Originally Posted by HarrisLam
Hey bro sorry for being noob but um..
Im not understanding that benchmark score table in that engadget review. Are higher numbers better?
Cuz I swear Galaxy Nexus got much lower scores on ALL of those benchmarks among other participants. If higher scores are indeed better wouldnt that make GN a bad phone? At least performance wise?
Sucks to have a sub par camera too.
If its true, I might have to rethink on getting it. I can stand having one of these 2 to be worse than other top tier phones even though the camera might be important in daily life usage, but not both....
I mean, whats the point of waiting for it if even the existing options are better. That would be lame to wait for a phone thats worse than what exist in the market.
That benchmark is a little off, because first off, Quadrant, Linpack, Nenamark, and Neocore are all unoptimized for ICS, hence lower scores.
Nenamark and Neocore test on GPU. The Galaxy Note has obviously proven to be faster with its Mali-400 GPU compared to both the PowerSGX540(Razr and GN) and the Adreno 220(Rezound). But, from what I've seen from videos, the Galaxy Nexus performance is top notch,running graphic intensive games like Shadowgun with superb fluidity, with the Galaxy Note just a little better with its better overall chipset.
SunSpider tests on browser, and it this benchmark, lower is better. And the Galaxy Nexus handily beats all of them.
Camera is plenty good from what people have been saying. Could be better, but good enough nevertheless.
The selling point with the Galaxy Nexus is really Ice Cream Sandwich, which, as reviews are saying, is a big enough jump to make this phone the best Android phone yet.