I just got my SGS2 today and was so eager I had it rooted within 2 hours of it being placed in my hands. I was messing around in quadrant and clicked System Information..I scrolled to the CPU section and by Cores it says 1..but my friends sgs2 says 2 cores. He has the Sprint model.
Now why does it say I only have 1 core when this phone has 2?
re: CORES
Ensomniacc said:
I just got my SGS2 today and was so eager I had it rooted within 2 hours of it being placed in my hands. I was messing around in quadrant and clicked System Information..I scrolled to the CPU section and by Cores it says 1..but my friends sgs2 says 2 cores. He has the Sprint model.
Now why does it say I only have 1 core when this phone has 2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because sometimes depending on the service providor some details
shown are not as specific as with other service providors.
Now if your friend was on AT&T like you you noticed
this difference then it would be a different matter.
Depends on your current frequency... when mine is 500MHz or higher, Quadrant returns 2 cores... when running low frequencies, it will return value of 1 core. If you load up a few apps, then jump over to Quadrant, it will most likely show 2 cores as your CPU frequency will be higher.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
The exynos cores on our phones run asynchronous - when not needed one of the cores will power down, and as soon as it is needed it will ramp up. so just as the poster above posted when the first processor throttles down the second will shut off to save power, there is no need for two processors running using battery when demand for them is low.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
DoctorQMM said:
Depends on your current frequency... when mine is 500MHz or higher, Quadrant returns 2 cores... when running low frequencies, it will return value of 1 core. If you load up a few apps, then jump over to Quadrant, it will most likely show 2 cores as your CPU frequency will be higher.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not exactly depending on frequency... I don't remember the exact hotplugging heuristic.
But in general - The second core is shut off by default and only gets powered on when under load.
Note that some dual-core phones (like Atrix) always show two cores because they are unable to fully remove the second core from a system and completely shut it down to save power. (Well, I assume the Atrix - I know the Tegra in my Tab 10.1 can't hotplug the second core out/in.)
Related
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
its saying that since .15 upgrade
Odd
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk
Actually, I think its the bogomips.
As does mine.
But the AnTuTu Benchmark system info shows the correct stuff. My guess? The actual tester hasn't been updated as frequently as the Benchmark.
If we got that high of a clock, especially with all 4 cores, our Tegra 3's would burn up in like two seconds lol
AnTuTu Battery test was making my Prime so hot I quit it out of fear
buxtahuda said:
As does mine.
But the AnTuTu Benchmark system info shows the correct stuff. My guess? The actual tester hasn't been updated as frequently as the Benchmark.
If we got that high of a clock, especially with all 4 cores, our Tegra 3's would burn up in like two seconds lol
AnTuTu Battery test was making my Prime so hot I quit it out of fear
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's only about 400MHz more than what it's running now, if you unlocked the 1.6GHz setting. I've seen speculation that we might be able to hit 2.0, but it's just that; speculation. I'm hoping it'll become a reality
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
SteveG12543 said:
That's only about 400MHz more than what it's running now, if you unlocked the 1.6GHz setting. I've seen speculation that we might be able to hit 2.0, but it's just that; speculation. I'm hoping it'll become a reality
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, but that's the point I'm making. 5 minutes running all 4 cores at 1.6 GHz had my Prime at 42 degrees Celsius! 46.2 degrees is when I have my devices all but shut down to about 200 MHz... Like one or two minutes, all 4 cores, at 2.0 GHz, I don't see being actually usable.
Awesome for quick benchmarking? Yes. Awesome when utilized in Power Saving mode and using 2 or 3 cores? Sure.
Usable for gaming with all 4 cores? Hell no lol the Prime would melt IMO
P.s. I personally think we'll top out on the best Primes at about 2.2/2.3, with many users incapable of going past 1.8/1.9 without reboots and freezes and such. Just my own speculation, but the dev's shall show us.
buxtahuda said:
I know, but that's the point I'm making. 5 minutes running all 4 cores at 1.6 GHz had my Prime at 42 degrees Celsius! 46.2 degrees is when I have my devices all but shut down to about 200 MHz... Like one or two minutes, all 4 cores, at 2.0 GHz, I don't see being actually usable.
Awesome for quick benchmarking? Yes. Awesome when utilized in Power Saving mode and using 2 or 3 cores? Sure.
Usable for gaming with all 4 cores? Hell no lol the Prime would melt IMO
P.s. I personally think we'll top out on the best Primes at about 2.2/2.3, with many users incapable of going past 1.8/1.9 without reboots and freezes and such. Just my own speculation, but the dev's shall show us.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow mine never gets that hot. Or even hot at all, really. Which governor did you have it set to? I always have mine set to 102MHz-1.6GHz with the interactive governor, and in performance mode, of course.
That's a good estimate for max clock speeds, I'd say. Can't wait to find out what the highest will be though!
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
SteveG12543 said:
Wow mine never gets that hot. Or even hot at all, really. Which governor did you have it set to? I always have mine set to 102MHz-1.6GHz with the interactive governor, and in performance mode, of course.
That's a good estimate for max clock speeds, I'd say. Can't wait to find out what the highest will be though!
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using XDA Premium.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, no scaling.
I realize it's not realistic, things aren't going to run that way, but that's strictly 1.6 GHz for about five straight minutes.
Oh no, running my normal Profiles, it's always Ondemand and lower clocks the lower the battery gets. I stay pretty low on temp with normal use.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium via my tethered HTC Vision
but wiki says that max clockrate is 2.0ghz so maybe its capable of doing that? but then its for all arm cortex-a9 so maybe for the future ones? but a15 is out soon
I'm using CM9 RC1 on a Note right now and the default settings are 200 Mhz min and 1.4 Ghz max.
Is there any benefit to using a higher min like 500 Mhz or is it just a waste of power? I'd assume it would be slightly faster upon wake up.
You can always try, as long as you know what you're doing. Are you familiar with overclocking, and how to test higher clock speeds without having them set on boot until you have tested for stability. 200MHz seems a bit low for echo 0, but you can try to start bumping up echo table 0 values slowly and at small incremental increases. For instance, from 200MHz, go to 220MHz and test, then if stable bump up to 240MHz and so on. Jumping from 200MHz to 500MHz may not be the best idea without a "seasoning" of the CPU at echo table 0...
Sent from my MB865 using xda's premium carrier pigeon service
I've overclocked on PCs before but I'm not overclocking. I just want to know if there's any benefit to setting a higher min speed.
It probably will not yield any performance increase to clock your lowest frequently scaling higher, since likely your device's governor (I'm assuming) is set to mot_hotplug.
Unless you're using a governor setting of "performance" or the like, your CPU's governor will step down through the kernel's frequently tables as determined by the load. Again, unless you're running a governor setting that does anything but what is similarly done with mot_hotplug the CPU's core(s) will be turned off when not demanded.
Sent from my ME860 using xda premium
Ive been using android overclock. On demand. and staying at 350 to 1420 and its been working really well as far as battery usage
I´ve been using ondemand-noop min 245, max 1024
Ok. That was 2012. Now is 2020. Updates to minimum and maximum for Android 8/9???
quantum-codes said:
Ok. That was 2012. Now is 2020. Updates to minimum and maximum for Android 8/9???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to have said it: CPU speed affects performance of Android device, doesn't depend on Android version. The more a processor is stressed the more the battery is drained. IMHO CPU speeds matter less than they did in the past, thanks to the advent of multi-core processors as they installed in ( most ) modern phones. Multi-core processors always have a "mixed speed": Not all cores are stressed the same way. Also, note how these multi-cores processors are designed: Octa-cores for example aren't using all 8 cores at once. Octa-cores use 4 high speed cores and 4 low speed power efficient cores. An Octa-core uses the 4 power efficient cores most of the time, but switches to the higher speed cores as needed for power intensive tasks.
I don't think there is a way to configure each cpu-core's max /min speed separately. BTW: Even today most Android apps/games make use of 2 cores only.
Does anyone know if changes made to scaling governor or clock speeds are applied to all four cores or only to core #1? How would you verify that said changes have been applied to all cores?
I dont know much about this stuff and just assumed that it applied to all cores, but today i was just wasting some time with benchmarking apps and in the Device Details tab of the "Vellamo Mobile Benchmark" app, it showed only Core #1 was effected by any changes i made. The other three cores were unchanged...any thoughts?
I used "no-frills cpu control" to select governor and clock speed.
Thanks
I am certain that any change in governor for core 0 will affect the other cores equally.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
I was messing around with this a bit ago. I use perfmon app. Any change in frequency or governor only seem to effect core 0. Also in that process I noticed my cores1-3 got stuck at only up to 1134 MHz. I can't seem to fix that anymore
Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2
Hi all
I have moved rather upgraded to the S6e and boy am I happy..amazing device. I happened to download cpu spy reborn app from play store and the funny thing was the app showed a max freq of 1500 mhz...am I missing something here or is the app not optimised to measure 8 core setups? Anyone else faced this issue?
From my understanding you need a Kernel that will support Overclocking/ Undervolting.
Now the GS6 has 8 cores.
The first 4 are used for low frequencies 0-1.5 GHz.
The last 4 are used for higher frequencies 0-2.1 GHZ.
Hope that helps.
I'm not sure if that's totally correct but from what I've read that seems to be the case.
amirage said:
Hi all
I have moved rather upgraded to the S6e and boy am I happy..amazing device. I happened to download cpu spy reborn app from play store and the funny thing was the app showed a max freq of 1500 mhz...am I missing something here or is the app not optimised to measure 8 core setups? Anyone else faced this issue?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's probably not been updated. Usually you take data from cpu0, but in this case cpu0 only accounts for the A53 cores. Any app would need to also read from cpu4 for the other 4 cores. If it doesn't do that, the app can't know that there are more than 4 cores.
mythos234 said:
It's probably not been updated. Usually you take data from cpu0, but in this case cpu0 only accounts for the A53 cores. Any app would need to also read from cpu4 for the other 4 cores. If it doesn't do that, the app can't know that there are more than 4 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Rjmcgauley said:
From my understanding you need a Kernel that will support Overclocking/ Undervolting.
Now the GS6 has 8 cores.
The first 4 are used for low frequencies 0-1.5 GHz.
The last 4 are used for higher frequencies 0-2.1 GHZ.
Hope that helps.
I'm not sure if that's totally correct but from what I've read that seems to be the case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the replies...I guessed the same too..