So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
jonathan3579 said:
So there were rumors that we'd not get the Hummingbird CPU here in the U.S. with our "Galaxy S phones" and after running the app Quadrant Standard, I'm a little confused. Here's the results that confuse me and it could be a simple lack of my knowledge so if anyone has the answer then please feel free to clue me in without flaming.
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
So does this mean we are NOT running the Hummingbird CPU or is the application wrong?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
greengoldmello said:
I believe that the arm v7 is a part of the cortex a8 family of processors, or vice versa.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm, I wonder why the app differentiates the two CPU's like that. I'm not able to come up with much info from searching for that exact CPU name other than info on the Motorola Droid X. Go figure...
I ran the benchmark and I was interested.
I hit up ARM's website and the ARMv7 falls under the Cortex A8 platform.
Now is there a difference in CPU's between the I9000 and the Vibrant I honestly cannot say. Very Very interesting though.
I wonder if anyone with a captivate can tell us what there's says I am interested in this.
Do you guys think that Samsung could have cheapened out and gave us a crappier CPU?
EDIT: I did some digging and found out that Apples A4 processor which is pretty much a hummingbird is under the ARMv7 instruction set which is a Cortex A8 processor.
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
jonathan3579 said:
I was able to pull up the same info in regard to the iPhone 4. I found that quite interesting. However, I'm still curious about a Captivate's results. The GPU is exactly the same on the app's results but it's just the CPU thing that bugs me. Is it normal for the phone to be running at 400 MHz? I keep turning up with that same result.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The processor will throttle itself based on demand, so yes it is totally normal to see a number less than 1000MHz
jonathan3579 said:
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My Vibrant shows Current frequency as 1000MHz.
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
gsvnet said:
Let's put it this way - T-Mobile and practically all marketing for the phones states it is in fact the 1ghz hummingbird CPU. If it isn't, then it is clearly false advertising.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So do we have any definitive answers on whether it's the same CPU that EU has? I've turned up with inconclusive results.
jonathan3579 said:
Result browser:
Device: Samsung Galaxy S
Other names: I900
CPU Name: ARM Cortex A8 (Hummingbird)
Max freq: 1000MHz
Now for me; I have a Vibrant...
Device: SGH-T959
CPU Name: ARMv7 Processor rev 2 (v71)
Current freq: 400MHz
Max freq: 1000MHz
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Cortex A8 is from the ARMv7 family of processors.
Think of it like Intel i7 family of processors, and individual processors being i7 965 or i7 920 or i3, or i5 or i9, etc. or better yet like intel processors being x86, then with all the different things they add on like mmx and hyperthreading and the like being additional instruction sets. so over time x86 gets tweaked for better performance, and the other instruction sets allow for specific tasks to be run faster. hence the difference between the different arm families. that and price tag.
any mobile processor will also dynamically clock itself based on requirements at the time. I don't know the exact frequencies because I haven't cared enough to find out, but the processor downclocks itself to something like 250mhz with the screen turned off, then up to 400mhz ish with the screen on, and then up to 800-1000mhz when running any applications or games or what have you. It does this to save battery life and not run too ungodly hot.
Laptops do the exact same thing, and desktop computers as well if you enable those settings to save on power consumption.
also the cortex a8 is just the cpu itself as far as i'm aware, that does not include the dsp nor the gpu.
ALL SGS phones run the same exact processor, Samsung's custom Hummingbird processor, with the cpu being 45nm based on the Cortex a8 (ARMv7 series) with some customizations, along with the SGX 540, i don't know what their dsp is off the top of my head though.
This is interesting!
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
rench32 said:
I have an incredible. I've noticed the exact same description for my processor using two different apps. If anyone has an answer I'd love to here it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon is also an ARM v7 CPU. basically ARM v7 is the CPU core, Snapdragon, OMAP, Hummingbird are all SoC(Systems on a Chip), where the CPU portion is ARM based.
I searched and searched and searched, I really want to know if qualcomm 1.5 ghz and adreno 220 in the tmo variant samsung galaxy s 2 is equal in performance as his brethren that sport the exynos and mali gpu. All the benchmarks I can find for the adreno are on qhd resolution. I thought about it but I couldn't find any backing to my theories that the adreno would run faster on a wvga resolution than qhd since the sgs2 is a wvga.
and would the qualcomm 1.5ghz soc run as efficient and fast as the exynos clocked at 1.2?
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
blackbeast8 said:
Hi all.
This is my first post here so forgive me if I've put it in the wrong forum.
I recently (6 days ago) bought a new phone, Ezio i95.
It looks like Samsung Galaxy S3/S4.
The specs are:
Quad core 1,8 GHz
2 GB RAM
Dual Sim
5" Super AMOLED screen (1920x1080), 440 ppi
But... In Antutu benchmark system info it correctly says that it is 1,8 GHz CPU (1741 MHz, to be precise). But, when I do the test, it sees only 1,2 GHz. When I try any app that does cpu scaling or any other cpu work, it also sees 1,2 GHz.
I searched for it on the net, but I didn't find anything conclusive. Actually, it seems that the CPU clock is really 1,2 GHz, but I don't know why and how do they sell it as 1,8. And how the hell Antutu sees it as 1,8?!?!?!
Here are screenshots:
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/9/kocl.png/
h ttp://imageshack. us/f/5/o0ph.png/
And here is from mediatek wiki:
MT6589[a] Cortex A7 (ARMv7) 28 nm 1.2*GHz quad-core PowerVR SGX544 @ 286*MHz
Any Ideas?!
Thanks in advance.
System won't let me to post a link, because I'm new, so I tried this workaround. Hope you don't mind. I've put two spaces.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
justmpm said:
I am not familiar with the device or the ROM you are using (stock?). But if you install cpuspy it will tell you all the freqs that are allowed and how much time your cpu spends at each freq. My guess is that the freq table goes up to 1.8GHz but that somewhere the maxfreq is set to 1.2 GHz. You might be able to up the maxfreq using an app like setcpu. The cpu you have is rated to 1.2 GHz so any overclocking you do comes with the risk that you will damage your phone. Basically if the cpu is getting hot....better back off the overclocking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Every app I tried, including SetCPU and CpuSpy, shows 1,2 GHz as max frequency. As you can see on screenshots, Antutu benchmark shows in system info 1,8 GHz (1741 MHz actually), but in test it uses 1,2 GHz. TBH, the only place I saw 1,8 GHz was in Antutu, not anywhere else.
I contacted the seller, and he is trying to convince me that the phone has CPU Booster and that frequency is really 1,8 GHz. I now sent him screenshots in order to convince him that he is wrong...
I researched that cpu, mt5689 and its max freq is 1,2. mt5689T is 1,5 GHz, but this one is without T.
Kernel version is 3.4.5, from 19th June this year
Baseband version: MOLY.WR8.W1248.MD.WG.MP.V6.P4, 2013/05/04
Android version is 4.2.3
I found some info about ROM: 06_v89_hydy_dangdang_gemi
h ttp://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3662/kocl.png
h ttp://img5.imageshack.us/img5/4357/o0ph.png
If that anything means to you...
I am not trying to overclock my phone, I just want to be able to use what I've payed for. I could have bought 1,2 GHz, but I payed for this one and I want to use it, that's the poing...
Unfortunately, only after I bought it, I found all this. I didn't inform myself enough, before purchasing...
Thanks anyway
The seller is still trying to convince me that the max cpu freq is 1,8 GHz, with cpu booster, but I still cannot see or use it in any app, except that Antutu benchmark sees the 1,8 GHz as max, but still uses 1,2 GHz.
Chipset and cpu is rated to 1,2 GHz, as I saw on mt6589 reviews, so I think that I am fooled...
Good morning, my name is Jorge Martinez, I am another ezio buyer i95, I arrived with several flaws, the most serious the gps it is impossible to make it work, even after following many online tutorials.
The on / off button sometimes gets caught and resets.
The headphone connection is not good and sounds bad.
Reviewed this to the salesman told me they would give me support, etc, etc, told me I was going to wait to send another new model, gave me all kinds of options, but ultimately it only to gain time.
Once you pass the time of the vote, and has forgotten all its commitments and ripped me off.
I recommend everyone to not deal with the seller, who has only good words but deceives.
I hope my mistake serve for one to be saved from falling into this trap, but also effectively tells you it's quad core 1.8, it's actually 1.2.
Greetings all, I hope this information will be useful.
Demonstrating GPS reception via Device-Z-Test app. My S3 on the left and Ezio I95 on the right.
The latter, bought through eBay, was successfully returned to the Hong Kong exporter.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4
Ezio i95 Stock rom
Any one had ezio i95 stok rom?
ezio 95
hi,
I have read that some of the specs get rewritten within the operating system to fool antutu.
However I am also after a copy of the stock rom. I have a enzio s89 that I have bricked before I made a rom copy. This ezio i95 uses the same processor and is about the same size Maybe it will work in mine.
Are you able to download MTK droid tools and make a copy of your stock rom please. That is always worth doing in any case.
Hello Developers,
Greetings to everyone!
I am looking at the specifications of a device using the Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 processor which is advertised at 1.2 GHz speed. When I tried to boot up the device, the internal specifications only show 1.19 GHz. My thought is that the device was designed at a lower clock speed considering performance vs. device heat & battery life. Is this generally true? and is it advisable to design a device at full rating?
In a project/business scenario, how do we explain this discrepancy in lay man's term? (e.g. the business requirement is for a manufacturer to create a device performing at 1.2 GHz using Qualcomm Snapdragon 400 but the device is running at 1.19 Ghz only). What information can we request from the manufacturer to address the concern?
Thank you in advance!
Could somebody please explain why the Snapdragon 821 @ 2.4 GHz has TWICE the single-core benchmark score compared to the MediaTek Helio P35 @ 2.3 GHz!?
https://nanoreview.net/en/soc/qualcomm-snapdragon-821
https://nanoreview.net/en/soc/mediatek-helio-p35
I can confirm that Snapdragon 821 devices indeed perform way better when it comes to say, emulation, but the question is... WHY? (considering it's only 0.1 GHz ahead in terms of clock speed)