I do think that if they improved memory bandwidth that can help a lot. If Tegra2 had dual-core 1Ghz sharing one memory pipeline let’s say 1000 bogomips throughput and Tegra3 quad-core 1.3Ghz sharing four memory pipelines that’s maybe up to 5200 bogomips throughput. That’s maybe what they mean as 5x improvement.

nVidia says that Tegra3 is 5 times faster Tegra2. But their CPU can only be 2 times the CPU of Tegra 2 (and that’s supposing they scale perfectly), and they say their GPU is 3 times faster than Tegra 2 GPU, but they only improved from 8 process units to 12 process units (not cores, as some say).

In the best scenario (and only in that ones), a Tegra3 could be twice as faster than a Tegra2, but they keep saying that Tegra3 is a x5 improvement (now we can understand their roadmaps promising 100x speed improvements in 5 years).

A nice processor (if it don’t has a memory bottleneck, as semiaccurate says), but please nVidia, stop lying.

Even if Google does, they can’t prevent companies like Nvidia giving themselves a performance edge.  After all, even with companies working with Google, not all of them have full control over the closed drivers they use and generic support usually falls second to specialized support.

Nothing new really though, Nvidia and ATI competed for years in the PC market with game deals that made the game work better with one or the other.  So similar competition is starting to be seen in the growing ARM gaming market and it’s just a question who can garner the most deals and how that compares to what is developed for the generic offerings to draw the most users to their product.

Next Gen ARM chips and ICS though should go a long way to improving the overall gaming experience for all devices though.  So while a few of these companies may get an edge I don’t think it will be a overly dominating advantage.  Also it will be interesting what starts to come out when Windows 8 joins the fray.

Sure, but Google must be coordinating all that with the chip providers, game engine providers and game developers to make sure more and better games are available in the Google Marketplace and ready to work fully hardware accelerated on all the platforms equally.

Yup, I think Microsoft was demoing Windows 8 on OMAP4 and Qualcomm MSM8660 also..

I would like to see performance info for normal/popular Android/Chrome use comparing the announced 1.5Ghz and 1.8Ghz dual-core with the announced 1.2Ghz and 1.3Ghz Quad-core.

Never said it wouldn’t be interesting to see the comparisons.  Just pointing out the Tegra 3 is still definitely an improvement, significant in that it is already rated to be able to run Windows 8, and we’re also likely to see some head on quad core solutions from other companies as well and not just higher clocked dual cores.

Yes, but all the other new processors are also much better than Tegra2, so it’ll be interesting to see some reliable real usage scenarios performance tests posted.

Clock speed for when it’s running 1-3 cores is 1.4GHz and it only drops to 1.3GHz when all 4 cores are running at the same time.

Mind on the GPU, Tegra 3 has a 12-Core Nvidia GPU with support for 3D stereo.  3D display support was one of the things the Tegra 2 lacked, along with limited h.264 support that Tegra 3 also addresses.  So at the very least it’s much better than the Tegra 2.

The Asus Transformer Prime’s 1280×800 Super IPS+ screen should look really nice as well.

Meanwhile, Samsung is also suppose to be coming out with a quad core Cortex A9 solution for the Sony PS Vital, so in addition to the continued dual core solutions we may also see some other quad core chips hit the market before the next gen 28nm chips come out.

Here are some more benchmarks comparing Tegra 3 with Tegra 2 and some platforms: http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mobile/display/20110921142759_Nvidia_Unwraps_Performance_Benchmarks_of_Tegra_3_Kal_El.html

Game engines like Unity3d do all the game optimizations not Google.

I don’t know that they can’t support stuff like that. Nvidia has been creating this Tegra-Zone for games to get optimized only on Tegra, but I don’t think that means other processors with other GPUs can’t also play the same games, it’s just a question of Google doing a bit of work to allow all the most advanced games to be easily hardware optimized for each GPU and available on all the platforms equally.

HD quality games is certainly a big priority for Google as now these new ARM Processors are reaching console-level quality even when outputting the 3D games onto an external 1080p HDTV.

Do you know any games for tablets with dynamic lightning? I really doubt any of the SoC you mentioned in the blog post can handle that.

PS: here is another demo: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C30ShWQm5pI

Yeah why not? The Mali-400, SGX54x and Adreno 220 are pretty amazing for graphics also..

Real life gaming example: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBvaDtshLY8 Can any of the competitors do that?

I don’t know if we can trust some leaked random benchmark. We’ve seen how cyanogenmod can “magically” double certain benchmark results, I’m not sure if that actually means anything. I’d like to know actual performance comparisons in actual real usage scenarios, for example multi-tab web browsing with flash, opening certain popular apps and games, video codecs/bitrates/framerates/profiles supported etc.