Hey guys, bit of a noob question here but nevertheless i shall ask it anyway
So as we know the samsung galaxy s3 has a quad core processor which churns out 1.4ghz which is rather fast!
But ive only seen the overclocking abilities for it to run at 1.7ghz max? Why is this? the galaxy note can run at 1.9ghz via dual core.
my question is this, why cant is run at over 2ghz? i mean 1.4 is enough but id like to say "my phone can run the same speed as my laptop"
Sorry for the noob-ish question but if anyone would reply, it would be great
Jack.
I've yet see a phone that can open the http://www.theverge.com/ at a decent speed.
I overcloceked to 1.6Mhz and still didn't make any difference.
Why would you want to run at 2.0Mhz?
Running at that speed would juts increase battery usage and overheat the CPU.
Ah right, yeah it even took my computer like 10seconds to load that site!
why wouldnt you want a phone to run at over 2ghz? admittedly your right about the overheat and battery life
For that exact reason...heat and battery life. What more reason would you need. For most instances its unnecessary. Isn't saying its quad core enough...
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
It will be faster wait for jellybean its optimized for more cores
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
The same applies to pc chips, more cores mean more heat. It's why many current dual and quad core chips are faster than the newer hex and 8 core chips. Less cores means more room for heat tolerances.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
LowSky said:
The same applies to pc chips, more cores mean more heat. It's why many current dual and quad core chips are faster than the newer hex and 8 core chips. Less cores means more room for heat tolerances.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason dual and quad cores are faster is because of the limitation of software and how multithreaded it can be (and there will be a point of diminishing returns which will be a lot sooner for basic programs).
I have a dual core 3ghz pc and my new pc is just 2.8ghz quad i7.... My old pc must be much faster!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
jhericurls said:
I've yet see a phone that can open the http://www.theverge.com/ at a decent speed.
I overcloceked to 1.6Mhz and still didn't make any difference.
Why would you want to run at 2.0Mhz?
Running at that speed would juts increase battery usage and overheat the CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It seems the SGS3 can open and scroll through http://www.theverge.com/ very fast, I've just tested it.
Is it not fast enough on yours?
JackHanAnLG said:
Hey guys, bit of a noob question here but nevertheless i shall ask it anyway
So as we know the samsung galaxy s3 has a quad core processor which churns out 1.4ghz which is rather fast!
But ive only seen the overclocking abilities for it to run at 1.7ghz max? Why is this? the galaxy note can run at 1.9ghz via dual core.
my question is this, why cant is run at over 2ghz? i mean 1.4 is enough but id like to say "my phone can run the same speed as my laptop"
Sorry for the noob-ish question but if anyone would reply, it would be great
Jack.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
norpan111 said:
I have a dual core 3ghz pc and my new pc is just 2.8ghz quad i7.... My old pc must be much faster!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I lol'd. 1.7ghz quad is leaps and bounds better than 1.9ghz dual. 1.7 and 1.9 ghz isn't that big of a leap, but 2 cores versus 4 cores is pretty significant. Jelly Bean improves multi-core processors so the SGS3 International version is going to be even more sick-nasty (in a good way) once that rolls out.
Chaos Residue said:
I lol'd. 1.7ghz quad is leaps and bounds better than 1.9ghz dual. 1.7 and 1.9 ghz isn't that big of a leap, but 2 cores versus 4 cores is pretty significant. Jelly Bean improves multi-core processors so the SGS3 International version is going to be even more sick-nasty (in a good way) once that rolls out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
NIK516 said:
It will be faster wait for jellybean its optimized for more cores
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it isn't. Not anymore than ICS.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
I dont know why u compairing a desktop pc to galaxy s3. A pc will win hands down but I have a fairly upto date pc. And since got this phone i never really use it unless doing video editing. This phone is great and is as good as a standarded laptop If not better. This speed is brilliant to, maybe jelly bean will make a great phone greater. And another thing apps for this phone weather it be media or web browsing etc isn't really pushing this phone to the limit. So give it a while might see a bigger improvement.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
There is more to CPU performance than the clock frequency, core efficiency is the key here.
E.g. Intel P4 processor -v- Intel 'Conroe' Processors.
The newer Conroe processors were smashing the granny out of the older P4 processor despite the significant lower clock speed. Does that mean the newer processors are inferior? No, it just means each clock cycle handles more instructions.
If you want willy waving rights about how awesome your phone is go buy an iPhone and check if theres an app for that.
joshnichols189 said:
NIK516 said:
It will be faster wait for jellybean its optimized for more cores
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it isn't. Not anymore than ICS.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android 4.1 Jelly Bean
In "Project Butter," Google has worked to improve graphical performance and touch responsiveness. On the graphics side, Android is now v-synced at 60 frames a second, with triple-buffered graphics. The result is that scrolling, paging, and animations are all smoother and consistent.
To make touch feel better, Google is making it anticipatory, so that the touch data applications receive corresponds to where fingers will be the next time the screen is redrawn. This means that apps won't have to be one step behind where the user's fingers actually are. Jelly Bean will also immediately ramp CPUs to their full speed whenever touch interaction is detected. This avoids lag caused by slower processing when the CPUs are in low power modes.
For developers, the Jelly Bean SDK will include a new profiling tool, systrace, that provides a clear visualization of their applications' use of the CPU, GPU, and other system components, so that bottlenecks can be more readily identified and resolved.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nothing specifically says "Jelly Bean is optimized for multi-core processors". That said, that entire article shows that Jelly Bean was brought about with processors in mind. You really think Google is going to make an OS that will "ramp CPUs to their full speed whenever touch interaction is detected," and "include a new profiling tool" that shows applications "use of the CPU" but not make sure it's going to be optimized for dual and quad-core devices? Also, keep this in mind:
Jelly Bean Lite
Jelly Bean Lite: Android OS definitely works efficiently on high-end dual-core phones. However, when it comes to lower end devices, the performance, reportedly, becomes very poor. Many users have also urged Google to release a lighter version of Android OS for midrange and lower end smartphones to rid themselves of the problem of performance of OS.
Rumors are already rife that Google will release a lighter version (Jelly Bean Lite) for smartphones with limited CPU and storage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd say you're probably wrong about Jelly Bean not being optimized for multi-core devices.
What really matters to the average person is that in real life use the S3 really isn't that much faster than S2, so until we get an OS optimised for those extra cores all we really gonna have is the "My processor's bigger than your processor" bragging rights.
Michael_P said:
What really matters to the average person is that in real life use the S3 really isn't that much faster than S2, so until we get an OS optimised for those extra cores all we really gonna have is the "My processor's bigger than your processor" bragging rights.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmark scores do show that it's a decent difference in the S2 versus the S3, though overall I would have to agree with you. But Jelly Bean will definitely be closer to the mark than Ice Cream Sandwich in terms of CPU optimization. That's my personal opinion based on my above comment of course.
JackHanAnLG said:
why wouldnt you want a phone to run at over 2ghz? admittedly your right about the overheat and battery life
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because I paid a lot for this phone and don't want it to break.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
I wonder why we take the matter with Overcloacken so important. as far as I know there are no games or apps which support the 4 cores. we should wait. I'm curious
Related
I picked up my Galaxy SII after seeing the disappointing specs on the iPhone 4S. But today I read preliminary benchmarks and it smokes the SII.
Sorry, unable to post a link yet.
How can a 800 mhz cpu beat the SII's 1.2 ghz processor?
I am confused. Am I missing something?
026TB4U said:
I picked up my Galaxy SII after seeing the disappointing specs on the iPhone 4S. But today I read preliminary benchmarks and it smokes the SII.
Sorry, unable to post a link yet.
How can a 800 mhz cpu beat the SII's 1.2 ghz processor?
I am confused. Am I missing something?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because benchmarks don't mean jack ****.
Look at how Quadrant scores are all over the damned place with no correspondence to actual usability.
its all about the software. I expect some good gains when moving over to ICS.
Edit, corrected iPhone processor family name.
Trying to benchmark across different operating systems and hardware is not easy to accomplish, but I can tell you that an (Apple A5) A9 800 mhz duel core Samsung processor is not faster than (Exynos) A9 1.2 ghz duel core Samsung processor.
Yes both phones processors are made by Samsung
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
Entropy512 said:
Because benchmarks don't mean jack ****.
Look at how Quadrant scores are all over the damned place with no correspondence to actual usability.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 10 char
dayv said:
Trying to benchmark across different operating systems and hardware is not easy to accomplish, but I can tell you that an A5 800 mhz duel core Samsung processor is not faster than A9 1.2 ghz duel core Samsung processor.
Yes both phones processors are made by Samsung
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true but your wording is a bit confusing. An "Apple A5" processor is a dual core a9 processor with a powervr 543mp2 gpu. An A5 processor is an Arm core made for ultra low power. Basically both the apple a5 and the exynos processor have have the same processor architecture but there are many other factors that can influence performance like the GPU, memory, cache, decoders, ect. In this case i think the main discrepancy will be the software thats so different between the two.
footballrunner800 said:
This is true but your wording is a bit confusing. An "Apple A5" processor is a dual core a9 processor with a powervr 543mp2 gpu. An A5 processor is an Arm core made for ultra low power. Basically both the apple a5 and the exynos processor have have the same processor architecture but there are many other factors that can influence performance like the GPU, memory, cache, decoders, ect. In this case i think the main discrepancy will be the software thats so different between the two.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did not doubt that both processors were of the same type and architecture, but I did not realize that apple A5 was just an apple brand and that both processors were A9. Both are still Samsung family processor one clocked at 800 mhz one clocked at 1.2 GHz
Thank you for the correction
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using XDA App
The iPhone is probably utilizing the processor to it's full extent, while Gingerbread (and Android in general) does a terrible job of utilizing the power of the hardware.
ICS should see a nice performance increase on dual cores.
OP is probably refering to the benchmark for gaming. It's not the processor that lacks on GS2. If iPhone 4S does come with the same A5 as iPad2, its GPU will smoke Mali400 in GS2 in almost every benchmark test (in most benchmarks, it is twice as fast as Mali400). Just checkout the review of Internationl GS2 by Anandtech.com with benchmark comparison of GS2 vs iPad2 and other smartphones. It is not the Quadrant or Linkpack benchmark but rather the professional benchmarks measuring fill rates and triangle thoughputs etc.
Processor performance wise, it is probably a wash because both are based on the same ARM design.
Although I do agree that benchmarks are just benchmarks, I am still surprised.
Is it true that Gingerbread only utilizes one cpu? And will Ice Cream Sandwich utilize both?
And BTW, I am by no means an Apple fanboy. I had been waiting for this phone to come out to replace my dinosaur BB 9000, so I wouldn't have to get an iPhone and deal with iTunes.
iOS5 > gingerbread. Sad but true.
Hope ICS comes out soon. It seems to be on par from what I hear.
Sent from my Galaxy S II using Tapatalk
I think I saw the benchmark in question - it was a GPU-heavy benchmark for a workload that most users won't experience 99% of the time. (It was a GPU-bound OpenGL benchmark. The GPU of the iPhone 4S IS faster than ours for 3D work - but unless you do lots of 3D gaming, it's wasted. Also, 3D is kind of a waste on a 3.5" screen.)
Apple has an extremely long history of misleading the public with selective benchmarking. Back in the Pentium II or III days, they claimed one of their machines was twice as fast as an Intel machine clocked at least 50% higher. While I agree that MHz isn't everything, there's a limit to that. In that case, on a single Photoshop benchmark that was optimized for PowerPC by using AltiVec and running non-optimized on the Intel chip (despite an optimized MMX or SSE implementation being available), the Apple did better - and Apple used that to try and make users believe the machine was twice as fast for all workloads.
026TB4U said:
Is it true that Gingerbread only utilizes one cpu? And will Ice Cream Sandwich utilize both?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is true.
I guess the benchmarking was for the javascript using safari browser. So it's apple vs oranges. Also completely 2 different OS. Let's run quadrant if it's available for iOS the see how it handles. In the mean time enjoy the best and fastest smartphone currently in the market no matter what other says.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using xda premium
It could be ten times faster than a GII, but it still has a 3.5" screen, and I-jail. My wife and kids have Iphone 4's and there is no way I would trade no matter how fast this new one is.
aintwaven said:
It could be ten times faster than a GII, but it still has a 3.5" screen, and I-jail. My wife and kids have Iphone 4's and there is no way I would trade no matter how fast this new one is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Except for the wife and kids part(I have neither) this. Very much this.
Just ran the SunSpider Javascript on CM7.1. Results seem to be quite a bit better than the ones I see posted on AnandTech. Obviously they were running the GS2 stock but I was surprised to see my numbers so low. Also did the GLBenchmark and while the Egypt was slower, the Pro was faster on CM7.1. Coin flip to me it seems...
Those are just plain synthetic benchmark, what does it mean for RL usage? not a damn thing.
You think all the fashionnista who's buying iphone 4s gonna care how fast their CPU are?
footballrunner800 said:
its all about the software. I expect some good gains when moving over to ICS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the problem with android; it is always wait for the next version of software, it'll be better then. How about making a good version now?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Tapatalk
arctia said:
iOS5 > gingerbread. Sad but true.
Hope ICS comes out soon. It seems to be on par from what I hear.
Sent from my Galaxy S II using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you high and drunk?? As far as I'm aware, iOS5 is just playing catch up to Android. There isn't one feature that they implemented that hasn't already been introduced in Android since the Froyo days.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUEG7kQegSA&feature=share
I see the GS2 has been to 1.8 GHz and it has the same processor as ours. So is it being attempted?
Arich0908 said:
I see the GS2 has been to 1.8 GHz and it has the same processor as ours. So is it being attempted?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read around, Faux has it up to 1.7
Sent from my HTC Amaze 4G using XDA App
Yes, there is a kernel by faux123 that goes up to 1.7GHz
Development forum.
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA App
1.7 is all we can get right now? I was at 1.9 with my htc g2
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA App
Bdix said:
1.7 is all we can get right now? I was at 1.9 with my htc g2
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Likewise, but that was a single core chip and for whatever reason it seemed to handle the increase in frequency wih a little more stability.
I can't really imagine what you would need a high frequency like that for on our device though, I watch mkv's with ease on this thing.
Besides it was like 8 months after the g2 the was released that kernels had that capability.
Bdix said:
1.7 is all we can get right now? I was at 1.9 with my htc g2
Sent from my HTC_Amaze_4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
honestly gingerbread is only optimized for one core. and At 1.5 I don't see any lag or any stutters whatsoever, Thats why I just clock my phone at 1.5 or even 1.4 sometimes...I don't understand why phones need a dual core?? its just a massive battery drainage and sell point. my old single core laptop runs windows 7 very smoothly...you're telling me we need a dual core processor on our phones to run android!!!
Waste of battery imo, if you're into gaming just get a psp, you'll get a wider selection of games, and also a much much better battery life that won't chip into your talktime
seansk said:
honestly gingerbread is only optimized for one core. and At 1.5 I don't see any lag or any stutters whatsoever, Thats why I just clock my phone at 1.5 or even 1.4 sometimes...I don't understand why phones need a dual core?? its just a massive battery drainage and sell point. my old single core laptop runs windows 7 very smoothly...you're telling me we need a dual core processor on our phones to run android!!!
Waste of battery imo, if you're into gaming just get a psp, you'll get a wider selection of games, and also a much much better battery life that won't chip into your talktime
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gingerbread may be optimized for one core but what about ICS? That's why we have it.. would you have bought the Amaze if it was single core?
And as far as over-clocking, if I'm understanding things correctly. The kernel is OC'd but isn't it only one kernel taking load a majority of the time? So it seems to me that its really like over-clocking a single core.
Sent from my HTC Amaze 4G using XDA App
Fahnix said:
Gingerbread may be optimized for one core but what about ICS? That's why we have it.. would you have bought the Amaze if it was single core?
And as far as over-clocking, if I'm understanding things correctly. The kernel is OC'd but isn't it only one kernel taking load a majority of the time? So it seems to me that its really like over-clocking a single core.
Sent from my HTC Amaze 4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ya overclocking a single core basically the second core is off whenever i check it. yes I understand ICS supports multicore and so does honeycomb. But do we really need multiple cores? my point was that It really is not needed, unless you're trying to play a really high def game!!!! playing high def games gives you about 2 or 3 hours max battery life, so you might as well just get a psp!!! you see my point? I overclocked my old N1 cause it was laggy, or getting laggy, and overclocking does not always mean better performance. it strains the processor and sometimes causes even more stutter!
seansk said:
honestly gingerbread is only optimized for one core. and At 1.5 I don't see any lag or any stutters whatsoever, Thats why I just clock my phone at 1.5 or even 1.4 sometimes...I don't understand why phones need a dual core?? its just a massive battery drainage and sell point. my old single core laptop runs windows 7 very smoothly...you're telling me we need a dual core processor on our phones to run android!!!
Waste of battery imo, if you're into gaming just get a psp, you'll get a wider selection of games, and also a much much better battery life that won't chip into your talktime
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I thought the same until i read more about the way android uses the cores. it doesnt always use both cores at the same time like Windows would.. It uses the other core when it needs to, Google just needs more optimizing and such. but i guess thats what ICS is for
I would agree but coming from a single core phone to my amaze. What a huge difference. So I say what ever there doing keep it up.
I love a dual core. Im surfing the web on a quad core amd, and my phone is just as quick as my computer .
Here is my next question. I dont know much on how to over clock a phone . I cant imagine its anything like overclocking my PC .
Where can I read more to find out on how to because I would love to.
if used correctly dual core can give much better battery life once it is supported fully by ICS. the trick is to have both processors work simultaneously on one task for battery purposes. for multitasking it is probably not a good idea, it will probably require good kernel and governor to figure it out here:
Just in case some of you missed it over at android central.
Just a quick demo of the S4 Krait vs the Tegra 3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6xb8t3FoFI&feature=player_embedded
Source:By Chris Parsons
http://www.androidcentral.com/att-one-x-benchmarks-pit-qualcomm-snapdragon-s4-against-nvidia-tegra-3
the Tegra 3 should probably shine when a Tegra 3 optimized app is used for comparison. not sure if you need special software framework to take advantage of the quad core +1
S4 build off the a15 takes the cake. Qualcomm did a great job with it.
some benchmarks indicate the tegra is more powerful and some indicate that the snapdragon is more powerful however it is ussually hinted that the snapdragon will provide similar performance but save battery because of its asynchronous dual cores. really it is all about software and drivers and nvidia is renowned for their developments in both. nvidia will get the game first, run them smoothly and display well optimized graphics. it doesn`t matter how pwerful the hardware is if the software can`t take advantage of it. this is clearly indicated in the last generation snapdragons which had terrible gpu issues due to poor gpu drivers. keep in mind however that many apps have not been optimised for quad core and may not run at their best.
Yes this is pretty well known here...each SoC has its own advantage over the other....specifically the Tegra3 should sin out GPU wise, while the S4 wins out in some other categories...
sgt. slaughter said:
Yes this is pretty well known here...each SoC has its own advantage over the other....specifically the Tegra3 should sin out GPU wise, while the S4 wins out in some other categories...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Did you not see the video? S4 spanked tegra3 in the graphics benchmark
Sent from my PG86100 using Tapatalk 2
Why was his tegra3 phone so much smaller? I thought they were both the same size just different soc?
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
bballer71418 said:
Why was his tegra3 phone so much smaller? I thought they were both the same size just different soc?
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are the same size one phone was on display platform and the other was laying flat..... Basically both phones in different angles.
pretty intresting test breakup, tegra 3 looks to have cpu cores with a lot more omph but its extremely memory-starved, even if nominally it should have twice the mhz for memory than s4 (from the datasheet, dunno what kind of memory HTC actually shipped in that phone)
as for graphics its a bit funny that the S4 gpu core is a development of one ati/amd project(*), even here we have ati/amd VS nvidia showoff...
(*) selling their mobile division for pocket change just when mobile chips were starting to become the biggest cpu business in the world was really the stupidiest thing even done by amd...
Anyone else have the feeling S4 gonna spank the new G3 Exynos chip too ?
meangreenie said:
Anyone else have the feeling S4 gonna spank the new G3 Exynos chip too ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dont know about spank, but it will be on par with everything except for graphics. I would expect the exynos to be better because of the GPU.
Is it just me or does the speed of a processor matter anymore?
Seriously. I have tried murdering my 3D with tons of roms, multiple resource hungry apps, graphics intense games, fancy live wall papers, and STILL. She barely breaks a sweat.
I do understand bragging rights with fellow gadget heads but really as long as I can play my occasional game, listen to music, watch porn, and do my social thing, I'm happy as can be. Battery life is my bragging game now.
munsterrr said:
Is it just me or does the speed of a processor matter anymore?
Seriously. I have tried murdering my 3D with tons of roms, multiple resource hungry apps, graphics intense games, fancy live wall papers, and STILL. She barely breaks a sweat.
I do understand bragging rights with fellow gadget heads but really as long as I can play my occasional game, listen to music, watch porn, and do my social thing, I'm happy as can be. Battery life is my bragging game now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know about you, but I use the MEAN ROM and while it is the best ROM hands down, I still don't get the performance I would expect from a dual core phone. It is the best performer among other ROMS, but still not what I would expect in this day and age. When I am connected to WIFI, I would expect that my web pages (on device), load as fast as on my PC... or at least almost as fast. This has never been the case with any ROM or any phone. Once that happens, I will be close to happy.
I am guessing that the biggest limiter these days is the speed of internal memory? Does anyone know how that compares to PC memory?
edufur said:
I don't know about you, but I use the MEAN ROM and while it is the best ROM hands down, I still don't get the performance I would expect from a dual core phone. It is the best performer among other ROMS, but still not what I would expect in this day and age. When I am connected to WIFI, I would expect that my web pages (on device), load as fast as on my PC... or at least almost as fast. This has never been the case with any ROM or any phone. Once that happens, I will be close to happy.
I am guessing that the biggest limiter these days is the speed of internal memory? Does anyone know how that compares to PC memory?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That makes sense. But is it the gpu that makes it slower than a pc? I want faster page loading too.
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
my evo 3d got 3500 in quadrant, nearly 2x of gtab at 810 megahertz. sk rom is crazy. However, I think the tegra 3 is better because companion core and doesn't afraid of anything.
jdeoxys said:
my evo 3d got 3500 in quadrant, nearly 2x of gtab at 810 megahertz. sk rom is crazy. However, I think the tegra 3 is better because companion core and doesn't afraid of anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Companion core doesn't do anything sir, the 28 nm process on the s4 kills the tegra 3 in battery, even with 4glte on
Source: anandtech htc one x for att review
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
I'm thinking I'm waiting for the s4 quad cores to come out. That will be epic
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
lpjzfan2005 said:
Companion core doesn't do anything sir, the 28 nm process on the s4 kills the tegra 3 in battery, even with 4glte on
Source: anandtech htc one x for att review
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra is still better because you have the privilege of having a tablet with 4 cores. If you say "oh I got a tablet with 2 ARM cortex 15 cores, nobodys gonna get what you're saying.".
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
xblackvalorx said:
I'm thinking I'm waiting for the s4 quad cores to come out. That will be epic
Sent from my PG86100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They already have them I believe its a 32 nm it has everything that the s4 has except the LTE
.Elite_The_King. said:
They already have them I believe its a 32 nm it has everything that the s4 has except the LTE
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 32nm quad core is by Samsung and is the Exynos SoC, not an S4...Currently the only S4 in the Qualcomm roadmap for this year is the APQ8064, and it has no modem so likely a tablet only chip...
Now the rumor of the VZ HTC phone for the holidays this year states they will have a quadcore S4 in it, which is odd given the roadmap leaks as the earliest MSM(these are the ones with built in modems) variant quad-core was not listed till Q1 of '13...
btw saw you got the credit for the EVOLTE buildprop and bootanimation leak on goodandevo man.
So in 2011 we have Tegra 2, in 2012 we have Tegra 3 so my questions is what will come in 2013? Octo-core or an improved version of quad core cpus?
Fasty12 said:
So in 2011 we have Tegra 2, in 2012 we have Tegra 3 so my questions is what will come in 2013? Octo-core or an improved version of quad core cpus?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as octo core desktop CPUs havnt really caught on yet I would guess just better quad cores likely with more powerful GPUs
Tegra 3 is already very powerful, presuming the will increase ram and make them more battery efficient or even higher clock speed. 12 core tegra gpu is pretty amazing already and anything better must be godly
Sent from my HTC Desire using xda app-developers app
If u mean for mobile platform , Will we really need beyond Quad core, having seen how SGSIII is smoothly running with it, beyond that what more perfection ( yaa still more can be expected) and speed u will need to do ur work . As known Android use other cores on need basis , why u need to see ur 2-3 cores never used.. i think its just more curiosity n to have more advaced/latest will be the only reason to have such high cpu on ur mobile..
What I like to see is ups in RAM installed and lows in RAM usage by system...
Sounds like octo-mom..the debate.lives on.. battery vs performance...but to answer your question I think it would be hexa-core which is 6..let's wait and see what is to come...
Sent from my SGH-T989 using Tapatalk 2
s-X-s said:
If u mean for mobile platform , Will we really need beyond Quad core, having seen how SGSIII is smoothly running with it, beyond that what more perfection ( yaa still more can be expected) and speed u will need to do ur work . As known Android use other cores on need basis , why u need to see ur 2-3 cores never used.. i think its just more curiosity n to have more advaced/latest will be the only reason to have such high cpu on ur mobile..
What I like to see is ups in RAM installed and lows in RAM usage by system...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Cores are at there peak right now. The amount of CPU power we have especially in the higher end phones is enough to acomplish many, many things. RAM is somewhat of an issue especially since multitasking is a huge part of android. I really thing a 2gb RAM should be a standard soon. Also, better gpu's won't hurt
Sent from my HTC T328w using Tapatalk 2
If they decide to keep going on the core upgrade in the next two or so years, I see one of two possibilities happening:
1) Dual Processor phones utilizing either dual or quad cores.
or
2) Hexacore chips since on the desktop market there's already a few 6-core chips (though whether or not they would actually be practical in the phones architecture, no clue).
Generally speaking whatever they come out with next will either need a better battery material, or lower power processors.
I mean I'm pretty amazed by what my brother's HTC One X is capable of with the quad core, and here I am still sporting a single-core G2. But yes I would like to see more advancement in RAM usage, we got a nice bit of power, but how bout a standard 2GB ram for better multitasking?
I believe 2013 will be all about more efficient quad-cores.
May i ask what going from 1gb to 2gb will improve? Loading times?
hello everyone, could you tell me what is cuad core?
Quad core means that a processor has four processing units.
Because there are more, that means that a process, theoretically, gets executed 4 times faster.
Read more about it: http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-core_processor
Maybe i7 in mobile devices?
I'm sure it will stay at quad core cpu's, anything more is just overkill. They may introduce hyperthreading. It's going to boil down to efficiency.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
I'd say the future lies in more efficient use of processors. Right now, Android is still far from optimized on multi-core processor-equipped devices. Project Butter is the start of a great movement by Google to optimize the operating system. Hopefully it spreads out to other OEMs and becomes the main focus for Android development.
Improving and optimizing current processors is the way hardware companies should go.
In my opinion, processor development is out running battery development. Optimized processors could reduce power consumption while preserving excellent speed and usability.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk 2
building processors on more efficient ARM architectures is going to be the way to go from what I see......throwing four less efficient cores at a problem is the caveman method to dealing with it.....looking at you Samsung Exynos Quad based on tweaked A9 cores.....
the A15 based Qualcomm S4 Krait is more efficient on a clock for clock core for core basis and once the software catches up and starts using the hardware in full capacity, less more efficient cores will be preferred
I dont see anything beyond quads simply because they havent even scratched the surface of what can be done with a modern dual core processor yet.......throwing more cores at it only makes excuses for poor code.....i can shoot **** faster than water with a big enough pump......but that doesn't mean that's the better solution
We don't need more cores! Having more than 2 cores will not make a difference so quad cores are a waste of space in the CPU die.
Hyperthreading, duh.
More ram. Got to have the hardware before the software can be made to use it.
With the convergence of x86 into the Android core and the streamlining of low-power Atom CPUs, the logical step would be to first optimize the current software base for multi-core processors before marketing takes over with their stupid x2 multiplying game...
Not long ago, a senior Intel exec went on record saying that today, a single core CPU Android smartphone is perhaps better overall performing (battery life, user experience, etc) than any dual/quad-core CPU. Mind you, these guys seldom if ever stick out their neck with such bold statements, especially when not pleasing to the ear...
For those interested, you can follow this one (of many) articles on the subject: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/hardware/intel-android-not-ready-for-multi-core-cpus/20746
Android needs to mature, and I think it actually is. With 4.1 we see the focus drastically shifted to optimization, UX and performance with *existing/limited* resources. This will translate to devices beating all else in battery life, performance and graphics but since it was neglected in the first several iterations, it is likely we see 4.0 followed by 4.1 then maybe 4.2 before we hear/see the 5.0 which will showcase maturity and evolution of the experience.
Just my 2c. :fingers-crossed:
Hey guys
I ran some benchmarks and it blew everything out of the water
So I decided to look into my phones specs and it says its running at 2150mhz not the 2260mhz I thought it was
Not a massive difference but that 110mhz extra could come in handy
J
Sent from my C6833 using xda app-developers app
JackHanAnLG said:
Hey guys
I ran some benchmarks and it blew everything out of the water
So I decided to look into my phones specs and it says its running at 2150mhz not the 2260mhz I thought it was
Not a massive difference but that 110mhz extra could come in handy
J
Sent from my C6833 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sony advertises it as 2.2GHz, so they are rounding up from 2.15GHz. This is the lower bin of the Qualcomm 8274.
2260Mhz is the higher specced Snapdragon 800. The standard one is 2150 which ZU uses. But still it proves that Software optimization will bring the best from your CPU, unlike G2 which uses the 2.3Ghz one but still scores lower than should be.
hansip87 said:
2260Mhz is the higher specced Snapdragon 800. The standard one is 2150 which ZU uses. But still it proves that Software optimization will bring the best from your CPU, unlike G2 which uses the 2.3Ghz one but still scores lower than should be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
REAVER117 said:
Sony advertises it as 2.2GHz, so they are rounding up from 2.15GHz. This is the lower bin of the Qualcomm 8274.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think we need to get some custom kernels and whack this baby up a bit
The cpu is good @ stock but i'd like to oc the GPU a bit since i'm using MSAA X4 in most of my games .
Imagine how cool it would've been if we had modular phones right now. "Meh, it can do better in Antutu, so i'll swap out the GPU this weekend". This is the dream, boys!
JackHanAnLG said:
Hey guys
I ran some benchmarks and it blew everything out of the water
So I decided to look into my phones specs and it says its running at 2150mhz not the 2260mhz I thought it was
Not a massive difference but that 110mhz extra could come in handy
J
Sent from my C6833 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guarantee you it doesn't matter, really. You literally wouldn't notice. There get to be limits. Like I suspect, now that Android is running on Intel that Android on a Core i3 wouldn't feel THAT much faster than a Snapdragon 800. Stuff like ART is going to make a bigger difference and the architecture of the platform going forward. Additionally, most stuff isn't terribly multithreaded (which kinda detracts from your point -- clock speed which is applicable in single-threaded tasks, but I digress)
They clock based on battery and thermal design limits. I guarantee you some people much smarter than you/me/us put a ton of time and effort into making sure everything works correctly. Sony did this for a reason and it wasn't to screw you.
Tie getting higher scores then me.
Sent from my C6833 using xda app-developers app
brashmadcap said:
I guarantee you it doesn't matter, really. You literally wouldn't notice. There get to be limits. Like I suspect, now that Android is running on Intel that Android on a Core i3 wouldn't feel THAT much faster than a Snapdragon 800. Stuff like ART is going to make a bigger difference and the architecture of the platform going forward. Additionally, most stuff isn't terribly multithreaded (which kinda detracts from your point -- clock speed which is applicable in single-threaded tasks, but I digress)
They clock based on battery and thermal design limits. I guarantee you some people much smarter than you/me/us put a ton of time and effort into making sure everything works correctly. Sony did this for a reason and it wasn't to screw you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, you dont need anymore then 1.5ghz as it is
Sent from my C6833 using xda app-developers app