DUNIA ANDROID

UPDATE: Samsung Galaxy S3 unveiled with specifications and features

Samsung announced a new Exynos 4 Quad CPU at 1.4GHz recently before introducing the SGS3 or Galaxy SIII. it is the first processor built on the 32nm HKMG (High-k Metal Gate) technology based on the ARM Cortex A9 architecture.

this processor doubles the performance when compared with the previous 45nm processor but 20% less power consumption. and with the multi-core processing design, it means the four cores handle different tasks simultaneously and hence allowing users to perform more tasks in less time

more, the new Exynos 4 Quad processor can produce 30fps (frames per second) HD 1080p video recording and playback and equipped with an HDMI 1.4 interface



officials from Samsung also said this new processor will be used in the next Galaxy S generation, which will be unveiled in early May this year. this means it is very likely to be shipped with the Samsung Galaxy S3 running Android 4.0.3

however, it is rumored that this processor will be availble for international versions only, except the USA market

recently, LG Optimus x2 has a new TV ad showing the phone takes only 4.6 seconds to load Yahoo HK main page. I surfed their website and found they have another claiming that it takes 7.6 seconds (average result via wifi) to load aastock.com (Traditional Chinese version) and ready for challenge. so i did some tests on my Galaxy S ...


DISCLAIMER:
- the data/results stated below are for reference only, and it is NOT supposed/assumed to be used for any other comparisons by any means, and does NOT represent any standard
- the data/results obtained may varies depending on a lot of uncontrollable factors
- the results were obtained with a non-stock and modified Galaxy S ROM I9000XWJS8, without overclocking
- the wifi link speed used for the test was 65Mbps, via a 100M broadband
- all caching, including proxy server cache were disabled (not including ISP's cache server, if any)
- the tests were taken on 03 April 2011 2045-2200 HKT


according to Optimus x2's website, i cleared all browser cache, and i even killed the browser process (not by closing it, but killed the application actually)

test 1: browser process retained, cache cleared, flash enabled, tested for 5 times as LG's
a/. loading www.aastocks.com/tc/default.aspx
Optimus x2: 7.6 seconds (quoted from their website)
my Galaxy S: max ~6.x seconds, min ~5 seconds, average ~5.x seconds

b/. loading hk.yahoo.com/?m=1
Optimus x2: 4.6 seconds (quoted from their tv ad)
my Galaxy S: max ~4 seconds, min ~3 seconds, average ~3.x seconds


test 2: started a new browser process (old process killed), cache cleared, flash enabled, tested for 5 times as LG's
a/. loading www.aastocks.com/tc/default.aspx
Optimus x2: 7.6 seconds (quoted from their website)
my Galaxy S: max ~7 seconds, min ~5.x seconds, average ~6.x seconds

b/. loading hk.yahoo.com?m=1
Optimus x2: 4.6 seconds (quoted from their tv ad)
my Galaxy S: max ~5 seconds, min ~4 seconds, average ~4.x seconds


test 3: browser process retained, cache cleared, flash enabled, computed with stop watch by lifehacker.com
a/. loading http://cache.lifehacker.com/assets/resources/stopwatch.php?u=http://www.aastocks.com/tc/default.aspx
my Galaxy S: 4.773 seconds


b/. loading http://cache.lifehacker.com/assets/resources/stopwatch.php?u=http://hk.yahoo.com/?m=1
my Galaxy S: 2.555 seconds



test 4: browser process retained, cache cleared, flash enabled, computed with stop watch by numion.com
a/. loading http://numion.com/stopwatch/Start.html?Url=http://www.aastocks.com/tc/default.aspx
my Galaxy S: 6.265 seconds


b/. loading http://numion.com/stopwatch/Start.html?Url=http://hk.yahoo.com?m=1
my Galaxy S: 3.11 seconds



conclusion? no need to conclude ...

just a few days after the release of their RC, Firefox 4 for Android finally out!

for general users, it may disappoint you coz it does not support flash. but for some other users like me, who don prefer auto loading flash movies, it doesnt matter

although it stopped responding for the first run with 3 tabs opened, FF4 loaded and reloaded web pages a bit faster then the stock browser (I9000XWJS8). however, the scolling is much slower (on my SGS)

perhaps the most interesting functions are the built-in sync and add-ons capabilities. i had not try these 2 functions yet and instead, i reconfigured the memory and cache settings in config to see how it affects the performance

one more thing to mention, for those who hate reloading the page everytime u go to the previous page like the stock one, FF4 could be a better option

with the power of dual processors, Galaxy S2 scored 1950 in quadrant
good enough? i don think so... although dual processors wont yield a double in performance actually

performed some tests days before and I would like to share the results with all of you. the result was as expected (my expectation)

the test was conducted on /dbdata, using dd to read and write, and with different slice_sync and slice_async values.
According to lwn.net:
- slice_sync: How many msec a sync disk slice lasts
- slice_async: How many msec an async disk slice lasts

in froyo, the default value for slice_sync is 97, and slice_async is 39. while in eclair, they are 100 and 40 respectively.

and, the results were obtained by the average value under different file systems as below:
write: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dbdata/test count=25000 (using default bs=512)
read: dd if=/dbdata/test of=/dev/null

test1: default slice_sync (97), slice_async (39)
ext2 w=0.3563576, r=0.2172932
ext4 w=1.7057048, r=0.1286368
ext2 on ext4 w=0.2786272, r=0.1360666
ext2 on ext4 noatime nodiratime w=0.279215, r=0.124138
ext4 on ext2 w=0.4299866, r=0.1277804

test2: slice_sync (50), slice_async (20)
ext2 w=0.3883144,r=0.2209398
ext4 - omitted
ext2 on ext4 w=0.2743988,r=0.1343098
ext4 on ext2 w=0.4350612,r=0.2513572

test3: slice_sync (500), slice_async (200)
ext2 w=0.4159796, r=0.40419
ext4 - omitted
ext2 on ext4 - omitted
ext4 on ext2 w=0.4252074, r=0.2614818

obviously, the fastest one was ext2 on top of ext4, with only insignificant impact with noatime and nodiratime options (i cant believe it). this combination of file systems performed well as expected since while ext2 do somewhat like "blind read/write", the ext4 will hold the data b4 commit (PLS, pls dont argue ext2 and ext4 with me and that's why i described them very roughly... )


actually this was just for my own leasure but i think it may be useful to u guys as well so i decided to post it here for your ref


more info