The Google Nexus 9 Review
by Joshua Ho & Ryan Smith on February 4, 2015 8:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- HTC
- Project Denver
- Android
- Mobile
- NVIDIA
- Nexus 9
- Lollipop
- Android 5.0
WiFi Performance
On most tablets, WiFi performance is perhaps one of the most crucial parts of the experience as WiFi is often the primary method of connectivity. Without working WiFi, a tablet is basically useless as the only alternative is either cellular (which is quite rare on most tablets) or Ethernet over USB-OTG, which destroys most of the value of a mobile device.
In the case of the Nexus 9, we see that HTC has fitted this device with a BCM4354 WiFi module to enable two spatial stream 802.11ac. Interestingly, there is some evidence to suggest that HTC has also adopted Cypress Semiconductor’s CapSense controller to enable antenna tuning for the WiFi antennas. However, it’s probable that this solution is only for HTC devices without a Qualcomm Gobi modem as we’ve seen the use of the QFE15xx antenna tuner in previous HTC products. In order to test how the Nexus 9’s WiFi solution performs, we turn to iperf on Android to test throughput across the network, and utilize Asus’ RT-AC68U router to ensure that the device under test will be able to reach maximum performance.
The Nexus 9's WiFi solution performs about as well as one might expect from a BCM4354 solution. For the most part I haven't noticed any reception issues, even when touching/detuning the WiFi antennas.
GNSS
While most of the GNSS solutions that we’ve looked at this year use Qualcomm’s GPSOne/IZat due to the presence of a Qualcomm Gobi Modem, the same isn’t true for the Nexus 9. Instead, Broadcom’s BCM4752 is used here. While this shouldn’t have a massive impact on the speed with which first lock is acquired, in practice Qualcomm’s solution is noticeably faster here as the modem can often provide data to make for a hot fix. At any rate, the Nexus 9 does perform acceptably in this regard. I don’t see any major issues with location performance, although it does seem that the GPS tends to report lower accuracy levels than the Qualcomm solutions that I'm used to. Other than this, the GNSS solution is quite usable.
Misc
While we don't have a proper audio quality test yet, it's clear that the audio codec used is the same Realtek RT5677 codec that we saw in the SHIELD Tablet. Outside of the code, we also see an RT5506 2.55V amp on the 3.5mm jack, along with two NXP TFA9895 amps on the speakers, which are quite good due to their front-facing placement. In practice I don't really see much issue with loudness or quality here, as the speakers can get even louder than the M8 in some situations. We also see a Broadcom BCM2079x NFC chip, which means HCE is fully supported out of the box. Interestingly, the VCM controller is exposed to the OS and is said to be a Texas Instruments DRV201 chip.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
169 Comments
View All Comments
PC Perv - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
It is clear, even though you did not say, why no one other than NV and Google will use Denver in their products. Thank you for the coherent review, Ryan.P.S. I can't wait for the day SunSpider, Basemark, and WebXPRT disappear from your benchmark suit.
jjj - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
You always make those kind of claims about dual core vs more cores but you have never attempted to back them up with real world perf and power testing.In real use there are alerts and chats and maybe music playing and so on. While your hypothesis could be valid or partially valid you absolutely need to first verify it before heavily insisting on it and accepting it as true. Subjective conclusions are just not your style is it, you test things to get to objective results.
And it wold be easy you already have "clean"numbers and you would just need to run the same benchmarks for perf and power with some simulated background activity to be able to compare the differences in gains/loses.
PC Perv - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
Where would you put the performance of "backup" ARM-only part of Denver? Cortex-A7? Is it measurable at all?Also, why don't Samsung use F2FS for their devices? I thought it was developed by them.
abufrejoval - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
While the principal designer seems to be a Korean, I'm not sure he works for Samsung, who typically used Yet Another Flash File System (YAFFS).Ryan Smith - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
It's not measurable in a traditional sense, as the DCO will kick in at some point. However I'd say it's somewhere along the lines of A53, though overall a bit better.Shadowmaster625 - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
The design philosophy of the DCO does make a lot of sense. When your mobile device starts to bog down and you start cursing at it, what is it usually doing? It is usually looping or iterating through something. The DCO wont help with small blocks of code that execute in 500uS, but you dont need help with that sort of code anyway. What you want to improve is exactly the type of code the DCO can improve: the kind of code that takes several dozen milliseconds (or more) to execute. That is when you begin to notice the lag in your cpu.mpokwsths - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
Joshua & Ryan,please update the charts with the bench results of the newer version of Androbench 4: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com....
(I had previously commented on the fact that you can't safely compare the i/o results of different OS AND different bench apps).
Androbench 4 is redesigned it to use multiple i/o threads (as a proper i/o bench app should have) and produces vastly improved results on both Lollipop and earlier Android devices.
You will not be able to compare the newer results with older ones, but at least it will put an end to this ridiculus ι/ο performance difference between iOS and Android, the one you persistently -but falsly- keep projecting.
Andrei Frumusanu - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
I tested this out on several of my devices and could see only minor improvements, all within 10%. The performance difference to iOS devices does not seem to be a dupe at all.mpokwsths - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
My results strongly disagree with you:Nexus 5: Seq Write: 19MB/s --> 55 MB/s
Rand Write: 0.9 --> 2.9 MB/s
Sony Z3 Tablet: Seq Write: 21 MB/s --> 53 MB/s
Rand Write: 1,6 MB/s --> 8MB/s
Seq Read: 135 MB/s --> 200MB/s
I can upload pics showing my findings.
mpokwsths - Wednesday, February 4, 2015 - link
Meet the fastest Nexus 5 in the world:https://www.dropbox.com/s/zkhn073xy8l28ry/Screensh...;)