By 
Nvidia saw their revenue dwindle towards the end of 2011 and for this year, the company hopes to get back on its feet, thanks to their new and improved, Tegra 3 processor hitting smartphones and tablets this year. Despite high expectations, Nvidia has slightly toned down its outlook for this year bringing down their previously expected $1 billion in revenue to a more reasonable $900 million.
Speaking of those Tegra 3 smartphones, during Nvidia’s earnings call today, CEO Jen Hsun Huang said the company plans to begin shipping these quad-core super phones within weeks of their big unveiling at Mobile World Congress in just a few weeks. Although he didn’t mention any phones by name, we’re expecting the LG X3, HTC One X and possible others to make their debut at this year’s MWC. Huang also mentioned that Nvidia also hopes to ship their new pure cellular chipset — codenamed Gray — this year. Gray will include both 3G and LTE capabilities into a single chipset.
Nvidia was first out the gate with a dual-core processor last year, but handset OEMs (or consumers?) seemingly lost faith in the processor moving onto similar offerings from rivals Texas Instruments and Qualcomm dual-core processors. Should be exciting to see which semiconductor company will be first to try and 1-up Nvidia’s Tegra 3 this year.
[Reuters | Via Electronista]
”
OEMs (or consumers?) seemingly lost faith in the processor moving onto similar offerings from rivals Texas Instruments and Qualcomm dual-core processors.”
Tegra 2 was over a year old when the first Tegra 2 device shipped. It was old, relatively slow, and probably didn’t have all the features OEM’s/Carriers wanted (such as a single chip). Tegra 3 is running dangerously close to the same timeline. I can easily see the same thing happen.
Tegra 2 was old but it wasn’t slow. It was just missing NEON. The Tegra 2 still holds up decently right now and nVidia has made an effort to get devs to actually USE the SOC as opposed to just releasing it and relying on less-than-reliable benchmarks to sell it like Samsung, TI, and Qualcomm have done.
Why do people want an Exynos? It’s the second fastest SOC in production right now. Why? Does it make games look more amazing? No. Does it play back all 1080p video file formats? No, it does a few more than a Tegra 2 but the SGS2 has an 800×480 display so most users won’t take advantage of that ability. Does it actually let you do Triple screen output? It’s supposed to but doesn’t. Will users keep their Exynos 4210 devices for more than 2 or 3 years? Not likely.
So why is an Exynos so good? Benchmarks… which are still below Apple’s A5… another SOC whose performance advantage will likely remain untapped.
The Exynos’ performance advantage will largely go unused and that’s a shame.
I own a epic 4g touch and what you say is false. Exynos may get good benchmarks, but that’s not the only measure for a processor…even stock I have had zero lag, errors, or lack of functionality. I will absolutely keep this device til the end of my contract.
I can pretty much say the same about my Photon. I do wish they included NEON. It’d be nice to have more HD video playback support but I’ve also realized just how impractical it is in practice. I haven’t hooked my phone up to a TV yet, my screen is too low-res to enjoy any true HD video, and I’d rather opt for a quicker download and standard def quality video while on the go even with a faster Double-digit Mbps connection.
Gaming is smooth on the Photon and I have nVidia exclusives coming to my device before the Exynos equipped ones. Textures in high end mobile games look better on the Photon than they do on the SGS2 while frame rate is slightly better on the SGS 2 (tested Riptide GP and Shadowgun side by side… extremely noticeable in Riptide GP).
Aside from playing back more HD video formats and recording 1080p video, what does the Exynos do?
The SGS2’s screen coloring is supersaturated (overdone) in my opinion and it’s not very usable in broad daylight.
The Photon’s screen is great in daylight, but color balance is a little meh and the pentile “screendooring” does show.
The SGS 2 is a great device and the Exynos is a powerful SOC but Samsung is simply not enticing devs to help translate the higher benchmarks of the Exynos to tangible advantages over the rest.
You’re not going to upgrade to a Galaxy S 3 this year? I bet you’ll be trading or selling your E4GT within the next 12 months.
Have you seen a sgs2 screen in direct sunlight? I can have it at 50% brightness and still see it fine. I dont understand why people bash on Samsung devices…it can do everything advertised that a dual core phone can do, the screen is nice ( in my opinion). There are no disadvantages as far as I can see. That includes every dual core device..all of them have some kind of preference over another. Whether its the screen, gaming selection, ui, etc…its all preference.
I will stick with this device until the end of my contract. It has everything I want…the only advantage of upgrading will be what? A better processor? ( I already run with no lag, on all games and emulators) better screen? ( maybe higher res? I already love the screen). I get 16 hours of battery with heavy internet usage and heavy gaming.
It’s mainly because a good many have been placing the Exynos on some kind of pedestal along with the SGS 2. It’s the first phone that actually outsold the iPhone in some countries. It’s a great device but is it THE BEST? No. Is the screen just that much better than everything else? No.
…and the poor Tegra series getting slammed when nVidia is actually getting devs to put the Tegra’s capabilities to good use while Samsung just puts out the Exynos 4210 almost a year later but doesn’t do anything else with it… and people are parading it around. Sad.
@draiko, what has nVidia done with it? Not much, but lock other people out of games. There is no reason non-nVidia devices can’t play Tegra games, except nVidia’s crappy marketing.
I have to OC my Tegra 2 tablet to 1.5Ghz to play average quality 720p video. Exynos can play a lot of 1080p. That’s a huge difference.
Second, where did this exynos comparison come from? I don’t have one, nor did I mention it in my OP. Someone a little sensitive? BTW, Galaxy Note/Tab 7.7. 720p exynos devices. I believe even the Tab 7+ is as well. Not sure, but whatever is in there, it made my 1.5Ghz Tegra 2 transformer feel slow.
Finally, Tegra 2 has a GPU equivalent to the one found in the SGS1. Nothing revolutionary.
Be careful, if you want people to take you seriously, don’t sound like you have a huge inferiority complex with the SGS2. You even start mocking the screen. What does that have to do with processors?
Second fastest SoC?
Sorry, but that’s simply not true
The Tegra 3 beats it, the A5 easily beats it, and the OMAP 4460 beats it.
It’s the fourth best though, can’t you just realize that the SoC is old and outdated?
The Exynos is the second fastest SOC. Read more carefully.
“Why do people want an Exynos? It’s the second fastest SOC in production right now.”
I wrote that the Exynos 4210 is the second fastest SOC (available in phones and third fastest over all).
Read it again.
I’m most interested in this Gray chip. I am kinda waiting on upgrading to LTE until they can get a lower power chip in there. I have an OG Droid and a Droid X. Both have around 1300 mah batteries and last from about 7am to 11pm with usually around at least 30% remaining. Waiting for LTE to be able to do this.