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:
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
X10 is garbage! this is outrageous!
Yes really, they got it working, you want it so bad try porting it yourself
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
cry about it?
if you want it so bad for your phone, learn to port it yourself. until then, since you rely solely on other peoples' hard work and sweat, shut up and be patient.
dLo GSR said:
cry about it?
if you want it so bad for your phone, learn to port it yourself. until then, since you rely solely on other peoples' hard work and sweat, shut up and be patient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh snap. That was awesome.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
I might start to look into trying to port it this weekend
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
firefox3 said:
I might start to look into trying to port it this weekend
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good news man
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Being that there are currently no EGL libs for anything except PowerVR SGX devices under ICS yet, and they're closed source and tightly dependent on the kernel there doesn't seem to be a huge point until the official updates start to hit for a range of devices.
Sure, Desire, HD, X10, N1 have ports of a sort at the moment, in fact there shouldn't be too many problems getting them working aside from the graphics drivers but they're just for fun with the framebuffer driver given how much of ICS' UI rendering is done with GPU acceleration in mind. You wouldn't want to use it day-to-day. The browser is surprisingly responsive on the Desire though (I'd say moreso than GB, despite the software rendering), as is the Market (the new one always lagged really badly for me on the Desire before) - glimmers of hope for ICS' eventual performance on older devices. The keyboard lags like you wouldn't believe though!
The Atrix should fly under 4.0.1 though, if it ever happens - bearing in mind the fact that the SGX 540 in the Galaxy Nexus is pretty much in a dead heat with Tegra 2's GPU, we've got a lower resolution screen, and can overclock past the its stock speeds.
Javi97100 said:
Good news man
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its turning out to be harder then i though... I think no one will get it until offical updates come out for other phones
Azurael said:
Being that there are currently no EGL libs for anything except PowerVR SGX devices under ICS yet, and they're closed source and tightly dependent on the kernel there doesn't seem to be a huge point until the official updates start to hit for a range of devices.
Sure, Desire, HD, X10, N1 have ports of a sort at the moment, in fact there shouldn't be too many problems getting them working aside from the graphics drivers but they're just for fun with the framebuffer driver given how much of ICS' UI rendering is done with GPU acceleration in mind. You wouldn't want to use it day-to-day. The browser is surprisingly responsive on the Desire though (I'd say moreso than GB, despite the software rendering), as is the Market (the new one always lagged really badly for me on the Desire before) - glimmers of hope for ICS' eventual performance on older devices. The keyboard lags like you wouldn't believe though!
The Atrix should fly under 4.0.1 though, if it ever happens - bearing in mind the fact that the SGX 540 in the Galaxy Nexus is pretty much in a dead heat with Tegra 2's GPU, we've got a lower resolution screen, and can overclock past the its stock speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So EGL = gpu driver? If thats the only setback, would it be possible to get an ICS rom with software rendering as a proof of concept, or are there other pieces missing?
GB/CM7 is pretty good on the Atrix, if we dont see ICS for a few months it doesn't hurt us in any way. I'd like to think most of us can be patient if we lack the skills to help.
I noticed the Captivate got a port of it too since i9000 ROMs and Cap ROMs are interchangeable. I thought its funny that it's running on the HD a Windows Mobile 6.5 phone lol. Let's all try to be patient and we will eventually see it.
Edit: not to mention I'm sure if it's not already it will soon be on iPhone too. It seems like iPhones always get the new Android versions kinda early. I'm not sweating it I love my Atrix in its current state.
According to anandtech, Tegra 2 support is essentially ready, so I think as long as nvidia releases the source for ics (libs?), someone will try to port it. Hell, I have a good 5 weeks during break, I might as well try then.
Sent from my MB860 using XDA App
Azurael said:
Being that there are currently no EGL libs for anything except PowerVR SGX devices under ICS yet, and they're closed source and tightly dependent on the kernel there doesn't seem to be a huge point until the official updates start to hit for a range of devices.
Sure, Desire, HD, X10, N1 have ports of a sort at the moment, in fact there shouldn't be too many problems getting them working aside from the graphics drivers but they're just for fun with the framebuffer driver given how much of ICS' UI rendering is done with GPU acceleration in mind. You wouldn't want to use it day-to-day. The browser is surprisingly responsive on the Desire though (I'd say moreso than GB, despite the software rendering), as is the Market (the new one always lagged really badly for me on the Desire before) - glimmers of hope for ICS' eventual performance on older devices. The keyboard lags like you wouldn't believe though!
The Atrix should fly under 4.0.1 though, if it ever happens - bearing in mind the fact that the SGX 540 in the Galaxy Nexus is pretty much in a dead heat with Tegra 2's GPU, we've got a lower resolution screen, and can overclock past the its stock speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no, despite being a much older GPU, the SGX 540 found in the GNexus outpaces the Tegra 2 due to its higher clock rate by 7% or 45% depending on the GLBenchmark being run. Both GPU tests were done at 720p resolution. Also, you can't overclock the GPU, only the CPU.
edgeicator said:
Actually, no, despite being a much older GPU, the SGX 540 found in the GNexus outpaces the Tegra 2 due to its higher clock rate by 7% or 45% depending on the GLBenchmark being run. Both GPU tests were done at 720p resolution. Also, you can't overclock the GPU, only the CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Buddy, check out any of the kernels available in the dev thread and you'll see that the GPUs are overclocked.
WiredPirate said:
I noticed the Captivate got a port of it too since i9000 ROMs and Cap ROMs are interchangeable. I thought its funny that it's running on the HD a Windows Mobile 6.5 phone lol. Let's all try to be patient and we will eventually see it.
Edit: not to mention I'm sure if it's not already it will soon be on iPhone too. It seems like iPhones always get the new Android versions kinda early. I'm not sweating it I love my Atrix in its current state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doubt the iPhone will see ICS, the newest model that can run android as far as I know is the iPhone 3G, which was incredibly slow under Gingerbread.
mac208x said:
X10 is garbage! this is outrageous!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
222 posts and zero thanks? Is this what you do, go around XDA and post useless threads like the guy complaining about returning home early despite nobody asking him to "to get MIUI ported on his grandma's phone"?
Are you guys related by any chance?
edgeicator said:
Actually, no, despite being a much older GPU, the SGX 540 found in the GNexus outpaces the Tegra 2 due to its higher clock rate by 7% or 45% depending on the GLBenchmark being run. Both GPU tests were done at 720p resolution. Also, you can't overclock the GPU, only the CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Depends on the benchmark, yes - texture-heavy rendering tends to perform better on the 540 in the OMAP4460 thanks to it's dual channel memory controller and high clock (and that's probably the directly relevant part to UI rendering to be honest, though as I said - lower resolution screen ) but the Tegra 2 is quite substantially ahead in geometry-heavy rendering (and games on mobiles are starting to move that way now, following the desktop landscape over the past 5 years or so.) Averaged out, the performance of the two is very close.
Plus, as I said, the GPU in my phone is running at 400MHz which ought to even things out in the GLMark 720p tests somewhat even if they are biassed to one architecture or the other. While the GPU in OMAP4460 may overclock just as well from its stock 400MHz, I'm only really concerned that the phone can run as fast as a stock GNexus to maybe skip the next generation of mobile hardware and tide it over until Cortex A15-based SoCs on 28nm process start to emerge with stronger GPUs. I don't really think I'm CPU performance bound with a 1.4GHz dual-core A9 - and increasing the number of equivalent cores without a really substantial boost in GPU horesepower seems worthless right now, even if ICS takes better advantage of SMP (re: Disappointing early Tegra 3 benchmarks - although it does seem GLMark stacks the odds against NVidia GPUs more than other benchmarks?)
Azurael said:
Depends on the benchmark, yes - texture-heavy rendering tends to perform better on the 540 in the OMAP4460 thanks to it's dual channel memory controller and high clock (and that's probably the directly relevant part to UI rendering to be honest, though as I said - lower resolution screen ) but the Tegra 2 is quite substantially ahead in geometry-heavy rendering (and games on mobiles are starting to move that way now, following the desktop landscape over the past 5 years or so.) Averaged out, the performance of the two is very close.
Plus, as I said, the GPU in my phone is running at 400MHz which ought to even things out in the GLMark 720p tests somewhat even if they are biassed to one architecture or the other. While the GPU in OMAP4460 may overclock just as well from its stock 400MHz, I'm only really concerned that the phone can run as fast as a stock GNexus to maybe skip the next generation of mobile hardware and tide it over until Cortex A15-based SoCs on 28nm process start to emerge with stronger GPUs. I don't really think I'm CPU performance bound with a 1.4GHz dual-core A9 - and increasing the number of equivalent cores without a really substantial boost in GPU horesepower seems worthless right now, even if ICS takes better advantage of SMP (re: Disappointing early Tegra 3 benchmarks - although it does seem GLMark stacks the odds against NVidia GPUs more than other benchmarks?)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would expect the Tegra to beat a nearly 5 year old GPU, but it only does so in triangle throughput. Tegra just uses a very poor architecture in general. Look at how little actual horsepower it can pull. The Tegra 3 gpu pulls 7.2GFLOPs @300mhz. The iPad GPU and the upcoming Adreno 225 both pull 19.2 GFLOPS at that same clockspeed. I honestly have no idea what the engineers are thinking over atNnvidia. It's almost as bad as AMD's latest bulldozer offerings. It's really more of Tegra's shortcomings than GLMark stacking the odds. PowerVR's offerings from 2007 are keeping up with a chip that debuted in 2010/2011. The Geforce just doesn't seem to scale very well at all on mobile platforms. But yea, all Nvidia did with Tegra 3 was slap in 2 extra cores, clocked them higher, threw in the sorely missed NEON instruction set, increased the SIMDs on the GPU by 50% (8 to 12), and then tacked on a 5th hidden core to help save power. Tegra 3 stayed with the 40nm process whereas every other SoC is dropping down to 28nm with some bringing in a brand new architecture as well.
edgeicator said:
I would expect the Tegra to beat a nearly 5 year old GPU, but it only does so in triangle throughput. Tegra just uses a very poor architecture in general. Look at how little actual horsepower it can pull. The Tegra 3 gpu pulls 7.2GFLOPs @300mhz. The iPad GPU and the upcoming Adreno 225 both pull 19.2 GFLOPS at that same clockspeed. I honestly have no idea what the engineers are thinking over atNnvidia. It's almost as bad as AMD's latest bulldozer offerings. It's really more of Tegra's shortcomings than GLMark stacking the odds. PowerVR's offerings from 2007 are keeping up with a chip that debuted in 2010/2011. The Geforce just doesn't seem to scale very well at all on mobile platforms. But yea, all Nvidia did with Tegra 3 was slap in 2 extra cores, clocked them higher, threw in the sorely missed NEON instruction set, increased the SIMDs on the GPU by 50% (8 to 12), and then tacked on a 5th hidden core to help save power. Tegra 3 stayed with the 40nm process whereas every other SoC is dropping down to 28nm with some bringing in a brand new architecture as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't you get tired if writing those long rants? We understand you know something about CPU architecture, and that Tegra isn't the best one out there, but damn man, it's the same thing in every thread. Just chill out and try to stay on topic for once
Sent from my MB860 using Tapatalk
edgeicator said:
I would expect the Tegra to beat a nearly 5 year old GPU, but it only does so in triangle throughput. Tegra just uses a very poor architecture in general. Look at how little actual horsepower it can pull. The Tegra 3 gpu pulls 7.2GFLOPs @300mhz. The iPad GPU and the upcoming Adreno 225 both pull 19.2 GFLOPS at that same clockspeed. I honestly have no idea what the engineers are thinking over atNnvidia. It's almost as bad as AMD's latest bulldozer offerings. It's really more of Tegra's shortcomings than GLMark stacking the odds. PowerVR's offerings from 2007 are keeping up with a chip that debuted in 2010/2011. The Geforce just doesn't seem to scale very well at all on mobile platforms. But yea, all Nvidia did with Tegra 3 was slap in 2 extra cores, clocked them higher, threw in the sorely missed NEON instruction set, increased the SIMDs on the GPU by 50% (8 to 12), and then tacked on a 5th hidden core to help save power. Tegra 3 stayed with the 40nm process whereas every other SoC is dropping down to 28nm with some bringing in a brand new architecture as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are not seeing the whole picture...
The Tegra 3 (Et-Al) is not just about its quad core implementation, remember that the GPU will offer 12 cores that will translate in performance not seeing as of yet on any other platform.
Benchmarks don't tell the whole story! Specially those benchmarking tools which are not Tegra 3 optimized yet.
Cheers!
Sent from my Atrix using Tapatalk
WiredPirate said:
I noticed the Captivate got a port of it too since i9000 ROMs and Cap ROMs are interchangeable. I thought its funny that it's running on the HD a Windows Mobile 6.5 phone lol. Let's all try to be patient and we will eventually see it.
Edit: not to mention I'm sure if it's not already it will soon be on iPhone too. It seems like iPhones always get the new Android versions kinda early. I'm not sweating it I love my Atrix in its current state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL I ran all the iDroid ports on my iphone. Not one was even in alpha stage, I would not even count iDroid as a port since you cant use anything on it.
So I've been lurking on the prime's forums for a while now and noticed the debate of whether the new qualcomm dual core will be better or the current tegra 3 that the prime has. Obviously if both were clocked the same then the tegra 3 would be better. Also I understand that the gpu of the tegra 3 is better. However, for normal user (surf web, play a movie, songs etc) isn't dual core at 1.5 ghz better in that an average user will rarely use more 2 cores? The way I understand it each core is able to handle 1 task so in order to activate the 3rd core you would have to have 3 things going on at the same time? Could someone please explain this to me?
First of all, the tegra 3 can go up to 1.6 ghz. Secondly, all 4 cores can be utilized by a multi threading app. Lastly, battery is great on tegra III due to teh companion core.
jdeoxys said:
First of all, the tegra 3 can go up to 1.6 ghz. Secondly, all 4 cores can be utilized by a multi threading app. Lastly, battery is great on tegra III due to teh companion core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But the native clock for that qualcomm would be 1.5 meaning o/c can take it higher. Also doesn't being dual core compared to quad core give it an edge in battery? You do bring up a good point with the multi threading app. Also to clarify I am not standing up for the qualcomm chip or putting down the tegra 3 just trying to get things straight.
Thanks
Hey I'm the ....idiot aboard here....lol
But the tegra 3 has a companion core, being a fifth core, to take over when the tablet is not stressed. Thus saving the battery.
I am just repeating what I have read, I have no knowledge of how it all works. I guess that is how we can get better battery life.
Just trying to help the OP, maybe some one way smarter can chime in. Shouldn't be hard....lol
Quad core is better by far. On low level tasks, simple things, and screen off/deep sleep the companion core takes over. Meaning its running on a low powered single core. This companion core only has a Max of 500Mhz speed. So when in deep sleep or low level tasks, companion core alone is running everything at only 102mhz -500Mhz. Most of the time on the lower end. Therefore tegra3 has the better battery life since all it's low power level tasks are ran by a single low powered companion core. That's 1 low powered core compared to 2 high powered cores trying to save battery. Quad core better all around. We hsvent even begun real overclocking yet. The 1.6Ghz speed was already in the kernel. So if you rooted n using vipercontrol or ATP tweaks or virtuous rom, we can access those speeds at any time. Once we really start overclocking higher than 1.6Ghz we will have an even more superior advantage. Anyone knows 4 strong men are stronger than 2..lol. tegra3 and nvidia is the future. Tegra3 is just the chip that kicked down the door on an evolution of mobile chip SoC.
---------- Post added at 10:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:06 PM ----------
If you really want to learn the in and outs of tegra3, all the details, and how its better than any dual core, check out this thread I made. I have a whitepaper attachment in that thread you can download and read. Its made by nvidia themselves and goes into great detail on tegra3 by the people who created it, Nvidia. Check it out.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1512936
aamir123 said:
But the native clock for that qualcomm would be 1.5 meaning o/c can take it higher. Also doesn't being dual core compared to quad core give it an edge in battery? You do bring up a good point with the multi threading app. Also to clarify I am not standing up for the qualcomm chip or putting down the tegra 3 just trying to get things straight.
Thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The maximum clock speed isn't all that important, since during tasks like web browsing, watching videos & movies and listening to music you will never push the processor to its highest available clock speed anyway. All mobile devices will underclock their processors so that you rarely have unused clock cycles eating up battery life. So all things being relatively equal performance would be about the same between both tablets during these types of lightweight tasks.
If you have a lot of background processes running, then the quad-core system might have an edge in performance since theoretically different tasks can be pushed off to different processors. However this use case is rarely found in Android. You might have an app checking weather or syncing photos in the background, or you might have music playing while you web surf, but those are generally fairly lightweight tasks that usually won't test the processor performance of your device.
In tasks that will stress you processor, such as 3D gaming, then quad cores have a very large advantage over dual core systems, despite the slight difference in maximum clock speeds. In addition the Tegra 3 has a more powerful GPU than the new Qualcomm chip, which will definitely make a noticeable difference in gaming performance.
Now when it comes to ultra-low power tasks or when the tablet is on Standby, the Tegra 3 uses its "companion core" which has incredibly low power requirements, so it can continue to sync your email, twitter and weather updates for days (or weeks) while having very little impact on the Transformer Prime's battery.
So in short, the Tegra 3 is more likely to outperform the Qualcomm in situations where you actually need extra performance. In light tasks performance between the two should be about the same. Battery life is yet to be definitively determined, however the Tegra's 3 ultra-low power companion core should give it an edge when only doing light tasks or on standb.
Keep in mind, the Tegra 3 in the TF Prime has a maximum clock speed of 1300Mhz. One core has a maximum clock speed of 1400Mhz. If all things were equal, a difference of 100-200 Mhz n a 1Ghz+ processor is practically unnoticeable in daily usage.
almightywhacko said:
The maximum clock speed isn't all that important, since during tasks like web browsing, watching videos & movies and listening to music you will never push the processor to its highest available clock speed anyway. All mobile devices will underclock their processors so that you rarely have unused clock cycles eating up battery life. So all things being relatively equal performance would be about the same between both tablets during these types of lightweight tasks.
If you have a lot of background processes running, then the quad-core system might have an edge in performance since theoretically different tasks can be pushed off to different processors. However this use case is rarely found in Android. You might have an app checking weather or syncing photos in the background, or you might have music playing while you web surf, but those are generally fairly lightweight tasks that usually won't test the processor performance of your device.
In tasks that will stress you processor, such as 3D gaming, then quad cores have a very large advantage over dual core systems, despite the slight difference in maximum clock speeds. In addition the Tegra 3 has a more powerful GPU than the new Qualcomm chip, which will definitely make a noticeable difference in gaming performance.
Now when it comes to ultra-low power tasks or when the tablet is on Standby, the Tegra 3 uses its "companion core" which has incredibly low power requirements, so it can continue to sync your email, twitter and weather updates for days (or weeks) while having very little impact on the Transformer Prime's battery.
So in short, the Tegra 3 is more likely to outperform the Qualcomm in situations where you actually need extra performance. In light tasks performance between the two should be about the same. Battery life is yet to be definitively determined, however the Tegra's 3 ultra-low power companion core should give it an edge when only doing light tasks or on standb.
Keep in mind, the Tegra 3 in the TF Prime has a maximum clock speed of 1300Mhz. One core has a maximum clock speed of 1400Mhz. If all things were equal, a difference of 100-200 Mhz n a 1Ghz+ processor is practically unnoticeable in daily usage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow! Thanks for taking the time for breaking it down for me like that! I understand exactly where your coming from and now have to agree.
demandarin said:
Quad core is better by far.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least that is what Nvidia would like you to think.
The Tegra 3 uses an older ARM core for it's quad core design while Qualcomm uses their own ARM instruction set compatible core for their Krait S4 design. For most current benchmarks the Qualcomm Krait S4 dual core seems to outpace the Tegra 3 by quite a large margin. And of course Krait will be expanded to quad core later this year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5563/qualcomms-snapdragon-s4-krait-vs-nvidias-tegra-3
Dave_S said:
At least that is what Nvidia would like you to think.
The Tegra 3 uses an older ARM core for it's quad core design while Qualcomm uses their own ARM instruction set compatible core for their Krait S4 design. For most current benchmarks the Qualcomm Krait S4 dual core seems to outpace the Tegra 3 by quite a large margin. And of course Krait will be expanded to quad core later this year.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5563/qualcomms-snapdragon-s4-krait-vs-nvidias-tegra-3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's already another thread on what you just mentioned and the Krait claims were easily shot down. Tegra3 still a better chip overall. Plus krait gpu was subpar to tegra3. We have more links and stuff in other thread showing Prime still right up there
demandarin said:
There's already another thread on what you just mentioned and the Krait claims were easily shot down. Tegra3 still a better chip overall. Plus krait gpu was subpar to tegra3. We have more links and stuff in other thread showing Prime still right up there
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As unlikely as that seems considering the slower cores that Nvidia uses, links to real benchmarks ( not self serving white papers ) would be appreciated. I have glanced at your Tegra3 thread but have not read it all the way through after I saw that it seemed to depend a lot on a white paper and not real comparison tests. It is true that the current GPU the Krait uses is not as fast as the one in the Tegra 3, but graphics is only one element of overall performance. The only benchmarks that I have seen Tegra beat out Krait on were benchmarks that emphasized more than two threads, and then not by much.
Dave_S said:
As unlikely as that seems considering the slower cores that Nvidia uses, links to real benchmarks ( not self serving white papers ) would be appreciated. I have glanced at your Tegra3 thread but have not read it all the way through after I saw that it seemed to depend a lot on a white paper and not real comparison tests. It is true that the current GPU the Krait uses is not as fast as the one in the Tegra 3, but graphics is only one element of overall performance. The only benchmarks that I have seen Tegra beat out Krait on were benchmarks that emphasized more than two threads, and then not by much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not my tegra3 thread I'm talking about. I think its the Prime alternatives thread created by shinzz. We had a huge debate over it. More benchmarks n supporting arguments in that thread. Check it out if you get the chance.
demandarin said:
Its not my tegra3 thread I'm talking about. I think its the Prime alternatives thread created by shinzz. We had a huge debate over it. More benchmarks n supporting arguments in that thread. Check it out if you get the chance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, Will do. Gotta run for a doctor appointment right now though.
I frankly think the power savings with the fifth core is mostly hype. According to many battery tests I've read online and my own experiences with my Prime, it doesn't get much different battery life from dual core tablets.
Quad core is better for future but problem for backwards compatibility... it's definitely good for tablet.
jedi5diah said:
Quad core is better for future but problem for backwards compatibility... it's definitely good for tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is another benchmark that shows that there is a least one current dual core that can soundly beat the Nvida quad core at benchmarks that are not heavily multithreaded.
http://www.extremetech.com/computin...ragon-s4-has-the-competition-on-the-defensive
Buddy Revell said:
I frankly think the power savings with the fifth core is mostly hype. According to many battery tests I've read online and my own experiences with my Prime, it doesn't get much different battery life from dual core tablets.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No dual core android tablet battery last longer than an ipad1. My prime easily outlasts my Ipad in battery life. The battery hype is real. Tons of people here seeing 9-11hrs+ on a single charge with moderate to semi heavy use on balanced mode. Even longer on power savings mode.
demandarin said:
No dual core android tablet battery last longer than an ipad1. My prime easily outlasts my Ipad in battery life. The battery hype is real. Tons of people here seeing 9-11hrs+ on a single charge with moderate to semi heavy use on balanced mode. Even longer on power savings mode.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really? I get 9-12 hours constant use on balanced. Plus 6 more with the dock.
Sent from my PG8610000 using xda premium
I think if Krait were to come out with quad core then it would beat out tegra 3 otherwise no. Also they are supposed to improve the chip with updated gpu to 3.xx in future releases. Also benchmarks have been proven to be wrong in the past so who knows? Not like benchmarks can determine real life performance, nor does the average user need that much power.
Companion core really does work
jdeoxys said:
Really? I get 9-12 hours constant use on balanced. Plus 6 more with the dock.
Sent from my PG8610000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Strange, we just started uni here (Australia) and I've been using my prime all day, showing it off to friends (to their absolute amazement!) showing off glowball, camera effects with eyes, mouth etc. 2 hours of lecture typing, gaming on the train, watched a few videos and an episode of community played music on speaker for about 40 mins, webbrowsed etc etc started using at lightly at 9 am (only properly at say 1:30 pm) and it's 10:00pm now and GET THIS!!:
72% battery on tablet and 41% on the dock. It's just crazy man. No joke, it just keeps going, I can't help but admit the power saving must be real :/
Edit: Whoops, I quoted the wrong guy, but you get the idea.
That's what I'm saying. Battery life on prime is great. Add a dock n battery life is sick!
I do agree a quad core variant of krait or S4 will give tegra3 a really good battle. Regardless I'm more than satisfied with power of tegra3. I'm not the type as soon as i see a newer or higher spec tab, ill feel like mines is useless or outdated. With have developement going hard now for this device. Just wait till the 1.8-2ghz+ overclock roms n kernels drop. Then we would even give new quad core higher speed chips a good run.
Above all of that, Android needs to developement more apps to take advantage of the more powerful chips like tegra3 and those that's upcoming. Software is still trying to catch up to hardware spec. Android apps haven't even all been made yet to take advantage of tegra2 power..yet lol. With nvidia/tegra3 we have advantage because developers are encouraged to make apps n games to take advantage of tegra3 power.
Regardless we all Android. Need to focus more on the bigger enemy, apple n IOS
Quick question. I was reading an article about the HTC One X. It supposedly will come with a tegra 3 quad core processor but not in the US. We will get a Snapdragon S4 dual core so it can have LTE.
Does this mean we are stuck with dual core Snapdragon's in the future? Why can't they add LTE to the Tegra 3? It seems like a pretty big difference in processors. If I were planning on getting the One X I would be pretty disappointed knowing there is a more powerful phone out there. Why do we get gypped compared to overseas??
I guess I'm just saying that there are a ton of different chips out there and I don't wanna be stuck with Snapdragon's forever just to have LTE.
SkizzMcNizz said:
Quick question. I was reading an article about the HTC One X. It supposedly will come with a tegra 3 quad core processor but not in the US. We will get a Snapdragon S4 dual core so it can have LTE.
Does this mean we are stuck with dual core Snapdragon's in the future? Why can't they add LTE to the Tegra 3? It seems like a pretty big difference in processors. If I were planning on getting the One X I would be pretty disappointed knowing there is a more powerful phone out there. Why do we get gypped compared to overseas??
I guess I'm just saying that there are a ton of different chips out there and I don't wanna be stuck with Snapdragon's forever just to have LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The S4 smokes the Tegra3 in just about every conceivable test. More cores ≠ better performance.
tekhna said:
The S4 smokes the Tegra3 in just about every conceivable test. More cores ≠ better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. People have this notion that just because a CPU has more cores that it is going to perform better. That isn't always the case. It has to do with architecture.
tekhna said:
The S4 smokes the Tegra3 in just about every conceivable test. More cores ≠ better performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cores do help in more simultaneous tasks taking place though, no? So if you're running multiple tasks, the Tegra can handle more of a load than the S4 would be able to?
engsoccerfan said:
Cores do help in more simultaneous tasks taking place though, no? So if you're running multiple tasks, the Tegra can handle more of a load than the S4 would be able to?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure, but as anandtech said:
"Qualcomm's strengths are clearly single/lightly threaded CPU performance as Krait is able to offer some significant steps forward in that department. Tegra 3 can hold onto an advantage in heavily threaded apps, but I'm not entirely convinced that in phones we'll see a lot of that."
Basically, sure, yeah, there's a theoretical advantage, but what are you doing on your phone that necessitates four cores? And even then, the S4 doesn't perform significantly better or worse on multithreaded tests than the Tegra3.
By the time you need a new phone, there'll be quad-core Qualcomm processors. I wouldn't worry, at all.
Sent from my bad**s mofo HTC Rezound
tekhna said:
Sure, but as anandtech said:
"Qualcomm's strengths are clearly single/lightly threaded CPU performance as Krait is able to offer some significant steps forward in that department. Tegra 3 can hold onto an advantage in heavily threaded apps, but I'm not entirely convinced that in phones we'll see a lot of that."
Basically, sure, yeah, there's a theoretical advantage, but what are you doing on your phone that necessitates four cores? And even then, the S4 doesn't perform significantly better or worse on multithreaded tests than the Tegra3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
It's like putting two engines in your car. It has the *potential* to go really fast, but unless your car is built to use two engines, it's not going to make any difference. Not the best example, I know. But it's simple.
As per the OP, we just don't have compatible LTE/Tegra3 combinations yet. Very bluntly, our LTE stuff sucks. (Which is why Apple passed on it with the 4S) Eventually, there will be an LTE modem that works with a quad-core chip, it's just not there right now. Like everyone else has said, in real world performance, you won't notice it anyway.
Nvidia is working on a Tegra 3 chipset with LTE built in I think I read.
Regardless, S4 is still a beast of a chip.
im glad the htc one isn't coming to verizon. it's stuff like this that makes our rezound outdated way before it's time. no one really "needs" a quad in a cell phone and im glad there isn't alot of quad core devices coming this year. both ces & mobile world congress were a big disappointment as far as im concerned.
IMO, the S4 dual core is an awesome chip. I am very skeptical about quad core battery performance. Due to technical advancements maybe they are superior. We will see soon enough.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium
still no good with limited. if you're not doing heavy multithreaded work you won't see much difference plus 4 cores means more battery consumption vs dual
Tegra = fail. The market is doing a good job with over hyping dual core and quad core. Some people think it's almost necessary to have dual/quad socs , when other platforms like w7 run just fine on a single core.
isn't the second core on resound usually asleep a lot of the time unless needed? now you can have 3 cores taking a nap
lol.
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda premium
most dual core phones only use the second core as a back-up or for HDMI only
thus making it pointless to have quad-core phones at the moment i ran everything just fine on my Thunderbolt which was single core and it out performed my stock rezound.. and yes quad core i presume would be a battery drainer cuz dual cores don't really even have that good of battery life and single cores r the same
and snapdragon has quadcores already and they r in the midst of working on 8core chipsets but that wont be out till late 2013 early mid 2014 so stick with what u have
all good things take time
)
Comparing The Tegra 3 and the Snapdragon S4 is like comparing the AMD Bulldozer chips with the current Intel chips. They put more cores on a die and call it "The Fastest" but when the benchmarks start showing up it falls short of a lower end, more efficient chips. In theory more cores = more power, but in reality architectural is everything. All the hype from people being like "MOAR COREZ OMG FASTER" is a bunch of bull...
mighty_markus12 said:
im glad the htc one isn't coming to verizon. it's stuff like this that makes our rezound outdated way before it's time. no one really "needs" a quad in a cell phone and im glad there isn't alot of quad core devices coming this year. both ces & mobile world congress were a big disappointment as far as im concerned.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CES and MWC are just teasers anyways. Did you see the Rezound, Nexus, Razr, Razr Maxx, Transformer Prime, Galaxy Note, etc at those events last year? Nope, you saw the Bionic which 7 months later was a disastrophy, lol.
Did veruzon say they weren't getting the one x? I know there is a new verizon htc phone on the road map.
I'm curious about the snapdragon s4 just because it has lte integrated.
Sent from my Rezound using Tapatalk
Well the One X has the same processor as my laptop 1.5 gh quad core. The only thing I think my computer really needs the quad cores for is intense games especially my wii emulator, which probably could run on One X since it has the same processor as my computer.
Ndaoud360 said:
Well the One X has the same processor as my laptop 1.5 gh quad core. The only thing I think my computer really needs the quad cores for is intense games especially my wii emulator, which probably could run on One X since it has the same processor as my computer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's also pretty dependent on the GPU. Not sure what kind of graphics card your laptop has, but that has a pretty substantial effect on gaming.
The One X has a great dedicated GPU, but it's still a phone. Not sure if it can really match up to an actual computer's graphics card, but I've been wrong before.
I dont understand why company's are concentrating on processor amount,dual ,quad? ITS RAM that is so important, put 2 gigs in a dual core phone it will fly! any comments by devs on this would really help thank you
Not true
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
Mylenthes said:
Not true
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanx can you elaborate? trying to learn
2gigs on dual core would fly, but 2gigs on quad core would fly much much faster...
Typed using a small touchscreen
RAM isn't overly important in terms of speed. CPU is extremely important. Basically RAM just holds files that will be needed in the immediate future (or have been used very recently) to reduce read times on those files when they are needed. When it comes to actually running code, that is pretty much purely down to CPU speed. 1GB RAM is plenty to store a few apps and the background OS processes. When more is needed, older apps are closed (by "older apps" I mean ones used least recently). Otherwise, recently used apps are kept in RAM for quick switching. Unless you are trying to multitask in dozens of apps simultaneously, 1GB of RAM should be plenty for a phone today.
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
The way I have always viewed ram is this; no, more ram than needed won't make your device faster, but it sure will make it slower if you don't have enough!
Sent using Tapatalk
DD-Ripper said:
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Awesome answer!! Thank you
Just like i thought!!!
"""""Under the hood, the Samsung Galaxy S III from Verizon Wireless is the same as the other US models. It ships with a dual core 1.5GHz processor and 2GB of RAM, which is meant to compensate for the lack of a quad-core processor that is found in the international version of the handset.""""""
JUST LIKE I THOUGHT!!! and above quote is from a major website!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lol :victory::victory::victory:
More than 1gb of ram isn't needed. If you are on ics or jb, then you need a good gpu. If you are on froyo or gb, then you need a good CPU since they aren't hw accelerated.
DD-Ripper said:
Both RAM and CPU has equal aspects on any device.
Ever tried playing GTA 4 on a PC with 1GB Ram and Quadcore CPU or on 4GB RAM with a SingleCore CPU...?
Both Ram and Cpu are important in terms of increasing speed.
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Comparing PC with Android is a lil'bit out of the rails here. Even with one core and enough GPU combined with 4GB RAM should be enough to enjoy many things. More core's is good for multitasking etc. But when you think how many apps etc are optimized for those gazillion cores......
Crwolv said:
I dont understand why company's are concentrating on processor amount,dual ,quad? ITS RAM that is so important, put 2 gigs in a dual core phone it will fly! any comments by devs on this would really help thank you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its simple. Big RAM can hold more running apps or a single big app (more bunch of codes). In any case, there'd be high demand of processing. So, manufacturers can only add more RAM when they ensure that they have enough processing speed for better experience.
You can say, we have quad-core CPUs now, why can't we add more RAM like we do in PCs?
Well, the answer: Don't go for specs. Smartphone CPUs/GPUs aren't powerful like Desktop ones (despite same specs). There's power and heat issues, in fact.
Plus, Android and its apps are unable to use multiple cores with high efficiency (Intel advocates this; that's why it launched powerful smartphone CPU with 1 core). So, quad-core performs poorer than single/double core performance on PCs.
It limits the lifetime of a device since it cannot be upgraded and maybe manufacturers like that. RAM usually seems to be the limiting factor on phones running future versions of android. Its too bad it can't be upgraded like a desktop/laptop but thats the cost of fitting all of this hardware into a tiny phone.
spunker88 said:
It limits the lifetime of a device since it cannot be upgraded and maybe manufacturers like that. RAM usually seems to be the limiting factor on phones running future versions of android. Its too bad it can't be upgraded like a desktop/laptop but thats the cost of fitting all of this hardware into a tiny phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AGREED! MANY DIFFERENT EXPLANATIONS! glad i asked ,all these helped. more ram would help but only to an extent. example if my wifes former htc design had a gig of ram it wouldn't have lagged so much running a single core 1.2 gig processor. FACT,so htc should have done it,it ran great till it attempted to multitask!:good:
Wasn't it stated during the I/O event that JB in general used less RAM and optimized apps better than the previous OS's so phones wouldn't need as much RAM as before?
It would be nice if JB or ICS had a timeout option for apps open more than a certain amount of time and would shut down automatically therein freeing more RAM. Obviously, it could be turned off or off depending on the user. Or if you could specify certain apps to close after an allotted amount of time if unused. Ex. Play store, calculator, calendar, SMS don't always need to stay on the page you left when you switched apps