Simple question. Is the 3VO's processor really 1.5 ghz underclocked to 1.2? I had seen this information floating around, but none of my searches are able to find anything firmly confirming or denying this.
Thanks
That's what I've also heard, however I still can't find anything to confirm or deny.
Nobody knows, eh?
Yes it is underclocked.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
Yes it is underclocked.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sources????
You can't be serious? This has been discussed and answered dozens of times... Google MSM8660..
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
You can't be serious? This has been discussed and answered dozens of times... Google MSM8660..
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't help, the MSM8660 comes in a 1.2 Ghz and a 1.5 Ghz variant.
poweroutlet said:
That doesn't help, the MSM8660 comes in a 1.2 Ghz and a 1.5 Ghz variant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
........
Appreciate my help? Thank me
It comes in two different factory clocks, which is what you said.. One is lower than the other because of manufacturer requests and the it being pointless to have 1.5 on a phone. If I were to pull the CPU's supported frequencies, it will say it supports 1512000, which is 1.5Ghz. The 8672 comes factory clocked at 1.5Ghz... They are all the same SoC, but with different applications. Such as one being CDMA support other being GSM. The ones that come in 1.2Ghz is because it is being used on a phone. If it were a tablet, or netbook, the clock would be 1.5Ghz which would be the 8672 or 8660..
Rest assured that 1.5Ghz is a frequency supported for the 8660...
In the end, they are the same SoC, running the same architecture. There is nothing different from the MSM 8260, 8660 and 8672 (which is cancelled). They are all under the 45nm process also.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
It comes in two different factory clocks, which is what you said.. One is lower than the other because of manufacturer requests and the it being pointless to have 1.5 on a phone. If I were to pull the CPU's supported frequencies, it will say it supports 1512000, which is 1.5Ghz. The 8672 comes factory clocked at 1.5Ghz... They are all the same SoC, but with different applications. Such as one being CDMA support of GSM. The ones that come in 1.2Ghz is because it is being used on a phone. If it were a tablet, or netbook, the clock would be 1.5Ghz
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Too bad you can't be sure of that. That MAY be the case, but it may also be the case that the 1.2 MSM8660s are the lower binned chips and the 1.5 are the higher binned units. This is done all the time in the CPU world. Someone gave an example here of how AMD sold the Barton 2500+ CPU which was really just a lower binned 3200+, a CPU that was far more expensive.
Your point that they are all the same SOC is not relevant, Intel and AMD for example have sold many processors which are all identical in architecture and every spec down to TDP, and the only difference is the frequency. It is just that the higher binned chips become the higher speced CPUs and the lower binned ones become the lower end ones. This doesn't mean that a lower binned CPU can't exceed its specification but it does mean that its likely that the higher binned CPU can go even higher. In any case, they are certainly not equal.
Just because they are the same SOC, does not mean you can assume that the 1.2 and 1.5 Ghz units are the same. That's like assuming the Intel Pentium 4 2.4C and the 3.0C are the same. They are the exact same CPU, same architecture, same cache, FSB, etc except one is clocked a bit higher and is of a higher bin. The 3.0C was the superior unit (Higher bin, better ability to overclock, etc).
My point is, we don't actually know if Qualcomm is giving us simply downclocked versions of the 1.5 or if our 1.2s are just lower binned 1.5s. The latter would make more sense for them in terms of profits, therefore its not surprising that this is a common practice in the industry.
poweroutlet said:
Too bad you can't be sure of that. That MAY be the case, but it may also be the case that the 1.2 MSM8660s are the lower binned chips and the 1.5 are the higher binned units. This is done all the time in the CPU world. Someone gave an example here of how AMD sold the Barton 2500+ CPU which was really just a lower binned 3200+, a CPU that was far more expensive.
Your point that they are all the same SOC is not relevant, Intel and AMD for example have sold many processors which are all identical in architecture and every spec down to TDP, and the only difference is the frequency. It is just that the higher binned chips become the higher speced CPUs and the lower binned ones become the lower end ones. This doesn't mean that a lower binned CPU can't exceed its specification but it does mean that its likely that the higher binned CPU can go even higher. In any case, they are certainly not equal.
Just because they are the same SOC, does not mean you can assume that the 1.2 and 1.5 Ghz units are the same. That's like assuming the Intel Pentium 4 2.4C and the 3.0C are the same. They are the exact same CPU, same architecture, same cache, FSB, etc except one is clocked a bit higher and is of a higher bin. The 3.0C was the superior unit (Higher bin, better ability to overclock, etc).
My point is, we don't actually know if Qualcomm is giving us simply downclocked versions of the 1.5 or if our 1.2s are just lower binned 1.5s. The latter would make more sense for them in terms of profits, its not surprise that this is a common practice in the industry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see what you are talking about.. I forgot about bins. I know for it on PC's, but didn't think much of it for a smartphone.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
I'm going to say you may be right about the bins. There are some people on here who can't reach past 1.5 for the life of god.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
I see what you are talking about.. I forgot about bins. I know for it on PC's, but didn't think much of it for a smartphone.
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, regardless though, our CPUs are already doing 1.8 stable and maybe even higher, that's plenty fast for me so I don't really care if the 1.5s are even better at clocking (well I might care if I start seeing the 1.5 phones breaking 2 Ghz haha).
poweroutlet said:
Yeah, regardless though, our CPUs are already doing 1.8 stable and maybe even higher, that's plenty fast for me so I don't really care if the 1.5s are even better at clocking (well I might care if I start seeing the 1.5 phones breaking 2 Ghz haha).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea me too
Appreciate my help? Thank me
You've been thanked for reminding me of the bins. Not once did that come into mind.
#fail
Appreciate my help? Thank me
DDiaz007 said:
You've been thanked for reminding me of the bins. Not once did that come into mind.
#fail
Appreciate my help? Thank me
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No worries man.
Related
How high do you think we can clock the processors on the EVO 3D? I recall they are 1.5 ghz chips underclocked to conserve battery life. Think these can hit that magical 2.0? Or at least 1.8?
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that's your opinion. I highly doubt a overclocking the processor to 1.8 would bring the phone down to one hour of battery life. It's not like it would be constantly running at that speed. I would prefer speed over battery life as I charge my phone every night and have plenty left over even overclocked to almost 1.3 on my EVO.
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think this is less about practicality and more about pushing our phone to the limits. overclocking on an already fast enough processor on a device which runs for the most part on battery, is not needed. however it is fun and nice to see the benchmarks soar.
I say 1.8ghz-2ghz
If they're anything like the EVO 4G, then it wont be a very high overclock
But assuming all are capable of 1.5 GHz, then it would be at least a 400-450 MHz overclock!
freeza said:
If they're anything like the EVO 4G, then it wont be a very high overclock
But assuming all are capable of 1.5 GHz, then it would be at least a 400-450 MHz overclock!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My g2x was overclocked to 1.6ghz and its only a 1ghz dual core phone...
Id say we could see maybe 1.8ghz if this phone is really 1.5 dropped down to 1.2
sent from anything but an iPhone
fmedina2 said:
Well that's your opinion. I highly doubt a overclocking the processor to 1.8 would bring the phone down to one hour of battery life. It's not like it would be constantly running at that speed. I would prefer speed over battery life as I charge my phone every night and have plenty left over even overclocked to almost 1.3 on my EVO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again for e-penis and bragging rights on benchmarks nothing more...
As for saying 1.8 oc would kill it in a hour I was joking...
And I bet dollars to donuts you don't see a change in "speed" past 1.6ghz other than a hot battery.
Ginger bread can't fully optimize dual cores it does the job but untill a new os is out
no point ruining a battery for "speed" you won't see
sent from anything but an iPhone
While performance is key, I'd say this phone is well above the bar of expectations for most Android Apps at the current time. I'm more interested in squeezing the most battery life I possibly can via Underclocking. It will be nice to see how far this can be pushed with Two Cores to spread the workload across.
nate420 said:
I could see maybe 1.6 but honestly nothing over 1.4ghz is worth it... (batter>speed)
And nothing currently requires anything over 1.2ghz or 1.5ghz for that matter, other than peoples e-penis.
Id like to see a 1.4ghz uv kernel over 1.8ghz 1 hour battery killer but I will use and test all of them
sent from anything but an iPhone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
btw the way i have the bigest e penis lol it is googolplex inchs
why are people saying such low numbers the second gen snapdragons can go to what 1.9? if ours is 1.5 stock dropped down to 1.2 then i think we can at least hit 2
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
hdad2 said:
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wrong, to lazy to explain for now.
toxicfumes22 said:
Wrong.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hope so!
10char
toxicfumes22 said:
Wrong, to lazy to explain for now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, a little less lazy right now. But simply the way that manufactures choose the speeds for processors is actually simple. In the case of the 3D it IS underclocked. The processor is an asynchronous dual core with clock speeds initially set at 1.5 by Qualcom and is used in Qualcom's phone they produce for developers. It is underclocked by HTC because of battery problems listed from the 4G and the unnecessary need of 1.5GHz in a F*ing phone. Manufactures for the most part do not underclock the CPU. The reason it is set at the level it is, is because it is most stable, efficient and meets the heat extraction needs (People forget CPUs are just circuits and produce heat with more voltage). OK lets back this up shall we. OK.
That is why I'm too lazy to post thing, I have to search up a link cause most of this is my general knowledge. Anyways, the QSD8650 found in the EVO 4G is clocked at 1GHz and has been posted to a stable 1.3GHz I believe by a recent post. Now the MSM8660 is posted to be a 1.5GHz CPU, so its overclocking potential is more near 2GHz but I would suspect it to get a little warm(sweaty palms anyone?) and I wouldn't know how stable it would be either (I don't know phones the best). Why is it underclocked? Because people kept *****ing at how much battery the EVO used and as technology improves so does the efficiency of CPUs so they go with the most recent and just underclock it. I've seen a comparison graph somewhere by Qualcom but I spent about 10minutes looking for it and couldn't find it but it was really nifty. If someone finds it plz post it, it shows the energy vs Clock speed and it is very cool.
Anyways, to respond to whoever said that the 1.5GHz is the max and that all manufacturers underclock the CPU based upon the silicon is WRONG, wrong WrOnG and Rong/wong (Im sorry I dont remember the exact response). Anyways, its the heat extraction and the silicon hurts it because it doesn't let all the heat through, which is one of the reason your PS3 may have yellow lighted on you(Yes its because of the CPU disconnecting from the Motherboard, but why do you think this extra heat was generated?).
Sorry this is so long and I got distracted a few times while writing it so it I messed up or something doesn't make sense I apologize but being lazy is really a pain in the ass.
hdad2 said:
I'd bet that the chips in these phones will be those that were unstable at 1.5 ghz. That's how chip makers do these things. They make them all the same, then those with unstable silicon are sold as a lower clock speed. Not sure I'd expect over 1.5 and that might require higher voltage. Hope I'm wrong. We'll see I guess.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would be the case if this wasn't an MSM 8660. You're thinking like when AMD makes chips for the HD 6970 and some are found not to be stable at 880 mhz so they bin it to use in the HD 6950 which runs at 800 mhz. These are actually sold as two separate products. In the case of the processor in the Evo it's an MSM 8660 which is sold by qualcomm to be run at speeds as high as 1.5 ghz. If they wanted to sell chips binned for lower speeds they'd have to sell it as a different model since it wouldn't be capable of the 1.5hz.
jersey221 said:
why are people saying such low numbers the second gen snapdragons can go to what 1.9? if ours is 1.5 stock dropped down to 1.2 then i think we can at least hit 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.9?
No sir it was 1.19stable...
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
donatom3 said:
That would be the case if this wasn't an MSM 8660. You're thinking like when AMD makes chips for the HD 6970 and some are found not to be stable at 880 mhz so they bin it to use in the HD 6950 which runs at 800 mhz. These are actually sold as two separate products. In the case of the processor in the Evo it's an MSM 8660 which is sold by qualcomm to be run at speeds as high as 1.5 ghz. If they wanted to sell chips binned for lower speeds they'd have to sell it as a different model since it wouldn't be capable of the 1.5hz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you explain this to me please.
toxic and donatom,
Your explanations make perfect sense. So I hope to be wrong. Does qualcomm sell a processor with that same architecture and a lower clock advertised?
Just seems like they're not gonna throw them away if they are stable and 1.2 or 1.4 but less stable at 1.5+. The 3vo seems like a good way for them to unload those processors.
hdad2 said:
toxic and donatom,
Your explanations make perfect sense. So I hope to be wrong. Does qualcomm sell a processor with that same architecture and a lower clock advertised?
Just seems like they're not gonna throw them away if they are stable and 1.2 or 1.4 but less stable at 1.5+. The 3vo seems like a good way for them to unload those processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To my knowledge, if this happens it gets recycled. But.....if this happens a lot then they need to change their manufacturing process or that the technology isn't there yet. Like now we have the technology to do 64GB MicroSD, but why do it because most devices can only do 32GB. For the companies that do sell them, well....I don't have good words for them, I also don't know of this happening. I can understand that it could be useful for donations to universities or others that could use them for damn near free prices, but not resold even under a different name.
toxicfumes22 said:
Can you explain this to me please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well in the case of AMD with many of their chip lines they produce a higher end chip. The ones that don't fully pass the tests at the higher speed get sold as a different model with a lower clock and voltage.
I have the most experience with the HD 6970 and 6950. They both use the same GPU, but the ones in the 6950 didn't pass AMD's tests at higher speeds so they are set at a lower clock and voltage than the 6970 (they also have some shaders disbaled). They are sold as two different models even though they were made the exact same way with the same silicone. This is not new chip manufacturers have been doing this for a while.
Think of it this way I make 100k chips out of those 100k I'm going to have a percentage that can't perform at their top performance, so instead of throwing them away I make a different model and underclock it and still make money on the chips that didn't pass at the higher speed. Now sometimes I will sell more of the lower end model so I actually have to take some chips that probably would have passed as the higher end model and sell them at the lower end. In this case the user gets lucky and can unlock their chip to the performance of the higher priced model.
EDIT: What HTC is doing here is buying a 1.5ghz chip but purposely underclocking it to save battery, since they figured most users wouldn't see the .3 ghz difference but would see the difference in battery life. Again in video cards you see this but usually the other way around. A manufacturer such as Asus, gigabyte, whomever takes the best of their chips they bought and overclocks them because again some were made even better than the standards set by AMD or Nvidia.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that ALL these chips should do 1.5 ghz stable without question, unless there isn't enough space inside for the cooling requirements at 1.5ghz (which I doubt), and most should easily go above 1.6.
Edit again since I just saw this post:
toxicfumes22 said:
To my knowledge, if this happens it gets recycled. But.....if this happens a lot then they need to change their manufacturing process or that the technology isn't there yet. Like now we have the technology to do 64GB MicroSD, but why do it because most devices can only do 32GB. For the companies that do sell them, well....I don't have good words for them, I also don't know of this happening. I can understand that it could be useful for donations to universities or others that could use them for damn near free prices, but not resold even under a different name.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is something that happens mostly in higher end processors because their tolerances at those speeds are less forgiving. No manufacturing process is perfect, you're going to have some that won't perform at those very high speeds, and recycling would cost more to the company and environment then simply selling them at lower speeds. These chips are not bad, and not defective, just found to not be stable at those highest speeds, but are perfectly fine at the speeds they are being sold at, so why throw them away. If they don't meet the standards at the lower speed then yes they would be recycled.
I have a question about the 3D's dual core that I'd like more clarification on the vague answers I'm getting by searching this site and google. So I've read that the core is asynchronous so basically meaning the second core doesn't do much work unless needed as others like the tegra 2 and exynos have both cores running or something similar to that, and that this is affecting the benchmark scores. I also read that one would basically double the score of the 3D to get a more accurate reading. Can anyone confirm or further explain this?
Yes, asynchronous is when something operates on another thread whereas the main thread is still available for operating. This allows for better performance in terms of managing tasks. Now just because it doesn't score high on a benchmark, it doesn't mean it is going to perform. Also this allows for better performance for the battery.
I haven't slept for the past 12 hours so if this doesn't help you, just let me know and I will fully elaborate on how the processor will operate on the phone. Now time for bed :'(
In short, asynchronous operation means that a process operates independently of other processes.
Think of transferring a file. A separate thread will utilized for doing so. You will then be able to do background things such as playing with the UI, such as Sense since you will be using the main thread. If anything were to happen to the transferring file (such as it failing), you will be able to cancel it because it is independent on another thread.
I hope this makes sense man, kind of tired. Now I'm really going to bed.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.
donatom3 said:
To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^This too
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I was also very curious to learn a little more about the async cores and how it differes from a standard "Always-On" dual core arctechiure.
Thh first page/video I found talks about the SnapDragon core specifically.
http://socialtimes.com/dual-core-snapdragon-processor-qualcomm-soundbytes_b49063
From what I've gathered, it comes down to using the second core and thus more power, only when needed. Minimizing voltage and heat to preserve battery life.
The following video goes into similar and slightly deeper detail about the processor specifically found in the EVO 3D. The demo is running a processor benchmark with a visual real time usage of the two cores. You can briefly see how the two cores are trading off the workload between each other. It was previously mentioned somewhere else on this forum, but I believe by seperating a workload between two chips, the chip will use less power across the two chips vs putting the same workload on a sinlge chip. I'm sure someone else will chime in with some additional detail. Also, after seeing some of these demos, I'm inclined to think that the processor found in the EVO 3D is actually stable at 1.5 but has been underclocked to 1.2 to conserve battery. Only time spent within our hands will tell.
Another demo of the MSM8660 and Adreno 220 GPU found in the EVO 3D. Its crazy to think we've come this far for mobile phone technology.
What occurred to me is how complex Community ROMs for such a device may become with the addition of Video Drivers that may continue to be upgraded and improved (think early Video Card tweaks for PC). Wondering how easy/difficult it will be to get our hands on them, possibly through extraction of updated stock ROMs.
EDIT: As far as benchmarks are concerned, I blame the inability of today's bench marking apps to consider async cores or properly utilize them during testing to factor the over all score. Because the current tests are most likely to be spread across cores which favors efficiency, the scores are going to be much lower than what the true power and performance of the chips can produce. I think of it as putting a horsepower governor on a Ferrari.
thanks for the explanation everyone
The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.
Harfainx said:
The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I was thinking that not just the battery savings but there could be a performance gain. Think of this if the manufacturer knows they only have to clock one core up to speed when needed they can be more aggressive about their timings and have the core clock up faster than a normal dual core would since they know they don't have to clock up both processors when only one needs the full speed.
I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.
I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.
mevensen said:
I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.
I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App
RVDigital said:
The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.
Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I went through all of your links, I didn't see anything that confirms that the benches are somehow affected by the asynchronous nature of the chipset. It's not that I don't believe you, I actually had that same theory when the benches first came out. I just don't have any proof or explanation of it. Do you have a link that provides more solid evidence that this is the case?
NVIDIA actually tells a different story (of course)
http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/24/nvidia-tegra-2-outperforms-qualcomm-dualcore-1015/
AnandTech's article does explain some of the differences
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/4
It appears that Snapdragon (Scorpion) will excel in some tasks (FPU, non-bandwith constrained applications), but will fall short in others .
I'm pretty sure none of the benchmark apps have even been updated past the release of the sensation so yeah....How could they update the app to use the asynchronus processors the if the only phones to use them have only recently been released.
Sent from my zombified gingerbread hero using XDA Premium App
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
tyarbro13 said:
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, if someone were to develop an app for that. I do not see why not.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Hmm...
If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.
I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...
Ex:
2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.
The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...
Maedhros said:
Hmm...
If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.
I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...
Ex:
2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.
The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
tyarbro13 said:
I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is something that the hardware needs to be capable of. Software can only do so much. As far as I've seen Tegra isn't capable of it.
I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.
DDiaz007 said:
There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?
nkd said:
I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What?!?
Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.
The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.
Arm 7 vs arm 9?
Maedhros said:
Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?
What?!?
Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.
The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.
Arm 7 vs arm 9?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude go back to sleep. You have no clue what you are talking about.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
Is there really no way to overclock our p500 to default 800mhz? i saw the samsung galaxy ace is running the same processor with us but the default cpu is 800mhz
Is there possible to overclock more to 800mhz for our p500?for me,748 stable for me,but when i change to 768,sometimes it will black screen and no responding n i got to take our my battery..
Sorry, physically it is NOT the same processor. I have explained it many times here. All those Intels/AMDs with exact same stepping sold at different freqs are also the "same" processor.
doktornotor said:
Sorry, physically it is NOT the same processor. I have explained it many times here. All those Intels/AMDs with exact same stepping sold at different freqs are also the "same" processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
but i heard that for galaxy ace samsung has overclock itself to 800mhz?they say the original fre also 600mhz?
it has to do with the way the mass produce IC. They are not the same cpus. Google for terms, stepping and waffer to get the picture
This is just absolutely lost cause trying to explain this, apparently. If you assume that LG are complete morons who could sell their phone with 800MHz CPU but they decided that would be too cool, continue to do so. You own experience shows that the chip is NOT stable @800 MHz. Guess what, yeah it is not rated to run @ that frequency, that is why LG buys it cheaper and why it sells it clocked @600 MHz.
Bye.
How big is the performance difference between this SOCs? and even though 4460 is more powerful will we see performance changes because the Galaxy Nexus uses a higher pixel count?
Razr will have 4460 - the same CPU as Galaxy Nexus. Information about 4430 chipset - is just a first guess. Motorola and their distributors confirmed it will have 4460 version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
UPD: I was wrong. They changed information on motodev website. Now the specs says its 4430. http://developer.motorola.com/products/razr-xt910/
nailll said:
Razr will have 4460 - the same CPU as Galaxy Nexus. Information about 4430 chipset - is just a first guess. Motorola and their distributors confirmed it will have 4460 version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you cite that? Everything that I've been reading about the RAZR has suggested otherwise.
Also read this: http://androidforums.com/motorola-droid-razr/431262-4430-4460-update-2-does-not-have-4460-a.html
Explains the differences between the 2 chips.
They posted 4430 on motodev portal a few days ago
It's 4430.
http://developer.motorola.com/products/droid-razr-xt912/
Damn. Sorry. I was confused. http://www.droid-life.com/2011/10/1...with-full-specs-omap4460-processor-confirmed/
Galaxy Nexus uses TI OMAP 4460 at 1,2GHz CPU and 304MHz GPU.
It doesn't use full speed of 1.5GHz CPU and 384MHz GPU.
So frequencies are the same between Galaxy Nexus and Moto Razr.
Razr has lower resolution 960x540 vs 1280x720.
So Razr should be faster.
should the 4460 be more efficient than the 4430 at 1.2GHz？
Diagrafeas said:
Galaxy Nexus uses TI OMAP 4460 at 1,2GHz CPU and 304MHz GPU.
It doesn't use full speed of 1.5GHz CPU and 384MHz GPU.
So frequencies are the same between Galaxy Nexus and Moto Razr.
Razr has lower resolution 960x540 vs 1280x720.
So Razr should be faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where are you seeing that the GPU clock in the Galaxy Nexus is 304MHz?
Chirality said:
Where are you seeing that the GPU clock in the Galaxy Nexus is 304MHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are the specs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_OMAP#OMAP_4
Galaxy nexus has 384 mhz
soremir said:
Here are the specs: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_Instruments_OMAP#OMAP_4
Galaxy nexus has 384 mhz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CPU and GPU frequencies are linked.
So i strongly doudt that with a 1,2 GHz CPU you can get 384MHz GPU.
Diagrafeas said:
CPU and GPU frequencies are linked.
So i strongly doudt that with a 1,2 GHz CPU you can get 384MHz GPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What makes you think that the CPU and GPU clocks are linked?
Chirality said:
What makes you think that the CPU and GPU clocks are linked?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They aren't... I don't know where he got that.
didibabawu said:
should the 4460 be more efficient than the 4430 at 1.2GHz？
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With emphasis on "should", yes. All things constant in the wild world of chip yields, the 4430 "should" require more effort to reach 1.2ghz. Not long to find out.
rushless said:
With emphasis on "should", yes. All things constant in the wild world of chip yields, the 4430 "should" require more effort to reach 1.2ghz. Not long to find out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe the 4430 actually comes in two flavors, a 1ghz and a 1.2ghz. I don't believe they are taking the 1ghz processor and overclocking it.
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Oaklands said:
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
^ That is all that needs to be said.
Oaklands said:
My understanding is the 4430 and 4460 are from the same wafers. The 4430's are just the ones that did not run reliably at 1.5 but would at 1.2. Kind of the samw on pc processors. AMD had some quad cores that would only run reliably on 3 cores. Instead of throwing them away, change the model number and sell them. This has been common for years. So it could be possible someone's 4430 might run reliably at 1.4.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Usually when chips are binned this way, the higher binned and lowered binned chips tend to be released at about the same time. However, there's a several months gap between the release of OMAP4430-based devices and OMAP4460-based devices, which seems to indicate that they are manufactured separately. Granted, this is the SoC-market with long lead times and complicated device development cycles so perhaps the chips were available at the same time but it has just taken longer for OMAP4460 devices to reach market, but the big gap between release frames suggest to me that these two SoCs are developed separately.
Chirality said:
Usually when chips are binned this way, the higher binned and lowered binned chips tend to be released at about the same time. However, there's a several months gap between the release of OMAP4430-based devices and OMAP4460-based devices, which seems to indicate that they are manufactured separately. Granted, this is the SoC-market with long lead times and complicated device development cycles so perhaps the chips were available at the same time but it has just taken longer for OMAP4460 devices to reach market, but the big gap between release frames suggest to me that these two SoCs are developed separately.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's nothing preventing them from releasing them months apart.
zetsumeikuro said:
There's nothing preventing them from releasing them months apart.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes there is, inventory. If they are binning chips off the same line but they are only selling the lower binned ones but holding off on selling the higher binned ones for several months, then they are piling up inventory of the higher clocked chips and not doing anything with them.
Now it is possible that the yield on the higher clocked chips is very low, such that only after several months of binning did they have enough inventory to move them to OEMs. But then this would mean that you'll probably have a harder time overclocking the 4430s due to how much difficulty they had with yields for higher clocked chips.
Does anyone know how to overclock the GPU (NOT THE CPU)?
I don't think it can be done with snapdragons
con247 said:
I don't think it can be done with snapdragons
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bringing this thread back from the dead cause I am too interested in doing this.
I have read up on other phones that have had developers make kernels where this is possible, although to little or no "concrete" evidence it actually works. But from reading up on our phone, it does have a snapdragon processor but states it also have an Adreno 220 GPU as well. Wouldnt this mean they are seperate? I dont consider myself a czar of phone hardware, so I of course could be mistaken. I also read that this GPU is really an underclocked Adreno 225 and is capable of being overclocked to 400Mhz (from its standard 200Mhz state) with no problems. I would really like to see if theres a difference in gpu performance, but I am in no position or knowlegdeable enough to firgure it out myself. If there was anyone that can figure this out I think it could be sweet if it made a difference.
anubis2k3 said:
Bringing this thread back from the dead cause I am too interested in doing this.
I have read up on other phones that have had developers make kernels where this is possible, although to little or no "concrete" evidence it actually works. But from reading up on our phone, it does have a snapdragon processor but states it also have an Adreno 220 GPU as well. Wouldnt this mean they are seperate? I dont consider myself a czar of phone hardware, so I of course could be mistaken. I also read that this GPU is really an underclocked Adreno 225 and is capable of being overclocked to 400Mhz (from its standard 200Mhz state) with no problems. I would really like to see if theres a difference in gpu performance, but I am in no position or knowlegdeable enough to firgure it out myself. If there was anyone that can figure this out I think it could be sweet if it made a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Put all these thoughts on hold for now. Until we have custom kernels available, none of this is possible.
custom kermels do it automatically. I have yet to see an app that does it with stability. I remember the incredikernal and app sorta did for original inc. chad would most likely be the man to possibly pull it off at some pointw