-
After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.
Razr vs Rezound Wirefly Schmackdown
- Thread starter sbebs2000
- Start date
cereal killer
Android Expert
Great, I'm taking this POS back tomorrow.
Martimus
One bite at a time...
While that is true the reviewer did not do a very professional job of conducting this comparison. After watching the video I picked out four oopses that the reviewer, Bob, made...
1. He commented that "there might be some adapters that you can plug on top" with respect to external batteries for the Razr. Apparently he knows little of iPhones since they've used external battery packs for years. He also failed to mention the battery capacity of either phone. He gave the round to the Rezound solely on the ability to remove the battery. The fact that the Razr has a battery capable of almost 200 additional mAh never came up in his review.
2. He commented that the launcher on the Rezound was better because it allowed him to go around and around between screens.
3. He compared performance of the two devices using Quadrant. Even though the Razr did better on Quadrant, I have an issue with this because Quadrant is optimized to function on single core devices. It currently doesn't do a really great job with most dual core devices.
4. After giving a win to the Rezound on display, and following the Quadrant test, Bob went and compared photographs on both phone. He compared pictures but I noticed something odd. The gentleman on the left of the photo was wearing a grey sweatshirt on the Razr pic and an orange sweatshirt on the Rezound pic. So apparently Bob used two different pictures likely taken at two different times as a qualitative test. I'm sorry but that's not really a valid comparison! For accuracy comparisons should be of the same image using similar lighting conditions.
Had he followed standard testing procedures I might even be OK with his decision.
Sandroidfan
Android Expert
I wonder how they do in signal reception and battery. My bet in on Razr. Probably some reviewers like Aaron on phonedog will do dogfight of these.
FragDroidX
Android Expert
While that is true the reviewer did not do a very professional job of conducting this comparison. After watching the video I picked out four oopses that the reviewer, Bob, made...
1. He commented that "there might be some adapters that you can plug on top" with respect to external batteries for the Razr. Apparently he knows little of iPhones since they've used external battery packs for years. He also failed to mention the battery capacity of either phone. He gave the round to the Rezound solely on the ability to remove the battery. The fact that the Razr has a battery capable of almost 200 additional mAh never came up in his review.
2. He commented that the launcher on the Rezound was better because it allowed him to go around and around between screens.
3. He compared performance of the two devices using Quadrant. Even though the Razr did better on Quadrant, I have an issue with this because Quadrant is optimized to function on single core devices. It currently doesn't do a really great job with most dual core devices.
4. After giving a win to the Rezound on display, and following the Quadrant test, Bob went and compared photographs on both phone. He compared pictures but I noticed something odd. The gentleman on the left of the photo was wearing a grey sweatshirt on the Razr pic and an orange sweatshirt on the Rezound pic. So apparently Bob used two different pictures likely taken at two different times as a qualitative test. I'm sorry but that's not really a valid comparison! For accuracy comparisons should be of the same image using similar lighting conditions.
Had he followed standard testing procedures I might even be OK with his decision.
Fantastic assessment. I would like to add that quadrant can also be duped. Take a look a the Galaxy S 2 scores for example. Remember when the Galaxy came out and the quadrant scores were lower than competing devices. Then some devs showed that it was because of the file system and put out a patch that would trick quadrant into a much higher score.
Samsung uses that same trick to inflate the scores of the Galaxy S 2. One of the many examples of why quadrant is a worthless "benchmark".
Hmm...no.
Quadrant is affected by resolution changes like all graphics benchmarks. If you are graphics benching a phone with a higher resolution vs. a phone with a lower resolution, the lower resolution gets higher framerates and wins.
This is the problem when you benchmark HTC and Motorola phones with qHD resolution vs. Samsung phones with only WVGA resolution.
Ironically, when the LG Optimus 3D was tested, which matched a 1GHz OMAP 4430 dual core with WVGA resolutions, the quadrant result is actually consistent to a device that is 200MHz slower than a Galaxy S2, yet way ahead of the qHD devices.
Quadrant is affected by resolution changes like all graphics benchmarks. If you are graphics benching a phone with a higher resolution vs. a phone with a lower resolution, the lower resolution gets higher framerates and wins.
This is the problem when you benchmark HTC and Motorola phones with qHD resolution vs. Samsung phones with only WVGA resolution.
Ironically, when the LG Optimus 3D was tested, which matched a 1GHz OMAP 4430 dual core with WVGA resolutions, the quadrant result is actually consistent to a device that is 200MHz slower than a Galaxy S2, yet way ahead of the qHD devices.
Galaxy S was saddled with Samsung proprietary file system called JFS, which caused serious lag with file fragmentation. The lag fix was to change the file system to Linux ext2 or ext3. Yeah it made file I/O faster and made Quadrant scored higher.
But its all moot with Gingerbread which made all file systems set to Linux ext4, which is even faster.
Thus the whole 'fix' doesn't matter with the Gingerbread era when every Gingerbread phone comes with ext4.
The question of the speed differences now falls to the differing resolutions.
But its all moot with Gingerbread which made all file systems set to Linux ext4, which is even faster.
Thus the whole 'fix' doesn't matter with the Gingerbread era when every Gingerbread phone comes with ext4.
The question of the speed differences now falls to the differing resolutions.
I'm sorry, but I saw how it was a 'schmackdown' and just knew it would be a superficial review. I've seen a few of Bob's reviews and, honestly, they all kinda suck.
Like I would love to see a comparison video where he charges both devices to full, reboots, locks the screens on, and let them sit overnight with a camera hooked up to see which one dies first. Now that would be a battery test that is worth a damn, rather than comparing battery capacity. Capacity means little if the thing devours power.
Like I would love to see a comparison video where he charges both devices to full, reboots, locks the screens on, and let them sit overnight with a camera hooked up to see which one dies first. Now that would be a battery test that is worth a damn, rather than comparing battery capacity. Capacity means little if the thing devours power.
You're taking back your Razr? I thought you liked it.
karandpr
Android Expert
Correction :
Samsung used Rfs (Robust File system) which is used on all samsung and devices indeed slow .
JFS (Journaled File System) is actually quite fast and CPU efficient .
All older samsung phones with gingerbread update still use Rfs which is painfully slow.
I agree the I/O score of Quadrant is quite buggy.ext2 and reiserfs had ridiculous scores .