PocketQuake Benchmark Archive

[sponge]

PocketQuake Benchmark Archive
Last Updated: A716

Reply to this post with any mistakes, or numbers I'm missing.

Feel free to use our information on your own website but only if you provide a link to the PocketQuake website: http://quake.pocketmatrix.com


Acer

n10 (300MHz XScale, WM2003)
12.8 FPS

n20 (400MHz XScale, WM2003)
15.2 FPS

n20 (472MHz XScale, WM2003)
16.6 FPS


Asus/Razor

MyPal A600/Razor Zayo (400MHz XScale)
10.3 FPS
8.7 FPS (Landscape)

MyPal A600/Razor Zayo (400MHz XScale @ 472MHz)
12.5 FPS
9.9 FPS (Landscape)

MyPal A600/Razor Zayo (400MHz XScale @ 200MHz)
5.3 FPS (Landscape)

MyPal A600/Razor Zayo (400MHz XScale @ 100MHz)
3.2 FPS (Landscape)

MyPal A620 (400MHz PXA255, PPC2K3)
18 FPS

MyPal A620 (472MHz PXA255, PPC2K3)
21.2 FPS

MyPal A716 (400MHz PXA255, PPC2K3)
18.3 FPS

MyPal A716 (472MHz PXA255, PPC2K3)
21.7 FPS


Audiovox

Maestro (206MHz SA)
8.4 FPS

Maestro (206MHz SA @ 236MHz)
10 FPS


Casio

Cassiopeia E-125 (150MHz MIPS)
6.8 FPS

Cassiopeia E-125 (150MHz MIPS @ 180MHz)
7.1 FPS

Cassiopeia E-125 (150MHz MIPS @ 200MHz)
7.3 FPS

Cassiopeia E-200 (206MHz SA)
8.9 FPS


Compaq \ HP

H1910 (200MHz XScale)
6.2 FPS

H1945 (266MHz Samsung)
14 FPS

H2215 (400MHz PXA255)
14.7 FPS

H2215 (400MHz PXA255 @ 530MHz)
18.5 FPS

H3630 (206MHz SA)
8.6 FPS

H3670 (206MHz SA)
8.9 FPS

H3670 (206MHz SA @ 221MHz)
9.6 FPS

H3835 (206MHz SA)
8.3 FPS

H3835 (236MHz SA @ 236MHz)
10.4 FPS

H3955 (400MHz XScale)
7.9 FPS

H4155 (400MHz PXA255, WM2003)
16.1 FPS

H5455 (400MHz XScale)
8.5 FPS

H5555 (400MHz PXA255)
14.0 FPS


Dell

Axim X5 (300MHz XScale @ 100MHz)
2.8 FPS

Axim X5 (300MHz XScale @ 200MHz)
5.8 FPS

Axim X5 Basic (300MHz XScale)
7.2 FPS

Axim X5 Basic (300MHz XScale, PPC2003)
12.5 FPS

Axim X5 Advanced (400MHz XScale)
7.8 FPS

Axim X5 Advanced (400MHz PXA255, PPC2003)
14.1 FPS

Axim X5 Advanced (600MHz PXA255, PPC2003)
17.6 FPS

Axim X30 (624MHz PXA270, PPC2003 SE)
24.2 FPS Portrait
18.5 FPS Landscape

Fujitsu-Siemens

Pocket Loox (400MHz XScale)
7.9 FPS


HP

Jornada 568 (206MHz SA)
8.5 FPS

Jornada 568 (206MHz SA @ 236MHz)
9.6 FPS

Jornada 720 (206MHz SA, HPC)
4 FPS - NEEDS CONFIRMATION


O2

XDA (206MHZ SA, WM2003)
11.1 FPS


Packard Bell

2060 (206MHz SA)
9.1 FPS


Toshiba

e330 (300MHz XScale)
7.5 FPS

e310 (206MHz SA)
7.8FPS

e550G (400MHz XScale)
8.2 FPS

e740 (400MHz XScale, old ROM)
7 FPS - NEEDS CONFIRMATION

e740 (400MHz XScale)
8.2 FPS

e740 (400MHz XScale @ 472MHz)
9.5 FPS

e750/e755 (400MHz PXA255)
10.3 FPS

e750/e755 (400MHz PXA255, WM2003)
14.9 FPS

e805 (400MHz PXA255, WM2003, QVGA)
15.3 FPS

e805 (400MHz PXA255, WM2003 SE, QVGA)
16 FPS

e805 (400MHz PXA255, WM2003 SE, VGA)
14.7 FPS

UR There

@migo (206MHz SA)
7.4 FPS

@migo (206 MHz SA @ 236MHz)
8.6 FPS


Yakumo

PDA Delta (200MHz XScale)
5.2 FPS

PDA Delta (200MHz XScale @ 300MHz)
7.6 FPS


Viewsonic


Viewsonic V36 (300MHz PXA255, WM2003)
15.6 FPS

Viewsonic V37 (400MHz XScale, PPC2002)
9.5 FPS

[NinthOption]

Does anyone have a bench of PQ on a zarus?(I know there's a port)

[sponge]

Well damn.. when I edit the post, it becomes unsticky.. CURSE YOU POCKETMATRIX/phpBB!

[James S]

I got it, don't worry, edit away. I'm here to serve.

[eminefes]

Toshiba

e310 (206MHz SA)
7.8FPS - NEEDS CONFIRMATION

Here's your confirmation.

My e310 did achieve 7.8fps.

[sponge]

Thanks. Has been fixed.

[Dan East]

It would be very good to have a set of landscape / fullscreen benchmarks as well for a couple reasons. In portrait mode less than 1/2 of the screen is blitted every frame (the onscreen controls and taskbar are not redrawn each frame), while in landscape the entire display is blitted each frame.

Also, the portrait mode uses a non-standard resolution that the PC version doesn't support. The landscape mode is 320x240, which corresponds to a PC version mode, for direct comparison.

Dan East

[James S]

sponge, are you up for the challenge?

[Mali]

results for asus a600 in landscape(right):

demo1.dem: 8.7 fps

[sponge]

Sure. The problem is, I skimmed (as in find, not read quickly) these benchmarks throughout the forum, and had no mention of orientation. But I'll update the results accordingly, even if it is all unknown orientations.

I thought the performance hit between landscape/portrait were minimal?

[James S]

Not at all! There is a HUGE difference. Check out the POLL Dan made in the General PPC Discussion forum for an indepth explanation.

[sponge]

I see that, but I was always under the impression that PQ is CPU limited, not on the renderer as much as it is sound, AI, game logic and the such. Same reason as why you can pump up the resolution on games that are too slow on your PC, without making them slower. (ie RTCW on my old 233, almost the same fps with r_mipmap 1 and r_mipmap 4)

[Robotbeat]

I can benchmark my e115!

On my e115, it doesn't really make much difference how detailed the textures are (until I get a memory over-run warning!), the performance seems to be about the same. Why don't we have Casio on that list?

When I get the chance, I'll bench my e115 Casio. I might as well hard-reset it, since it was recently hard-reset anyways.

See ya!

[sponge]

No Casios on that list simply because I couldn't find any :P

Try to reduce the changes as much as possible, and grab different benchmarks for portrait and landscape. Thanks for the support!

[James S]

I think my Casio E-125 got 6.8FPS at 150MHz, at increased another 0.1FPS for every 10 MHz I overclocked. So at 180MHz I got 7.2, at 200 I received 7.5 I think.

I'm giving my E-125 to my 21 year old brother in Orlando as a Christmas present, so it's wrapped under the tree, thus I cannot benchmark it. But I'm 93% positive that those are the numbers for the Casio E-125. I'll add those numbers for the moment.