HTC EVO 3D vs. LG Optimus 3D: Battle of the 3D Superphones


Well-Known Member
Thread starter
I did notice one little error. They said the LG has 512GB of ram!



Android Enthusiast
The only comment I have to make is in what way is the LG superior to the HTC? I don't see one advantage.

More ROM (trivial, but hey, you asked...) Otherwise, the Evo is on par with or better than everywhere else (especially with say, doubling RAM, which I can see being a big difference performance wise).
the article claims that the LG processor and GPU are superior? Is this fact or subjective? I don't know enough about the technology to be able to tell


Well-Known Member
The only comment I have to make is in what way is the LG superior to the HTC? I don't see one advantage.

The Cortex A9 is an out-of-order core, so even at 1GHz it could possibly be a bit faster than the 1.2 GHz Snapdragon, and may some small battery life difference? (Insert large grain of salt with that assessment; I'm basing this on speculation, not any testing, and even if I'm right, the differences would be small.)


The PearlyMon
The OMAP 4330 by TI is no slouch whatsoever - and they borked the GPU id - it's the PowerVR SGX540 (TI's site is down, I wanted to confirm that at the source - if incorrect, I'll repost on that one).

Also, MelissaM did a GREAT job on clarifying the 8660 Cortex A8 issue, so I'll just quote her:

Except the Qualcomm 8660 is not A8. It's Qualcomm's own modified ARM architecture, Scorpion. Now if A9 & Scorpion are both running 1.2GHz, the A9 may still be slightly more powerful, but it's not as clearcut as A8 v A9. And processor power aside, it sounds like S II has GPS issues along with other QC problems. Who knows, the 3D/Sensation may have their own QC issues, but unfortunately we won't know until they are released (hopefully soon).

Per Anandtech: "The third contender in 2011 is Qualcomm’s Scorpion core. Scorpion is a dual-issue, mostly in-order microprocessor architecture developed entirely by Qualcomm. The Scorpion core implements the same ARMv7-A instruction set as the Cortex A8 and A9, however the CPU is not based on ARM’s Cortex A8 or A9. This is the point many seem to be confused about. Despite high level similarities, the Scorpion core is not Qualcomm’s implementation of a Cortex A8. Qualcomm holds an ARM architecture license which allows it to produce microprocessors that implement an ARM instruction set. This is akin to AMD holding an x86 license that allows it to produce microprocessors that are binary compatible with Intel CPUs. However calling AMD’s Phenom II a version of Intel’s Core i7 would be incorrect. Just like calling Scorpion a Cortex A8 is incorrect."

The little I know:

What sets the OMAP series apart from others is their superior glue logic between cores. So, it's not just the CPU or GPU that needs calling out - it's how to get that data in and out of the various processor cores and that's traditionally been an area where the OMAP architecture excels.

Also - it's important to ferret out the other cores, because benchmarks don't really get it for that, from what I've seen (and I could be wrong on that). In addition to cpu and gpu cores, each of the SoCs in question also have cores for image processing or digital signal processing. (Qualcomm has locked out the sources I used to use for citations on what they really had inside except for developers and TI is always changing their site, so I don't know if I'll be able to get the architectural diagrams for the OMAP 4 like I did for the 3 last year (I'm constrained to using only publicly-available source material)).

One big advantage that the Snapdragons have held in the past is a 128-bit wide bus where others used 64 - a different but worthy approach to moving data around quickly within a core or between cores, as opposed to superior glue logic circuitry.


The takeaway - I'd be happy with either processor, and I'd care only a little about core-only benchmarks on these because they're truly designed as system devices and need to be evaluated with real-world system-use cases.

I've read in a number of places, but haven't been able to confirm, that the 3vo will only do 24 fps when recording 3D at 720p, and 30 fps for 1080p.

For real comparison capabilities, I'll be watching for (confirmed) metrics like that for both phones - that might be very telling indeed as it would bridge from a bunch of buzzwords to how the beasts stack up in the end.

And I will say this about the LG's 3D performance - one of the Apple blogs really tore into it as just completely terrible, so it's likely to be quite good. ;)


Extreme Android User
so earlymon....

if it was a horse race... to the end... in general over all performance...
which would nose out the other? of course we know it would be a guess at this point.. but if you had to pick a horse? which?


Fixing stuff is not easy
If the LG does have better performance in it's chipset, I wonder how much of that would be negated by running Froyo on what looks to be an inferior UI to Sense...

What caught my eye was:

"However, the HTC EVO 3D features MHL technology which combines HDMI & MicroUSB into the same port!"

Umm....if my standard microUSB cables still If not...lame.

Edit: Found some info that answered my question. Posting in case someone else didn't know. From :

"You can also use your standard USB connector with the port. When connected, your phone will automatically recognize whether it is hooked up to an MHL port or a USB port and will switch accordingly."


Extreme Android User
that good enough for me...

both are going to be good.. i really dont care about needing to be the mostest fastest bestest what ever thingy for the day. it will be out done soon enough.

what is important.. is total over all usage to my hands and eyes and mind and needs.

htc + sense + great hardware = wins my $$$


Well-Known Member
I'm super pumped for the mhl! I wonder how it works when controlling it by remote control.

Also: Who needs a Google TV now?

Heh. I had a similar thought process go through my head the other day.

I look at those advertisements talking about how you can 'stop playing a movie in one room and continue in another.' Then I look at this phone.

I don't need U-verse or whatever it is. Because now, not only can I take the movie to another room, I can take it to another fricking house or train or whatever AND see it in 3D.

Well, not me with as the left eye doesn't work, but you get the picture.

I also do not see the MHL standard on the Optimus 3D, so that is a negative for me right there as well.


:thinking: Thats not an error? The LG does only have 512mb of ram.... Or rather, 2x256mb of ram= 512mb total


(Edit - i'm being thick, just noticed it says 512GB :eek: sorry guys, my bad)

Ummm, I don't think phones can have 512GB. And I think the LG is 2X512.
So if you count both of them it's 1GB, but don't take my word. I am not sure.


The PearlyMon
Asking a noob question here... how to find out the RAM size from a device? (to see if it matches the spec)?

One of tools that profile the system can get close for you: Android System Info by Electric Sheep, or Elixer, both free in the Market.

They tell the truth and they don't - on my Evo for example, they say I have 394 MB of ram. Not a power of two so no embedded memory was made that way.

The tools determine this size by a kernel probe.

In my case, the kernel is not recognizing more ram for the user than that, so that's the discrepancy. It's likely that the remainder is being used for memory-mapped i/o or some other reserved allocation.

Here's a sample discussion that I'm not making this up:

How much RAM does Nexus S has? - Google Mobile Help

I don't doubt my Evo hardware sports 512 MB physically.

Ummm, I don't think phones can have 512GB. And I think the LG is 2X512.
So if you count both of them it's 1GB, but don't take my word. I am not sure.

Yeah, it's just a misprint - and I wouldn't worry about 2x256 or 1x512 - the memory is typically embedded so it's not like counting PC motherboard slots (iow - it's not user-accessible physically so that's a don't-care for us users).

This spec is probably helpful -


Well-Known Member
Which phone has the better 3D experience as a whole? Does one have a better pop out 3D experience or a better depth experience than the other? Which one has more raw power or better performance as a device?