The NVIDIA SHIELD Tablet Review
by Joshua Ho on July 29, 2014 9:00 AM ESTWiFi Performance
For the most part these days it seems that the situation for WiFi is much better in mobile than it is anywhere else, but it's still important to test throughput, especially on a device like the Shield tablet that requires low latency, high bandwidth connections in order to support GameStream and GRID. To this end, while NVIDIA hasn't shipped 802.11ac the Shield tablet ships with a 2x2 antenna configuration for a maximum PHY rate of 300 Mbps. Like the Shield portable, this is a BCM43241 chip, likely shared to improve economies of scale. To look at how it performs, we turn to iperf. Before we get into the results of the test, I'd like to thank ASUS for providing the RT-AC68U router to test WiFi perfomance.
Surprisingly, the Shield tablet performs about as well as some single stream 802.11ac solutions like the one found in the Galaxy Note 3. Performance is generally in line with what we'd expect for such a solution, although it would be nice to see 802.11ac for future products.
Camera
While I currently don't have the means to properly test camera, there are still some things to talk about for camera. Both the front and rear camera modules use OmniVision's OVT5963 sensor, which appears to be a 1/4", 5MP sensor. The rear camera has an F/2.0 aperture with 2.95mm focal length, and the front camera has an F/2.8 aperture, with a claimed 4.76mm focal length, although the field of view appears to be somewhat wider. This is the same sensor as the camera in the Nexus 7 (2013). As a rear facing camera, the quality is nothing special but as a front facing camera it's surprisingly high quality. The photo above is with the rear facing camera, the photo below is from the front facing camera. The stock camera application also doesn't show the correct aspect ratio for the camera, so the preview is cropped.
Audio
While I don't have the equipment available to test audio quality and peak volume quite yet, subjectively the two bass reflex ports and dual front facing speakers make for a great experience. It's definitely a major advantage over other devices when it comes to watching movies and playing games as I don't have to cup my hand around the speaker. The larger size of the tablet formfactor means that the stereo separation is much more obvious. On the headphone jack, the device appears to be using a Realtek RT5639 codec. It seems that NVIDIA has continued to use their own speaker protection system that runs on the SoC, as there isn't any clear evidence of a speaker protection IC connected via I2C.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
174 Comments
View All Comments
ddriver - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
What you mean by "rich colors" is OVER-SATURATION, not color accuracy but the full opposite of it. Most games actually prefer TN panels because of their fast refresh rates, and TN panels' color accuracy suks big time.aliquis - Sunday, November 9, 2014 - link
Regardless it's fair to say most gamers use TN monitors and those are far from perfect but gamers have used them anyway due to speed or price.B3an - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
I know for a fact i can see a noticeable difference. In the same way i can easily see a difference between IPS and shitty TN panels. So YOU'RE fooling yourself if you actually believe that.inighthawki - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
And you're showing your foolishness by comparing color accuracy to color precision. The difference between TN and IPS panels typically stems from color depth. Most TN panels are 6 bit color with dithering, while IPS panels can be 8 bit, or 10 bit simulated, producing a higher range of visible color.Here we are talking about the ACCURACY of colors. i.e. that shade of blue appears as (10, 24, 237) instead of (11, 28, 233). While playing a game, this kind of thing is generally unnoticeable, because you do not have a reference image or render to define what it should look like in the first place. In rare cases when you have large swatches of deep vivid colors you might notice they are a bit undersaturated, but for the most part, the lighting and texture quality in even AAA titles do not produce this kind of photorealism.
ddriver - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
And in the end, it is all relative, since all humans perceive colors differently. This is not an issue for calibrating equipment, which itself can be calibrated, but the human eye is an analogue instrument and no calibration for its color reproduction currently exists.Color accuracy is vital only in one field - and that is content creation. I paid 7k for a "reference" screen and 4k for reference audio monitors, and exactly for that reason. But for content consumption it is irrelevant, considering most users don't even have pro-grade equipment and the content is going to be consumer on a wide range of devices, ranging from totally cr@ppy to above decent.
niva - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
Seriously, the color accuracy being 1% or even 10% off will really mess up your gaming experience? Color accuracy is wildly irrelevant to anyone but professionals who work in image/print/video production industries.dstarr3 - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
I have to agree that color accuracy in gaming is a non-issue. In developing games, sure. But not in playing them. It's not like anyone is printing screenshots for work. Unless, again, you're a dev.ddriver - Tuesday, July 29, 2014 - link
Nah, I am not a moron, in fact I've been an artist in a AAA game studio for 6 years, so I know what I am talking about. You on the other hand might just be that, seeing your "foolproof" argumentation skills :Dmikegonzalez2k - Wednesday, August 6, 2014 - link
Most of these people probably aren't in the industry and hence wouldn't know such things. That is why they are consistently on here instead of working on actual projects. Especially those that comment daily. You have to wonder what they are doing with their life. I wouldn't pay them much attention. It isn't worth it.dcyli - Wednesday, July 30, 2014 - link
HURR DURR, I PLAY GAMES FOR DA COLORS. DUURRR