Two-year-old phone still tops the chart Nokia’s smartphone isn’t getting faster
Nokia N96
Nokia’s new Nseries smartphones are not getting faster, they are getting slower. The benchmark tests of Futuremark show that the best performing phone in Nokia line-up is still the N93 that first came to stores in the summer of 2006, over two years ago.
Nokia’s great success, the N95 multimedia computer, compares well with N93, especially after its firmware updating.
But the test scores of the brand new N96 fall far behind the N93 and N95. It is especially sluggish in the 3G graphics performance with scores reaching only one tenth of the top-level performers.
Even in the system tests N96 scores are somewhat lower than the old N93. Overall, the systems test results for all three Nokia phones are in the same ballpark. The same holds true with new Samsung SGH-L870. Unfortunately, Samsung’s Symbian phone would not run all the 3D-tests.
The technical explanation behind the lack of progress is the new platform. In the new phones Nokia is using a hardware platform from ST Microelectronics. The best performers have been built on Texas Instruments’ OMAP 2 platform. Presumably we will see several ST Micro-based smartphones in the near future. Judging from the performance, the decision to switch the platforms must have been made for financial reasons.
|
Nokia N96 is much slower than 2 year old N93 Bigger is better |
||||
| Phone model | N93 |
N95 (FW 11.0.026) |
N96 | Samsung SGH-L870 |
| SPMark Score, 1) | 5362 | 6381 | 2253 | N/A |
| 3D Score, 2) | 9061 | 6878 | 898 | N/A |
| System Score, 3) | 2205 | 1635 | 1895 | 1950 |
| Details: 3D Performance | ||||
| 3D Game | 84.6 | 71.5 | 12.7 | N/A |
| 3D FillRate | 40.8 | 27.4 | 2.8 | 2.3 |
| 3D PolyCount | 695.6 | 552.6 | 69.0 | N/A |
| System Tests | ||||
| 2D Image, 4) | 64.2 | 64.2 | 64.2 | 64.2 |
| Image Scaling, 5) | 6.1 | 7.4 | 5.7 | 5.5 |
| JPEG Encoding, 6) | 1221 | 1175 | 1073 | 740 |
| Contacts, 7) | 11.8 | 10.3 | 8.7 | 12.1 |
| Calendar, 8) | 7.7 | 7.7 | 5.1 | 5.2 |
| Disk Access, 9) | 34.9 | 5.7 | 35.3 | 44.5 |
Source: Futuremark
1) Overall Score of Performance, 2) Overall 3D Performance Score,
3) Overall System level Performance Score (basic usefulness score), 4) Performance of 2D Image
Drawing Operations, 5) Performance of Image Scaling Operations, 6) Performance of
Image Covertion/Encoding Operations, 7) Basic Contacts Application Test from
Performance/Usefullness point of view, 8) Basic Calender Application Test from Performance,
9) Performance of memory (file open/save/delete) operations
No comments
Industry News
- Finnish venture capital market declined in 2009 11 Feb 2010
- MobileMonday to launch chapters in Africa 09 Feb 2010
- MoMo founders in MWC 2010 Barcelona 08 Feb 2010
- FinnMob and IMA Form Alliance 05 Feb 2010
- Gemalto acquires mobile authentication company Valimo Wireless 03 Feb 2010
Chapters
- Adelaide
- Amsterdam
- Andalucia
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Austria
- Bangalore
- Bangkok
- Barcelona
- Beijing
- Belfast
- Berlin
- Bogota
- Boston
- Brussels
- Buenos Aires
- Caracas
- Chennai
- Chicago
- Colorado
- Copenhagen
- Dallas
- Dublin
- Dusseldorf
- Frankfurt
- Geneva
- Hamburg
- Helsinki
- Hong Kong
- Hungary
- Hyderabad
- Istanbul
- Jakarta
- Kuala Lumpur
- Lithuania
- London
- Los Angeles
- Madrid
- Malmö
- Melbourne
- México
- Milan
- Monaco
- Montreal
- Moscow
- Mumbai
- Munich
- New Delhi
- New York
- Norway
- Oulu
- Paris
- Philadelphia
- Poland
- Portugal
- Rio de Janeiro
- Rome
- São Paulo
- Seattle
- Seoul
- Shanghai
- Silicon Valley
- Singapore
- Sofia
- South Africa
- St. Petersburg
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Sydney
- Taipei
- Tel Aviv
- Tokyo
- Toronto
- Turku
- Ukraine
- Vancouver
- Washington, DC
- Upcoming
- Croatia
- Medellín
Maintained by MobileMonday Oy. Privacy Policy, Copyright and Terms of Use