Just trying to figure out what's the pros and cons between a 1.5ghz single core and a 1.0ghz dual core. Like which one would be faster? Where would I notice these differences?
I'm trying to details decide between the flyer and the transformer.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
While I see where you are coming from on processor speed, The processor wouldn't be what I would be most concerned about when choosing between the two. I'd be looking at the mobility issue. Flyer fits in my shorts pocket. It's hands free when not in use but available whenever needed. Transformer have to carry around in hand all the time or in a bag. It is added bulk, & I found when only using a 10" device I didn't carry it around everywhere with me. It was a couch surfer.
Back to the original question. In my experience with the Notion Ink Adam Dual Core Tegra, The Flyer blew it away speed wise when running single apps and in general operation. The Tegra chip starts catching up when running multiple processes, like switching between open internet pages and other apps all running at the same time. Majority of apps aren't built to utilize dual core for speeding up their processes.
Picking the Flyer or the view isn't about processors or operating systems it's about functionality and portability. The flyer will be there when you need it, the 10" will be on the couch when you need it.
Previous post answers it quite well. In general, a higher clocked single core CPU will be faster within a single app than a lower clocked dual core CPU (although design differences between chip manufacturers means that straight comparison between MHz is not always a reliable point of comparison). Just like with PCs several years ago, there just aren't enough dual-core phones around yet for app developers to support multiple cores in their apps. Where you will see the dual core excel, is switching between apps, running lots of background processes, etc. But eventually, as multi-core phones become more commonplace, app developers will likely add support into their apps.
Thank you gentlemen, nice to see those responses. Those replys helps me make the decision.
Thanks again,
Eyeandroid
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
Be sure to click the "Thanks" button on the posts that were helpful!
Maybe this will make a little sense....
Another important factor in speed is the memory, not just memory as in ram but memory as in cached memory that is built into the processor. I'm going to try to make a little diagram.
p1-->L1--L2
L3- shared ---->Ram
p2-->L1--L2
So in this diagram p1 is processor one, p2 is processor 2, and all the L1's...etc are cache.
L1 is the fastest, smallest memory cache, memory size increases as you move to L2, L3, Ram, but memory speed slows down.
Basically everytime the processor has a new task it puts that task on a stack(in one of the caches). So the faster it can unload and reload that stack then the faster the speed. Thats where processor speed comes in. So a bigger L1 cache means it can store more tasks in its stack in the fast memory cache making the machine run faster(processor can access the tasks quicker)
Now this is why the Flyer out performs so many dual cores. As someone already mentioned, most applications aren't optimized for dual cores. That means that it can only take advantage of half of the combined L1. Then on top of that, it is only 1gz so it can't unload and reload the stack as fast as a 1.5 ghz can. Does that make a little sense? Ha.
I'm not exactly sure what the hardware structure is of the tegra2s, I doubt they have an L3 cache, I'm pretty sure (99.9%) thats a quad core thing, so they probably share the L2 cache.
Related
Just as the question states. I know the second core will sleep when not needed but say you launch an app, does the second core help load the app? The reason I ask is because I'm curious about the raw speed difference between the atrix and inspire. Now compairing the inspire running at 1.8 and the atrix seemingly stuck at 1 per core (I'm not saying the atrix wont ever be OCed but I'm just talking about what's currently available). I'm just curious if the second core will help the first with tasks. If it doesn't would that make the inspire technically way faster (obviously battery life may be an issue but this isn't a battery compairo)?
Thanks for any insight
I think you should start by knowing that overclocking ARM prroccessors gives little yield.
XOOM at 1.5 ghz scores only 500 better than a non-overclocked xoom on quadrant.
I'm going to try and simplify the answer for you.
Will BOTH cores be used? Maybe. First off, is the app itself optimized for dual core, or does it even need dual core / multithreaded capability.
Secondly, and I think more importantly, what is the rest of the phone doing. So, let's say you fire up your favorite app, the phone is still doing stuff in the background. Maybe it's checking email. Maybe Google Latitude is checking your location and updating. The point is - the other core will still be around to offload this work.
Now, WILL it go to the other core. Maybe. Maybe not. I do work on some big Sun machines, and have seen them use one or two out of 64 cores, even with massive loads and each core being used 100%, it refused to balance the load amongst CPU's.
Hope this helps.
mister_al said:
I'm going to try and simplify the answer for you.
Will BOTH cores be used? Maybe. First off, is the app itself optimized for dual core, or does it even need dual core / multithreaded capability.
Secondly, and I think more importantly, what is the rest of the phone doing. So, let's say you fire up your favorite app, the phone is still doing stuff in the background. Maybe it's checking email. Maybe Google Latitude is checking your location and updating. The point is - the other core will still be around to offload this work.
Now, WILL it go to the other core. Maybe. Maybe not. I do work on some big Sun machines, and have seen them use one or two out of 64 cores, even with massive loads and each core being used 100%, it refused to balance the load amongst CPU's.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea that's exactly like I figured, I was kinda going off Windows/Intel multi core setup. Even after dual+cores have been out for quite some time 95% of programs made still don't use more than one core (Most of those remaining 5% being very CPU intense programs PS, Autocad ect.). But I get what you mean, the one core will be dedicated to what your doing and not sharing cycles with anything else because core 2 is working on whatever pops up. So basically the Atrix might be a little slower at doing things BUT it will always stay the same speed with less/no bog.
Techcruncher said:
I think you should start by knowing that overclocking ARM prroccessors gives little yield.
XOOM at 1.5 ghz scores only 500 better than a non-overclocked xoom on quadrant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you're saying Quadrant suck as it does with most phones or OCing the Xoom (and Atrix) wont really do much?
I already built an apk for testing CPU usage on both processors... When I get some free time, I'm going to turn it into a widget... Here's what I noticed:
Because of the current OS and less dual core support for apps, the phone kind of kicks certain tasks into using the 2nd processor. The APK i built reads the '/proc/stat' file and i've noticed that when the 2nd processor is being used it actually shows up in the file as 'cpu1'. However, when it's not being used the 'cpu1' line does not exist and you can default the 2nd processor usage to 0%. It seems like performing core OS tasks (like installing apps) kick the 2nd processor into use, which is what you can expect since froyo supports dual cores.
Like everyone says, I'd expect to see more dual core usage on 2.3/2.4 (whichever motorola gives) and when more apps are designed to kick certain threads onto the 2nd processor.
This is actually the second time I'm opting for a single core device (first being when I got my samsung captivate instead of the moto atrix which would have required a 1 month wait)
My logic has been that it took a long time for dual cores to really be worked into laptops/desktops well therefore I probably wouldn't miss too much with a single core tablet if I wasn't multitasking a lot.
So after reading http://www.anandtech.com/show/4463/the-htc-flyer-review/8
I've really began to wonder.. while I don't doubt the programming skills of the android creators or anything..
How much multi core optimizing is really going on? I have no doubt that the Tegra 2 processor can mop the floor with a single core in a lot of areas.. But, on the flipside.. the higher clockspeed seems to have quite a few advantages.. And outside of multitasking or apps that are seriously threaded well.. Seems like the benefits of dual core are a bit over rated..
You might not have threaded apps, but you would presumably multitask a bit on your phone, so one core can run a browser and the other core something else, etc.
Still, I don't think single cores are yet outdated, simply because none of the non-gaming apps really load one core that much anyway. If you wanted to crunch numbers, you'd use a PC. And if you're gaming on your phone, you wouldn't be multi-tasking.
Its just the way things work. Hardware always leads software that can actually take advantage of it by 6 to 18 months. That's why if you keep buying the next big things , you never actually get to use the new features. It's a marketing ploy a lot of times.
porcupineadvocate said:
You might not have threaded apps, but you would presumably multitask a bit on your phone, so one core can run a browser and the other core something else, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the thing, there isn't much "something else" going on most of the time. Background synching of email and a few other apps; downloading a big file. What else? Most apps just get suspended in memory, and don't need to be actively "running". Multi core may make switching a bit faster, but that's really it, until we see apps optimized for multi cores.
Back to the OP's question, in a similar discussion on multi cores, one person on these forums mentioned that hardware always precedes software. I have to agree with that point. Hardware manufacturers will always sell what is on the bleeding edge, because specs and marketing buzzwords (which dual or quad core have definitely become) will always sell hardware. But software developers just want there apps to be compatible with the majority of the hardware being used. If most people have single core Android devices (huge majority do, right now), there is little motivation to spend the resources making the apps optimized for multi cores.
Makes a lot of sense to me.
I think a lot of people forget that if all you want to do is browse the web/email.. Even a computer that is old will still work well enough for basic task.. Example I'm typing this from a single core emachines that is a 2 ghz athlon processor.. My parents haven't upgraded, because it still works and still moves relatively fast for basic task.
Plus, there is a misconception that two 1 ghz processors = 2 ghz total clockspeed.. but, doesn't quite work like that..
So I've been lurking on the prime's forums for a while now and noticed the debate of whether the new qualcomm dual core will be better or the current tegra 3 that the prime has. Obviously if both were clocked the same then the tegra 3 would be better. Also I understand that the gpu of the tegra 3 is better. However, for normal user (surf web, play a movie, songs etc) isn't dual core at 1.5 ghz better in that an average user will rarely use more 2 cores? The way I understand it each core is able to handle 1 task so in order to activate the 3rd core you would have to have 3 things going on at the same time? Could someone please explain this to me?
First of all, the tegra 3 can go up to 1.6 ghz. Secondly, all 4 cores can be utilized by a multi threading app. Lastly, battery is great on tegra III due to teh companion core.
jdeoxys said:
First of all, the tegra 3 can go up to 1.6 ghz. Secondly, all 4 cores can be utilized by a multi threading app. Lastly, battery is great on tegra III due to teh companion core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the native clock for that qualcomm would be 1.5 meaning o/c can take it higher. Also doesn't being dual core compared to quad core give it an edge in battery? You do bring up a good point with the multi threading app. Also to clarify I am not standing up for the qualcomm chip or putting down the tegra 3 just trying to get things straight.
Thanks
Hey I'm the ....idiot aboard here....lol
But the tegra 3 has a companion core, being a fifth core, to take over when the tablet is not stressed. Thus saving the battery.
I am just repeating what I have read, I have no knowledge of how it all works. I guess that is how we can get better battery life.
Just trying to help the OP, maybe some one way smarter can chime in. Shouldn't be hard....lol
Quad core is better by far. On low level tasks, simple things, and screen off/deep sleep the companion core takes over. Meaning its running on a low powered single core. This companion core only has a Max of 500Mhz speed. So when in deep sleep or low level tasks, companion core alone is running everything at only 102mhz -500Mhz. Most of the time on the lower end. Therefore tegra3 has the better battery life since all it's low power level tasks are ran by a single low powered companion core. That's 1 low powered core compared to 2 high powered cores trying to save battery. Quad core better all around. We hsvent even begun real overclocking yet. The 1.6Ghz speed was already in the kernel. So if you rooted n using vipercontrol or ATP tweaks or virtuous rom, we can access those speeds at any time. Once we really start overclocking higher than 1.6Ghz we will have an even more superior advantage. Anyone knows 4 strong men are stronger than 2..lol. tegra3 and nvidia is the future. Tegra3 is just the chip that kicked down the door on an evolution of mobile chip SoC.
---------- Post added at 10:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 PM ----------
If you really want to learn the in and outs of tegra3, all the details, and how its better than any dual core, check out this thread I made. I have a whitepaper attachment in that thread you can download and read. Its made by nvidia themselves and goes into great detail on tegra3 by the people who created it, Nvidia. Check it out.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1512936
aamir123 said:
But the native clock for that qualcomm would be 1.5 meaning o/c can take it higher. Also doesn't being dual core compared to quad core give it an edge in battery? You do bring up a good point with the multi threading app. Also to clarify I am not standing up for the qualcomm chip or putting down the tegra 3 just trying to get things straight.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The maximum clock speed isn't all that important, since during tasks like web browsing, watching videos & movies and listening to music you will never push the processor to its highest available clock speed anyway. All mobile devices will underclock their processors so that you rarely have unused clock cycles eating up battery life. So all things being relatively equal performance would be about the same between both tablets during these types of lightweight tasks.
If you have a lot of background processes running, then the quad-core system might have an edge in performance since theoretically different tasks can be pushed off to different processors. However this use case is rarely found in Android. You might have an app checking weather or syncing photos in the background, or you might have music playing while you web surf, but those are generally fairly lightweight tasks that usually won't test the processor performance of your device.
In tasks that will stress you processor, such as 3D gaming, then quad cores have a very large advantage over dual core systems, despite the slight difference in maximum clock speeds. In addition the Tegra 3 has a more powerful GPU than the new Qualcomm chip, which will definitely make a noticeable difference in gaming performance.
Now when it comes to ultra-low power tasks or when the tablet is on Standby, the Tegra 3 uses its "companion core" which has incredibly low power requirements, so it can continue to sync your email, twitter and weather updates for days (or weeks) while having very little impact on the Transformer Prime's battery.
So in short, the Tegra 3 is more likely to outperform the Qualcomm in situations where you actually need extra performance. In light tasks performance between the two should be about the same. Battery life is yet to be definitively determined, however the Tegra's 3 ultra-low power companion core should give it an edge when only doing light tasks or on standb.
Keep in mind, the Tegra 3 in the TF Prime has a maximum clock speed of 1300Mhz. One core has a maximum clock speed of 1400Mhz. If all things were equal, a difference of 100-200 Mhz n a 1Ghz+ processor is practically unnoticeable in daily usage.
almightywhacko said:
The maximum clock speed isn't all that important, since during tasks like web browsing, watching videos & movies and listening to music you will never push the processor to its highest available clock speed anyway. All mobile devices will underclock their processors so that you rarely have unused clock cycles eating up battery life. So all things being relatively equal performance would be about the same between both tablets during these types of lightweight tasks.
If you have a lot of background processes running, then the quad-core system might have an edge in performance since theoretically different tasks can be pushed off to different processors. However this use case is rarely found in Android. You might have an app checking weather or syncing photos in the background, or you might have music playing while you web surf, but those are generally fairly lightweight tasks that usually won't test the processor performance of your device.
In tasks that will stress you processor, such as 3D gaming, then quad cores have a very large advantage over dual core systems, despite the slight difference in maximum clock speeds. In addition the Tegra 3 has a more powerful GPU than the new Qualcomm chip, which will definitely make a noticeable difference in gaming performance.
Now when it comes to ultra-low power tasks or when the tablet is on Standby, the Tegra 3 uses its "companion core" which has incredibly low power requirements, so it can continue to sync your email, twitter and weather updates for days (or weeks) while having very little impact on the Transformer Prime's battery.
So in short, the Tegra 3 is more likely to outperform the Qualcomm in situations where you actually need extra performance. In light tasks performance between the two should be about the same. Battery life is yet to be definitively determined, however the Tegra's 3 ultra-low power companion core should give it an edge when only doing light tasks or on standb.
Keep in mind, the Tegra 3 in the TF Prime has a maximum clock speed of 1300Mhz. One core has a maximum clock speed of 1400Mhz. If all things were equal, a difference of 100-200 Mhz n a 1Ghz+ processor is practically unnoticeable in daily usage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow! Thanks for taking the time for breaking it down for me like that! I understand exactly where your coming from and now have to agree.
demandarin said:
Quad core is better by far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least that is what Nvidia would like you to think.
The Tegra 3 uses an older ARM core for it's quad core design while Qualcomm uses their own ARM instruction set compatible core for their Krait S4 design. For most current benchmarks the Qualcomm Krait S4 dual core seems to outpace the Tegra 3 by quite a large margin. And of course Krait will be expanded to quad core later this year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5563/qualcomms-snapdragon-s4-krait-vs-nvidias-tegra-3
Dave_S said:
At least that is what Nvidia would like you to think.
The Tegra 3 uses an older ARM core for it's quad core design while Qualcomm uses their own ARM instruction set compatible core for their Krait S4 design. For most current benchmarks the Qualcomm Krait S4 dual core seems to outpace the Tegra 3 by quite a large margin. And of course Krait will be expanded to quad core later this year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5563/qualcomms-snapdragon-s4-krait-vs-nvidias-tegra-3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's already another thread on what you just mentioned and the Krait claims were easily shot down. Tegra3 still a better chip overall. Plus krait gpu was subpar to tegra3. We have more links and stuff in other thread showing Prime still right up there
demandarin said:
There's already another thread on what you just mentioned and the Krait claims were easily shot down. Tegra3 still a better chip overall. Plus krait gpu was subpar to tegra3. We have more links and stuff in other thread showing Prime still right up there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As unlikely as that seems considering the slower cores that Nvidia uses, links to real benchmarks ( not self serving white papers ) would be appreciated. I have glanced at your Tegra3 thread but have not read it all the way through after I saw that it seemed to depend a lot on a white paper and not real comparison tests. It is true that the current GPU the Krait uses is not as fast as the one in the Tegra 3, but graphics is only one element of overall performance. The only benchmarks that I have seen Tegra beat out Krait on were benchmarks that emphasized more than two threads, and then not by much.
Dave_S said:
As unlikely as that seems considering the slower cores that Nvidia uses, links to real benchmarks ( not self serving white papers ) would be appreciated. I have glanced at your Tegra3 thread but have not read it all the way through after I saw that it seemed to depend a lot on a white paper and not real comparison tests. It is true that the current GPU the Krait uses is not as fast as the one in the Tegra 3, but graphics is only one element of overall performance. The only benchmarks that I have seen Tegra beat out Krait on were benchmarks that emphasized more than two threads, and then not by much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not my tegra3 thread I'm talking about. I think its the Prime alternatives thread created by shinzz. We had a huge debate over it. More benchmarks n supporting arguments in that thread. Check it out if you get the chance.
demandarin said:
Its not my tegra3 thread I'm talking about. I think its the Prime alternatives thread created by shinzz. We had a huge debate over it. More benchmarks n supporting arguments in that thread. Check it out if you get the chance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, Will do. Gotta run for a doctor appointment right now though.
I frankly think the power savings with the fifth core is mostly hype. According to many battery tests I've read online and my own experiences with my Prime, it doesn't get much different battery life from dual core tablets.
Quad core is better for future but problem for backwards compatibility... it's definitely good for tablet.
jedi5diah said:
Quad core is better for future but problem for backwards compatibility... it's definitely good for tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is another benchmark that shows that there is a least one current dual core that can soundly beat the Nvida quad core at benchmarks that are not heavily multithreaded.
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...ragon-s4-has-the-competition-on-the-defensive
Buddy Revell said:
I frankly think the power savings with the fifth core is mostly hype. According to many battery tests I've read online and my own experiences with my Prime, it doesn't get much different battery life from dual core tablets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No dual core android tablet battery last longer than an ipad1. My prime easily outlasts my Ipad in battery life. The battery hype is real. Tons of people here seeing 9-11hrs+ on a single charge with moderate to semi heavy use on balanced mode. Even longer on power savings mode.
demandarin said:
No dual core android tablet battery last longer than an ipad1. My prime easily outlasts my Ipad in battery life. The battery hype is real. Tons of people here seeing 9-11hrs+ on a single charge with moderate to semi heavy use on balanced mode. Even longer on power savings mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? I get 9-12 hours constant use on balanced. Plus 6 more with the dock.
Sent from my PG8610000 using xda premium
I think if Krait were to come out with quad core then it would beat out tegra 3 otherwise no. Also they are supposed to improve the chip with updated gpu to 3.xx in future releases. Also benchmarks have been proven to be wrong in the past so who knows? Not like benchmarks can determine real life performance, nor does the average user need that much power.
Companion core really does work
jdeoxys said:
Really? I get 9-12 hours constant use on balanced. Plus 6 more with the dock.
Sent from my PG8610000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strange, we just started uni here (Australia) and I've been using my prime all day, showing it off to friends (to their absolute amazement!) showing off glowball, camera effects with eyes, mouth etc. 2 hours of lecture typing, gaming on the train, watched a few videos and an episode of community played music on speaker for about 40 mins, webbrowsed etc etc started using at lightly at 9 am (only properly at say 1:30 pm) and it's 10:00pm now and GET THIS!!:
72% battery on tablet and 41% on the dock. It's just crazy man. No joke, it just keeps going, I can't help but admit the power saving must be real :/
Edit: Whoops, I quoted the wrong guy, but you get the idea.
That's what I'm saying. Battery life on prime is great. Add a dock n battery life is sick!
I do agree a quad core variant of krait or S4 will give tegra3 a really good battle. Regardless I'm more than satisfied with power of tegra3. I'm not the type as soon as i see a newer or higher spec tab, ill feel like mines is useless or outdated. With have developement going hard now for this device. Just wait till the 1.8-2ghz+ overclock roms n kernels drop. Then we would even give new quad core higher speed chips a good run.
Above all of that, Android needs to developement more apps to take advantage of the more powerful chips like tegra3 and those that's upcoming. Software is still trying to catch up to hardware spec. Android apps haven't even all been made yet to take advantage of tegra2 power..yet lol. With nvidia/tegra3 we have advantage because developers are encouraged to make apps n games to take advantage of tegra3 power.
Regardless we all Android. Need to focus more on the bigger enemy, apple n IOS
I dont understand why company's are concentrating on processor amount,dual ,quad? ITS RAM that is so important, put 2 gigs in a dual core phone it will fly! any comments by devs on this would really help thank you
Not true
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
Mylenthes said:
Not true
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanx can you elaborate? trying to learn
2gigs on dual core would fly, but 2gigs on quad core would fly much much faster...
Typed using a small touchscreen
RAM isn't overly important in terms of speed. CPU is extremely important. Basically RAM just holds files that will be needed in the immediate future (or have been used very recently) to reduce read times on those files when they are needed. When it comes to actually running code, that is pretty much purely down to CPU speed. 1GB RAM is plenty to store a few apps and the background OS processes. When more is needed, older apps are closed (by "older apps" I mean ones used least recently). Otherwise, recently used apps are kept in RAM for quick switching. Unless you are trying to multitask in dozens of apps simultaneously, 1GB of RAM should be plenty for a phone today.
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
The way I have always viewed ram is this; no, more ram than needed won't make your device faster, but it sure will make it slower if you don't have enough!
Sent using Tapatalk
DD-Ripper said:
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awesome answer!! Thank you
Just like i thought!!!
"""""Under the hood, the Samsung Galaxy S III from Verizon Wireless is the same as the other US models. It ships with a dual core 1.5GHz processor and 2GB of RAM, which is meant to compensate for the lack of a quad-core processor that is found in the international version of the handset.""""""
JUST LIKE I THOUGHT!!! and above quote is from a major website!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lol :victory::victory::victory:
More than 1gb of ram isn't needed. If you are on ics or jb, then you need a good gpu. If you are on froyo or gb, then you need a good CPU since they aren't hw accelerated.
DD-Ripper said:
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing PC with Android is a lil'bit out of the rails here. Even with one core and enough GPU combined with 4GB RAM should be enough to enjoy many things. More core's is good for multitasking etc. But when you think how many apps etc are optimized for those gazillion cores......
Crwolv said:
I dont understand why company's are concentrating on processor amount,dual ,quad? ITS RAM that is so important, put 2 gigs in a dual core phone it will fly! any comments by devs on this would really help thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its simple. Big RAM can hold more running apps or a single big app (more bunch of codes). In any case, there'd be high demand of processing. So, manufacturers can only add more RAM when they ensure that they have enough processing speed for better experience.
You can say, we have quad-core CPUs now, why can't we add more RAM like we do in PCs?
Well, the answer: Don't go for specs. Smartphone CPUs/GPUs aren't powerful like Desktop ones (despite same specs). There's power and heat issues, in fact.
Plus, Android and its apps are unable to use multiple cores with high efficiency (Intel advocates this; that's why it launched powerful smartphone CPU with 1 core). So, quad-core performs poorer than single/double core performance on PCs.
It limits the lifetime of a device since it cannot be upgraded and maybe manufacturers like that. RAM usually seems to be the limiting factor on phones running future versions of android. Its too bad it can't be upgraded like a desktop/laptop but thats the cost of fitting all of this hardware into a tiny phone.
spunker88 said:
It limits the lifetime of a device since it cannot be upgraded and maybe manufacturers like that. RAM usually seems to be the limiting factor on phones running future versions of android. Its too bad it can't be upgraded like a desktop/laptop but thats the cost of fitting all of this hardware into a tiny phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AGREED! MANY DIFFERENT EXPLANATIONS! glad i asked ,all these helped. more ram would help but only to an extent. example if my wifes former htc design had a gig of ram it wouldn't have lagged so much running a single core 1.2 gig processor. FACT,so htc should have done it,it ran great till it attempted to multitask!:good:
Wasn't it stated during the I/O event that JB in general used less RAM and optimized apps better than the previous OS's so phones wouldn't need as much RAM as before?
It would be nice if JB or ICS had a timeout option for apps open more than a certain amount of time and would shut down automatically therein freeing more RAM. Obviously, it could be turned off or off depending on the user. Or if you could specify certain apps to close after an allotted amount of time if unused. Ex. Play store, calculator, calendar, SMS don't always need to stay on the page you left when you switched apps
So in 2011 we have Tegra 2, in 2012 we have Tegra 3 so my questions is what will come in 2013? Octo-core or an improved version of quad core cpus?
Fasty12 said:
So in 2011 we have Tegra 2, in 2012 we have Tegra 3 so my questions is what will come in 2013? Octo-core or an improved version of quad core cpus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as octo core desktop CPUs havnt really caught on yet I would guess just better quad cores likely with more powerful GPUs
Tegra 3 is already very powerful, presuming the will increase ram and make them more battery efficient or even higher clock speed. 12 core tegra gpu is pretty amazing already and anything better must be godly
Sent from my HTC Desire using xda app-developers app
If u mean for mobile platform , Will we really need beyond Quad core, having seen how SGSIII is smoothly running with it, beyond that what more perfection ( yaa still more can be expected) and speed u will need to do ur work . As known Android use other cores on need basis , why u need to see ur 2-3 cores never used.. i think its just more curiosity n to have more advaced/latest will be the only reason to have such high cpu on ur mobile..
What I like to see is ups in RAM installed and lows in RAM usage by system...
Sounds like octo-mom..the debate.lives on.. battery vs performance...but to answer your question I think it would be hexa-core which is 6..let's wait and see what is to come...
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
s-X-s said:
If u mean for mobile platform , Will we really need beyond Quad core, having seen how SGSIII is smoothly running with it, beyond that what more perfection ( yaa still more can be expected) and speed u will need to do ur work . As known Android use other cores on need basis , why u need to see ur 2-3 cores never used.. i think its just more curiosity n to have more advaced/latest will be the only reason to have such high cpu on ur mobile..
What I like to see is ups in RAM installed and lows in RAM usage by system...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Cores are at there peak right now. The amount of CPU power we have especially in the higher end phones is enough to acomplish many, many things. RAM is somewhat of an issue especially since multitasking is a huge part of android. I really thing a 2gb RAM should be a standard soon. Also, better gpu's won't hurt
Sent from my HTC T328w using Tapatalk 2
If they decide to keep going on the core upgrade in the next two or so years, I see one of two possibilities happening:
1) Dual Processor phones utilizing either dual or quad cores.
or
2) Hexacore chips since on the desktop market there's already a few 6-core chips (though whether or not they would actually be practical in the phones architecture, no clue).
Generally speaking whatever they come out with next will either need a better battery material, or lower power processors.
I mean I'm pretty amazed by what my brother's HTC One X is capable of with the quad core, and here I am still sporting a single-core G2. But yes I would like to see more advancement in RAM usage, we got a nice bit of power, but how bout a standard 2GB ram for better multitasking?
I believe 2013 will be all about more efficient quad-cores.
May i ask what going from 1gb to 2gb will improve? Loading times?
hello everyone, could you tell me what is cuad core?
Quad core means that a processor has four processing units.
Because there are more, that means that a process, theoretically, gets executed 4 times faster.
Read more about it: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor
Maybe i7 in mobile devices?
I'm sure it will stay at quad core cpu's, anything more is just overkill. They may introduce hyperthreading. It's going to boil down to efficiency.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
I'd say the future lies in more efficient use of processors. Right now, Android is still far from optimized on multi-core processor-equipped devices. Project Butter is the start of a great movement by Google to optimize the operating system. Hopefully it spreads out to other OEMs and becomes the main focus for Android development.
Improving and optimizing current processors is the way hardware companies should go.
In my opinion, processor development is out running battery development. Optimized processors could reduce power consumption while preserving excellent speed and usability.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2
building processors on more efficient ARM architectures is going to be the way to go from what I see......throwing four less efficient cores at a problem is the caveman method to dealing with it.....looking at you Samsung Exynos Quad based on tweaked A9 cores.....
the A15 based Qualcomm S4 Krait is more efficient on a clock for clock core for core basis and once the software catches up and starts using the hardware in full capacity, less more efficient cores will be preferred
I dont see anything beyond quads simply because they havent even scratched the surface of what can be done with a modern dual core processor yet.......throwing more cores at it only makes excuses for poor code.....i can shoot **** faster than water with a big enough pump......but that doesn't mean that's the better solution
We don't need more cores! Having more than 2 cores will not make a difference so quad cores are a waste of space in the CPU die.
Hyperthreading, duh.
More ram. Got to have the hardware before the software can be made to use it.
With the convergence of x86 into the Android core and the streamlining of low-power Atom CPUs, the logical step would be to first optimize the current software base for multi-core processors before marketing takes over with their stupid x2 multiplying game...
Not long ago, a senior Intel exec went on record saying that today, a single core CPU Android smartphone is perhaps better overall performing (battery life, user experience, etc) than any dual/quad-core CPU. Mind you, these guys seldom if ever stick out their neck with such bold statements, especially when not pleasing to the ear...
For those interested, you can follow this one (of many) articles on the subject: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/intel-android-not-ready-for-multi-core-cpus/20746
Android needs to mature, and I think it actually is. With 4.1 we see the focus drastically shifted to optimization, UX and performance with *existing/limited* resources. This will translate to devices beating all else in battery life, performance and graphics but since it was neglected in the first several iterations, it is likely we see 4.0 followed by 4.1 then maybe 4.2 before we hear/see the 5.0 which will showcase maturity and evolution of the experience.
Just my 2c. :fingers-crossed: