Michal Ždanský Server & Hosting AnandTech.com caught Samsung cheating on Galaxy S 4 benchmarks:
We should see roughly an 11% performance increase in GLBenchmark 2.5.1 over GFXBench 2.7.0, and we'll eventually see a bit more. The reason for this difference? GLBenchmark 2.5.1 seems to be one of the benchmarks that is allowed to take advantage of higher GPU frequency/voltage settings.
[...]
At the moment, it seems that only certain benchmarks are allowed to use higher GPU frequencies. AnTuTu, GLBenchark 2.5.1 and Quadrant have fixed CPU frequencies and a GPU clock of 532 MHz, while GFXBench 2.7 and Epic Citadel do not. Upon further investigation, I came across an application that changes the behavior of DVFS and allows this change of frequencies. Opening the file in a hex editor and searching for strings inside, I discovered hard-coded code containing profiles/exceptions for specific applications. The string "BenchmarkBooster" speaks for itself.
So Samsung set the GPU to overclock when running certain benchmarks and the phone did better in the test. At the same time, overclocking is only available for benchmarks, not for games and applications. What to expect from a company that paid students to write fake critical reviews of competing phones?
However, it is surprising that at the time of optimization for CPU and GPU benchmarks of phones or tablets, anyone can still give. For example, the iPhone usually didn't have the highest processor speed, the most RAM, or the best test results, but it was smoother and faster than its competition thanks to software optimization. In the Android world, it's obviously still a matter of who has a higher CPU clock or better benchmark results, while software optimization comes second. Overclocking the GPU is obviously easier.
better than if the home button is screwed on the iPhone for twenty thousand....
button on ebay for 1 dollar you think....?
I don't care, the quality should match the price ;)
and doesn't answer? just propo, as work. I use an old 3G 16GB phone for calls, which has been used for 5 years per month. That, at least for me, is a guarantee of quality. And the fact that I changed a lot of things on it I take as automatic as part of using something. No samsung and others in my area had such a lifespan.
My iPhone was subject to a complaint only once in those 3 years, and that was due to the aforementioned button. Then they sent me a brand new unscratched piece, which I welcomed after 2 years of use. On the other hand, a friend with her Nexus 4 has been to the repair shop twice in a year and a half and she still has her old worn-out piece...
How could there be more than 1,5 repairs in 2 years with a phone that has not been on the market for a year? :O
hmm... but quality doesn't mean that the thing you press will last forever, right?? :)
The iPhone doesn't necessarily cost "twenty thousand". On the other hand, we will not compare the service you can get with it here with the one you get from Samsung.
By how many? One in a million? At least I don't know anyone like that. The hardware buttons from Samsung are more or less not different from those of the iPhone, so their wearability will be the same.
if this happened to someone.. then show it to us... I haven't heard anything like this yet...
So try to optimize the software (Android) for 15 or more different companies, types of phones/tablets. A bit different from one type (iShit) within one company, don't you think? #iDiots
It's genius to write a comment unrelated to the article on a website dedicated to Apple products, which actually degrades Android, but in the end it senselessly insults the obvious majority of the readers of the said page. If a troll wanted to be fed, he couldn't have chosen better. If some wretch just wanted to elevate himself over people he has never seen before and will never see, even though his mobile phone has a better operating system in his opinion, I really feel sorry for him considering his mental state.
the superficial gloss fully deserved that comment.
On the one hand, someone should look up the meaning of the word gloss in the dictionary, and on the other hand, I don't think that the comment will help the editors in any way and force them to stop making similar ones. It is also unlikely that he changed anyone's mind; it was just plain senseless insulting.
find anyway. do what you want
you are a free man.
btw, that post, no matter how offensive it was, was about the article. due to this fragmentation, optimization is much more difficult and less effective. The author of the article is certainly aware of this, so it's just unnecessary jabbing.
Of course, constructs like "What to expect from a company that..." do not add much to it. because a similar dictionary could be absolutely easily applied to apple. but that would be journalistic amateurism, to which local glosses happily indulge.
Do you have any comments?
Optimization is done by the hardware manufacturer, not by Google, so don't worry. Anything can be applied to anything, but it is not always possible to find the right argument. The author of the article has an argument, what do you have?
Ok, maybe it's unfair that they generalized their claim to the entire Android world, while the gloss only applies to one company. However, the truth remains that the manufacturers of Android devices focus more on increasing the clock speed of the processor than on optimization, which they subsequently slow down in one way or another with their stupid software add-ons. And as far as I know, the Android source code is freely available - any company can customize it for a specific device. The fact that the majority decided to produce so many types of devices that they no longer have time to smooth out the OS for each one separately is their business.
Optimizing, as you say, the software, i.e. the operating system of Android devices, should be the responsibility of the device manufacturer. The fact that the manufacturer just adds a software add-on to it will overwrite the display resolution values and the number of HW buttons in the config, so that it doesn't look like it does.
Take the previous description of "optimization" of the system as an exaggeration, but in my opinion it would not be so far from the truth.
However, Google and its Android are not to blame, but the device manufacturers themselves, who degrade this system. A great example is a device from Samsung and a device like the Nexus.
Then it shouldn't hit people's pockets..
so.. are apple products more suitable for running benchmarks in pockets?