the entry-level model to 768GB, yes, but it’ll cost you more than a MacBook Air to do so – but the $200 extra for the Core i7 dualcore strikes us as a worthy upgrade given the impact it has on performance overall. Apple still offers the non-Retina 13-inch MacBook Pro, which starts at $1,199 with the same 2.5GHz Core i5 dualcore, though to specify the same memory and a 128GB SSD you’re looking at $1,499. You also get a gigabit ethernet port, FireWire, and an optical drive, though you miss out on the lighter chassis and far improved Retina display.

While the Air might be the smallest of Apple’s notebook line-up, the 13-inch Pro hits a more palatable sweet-spot for balancing power, performance, and functionality. At $1,699 and up, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display sits at the premium end of the notebook market ($500 less than the entry-level 15-inch model, mind, although you do get extra performance for that) but it does offer features that, right now, you can’t get elsewhere. Those for whom sheer power – particularly multimedia editing – is essential should probably opt for the bigger model, but those road warriors looking to pare back weight and bulk without unduly sacrificing usability will find a lot to love in the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display.

Compared to the One X we reviewed back in April, HTC’s new top-end Android phone steps up to the latest version of Tegra 3, a quadcore running at 1.7GHz. It’s paired with 1GB of RAM and Android 4.1 Jelly Bean with HTC Sense 4+; our review model is European-spec, which means no LTE.

We focused on some basic benchmarking tools most Android users are familiar with. First up, Quadrant Standard, which tests CPU, I/O, and 3D graphics performance; next SunSpider, a test of browser JavaScript performance, which gives a good idea of how web surfing compares to other phones, tablets, and even desktops; then Qualcomm’s Vellamo, which focuses on mobile web performance, examining HTML5 crunching abilities and CPU subsystem performance; and finally, AnTuTu, which looks at CPU, GPU, RAM, and I/O performance.

In Quadrant, the One X+ pulled ahead with a score of 6068, over 800 points more than the Galaxy S III, at 5207. The HTC did particularly well in the CPU and I/O subcategories, though the Samsung did much better in memory performance and 3D graphics. HTC’s phone put in a better showing in SunSpider, too, scoring 1082.2ms (lower is better) against the Samsung’s 1215.4ms. Neither managed to quite match the results we saw from the iPhone 5, however, which nipped underneath the 1,000ms boundary with a score of 914.7ms.

Quadrant and SunSpider benchmarks:

As for Vellamo, the scores here were mixed. In the HTML5 side of testing, the One X+ did better, edging ahead with 1894 against the Galaxy S III’s 1615. However, the tables were turned in the Metal tests, with the One X+ managing 491 against the Galaxy S III’s 558.

Vellamo benchmarks:

Finally, AnTuTu. The HTC pulled ahead once more, though again not in all of the categories. In total, it scored 12,945, besting the Samsung in CPU, RAM, and I/O testing. The Galaxy S III, however, scored 12,082 overall, with better performance in the GPU category.

Synthetic tests of smartphone performance don’t tell anywhere near the full story; you can’t say from benchmark results whether a phone will necessarily lag in multitasking, or suffer frustrating pauses in keyboard responsiveness or when trying to open up a well-stocked inbox. They’re a good indicator of the raw potential of the smartphone, however: what well-written apps will be able to call upon to achieve great performance.

We’ll be running the One X+ through real-world testing ahead of the full SlashGear review, but already HTC’s new powerhouse has shown its mettle.

EE had laid on a number of its devices for us to benchmark, with the iPhone 5 being joined by HTC’s One XL LTE, and Huawei’s Ascend P1 LTE. The handsets span the gamut of price points, something EE says is very much intentional: data plan pricing hasn’t been confirmed yet, but EE told us it has resolutely mass-market ambitions in mind.

That likely means a slight premium over 3G data, but hopefully not too much as to dissuade regular customers from dipping a toe into 4G. From what we’ve seen, it’s certainly worth their while: as our comparison video shows, all three phones are capable of impressive turns of speed.

EE 4G LTE benchmarks:

In our testing – conducted in central London – performance was reasonably variable, though we noted that the Huawei handset seemed to regularly post slower speeds than its HTC and Apple rivals. The biggest difference may well be how the 4G system holds up under heavy use: LTE is designed to take better advantage of the available spectrum, so EE’s network should be less prone to bogging down when multiple concurrent users are taking advantage of the upload and download speeds.

One minor blip may well be in the 3G/4G handover. As it stands, voice calls are still carried over EE’s 3G network, so the handsets automatically step down onto 3G whenever a call is made. That means, if you’re also tethering with the phone, the data connection you’re relying on will also slow. There’s a slight increase in the time it takes to initiate a call, though only of 1-2 seconds, and the 4G signal is restored shortly after the call is terminated.

The first EE phones go up for sale today, albeit through Orange and T-Mobile, with the promise of an easy switch to a 4G contract when the service goes live to the public. There’s more on the iPhone 5, meanwhile, in our full review.

Sunspider is a test of JavaScript performance, and a good indication of how a browser will hold up when it comes to real-world surfing the web. Faster scores are better, suggesting that your webpages will render more rapidly and be more responsive.

With a score of 914.7ms, the iPhone 5 squeezes in under the 1,000ms point. That’s faster than rival Android handsets such as the Galaxy S III – which scored 1,441.7ms in our testing - and the new LG Optimus G which managed 2,417.3ms with its Snapdragon S4 Pro chipset.

Considering how often we rely on web apps or services, or indeed how many local apps on the iPhone rely on the underlying browser engine, this extra jolt of performance is a welcome one. For more on the iPhone 5, check out our review.

The more usual rates we saw were in the 26-30Mbps download range, here in London, while uploads generally hovered in the range of 12-13Mbps. Peak bursts improved those numbers considerably, while ping times hovered around the 60-70ms mark.

Of course, it’s easy to see ridiculously high speeds when there’s hardly anyone else using the network; we saw similarly eye-watering figures from Verizon’s initial benchmarking in the US. That settled into somewhat less incredible numbers eventually, though still well in excess of what 3G could deliver.

EE is talking about LTE speeds around 4-5x what the current 3G network offers, which is still a considerable improvement, though we’ll need to wait until the roll-out begins in the tail-end of 2012 to see how it holds up in practice. The first four cities go live from today, broadening to sixteen cities by the end of the year.

The same Intel Core i7-3520M is still present in this new model, and it’s still clocked at 2.9 GHz. This time around, however, the amount of RAM in the 13-inch MacBook Pro has been boosted from 4GB to 8GB, which is more along the lines of what we would expect with the Core i7 present. Another interesting thing to note is that new benchmark shows Mac OS X 10.8.1 as the machine’s operating system. Apple is set to begin seeding that version of the OS to developers soon, but at the moment we don’t have a clear idea of when.

For the most part, however, the Geekbench results for this machine and the one that was spotted last month are very much the same. That’s reflected in the overall scores given to both – the results for this new model give a score of 7756, a mere 50 points below the model we saw last month. It would appear that Apple is planning a 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina Display, and it has locked down the specs it wants for the laptop.

Apple, for its part, has remained silent on the existence of this new MacBook. These new results reinforce the idea that it will be revealing the 13-inch laptop soon, however, so keep your fingers crossed. Perhaps we’ll get a reveal during that event Apple is planning for September 12? Keep it tuned right here to SlashGear for more information.

NeNaMark 2 results show that the handset features a 1196×720 display, with the 84 missing pixels taken up by the on screen buttons in Ice Cream Sandwich. An Adreno 225 GPU is also onboard, which means we should be looking at Qualcomm’s extremely popular Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 SoC.

AnTuTu indicates that the clock speed is 1.5Ghz, so Sony’s latest handset should feature the same silicon that HTC and Samsung are using for their phones in the United States. Several carrier variants are in the works too: the LT25c is said to be tailor made for China Telecom, the SO-01E will make an appearance on NTT DoCoMo, the SOL21 will feature on KDDI, and the LT25i and LT25i will be LTE and HSPA+ models for other international markets.

Sony has an event at IFA 2012 lined up, and we’d hazard a guess that it’s where we’ll see this new handset, along with the recently leaked Sony Xperia Tablet. Sony’s event starts on August 29th, and we’ll bring you coverage of all the goodies that Sony unveils on the big day.

[via Unwired View]

Without getting too technical here the Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro APQ8064 developer tablet kit contains a quad-core processor, 2GB of RAM and is running on Android 4.0.4 Ice Cream Sandwich. This 10.1-inch display running a 1366 x 768 resolution is going to be put through its paces but for now here’s a quick glance at a few of the popular Android benchmark apps. Quadrant blew through the roof posting numbers nearing 8000, and AnTuTu clearly was ahead of the other quad-core options available today.

Being a developer based platform this tablet isn’t something any consumer will see, but we’ll still give a quick input on performance. Usual tasks such as browsing the web, scrolling through webpages, heading to the Google Play Store and more are all extremely buttery smooth. Android 4.0 ICS is on board, instead of Android 4.1 Jelly Bean, but performance is still quite swift.

With popular tests such as Quadrant and AnTuTu we clearly see some extremely impressive results. Boasting nearly 8k in Quadrant was plenty exciting, considering most devices are lucky to break 5000 — those of which are all running Qualdcomm’s dual-core S4 processor. Anything older isn’t quite as lucky, and that includes some other quad-core options on the market. Vellamo, Qualcomm’s own in-house benchmark suite that focuses on web browsing also takes charge and scores well with their new quad-core. Results aren’t as chart topping as the others, but certainly shows some real progress.

While this is just a MDP device geared at developers, it’s already clearly beating the Nexus 7, and Samsung’s Exynos 4 Quad powered Galaxy S III easily. These devices don’t give us an idea of battery life so that is still up in the air, but Qualcomm promises “all-day battery life.” For now take a quick glance at the results below. We’ll continue to update with additional screenshots and more tests, but Qualcomm has another winner here to top the charts. We can expect to see the new S4 pro quad-core arriving in devices later this year.

There’s many different options when it comes to smartphones, tablets, processors, and of course benchmarks. The Android market space for example has multiple options available. We’re not going into specifics here, nor are we naming names — but what do these really test? Mobile benchmarks need to fully test the device from all angles, not just any one scenario.

Obviously we have multiple options from SunSpider, Linpack tests for CPU, Quadrant which seems to focus on graphics, and more. Qaulcomm not only wants to make the mobile benchmark space better for consumers, but for everyone. Being able to test every aspect including user experience with things like browsing, and video playback should all be included. Along those same lines these tests need to also take advantage of the increasing power being built into devices. Apps that will truly test all 4 cores of our smartphones and tablets. Qualcomm offers an option with Vellamo, which we’ve covered in the past and will surely be hearing about more throughout the day.

Many enthusiasts and consumers alike might be hesitant to trust a benchmark built in house by any one party or SoC manufacturer, but we’ll be focusing more on Vellamo as the day continues. Another option could very well be Augmented Reality. As AR still hasn’t made a huge dent in the mobile space it surely is the future. Jon Peddie from JPR (research) briefly mentioned AR while speaking and stated it “will be the killer app,” and even went as far as to call it the mother of all benchmarks — as it stresses every aspect of a processor.

What do you guys think? Do benchmarks need to be improved for mobile devices, do they need to focus more on battery life and daily usage? Would an AR test be the ultimate benchmark? Stay tuned for more details on mobile benchmarks and Qualcomm’s new quad-core S4 processor.

Not only that, but the device seems to feature a 1080p display. GLBenchmark lists the device as having a 1794 x 1080 resolution, which would indicate that some space is being used by the onscreen buttons in Ice Cream Sandwich. Whatever this device ends up being, its also appears to be destined for Verizon, with the OS brand and fingerprint both mentioning Big Red’s name.

If the benchmark listing is real, then we could be looking at a souped up version of Qualcomm’s Snapdragon S4 processor with a beefier GPU. There’s no indication of whether it’s a dual-core or quad-core device, or even if its a phone or a tablet. We’d hazard a guess that it’s a dual-core tablet with a faster Adreno GPU, but anything is possible.

[via Engadget]

This device is being displayed at MacBookPro10,2 in the benchmark. The new non-Retina 13-inch MacBook Pro (also released in the last few weeks) goes by MacBookPro9,2 while the 15-inch non-Retina model goes by MacBookPro9,1. The Retina model with a 15-inch screen is called MacBookPro10,1 – making this device, of course, a 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro.

This device appears to be running a 3rd Generation Intel Core i7 processor at 2.90 GHz and is working with 4GB of RAM. That’s a bit strange. The 2.9 GHz Core i7 processor should by all means be paired up with no less than 8GB of RAM, and certainly is on all other Macs on the market today – this is why the score is so low in Geekbench, too. Two possibilities exist (or more, of course), one being that this simply isn’t a real device, that it’s faked. The second is that this will be a low-cost model with a strange new configuration we’ve not yet seen.

Stay tuned for more info as this next model Retina MacBook Pro gets nearer and nearer reality – we’ll see if it ever reaches the public!

[via Mac Rumors]

Netbooknews purchased one for the high price of 17,500NT (~$585), although specs seem to be as they were at CES. The 7-inch IPS display has a 1280×800 resolution, along with a 1.2Ghz dual-core Snapdragon S3 CPU, 1GB of RAM, 16GB of storage, five megapixel rear camera, and 1.2 megapixel front facing camera. The battery is rated at 4,400mAh, which ASUS say should provide 8.5 hours of video playback. Currently the tablet is running Android 3.2, Honeycomb, although an upgrade to Ice Cream Sandwich has been promised.

In terms of benchmarks, the MeMo 171 scored 24fps on NenaMark 2, Quadrant came in at around 1800, and AnTuTu gave a score of 4377. Not exactly blistering speeds, but that’s to be expected running a last-generation Qualcomm chip. While it’s not a performance powerhouse, the MeMo does seem to work well with the included stylus, allowing you to doodle or take notes, as well as featuring handwriting recognition that converts your words to text.

Also included with the MeMo 171 is a Bluetooth handset that has a transparent OLED display, although Netbooknews didn’t get a chance to test that properly thanks to a lack of battery charge out of the box.

The reason these results are surprising is how comparable they are to the results of the NIVIDA processor which has twice the amount of CPU cores in it. Qualcomm’s S4 processor has two CPU cores while NVIDIA’s Tegra 3 has four main CPU cores with an extra CPU core for low-power operations (this setup dubbed 4-PLUS-1 technology). Have a peek at the video of the Quadrant Standard benchmark being run here on the Qualcomm-toting AT&T HTC One X first:

The results this fellow (from iGear360 YouTube Channel) finds are as follows:

Total: 4912, CPU: 8521, Mem: 7266, I/O: 5527, 2D: 1042, 3D: 2196

We found the following for the international Tegra-toting HTC One X:

Total: 4217, CPU: 11269, Mem: 2623, I/O: 3829, 2D: 943, 3D: 2420

Compare this then to the HTC One S, a device with a smaller display and the same S4 processor from Qualcomm:

Total: 5190, CPU: 8574, Mem: 7629, I/O: 6472, 2D: 1000, 3D: 2276

Now if only we could also have the HTC One S with a Tegra 3 in it as well! What we’re seeing here is the Tegra 3 out-perform the S4 by a significant amount in the CPU department. On the other hand, compared to the rest of the Android world, both processors seem to clobber the competition by a relatively similar amount.

That said, if you do plan on purchasing an HTC One device here in the United States directly from a USA-based carrier, you’ll only have the HTC One X if you’re on AT&T and the HTC One S if you’re on T-Mobile. So the choices may be made for you already! No word yet from the other carriers what they’ll be working with from this line of HTC hero devices!

Techblog.gr managed to score one of LG’s new superphones and put it through its paces. In terms of raw benchmarks, here are the crucial details: Quadrant saw a score of 4,512, 11,147 on AnTuTu, and 44.5fps on NenaMark2. Engadget notes that the Quadrant and NenaMark scores are lower, while the AnTuTu score is higher. Having said that, we’re most likely looking at software that hasn’t been finalized, and both phones are running the same chip and screen resolution: the difference in raw performance will be minor.

The LG Optimus 4X HD will have a 4.7-inch 720p IPS display, a quad-core Tegra 3 chip courtesy of NVIDIA, 1GB of RAM, 16GB of storage, eight megapixel camera with 1080p video recording, and run Ice Cream Sandwich. The phone is expected to launch in the UK sometime in May, although there’s no word yet on who will be carrying the device in the United States.

Huawei were keen to boast about how their offering was “the world’s fastest”, and that certainly seems to be the case if you rely on these benchmarks. The first test is Basemark, comprised of several individual tests designed to stress an Android device, then correlated one easy to understand number. As you can see from the chart, Huawei’s chip manages to beat NVIDIA’s quad-core Tegra 3 processor found in the Transformer Prime, and the dual-core 1.4Ghz Exynos processor found in the Galaxy Note.

Second is Nenamark, primarily a GPU test run at the device’s native resolution. The Ascend D quad XL tops the list with 62.75 frames per second, beating Qualcomm’s dual-core Snapdragon S4, as well Tegra 3 once again.

As for the rest of the device, the Ascend D quad XL has a 4.5-inch 720p IPS display, 1GB of RAM, eight megapixel camera with 1080p video recording, plus a large 2,500mAh battery, all running on Ice Cream Sandwich. There’s no word on what carriers the device is headed to, although Huawei have promised a Q2 launch.

[via Android Community]

In comparison, the original iPad scored 618 and the iPad 2 scored 751 in Geekbench. The A5X chipset is a modified version of the A5 in the second iPad, still using a dualcore CPU but upgrading to quadcore graphics to help drive the doubled-resolution Retina Display.

While the almost unchanged benchmarks would imply similar processing performance from the new iPad – something our own hands-on experience would concur with – the extra RAM should make a difference in how memory-intensive apps, like the browser, run. Apple’s strict controls around what processes can run in the background help with that anyway, but if you’ve ever had the browser shut down unexpectedly on you because of a particularly heavy webpage, the doubled up memory will be a boon.

Apple has played coy on exact hardware specifications so far, with no mention of specific memory amounts on the tablet’s spec page.

Update: The Geekbench results seemingly come from the same source as the new iPad unboxing.

[via Twitter]

Caschys Blog managed to run some benchmarks on the phone to give us all a better idea exactly what the phone is capable of. First, the Rightware Browsermark benchmark was run, which tests the phone’s ability to render Javascript and HTML. Currently the Samsung Galaxy Nexus holds the crown, scoring 98,272 points, while the iPhone 4S scores 87,801. Both of those are dual-core devices, so how did Intel’s single-core stack up? It managed 89,180, actually coming in ahead of the iPhone 4S.

The second benchmark was Vellamo, created by Qualcomm and designed to test eleven seperate areas of a phone’s performance. All the areas are then corelated into a single score to be compared against other devices. As you can see from the image, the Santa Clara once again beat out the Galaxy Nexus, along with a slew of other phones and tablets, mainly thanks to its impressive Javascript performance. The Asus Transformer prime with its quad-core Tegra 3 chip still seems to reign supreme in benchmark tests.

Benchmarks aren’t everything, of course, and overall user experience and fluidity of a device are paramount. We won’t have a better idea of that until the Santa Clara begins shipping and we have a chance to properly put it through its paces. Right now the phone is expected to begin shipping in the UK and France this summer, although pricing has yet to be confirmed.

[via Netbook News]

This device is running Android 4.0.3 at the Snapdragon S4 chip at 1.5 Ghz currently, with a 4-inch 1024 x 600 display up front and 1GB of LPDDR2 inside. What this device replicates for the most part is the previous generation MDP which has basically the same specifications, including the 13 megapixel camera on the back, save for the new S4 chip inside. Have a look at our MSM8660 hands-on from 2011 for more comparisons if you’d like to compare.

What we’re doing in this first of a series of benchmarking posts is having a look at the more common benchmark apps out there for Android. These are the tests we’ve used before on smartphones and tablets alike, and what you’ll be seeing is how well the device and more importantly the processor inside it perform. The first test we’re looking at is AnTuTu. This happy little bunny rabbit tests performance in memory, CPU Integer, CPU Floating point, 3D Graphics, SD card reading/writing speed, and Database IO via a series of on-screen tests running on your device in real time. The results we’ve gotten are thus:

Compared to what we’ve gotten with the only device in our hands with a comparably new chipset, the ASUS Transformer Prime with an NVIDIA Tegra 3 quad-core processor, results show that though the S4 does have significantly less of a high score in RAM, CPU integer, and CPU float-point, its nearly the same or better than the Tegra 3 in 2D graphics, 3D graphics, and Database IO. Take note that the Tegra 3 is running at 1.4GHz and the S4 is running at 1.5GHz, and that the S4′s total score on AnTuTu in the end is about 3,000 less than what the Transformer Prime turned up, but that having a winning combination in graphics like we’re seeing here is an interesting set of points when you consider how well the Prime and the Tegra 3 on the whole have been received in the graphics department thus far.

UPDATE: As you’ll see throughout the post here, there are several addendums that need to be made to make sure you, the reader, understand the vital information surrounding not only the S4 developer platform device, but the Transformer Prime as well. The first important point to make here about the MDP is again, as mentioned, it’s not a consumer product – but the Transformer Prime is. As such, the chipset will undoubtedly be changed in several ways which give it different results when it’s placed inside a smartphone or tablet. The Transformer Prime is, of course, a consumer product, and has therefor been optimized for both battery life and thermal constraints, this putting the Tegra 3 at a disadvantage when benchmarking.

UPDATE 2: It’s also important to note that these devices are being compared with scores from the Transformer Prime as it existed in our original review before Ice Cream Sandwich was released on it. As such, these tests are also showing a system running Honeycomb vs a system running Ice Cream Sandwich, giving a significant advantage to the MDP.

For those of you that like to compare numbers, have a peek here, with Tegra 3 on the left and the Snapdragon S4 on the right:

RAM: 2055 / 1282
CPU Integer: 3532 / 2321
CPU float-point: 2787 / 1103
2D graphics: 296 / 297
3D graphics: 1208 / 1254
Database IO: 305 / 480
SD card write: (14.2 MB/s) 142 / (6.2 MB/s) 62
SD card read: (22.4 MB/s) 191 / (30.4 MB/s) 194
CPU frequency: 1400 MHz / 1512 MHz
Total Score: 10516 / 6993

UPDATE: What we need to notice here is that because the Transformer Prime has a display resolution of 1280×720 while the MDP has a display resolution of 1024×600, the Prime is processing 66% more pixels than the MDP. As such, the scores in both 2D and 3D can be incredibly misleading if you don’t consider the fact that the Prime is doing 66% more work.

Next we’ll have a look at Vellamo, a comprehensive test created by Qualcomm of how the system, CPU, and browser perform under pressure. For more information on how Vellamo came to be created by Qualcomm and what it does, head back to our Vellamo Benchmarking System Hands-on from back in July when the system was first released, and decide for yourself whether the fact that Qualcomm developed it is reason enough to use it – or reason enough to not trust it at all. The set of tests you see in Vellamo are compiled into one by Qualcomm and made to be a non-partisan test showing how well a device can handle them. Results here have been impressive, to say the least:

For our next test we’re working with the Java port of the original Linpack, here made for Android to show off memory bandwidth and act as an FPU test. We’ve run the test six times total, three each for single-threaded and multi-threaded. Note that we’ve taken only the consistent results, finding an “inconsistent result” a couple times when running multi-threaded. This sort of situation has not been uncommon on Android devices since the app was first released though, so no worries!

The results you’re seeing here absolutely decimate not only the previous generation MDP device running Qualcomm’s 1.5GHz dual-core MSM8660 chipset, but the vast majority of the processors on devices released today. What this means is that Krait’s improvements on both cache and memory control are working their magic quite well.

Next we’ve got Quadrant Benchmarks, both Quadrant Advanced and Quadrant Professional, both of these running a set of tests including CPU, Memory, IO, as well as 2D and 3D graphics. Quadrant is one of the few benchmarks that specifically claims to test multi-core processors to their fullest as well as specifically being tuned for Android as new as 4.0 Ice Cream Sandwich. The Advanced version is made specifically for, as Aurora Softworks, the developers of Quadant, say: “Tech savvy users experimenting with custom ROMs and overclocking.”

This means the test is tuned to specifically attach itself to specific workings of the device in a way that will accurately tell them not only how well the processor is working, but how well its performing specifically based on the software and the hardware its running on. Quadrant Professional is similar, made instead for hardware vendors and game developers as well as publishers (like SlashGear) who plan on publishing results. It simplifies the results in the grid as well as comes with a license, essentially. Have a peek at these results and see what you think:

UPDATE: Again note that these two charts both show the MDP, one time running on Quadrant Advanced, the other on Quadrant Professional. Again the results showing the MDP up against the Transformer Prime are doing so with numbers taken from the original Transformer Prime review before it was running Ice Cream Sandwich. That said, one should also consider once more that the 2D and 3D subsets should take into consideration the fact that the Transformer Prime is processing 66% more pixels. Because of this, the MDP is again given a significant advantage. We’ll be running additional tests in the future to more accurately compare these two devices such as GLBenchmark 2.1 with its offscreen test specifically to show the performance at the rather common 720p. In addition, consider the fact that the MDP is running at a higher clock speed than the Prime, here at 1.5GHz vs the Prime’s 1.3 GHz – this will inevitably give a massive advantage to the higher clocked device for CPU subscore.

What we’re seeing here is an unbelievably high IO, first of all. This test shows how well the device is able to perform with internal or SD card storage. The test shows what’s the result of a set of read and write tests and, for example, overtakes the Transformer Prime with Tegra 3 by a full 3300 points. Next we’ve got 3D test showing an abnormally giant result as well, trumping the Transformer Prime by 2X. I’d be lying if I didn’t say I was extremely surprised by these results thus far. Have a peek back at the full Transformer Prime review to check out any other specific points you’d like to access for benchmarks.

Wrap-Up

This is just the first of many sets of benchmark tests and tests of the device’s Snapdragon S4 SoC we’ll be performing in the near future. One thing we’re going to continue to emphasize is the idea that it’s not necessarily these numbers that matter most, it’s the performance of the machine. Not just how well the machine processes data, but how engaging, full, and satisfying the processor will make the devices it’s embedded in. Thus far what we’re seeing on this beast of a developer platform device is that whatever this S4 chip ends up landing on, it’ll be a fabulous experience – now we just need manufacturers of smartphones and tablets to bring their A-game to create some fabulous devices in the near future.

Stay tuned to SlashGear for more MWC 2012 news through our [MWC 2012 portal] and stick around for the extended future of our work with Qualcomm through, of course, our [Qualcomm portal]. Stay tuned for more benchmarks soon!

The huge numbers kick off in earnest in Linpack, with the S4 showing its skills in single-threaded and multicore testing. The advantage is similarly huge in Qualcomm’s own Vellamo benchmarking tool, while power management systems also keep one of the cores sleeping unless it’s vitally necessary that it be woken up.

The potential fly in the ointment, at least at first, is the GPU. In an attempt to get the MSM9860 to the market as soon as possible, Qualcomm has opted to use the Adreno 225 graphics processor rather than wait for the Adreno 3xx series to be ready. That means performance more akin to what we’re seeing in current devices, with the S4 coming in roughly alongside the Apple A5.

Still, it sounds like the S4 is most definitely something we’d like to see inside our Android phones. “The UI is absolutely butter smooth everywhere, and web browsing in either Chrome or the stock Android Browser is also the smoothest we’ve seen it” AnandTech concludes, with slickness during app switching and screenshots also proving beyond reproach.

The first S4-based devices are expected in Q2 2012, and we’ll likely hear more about them at MWC 2012 next week.

If you spent any time with the original Arc, then the new Arc S isn’t going to bring much in the way of surprises. The design still feels slick, with the bowed battery cover making the smartphone feel slimmer still than its already narrow 8.7mm, though Sony Ericsson’s plastics still don’t hold up to those used by some other vendors. White is a fashionable finish, but like a beaming bride can leave the Arc S looking fatter from some angles.

It’s the faster processor that is the real draw here, and it does make the Arc S feel swifter. Apps load with less delay and there are fewer pauses during heavy webpage loading and when navigating through a well-stocked Gmail inbox. In terms of pure figures, we ran Quadrant Standard and the updated Sony Ericsson scored 1542, almost exactly what you’d expect for a 40-percent bump in speed over the original Arc’s performance.

Turning to Vellamo, which is a combination test of CPU and memory, Javascript, HTML5, canvas rendering speed, scrolling, network access and other factors, the Arc S scored 998. That’s better than we’d have expected, given the 625 score of the original Arc.

Does it make the XPERIA Arc S worth considering if you’re in the market for a new Android smartphone? Design-wise, the handset still has a great screen, is highly pocketable and the camera – though showing a tendency to make images slightly punchier than is natural – remains among the best. However, dual-core devices offer stronger performance still, it’s WVGA not qHD, and we’d have liked to have seen more metal than plastic in the construction. As a mid-range device, though, there’s plenty to like about a phone that, in effect, comes ready over-clocked and ready for action.

LaCie had two Little Big Disk units on hand, each packing a pair of 160GB SSDs set up in RAID 0 configuration for speed. The first drive was hooked up to a Core i7 MacBook Pro, and then a second Little Big Disk was daisy-chained off that, with the two external drives set up in a second RAID 0 configuration. Off the back of the second drive was a 24-inch Full HD LCD display.

The first demo was a raw speed test, reading and writing to the drives with 4GB files. As you can see in the video, the MBP was able to write at up to 352.5 MB/s, while read speeds reached 827.2 MB/s. The company told us that the same setup had hit 870 MB/s peaks in their own testing.

The second test was playing back three simultaneous video files stored on the drives, each coming in at 1080p Full HD resolution. Again, as in the video, playback was stutter-free whether windowed or full-screen. We were also able to scrub back and forth through the clip – with the two others running in the background – with no lag or pauses.

LaCie tells us that, as well as the SSD Little Big Disk, there’ll be an HDD version pairing two regular hard-drives. That should be more affordable – the company isn’t saying exactly how much the Thunderbolt drives will cost, but a pair of SSDs is never going to be cheap – though with some inevitable impact on overall performance. The SSD version will drop sometime over the summer, with production starting soon; there’s no public timeline for the HDD model.

In CaffeineMark 3, a test of Java performance, the Oak Trail prototype scored 1562, while Tegra 2 tablets like the Galaxy Tab 10.1 and Iconia Tab A500 came in at 7194 and 7197 respectively. Quadrant, meanwhile, brought in a score of 1978, besting Android smartphones but falling short of the 2107 we found the Galaxy Tab 10.1 capable of.

Linpack results were even worse, with the Compal slate managing 9.4MFLOPS versus the 42.2MFLOPS of the Eee Pad Transformer. SunSpider, however, was a rare moment of sunlight: the browser speed test came in with a score of 1500ms (lower is better), neatly undercutting the 1888ms of the ASUS.

Of course, there’s more to everyday use than raw benchmarks, but Tweakers say the unit they were using felt sluggish in comparison to its ARM brethren, with apps slow to load and the whole slate getting surprisingly warm under use. Intel has said that it’s still optimizing its x86 Android port and so we’re expecting – and hoping – things will get better before the first Oak Trail based tablets using the Google platform hit the market.

That clears up one lingering question about the DROID3, namely which chipset it would use. Unlike the ATRIX, which is based on NVIDIA’s Tegra 2, it seems Motorola has used the 1GHz Texas Instruments OMAP4430, an alternative dual-core processor.

OS is Gingerbread, at least at time of testing, and the phone scored 45.7 (though, since we’re guessing the firmware isn’t final at this stage, that should probably be taken with a pinch of salt). Other expected specs include a 4-inch display and a front-facing camera for video calls; still unclear is when, exactly, Motorola and Verizon will announce the new QWERTY slider.

[via DROID-Life; via Android Community]

What the Quadrant benchmarking system does is test the CPU, the I/O, and the 3D graphics capabilities of the phone it’s being used to test. Whenever we pick up a device, we’ve basically got Quadrant downloading before we open much of anything else. We do this in order to get a generally fair look at all devices as they sit in their most basic state. This test was done on a pre-release edition of the phone at the HTC event in England.

To see further benchmarks we’ve done, search for either SunSpider or Quadrant in your search box to your upper right.

This second test, the one that goes by the name SunSpider, and if you’ve been following our benchmarks over the past few months, you know this runs inside a given web browser. This test tests the core JavaScript language of the browser it’s running inside, here testing the HTC Sensation’s stock browser.

Update: We’ve spoken to HTC, and they’ve confirmed that the firmware is definitely not “near final” and that their software engineers are busy working on readying the eventual builds for the mid-May release. There are also some questions over how well both of these tests measure the performance of dual-core devices, and HTC is looking into that for us.

Enjoy!

Traditional benchmarking, Blaze suggests, is generally custom-created and doesn’t relate especially well to the real-world. SunSpider and other tools, the company claims, don’t reflect actual user experiences. Instead, Blaze used a homegrown browser wrapper app – available to try from its site – to time loading speeds on 1,000 different sites, loaded onto an iPhone 4, Nexus S and Samsung Galaxy S. The eye-catching “52-percent faster” figure is based on median load times across all of the pages: on iPhone it was 3.2 seconds, whereas on Android it was 2.1 seconds.

The report also points out in the appendix that their tests on both devices were not actually done in the devices browser themselves but rather used the proprietary software Blaze created, noted above, to track the browsers performance.

Nonetheless, Blaze also cites individual site performance, and some of the differences claimed are considerable. WSJ.com, for instance, took 7.5 seconds on Android and 17 seconds on iPhone during its testing. When we repeated the tests using the Blaze timing tool, however, we found an iPhone 4 loaded the WSJ site faster than the Nexus S every time. Blaze CTO Guy Podjarny re-ran the WSJ tests at SlashGear’s request, and found median load times on 18.4 seconds on iPhone and 13.4 seconds on Android; not, he admits, the 10 second gulf previously observed, but “still a clear difference.”

Podjarny concedes that there can be significant differences depending on when you test and with what connection, but insists that there’s more to browser performance than pure JavaScript speed. He describes the Android browser as “smarter in more ways than just JavaScript,” for instance in how it handles image downloads. While the iOS browser seems to download images in the order they appear on the page, the Android browser “seems to use intelligence when choosing which images to download first, trying to download as much from the same server at once as possible.” Meanwhile on Android CSS or JavaScript files, as well as other resources, can be downloaded in parallel, while on iOS, Podjarny says, they happen one at a time.

Interestingly, during the Blaze benchmarking process, the company says it has seen various sites (and benchmarks) that “indicate Nitro is sometimes on and sometimes off.” It’s too early for them to say anything conclusively about it, but Podjarny suggests it maybe be down to memory issues. JavaScript performance alone may be more hyperbole than you’d think, however. Comparing Android 2.2 to 2.3, the JavaScript boost is marginal: an almost 40-percent increase in JavaScript engine performance led to just a 10-percent boost in page load time.

In the end, as Podjarny agreed, the value of benchmarking is always impinged upon by the nature of real-world connections. Blaze used a “fast WiFi connection” at night and during weekends where it could be more confident that network usage was low, but of course that’s not a consistency upon which mobile users can rely on. Stand an iPhone 4 and Nexus S user next to each other and, even on the same cellular network, they could well see different performance from the dumb pipe itself. That’s before it even gets to the rendering engines on either platform.

Podjarny tells us Blaze isn’t conclusively saying that specific sites take longer on one device versus another, but that the testing “does conclusively say which device generally loaded web apps faster.” To that we’d add our own skepticism, both of the inconsistencies in results from Blaze’s software wrapper and the nature of mobile device benchmarking as a whole. We’re also confident that both Apple and Google will continue to polish browsing technologies in the attempt to bring the best possible experience to their users. One thing’s for sure, the battle of the mobile benchmarks is unlikely to go anywhere as manufacturers and software developers compete to brand their offerings “the fastest browsing experience.”

Blaze’s research is available here; we’d be very interested to hear SlashGear readers’ thoughts on it, and how the results match your own experiences with mobile browsing.

SunSpider, for those unfamiliar, tests core JavaScript performance with a variety of tasks intended to replicate real-world behaviors. So, it generates a tagcloud from JSON input, a 3D raytracer, performs cryptography tests and code decompression, and other tasks that might be encountered in everyday browsing.

In SunSpider, a lower score is better, and the iPad 2 proved more than 4x as fast as the iPad overall. The original tablet scored 8594.9ms, while the iPad 2 managed 2121.7ms. Among the individual benchmarks the iPad 2 scored 263.4ms in 3D testing (vs 1202.2ms), 265.0ms in access (vs 1247.1ms), and 142.8ms in cryptography (vs 572.7ms).

Now, there’s more to browsing than just JavaScript of course, but this is a pretty first fantastic showing from the new Apple slate.

Click the image below for the full-sized results; the iPad 2 is on the left, the iPad on the right.

The entry-level 13-inch with the 2.3GHz Core i5 CPU scores 5900; the entry-level version from early 2010 managed 3351. The improvement for the 15-inch and 17-inch versions is even more impressive, with the entry-level 15-inch jumping from 4866 last year to 8804 on this year’s quadcore 2.0GHz Core i7. The 17-inch goes from 5837 to 10026 with its new quadcore 2.2GHz Core i7.

As you’d expect, the faster versions of each MacBook Pro do even better; the full graphi is below. It’s worth remembering that Geekbench only tests CPU and memory performance, not graphics card and HDD, so a speedy SSD and potent GPU will make a difference in real-world usage, but from the outset it’s clear the new MacBook Pro line means business.

This updated version, however, could test iOS devices based on so far unannounced chips. It also tweaks the processor frequency detection on late-model iOS devices, something which could be more important should Apple use a chipset with asymmetric ARM cores that can each be run at different speeds depending on overall load, something which is used to reduce power consumption.

Now, Primate Labs – the developers of Geekbench 2 – might simply be looking to future-proof the app; their desktop version of Geekbench already supports multi-core chips, after all. However, we’re assuming they’ve spent the development and submission time believing it’s worthwhile, and that could well imply a dual-core device – initially, we’re guessing, a dual-core iPad 2 – in the near future.

[via iTechNewsNet]

Video after the cut

We ran Quadrant Advanced on the Adam, and the Tegra 2 powered slate scored 1,836. Now, before you panic, you have to remember that Froyo hasn’t been optimized to take advantage of multithreading, so the number isn’t going to be fully representative of real-world performance. It’s an issue we’re going to see increasingly with dual-core devices like the Motorola ATRIX 4G and LG Optimus 2X.

On top of that is Notion Ink’s own Eden multitasking system, which doesn’t use parallel processing – instead, it only kickstarts the second core when the first core is full loaded. That helps battery life, by minimizing power consumption when two running cores aren’t essential, but it doesn’t do Adam any favors when it comes to on-paper benchmark results. The short of it is, though, that this is one slick, fast-moving tablet, and Notion Ink has done its homework getting the customizations working well.

Notion Ink Adam Quadrant Benchmarks:

Notion Ink Adam Flash Performance:

Beyond that, the hardware details are unknown: we’d guess there’s WiFi and Bluetooth, along with GPS and the usual bevy of digital compasses and other sensors. It looks like there could be a front-facing camera for video calls, too; that almost makes up for Sony Ericsson flipping the control buttons on the front panel, something guaranteed to confuse the muscle-memory of existing X10 owners upgrading.

In benchmarking, the unbranded XPERIA scored 1,553 in Quadrant and 42.5fps in Neocore; impressive stuff. It seems likely Sony Ericsson would be bringing the phone to MWC 2011 in February, though they could surprise us with a CES 2011 debut next week.

[via Android Community and via Engadget]

Video demo after the cut

That digitizer tech seems to have prompted some confusion in the past; Adam won’t have an active digitizer, like a Wacom graphics tablet, instead simply allowing you to use the 10.1-inch capacitive touchscreen as a massive trackpad for your computer. Alternatively, with a capacitive stylus, you could use it for drawing; still, this isn’t going to be a replacement for proper artwork production. Adam will also work with USB modems, as long as there are Android drivers for them; that latter point will likely be the stumbling block in most cases.

As for software, as well as a quick Christmas demo of the Adam boot-animation, it’s the browser that has come in for attention next. Possibly the most important part of any consumer tablet, it’s obviously something Notion Ink has spent some time tweaking; Adam scores 51,049 in Rightware’s BrowserMark benchmarking tool, versus the iPad’s 38,620 and the Nexus One’s 23,726. All the controls run down a narrow bar on the left hand side, with pop-out buttons for tab management and the like. Obviously there’s multitouch support, too.

Notion Ink Adam boot-screen

Notion Ink Browser Demo:

Notion Ink Adam Hardware Demo:

Hardware

Our Aspire 5745DG-3855 review unit is certainly an imposing machine, both physically and in terms of the core specs. Measuring a bulky 14.9 x 9.8 x 1.25 – 2.27 inches and tipping the scales at 6.6lb, it’s heavy for a 15.6-inch notebook and the standard 9-cell battery protrudes considerably from the base. Design-wise, it’s in keeping with other Acer machines we’ve looked at recently, with decent plastics and a mixture of glossy and matte silver and black.

Inside there’s a 2.4GHz Intel Core i5-450M processor paired with 4GB of RAM and a 500GB 5,400rpm hard-drive. Graphics are courtesy of NVIDIA’s GeForce GT 425M GPU, though there’s no Optimus switching between the onboard Intel HD GPU and the discrete chip; in fact, the Intel graphics are basically disabled, since there’s no option to use anything but the NVIDIA chip. It powers a 15.6-inch 1366 x 768 display, and though we’d like to have seen some extra pixels in there, it’s a decent – if highly glossy – panel. Viewing angles are good horizontally, though the combination of slightly reduced vertical angles and the gloss finish can make finding the ideal lid position a little trickier.

The broad width of the Aspire 5745DG has allowed Acer to slot in both a full-sized keyboard and a separate numeric keypad, which follows the fashionable chiclet-style design. It’s a good keyboard, too, with nicely weighted response and little bowing during typing. Underneath is a multitouch trackpad, offset to the left to fall beneath the space bar, and Acer also includes a button to turn it off should you find yourself accidentally hitting it.

Connectivity includes WiFi b/g/n, gigabit ethernet, HDMI, four USB 2.0 ports and audio in/out (with S/PDIF), along with a DVD burner and multi-format memory card reader. No Blu-ray, however, which seems a bizarre omission on a media-centric machine, nor eSATA, USB 3.0 or ExpressCard. A webcam above the screen and integrated microphone round out the main specs.

In the box there’s also a set of NVIDIA’s 3D Vision glasses, recharged via miniUSB. These take advantage of the 5745DG’s 120Hz display, synchronizing with an infra-red emitter built into the bezel and flicking the view between the two lenses while the GPU serves up each half of a 3D image alternately. The end result is a 60Hz 3D picture.

Software

The Acer Aspire 5745DG runs Windows 7 Home Premium, and as we’ve complained about before there’s the usual array of bloatware and trials pre-loaded. Several of those are of Acer’s own creation, handling webcam, registration and driver updating, but then you also get trials of Microsoft Office and McAfee Internet Security, Google’s Toolbar pre-installed, Skype, Norton Online Backup and more. The end result is a system that feels sluggish at the first power-on, and we wonder when Acer – and other manufacturers – will see sense and sacrifice the referral fees from the software companies in favor of a more favorable first-impression for the user.

NVIDIA’s 3D Vision system is currently supported by over 450 games by the company’s own count, and of course there’s 3D video to think of as well. Since there’s no Blu-ray drive, that content will likely be downloaded rather than supplied on a disc; NVIDIA preloads sample media which performs well, but 3D content online is still in its infancy.

Performance

With no Blu-ray on this particular SKU, you’d be forgiven for assuming the 5745DG-3855 was targeted at gamers. Unfortunately, the mid-tier GPU may present a stumbling block for system-intensive modern titles. We kicked off our benchmarking with Geekbench, a synthetic test of processor and memory performance, and as you’d expect the Core i5 CPU puts in a decent show. The 2.4GHz Aspire scored 4814, roughly on a par with the similarly-specified HP ENVY 14, and around 200 points behind the 2.53GHz Gateway ID49C.

Unfortunately PCMark proved unable to detect the GeForce GT 425M GPU, so we turned instead to Cinebench. The Acer scored 20.67fps in OpenGL and 2.15pts in CPU. In terms of real-world performance, we had no problems with regular daily tasks, such as browsing with multiple tabs and windows open, or simultaneously playing video and audio.

However, recent games such as Call of Duty 2 struggled with the power on offer, only playing comfortably when a knife was taken to the quality settings. It’s worth remembering, too, that 3D games place more of a demand on the GPU than 2D titles: the NVIDIA chip has to create left- and right-eye graphics for each frame, and that can take a significant toll on framerates. Need for Speed: Shift was more successful, with the 3D effect proving impressive.

Ironically, the 120Hz screen actually showed its worth more during regular 2D gaming and multimedia, where – just as on 120Hz HDTVs – faster content such as sports was smear-free. Glasses-free 2D viewing also avoids the inevitable brightness loss encountered during 3D playback, which can leave darker movies and games murky and uninspiring.

Battery

With a 9-cell battery, you’d hope the Aspire 5745DG could offer above the odds in terms of runtimes, but the Core i5 CPU and always-on GPU chew their way through a significant amount of power. Acer quote up to 4hrs normal use from a full charge. The absence of Optimus is a particular frustration, though the GT 425M is able to underclock itself depending on activity and load. Still, it’s not as frugal as Intel’s HD GPU.

With a mixture of browsing over WiFi and some media playback, we managed around 3hrs 30mins of runtime. Playing DVD content continuously sapped that down to just under 3hrs.

Wrap-Up

There’s no denying that NVIDIA’s 3D Vision technology works, although those who already wear glasses or struggle to remember to charge their phone will likely find the necessary 3D eyewear a frustration. The question we’re left asking is why Acer decided to cut corners on the optical drive, given you’d expect the company to want Aspire 5745DG owners to have access to as much 3D content as possible. With no Blu-ray option, that choice is seriously curtailed.

The limitations of the NVIDIA GPU, meanwhile, mean 3D gaming isn’t quite the Acer’s natural forte either. There are plenty of games that run perfectly well on the GeForce GT 425M, but they’re generally not the most recent and that doesn’t bode well for future 3D titles on the Aspire. Mix in the absence of Optimus technology and its impact on battery life, and you’re left with a fair few compromises for the Aspire 5745DG’s 3D offering.

For most users, those compromises are unlikely to be worth the benefits. 120Hz displays on notebooks are relatively rare today, but as 3D Vision gains traction we imagine that will change; holding off will also give GPUs a chance to catch up and offer more future-proofing for system-intensive gaming. A combination of lacklustre content availability and middling performance leaves the Acer Aspire 5745DG-3855 underwhelming.

In fact, where IE9 managed the standard math-cordic test in an impressive 1.0ms, when the tweaked versions were introduced it delivered scores around 20x slower. Similar tweaks to Chrome and Opera produced consistent results, as was expected.

Digitizor suggests that Microsoft has either optimized IE9 to return strong SunSpider results – which they say is “cheating” – or that the company’s engineers have been focusing too greatly on the benchmarking test and have over-optimized the JavaScript engine to suit its requirements. Alternatively, it could be a legitimate bug, and indeed Sayre has filed a bug form on Microsoft Connect.

[via Slashdot]