http://www.anandtech.com/show/6121/glbenchmark-25-performance
Anandtech has results up for a variety of Android SoC.
EDIT:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6126/glbenchmark-25-performance-on-ios-and-android-devices
iOS results now up too. Looks like the SGX543MP2 struggles in the triangle tests against the Tegra 3 and Adreno 225.
The marginal struggle in triangle performance of the A5 versus the newer competition appears to be a condition of the higher image resolutions; I'm guessing it's a consequence of USC balancing.
The comparison of the A5 with the A5X (second link) was more interesting. The A5X is nearly always roughly twice as fast as the A5. Therefore PowerVR seems to have a really scaleable Multi-GPU implementation. Nice!
PowerVR's scalable core count is as much multi-GPU as a Radeon HD 7970 is a 7770 in tri-CF. Which is to say it's 1 GPU with multiple functional units, a far different beast than discrete GPUs.Therefore PowerVR seems to have a really scaleable Multi-GPU implementation. Nice!
That's not completely true - there are several fundamental differences, including separate triangle setup/rasterisation units (only introduced in Fermi - you could make an argument that the GTX480 had 4 cores) but also all the complexity inherent in multiple cores having their own binning unit which can write triangles to memory despite that these triangles must ultimately still be rasterised/rendered in order.PowerVR's scalable core count is as much multi-GPU as a Radeon HD 7970 is a 7770 in tri-CF. Which is to say it's 1 GPU with multiple functional units, a far different beast than discrete GPUs.
I'd personally be in for a shock if the Adreno 320 wasn't at least in the same ballpark Remember that Adreno 320 is supposedly 4 TMUs@400MHz or 1600MPix/s peak while the A5X is 2000MPix/s according to GLBenchmark. At the same time, the Adreno 225 already had 2x the raw GFlops compared to SGX per TMU, and you'd expect efficiency to have improved further in Adreno 320. So 0.8x the fillrate and >1.6x the GFLOPS in a flops-heavy benchmark that does very good front-to-back sorting so TBDR helps but not as much as in typical workloads - yeah, I'd be disappointed if the Adreno 320 wasn't fairly competitive, speaking strictly for myself.If so we could be in for a shock when the scores debut for 2.5...it has a good chance to overtake the A5x..
And being on 45nm versus 28nm for the Adreno 320 - today's tablets chips are tomorrow's smartphone chips...despite A5x having quad memory and being a tablet chip...
PowerVR's scalable core count is as much multi-GPU as a Radeon HD 7970 is a 7770 in tri-CF. Which is to say it's 1 GPU with multiple functional units, a far different beast than discrete GPUs.
If it's on the same piece of silicon it's not the same as Crossfire or SLI.
.....while the first on SFR with hw scheduling logic (oversimplified).
and:
not only the fillrate increases, but also the polygon throughput.
If you look at a few of the offscreen-results from anandtech the triangle rate increases nearly 2-times between the MP2 and the MP4.
I noticed that, as expected for a proper TBDR, increasing the precision of the depth buffer to 24-bit and also adding 4xMSAA doesn't impact performance much.
And the results are in for Qualcomm's Adreno 320 GPU:
Qualcomm's APQ8064 and GLBenchmark 2.5 - MDP/T Results
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6185/qualcomms-apq8064-and-glbenchmark-25-mdpt-results
Egypt HD (Offscreen 1080p):
APQ8064: 28.6
A5X: 24
Egypt Classic (Offscreen 1080p):
APQ8064: 79.2
A5X: 87
Not a generational leap but probably good enough to share the top spot with the SGX543MP4 for the next 6 months or so (APQ8064 is not yet available in a retail device, but should be in the next 1-2 months).