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.
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
I finally found a comparable tegra 2 bench posted online in a droid x 2 review, both devices have a qHD screen. It's looking like the hardware we have here isn't particularly impressive, and let's not even go there with the Galaxy s 2 *shudder*, it's a massacre.
I was to understand that the Qualcomm/Adreno setup was going to at least be competitive, and was supposed to be all out superior to Tegra 2. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Levito said:
I finally found a comparable tegra 2 bench posted online in a droid x 2 review, both devices have a qHD screen. It's looking like the hardware we have here isn't particularly impressive, and let's not even go there with the Galaxy s 2 *shudder*, it's a massacre.
I was to understand that the Qualcomm/Adreno setup was going to at least be competitive, and was supposed to be all out superior to Tegra 2. Can anyone shed some light on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't look at benchmarks too much... but it can download n' upload like a God that's its power tool
My overlocked 1.5 Ghz tegra 2 lags behind my EVO 3D but it scores 900 more points in quadrant so my epeen feels alright. Seriously most of these benchmarks are not coded well.
I think the 3vo uses only one core with quadrant. You have to use a dual core benchmark test like CF Bench for better results. Then again benchmarks really don't mean much.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Benchmarks are nearly useless measures.
Using benchmarks to determine real world performance is like licking your finger and sticking it up in the air to determine how fast the wind is moving.
Yeah, it'll put you roughly in the ballpark--roughly. But that ''ballpark'' is big enough to drive a couple dump trucks through...
Both the droid x2 and the galaxy s2 aren't running sense, which usually drags down bench marks even though the phone is silky smooth. Benchmarks may be useful for testing modifications on the same phone, but not for comparing different phones. Just ask yourself... Does it seem to suffer to you?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Who gives a #$% about benchmarks, all I know is that this thing is fast, way faster than the EVO. I have a gTablet (tegra 2, Honeycomb) that runs games very well and this 3VO runs the same games but only smoother and faster, no hiccups at all. Totally happy here and I have like 200 apps on this thing and I have like 280 megs left.
Oh, and my gTablet is clocked to 1.5ghz!
G_Dmaxx said:
Who gives a #$% about benchmarks, all I know is that this thing is fast, way faster than the EVO. I have a gTablet (tegra 2, Honeycomb) that runs games very well and this 3VO runs the same games but only smoother and faster, no hiccups at all. Totally happy here and I have like 200 apps on this thing and I have like 280 megs left.
Oh, and my gTablet is clocked to 1.5ghz!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seriously my Tegra 2 Transformer has nothing on my EVO 3D. Why people look only at benchmarks and not what is in front of them I have no clue.
danaff37 said:
Both the droid x2 and the galaxy s2 aren't running sense, which usually drags down bench marks even though the phone is silky smooth. Benchmarks may be useful for testing modifications on the same phone, but not for comparing different phones. Just ask yourself... Does it seem to suffer to you?
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've actually never had an AOSP rom run all that much faster than a Sense rom. Enough of a variance to say that there isn't a difference at all.
Like many others have pointed out. Quadrants is a terrible bench for dualcore phones until it's updated. When it reads off a bunch of question marks as the evo3ds CPU, CPU speed,etc. You know its not going to be a reliable test.
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Go to anand-tech for the Adreno 220 benches... It crushed the competition so maybe that'll make you feel better.
1 possible reason why the EVO 3D isn't scoring as high as you expect is because I think the benchmark tests don't utilize CPU's with asynchonous dual cores correctly.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Galaxy uses synchonous cores which mean they can only work on the same thing at the same time, they can't work on separate operations at the same time.
The EVO 3D has asynchonous cores which allow for true multitasking meaning each core will work on separate tasks. As I understand it, support for this type of CPU is going to be added in Android 2.4 and later, but don't quote me on that.
LOL @ benchmarks
DDiaz007 said:
Go to anand-tech for the Adreno 220 benches... It crushed the competition so maybe that'll make you feel better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any similar comparisons to the exynos/mali(?) that the sgs 2 is packing?
Some of the above statements about asynchronous processing do make me feel better if true.
Levito said:
Any similar comparisons to the exynos/mali(?) that the sgs 2 is packing?
Some of the above statements about asynchronous processing do make me feel better if true.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not feel good in the first place?
This phone screams. You're comparing it to a Moto phone with Tegra 2 which will likely be one of the last new phones with Tegra 2. Enjoy the 3D. By the time something comes around to crush it, we'll be into 4 core territory, or Android will be updated to better support multiple cores (if I remember right, this was only really started for 3.0).
I'll agree the SGS2 seems like a killer but I'll take HTC build quality over Samsung any day of the week. Plus, let's see Exynos pushing qHD.
No I hear you. Truth is that there probably won't be any software written for quite sometime that is going to really push our current hardware. Besides I upgrade every year or so anyway, making future proofing less of an issue for me.
It's the principle of the thing.
Levito said:
No I hear you. Truth is that there probably won't be any software written for quite sometime that is going to really push our current hardware. Besides I upgrade every year or so anyway, making future proofing less of an issue for me.
It's the principle of the thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hear ya too, but you gotta try not to get caught up in numbers. Numbers can be manipulated. Manufacturers can tune their phones to perform better in Quadrant (this can also be done with custom ROMs; when it is, performance in other categories suffers). AMD and Intel still participate in this ePeen warfare.
I won't be surprised if we see that Evo 3D outperforms the Tegra Moto overall.
The good thing is, we will eventually see this thing rooted completely (hopefully not after it's lost most of its luster). THEN we will see what we can push out of this phone. Look how fast it's running sense. Imagine a vanilla Android experience on it, or an overclock to say, 1.8 GHz (which will probably happen). I dunno about you but I'm salivating.
Ok, the only benchmark I need to know is that my phone boots up from "off" in 10-12 seconds. Base your satisfaction on a constant, not on relativism.
megatron-g1 said:
1 possible reason why the EVO 3D isn't scoring as high as you expect is because I think the benchmark tests don't utilize CPU's with asynchonous dual cores correctly.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the Galaxy uses synchonous cores which mean they can only work on the same thing at the same time, they can't work on separate operations at the same time.
The EVO 3D has asynchonous cores which allow for true multitasking meaning each core will work on separate tasks. As I understand it, support for this type of CPU is going to be added in Android 2.4 and later, but don't quote me on that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Should be no difference to code for asynchronous or synchronous. The cores will run at full speed if they're pushed. Quadrant scores are more based on database read and write speeds than anything.
I've owned many many phones, and this one is by far the most fluid (although I have not had hands on with the Galaxy SII, but I hate Samsung's software)
I haven't run into a case where the phone stutters, have you?
I believe in the Anandtech benchmarks, they used a developer phone that has the same qualcomm chipset running at the stock 1.5ghz, while our phones were downclocked to 1.2ghz.
They might have done this for various reasons, it would be interesting to see how our phones overclock and if there's any changes in battery life.
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
markimar said:
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ill check on this when i get home. this issue im assuming is with honeycomb itself. we would assume that ICS would properly use those cores
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S II t989
i don't have it yet (mine gets delivered on wed), but what you observed makes perfect sense. Can they change it to run on say an 800 MHZ constant "down" to 500MHZ when doing the most simple tasks? obviously i to do not believe that 500MHZ will be sufficient at all times to do screen scrolling and such on it's own.
I'm really hoping that the few performance issues people are seeing is resolved in firmware updates and a tegra 3 optimized version of ICS. Maybe asus/nvidia needs to do more tweaking to HC before the ICS build is pushed if it will take a while for ICS to arrive to the prime (past january).
The cores are optimized just fine. They kick in when rendering a web page or a game, but go idle and use the 5th core when done. Games always render.
ryan562 said:
ill check on this when i get home. this issue im assuming is with honeycomb itself. we would assume that ICS would properly use those cores
Sent from my Samsung Galaxy S II t989
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing's changed over HC in the way ICS uses h/w acceleration. And I'd assume apps using h/w acceleration do so via calls to the OS, not to the chip directly. So it appears what you've got is what you're going to get.
---------- Post added at 06:59 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:55 PM ----------
markimar said:
OK I've got mine on normal mode, and this kind of confirms my original thought that the 500mhz 5th core is clocked to low. I find the pad actually speeds up when I have multiple items in my recently run tab! If my understanding of the way it works these programs are still running in the background right? Then it starts kicking in the other 4 and not just running on the 5th at 500mhz! I really think we'd see a speed boost if we can get that 5th core over 500. Yes its supposed to save battery life but I really don't think 500 is fast enough to run on its own. You're thoughts and observations?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Do you have Pulse installed? A bunch of people using it were reporting stuttering where their lower powered devices aren't. If you run it at full speed, does it stutter? One of the hypothesis is that it's the core's stepping up and down that's causing the stuttering.
BarryH_GEG said:
Nothing's changed over HC in the way ICS uses h/w acceleration. And I'd assume apps using h/w acceleration do so via calls to the OS, not to the chip directly. So it appears what you've got is what you're going to get.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the OS knows about the fifth core? I believe the chip's own scheduler manages the transition between the quad-core and the companion core, not the Android scheduler.
Mithent said:
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that the OS knows about the fifth core? I believe the chip's own scheduler manages the transition between the quad-core and the companion core, not the Android scheduler.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the way I'd guess it would work. I don't think Android addresses different chips differently. I'd assume it's up to the SoC to manage the incoming instructions and react accordingly. If Android was modified for dual-core, I don't think it diffentiates between the different implementations of dual-core chips. Someone with more h/w experience correct me if I'm wrong. Also, does anyone know if the chip manufacturer can add additional API's that developers can write to directly either instead of or in parallel with the OS? I ask because how can a game be optimized for Tegra if to the OS all chips are treated the same?
I tried out the power savings mode for a while.it seemed to perform just fine. Immediate difference is that it lowers the contrast ratio on display. This happens as soon as you press the power savings tab. Screen will look like brightness dropped a bit but if you look closely, you'll see it lowered the contrast ratio. Screen still looks good but not as sharp as in other 2 modes. UI still seems to preform just fine. Plus I think the modes doesn't affect gaming or video playback performance. I read that somewhere, either anandtech or Engadget. When watching vids or playing games, it goes into normal mode. So those things won't be affected no matter what power mode you in, I think..lol
I was thinking of starting a performance mode thread. To see different peoples results and thoughts on different power modes. I read some people post that they just use it in power/battery savings mode. Some keep it in normal all the time. Others in balanced mode. Would be good to see how these different modes perform in real life usage. From user perspective. I've noticed, so far, that In balanced mode, battery drains about 10% an hour. This is with nonstop use including gaming, watching vids, web surfing, etc. now in battery savings mode, it drains even less per hour. I haven't ran normal mode long enough to see how it drains compared to others. One thing though, web surfing drains battery just as fast as gaming.
BarryH_GEG said:
I ask because how can a game be optimized for Tegra if to the OS all chips are treated the same?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate quoting myself but I found the answer on Nvidia's website. Any otimizations are handled through OpenGL. So games written to handle additional calls that Teg2 can support are making those calls through OpenGL with the OS (I'm guessing) used as a pass-through. It would also explain why Tegra optimized games fail on non-Teg devices because they wouldn't be able process the additional requests. So it would appear that Teg optimization isn't being done through the OS. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
BarryH_GEG said:
That's the way I'd guess it would work. I don't think Android addresses different chips differently. I'd assume it's up to the SoC to manage the incoming instructions and react accordingly. If Android was modified for dual-core, I don't think it diffentiates between the different implementations of dual-core chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did some research on it; here's what Nvidia say:
The Android 3.x (Honeycomb) operating system has built-in support for multi-processing and is
capable of leveraging the performance of multiple CPU cores. However, the operating system
assumes that all available CPU cores are of equal performance capability and schedules tasks
to available cores based on this assumption. Therefore, in order to make the management of
the Companion core and main cores totally transparent to the operating system, Kal-El
implements both hardware-based and low level software-based management of the Companion
core and the main quad CPU cores.
Patented hardware and software CPU management logic continuously monitors CPU workload
to automatically and dynamically enable and disable the Companion core and the main CPU
cores. The decision to turn on and off the Companion and main cores is purely based on current
CPU workload levels and the resulting CPU operating frequency recommendations made by the
CPU frequency control subsystem embedded in the operating system kernel. The technology
does not require any application or OS modifications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/t...e-for-Low-Power-and-High-Performance-v1.1.pdf
So it uses the existing architecture for CPU power states, but intercepts that at a low level and uses it to control the companion core/quad-core switch?
Edit: I wonder if that means that tinkering with the scheduler/frequency control would allow the point at which the companion core/quad-core switch happens to be altered? If the OP is correct, this might allow the companion core to be utilised less if an increase in "smoothness" was desired, at the cost of some battery life?
Mithent said:
I wonder if that means that tinkering with the scheduler/frequency control would allow the point at which the companion core/quad-core switch happens to be altered? If the OP is correct, this might allow the companion core to be utilised less if an increase in "smoothness" was desired, at the cost of some battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what we guessed was right. The OS treats all multi-cores the same and it's up to the chip maker to optimize requests and return them. To your point, what happens between the three processors (1+1x2+1x2) is black-box and controlled by Nvidia. To any SetCPU type program it's just going to show up as a single chip. People have tried in vain to figure how to make the Qualcomm dual-core's act independently so I'd guess Teg3 will end up the same way. And Nvidia won't even publish their drivers so I highly doubt they'll provide any outside hooks to control something as sensitive as the performance of each individual core in what they're marketing as a single chip.
[/COLOR]
Do you have Pulse installed? A bunch of people using it were reporting stuttering where their lower powered devices aren't. If you run it at full speed, does it stutter? One of the hypothesis is that it's the core's stepping up and down that's causing the stuttering.[/QUOTE]
I have been running mine in balanced mode, have had pulse installed since day one, no lag or stuttering in anything. games, other apps work fine.
Well my phones when clocked at 500 so I wouldn't be surprised
Sent from my VS910 4G using xda premium