so will the gnex be a high end phone as in having desktop convergence? according to their website, for it to be a high end phone, it needs to have a quadcore a9 processor. otherwise it fulfills every other aspect. this phone has a dualcore a9 processor, so will there be desktop convergence. I really hope there will be I want to try it out.
Well from what I saw, every video demo etc. Was specifically the galaxy nexus. At one point I did see "a" phone connected using the desktop feature. Each phone I saw using the Ubuntu mobile has been the nexus.
Edit : I've also heard the specs released aren't final and just a figure for certain phones.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
vwade79 said:
so will the gnex be a high end phone as in having desktop convergence? according to their website, for it to be a high end phone, it needs to have a quadcore a9 processor. otherwise it fulfills every other aspect. this phone has a dualcore a9 processor, so will there be desktop convergence. I really hope there will be I want to try it out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the entry specs are
1Ghz Cortex A9
512MB – 1GB
4-8GB eMMC + SD
Multi-touch
hig end specs are
Quad-core A9 or Intel Atom
Min 1GB
Min 32GB eMMC + SD
Multi-touch
so i think The Galaxy Nexus is just a "normal" UbuntuPhone device
owain94 said:
the entry specs are
1Ghz Cortex A9
512MB – 1GB
4-8GB eMMC + SD
Multi-touch
hig end specs are
Quad-core A9 or Intel Atom
Min 1GB
Min 32GB eMMC + SD
Multi-touch
so i think The Galaxy Nexus is just a "normal" UbuntuPhone device
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that's OEM specs, which doesn't mean much for download/install version potentially. The values of which would have been decided are best to give the full desktop experience - including downloading alot of desktop apps. Time will tell, but I suspect desktop version will run perfectly on GNEX, or any other internal memory only phone - it's just a matter of keeping your eye on space available when you are installing Ubuntu native apps.
I'm also wondering if the Desktop Feature will simply be disabled on devices with lower than recommended specs. I have seen some Ubuntu on Android videos using a Motorolla Atrix II which has exactly the same hardware as the GNex. It ran the desktop and even Ubuntu TV pretty good considering it was early in development (1 year ago) and running ontop of Android with bridges to access the phone settings and apps.
Related
Hi,
I know that the Iphone 3GS has ARM 600 MHz processor and the HERO has a Qualcomm MSM7200A 528 Mhz process.
But what really is the difference between them??
Why don't we have more games running on android as apple for Iphone?
If we had iphone games on android from the best one s would it work on HERO?
I know that Iphone s games are more developped cause apple is older but the games for android are so rubbish for most of them.
In fact, I had two questions in one
1. processor differences hero VS Iphone 3GS
2. available and quality games differences ANDROID (Hero) VS Apple (Iphone 3GS)
THX A LOT GUYZ!
Hi there. I too am annoyed at the lack of development for games for Android. It is the fault of Google and Android handset manufacturers.
However it mostly comes down to this:-
1. Very limited internal memory to install apps on (512mb etc)
Some of the games on the iPhone are quite big. A couple of 100mbs. 1-3 games at that size will mean you have no room for other apps on Android and you will see 'low memory' all day long.
At the moment most people use Apps2SD but as this is an unofficial way no 'big' games developer is going to see this as a base for creating a game.
However new phones coming out have a few gigabytes of internal memory so hopefully we can get things moving.
2. GPU's or lack of one. (Proper)
Hopefully with Android taking off as it is, we won't have to wait long to more Android devices with a GPU (e.g. PowerVR SGX .. .Like the iPhone has) thus enabling proper OpenGL ES 2.0 support. The Milestone has one. Nice !
I want proper 3D games like the iPhone has. So until we get proper GPU's in our Android devices we are still lagging behind in some ways to the iPhone.
The Motorola Droid’s GPU, a PowerVR SGX 530 is similar to that of the iPhone 3GS yet with no proper application storage capability it seems quite a waste and one that will make sure the Motorola Droid isn’t an iPhone Killer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Kind of sums my thoughts up really... We need at least 8GB internal memory as standard (My N95 had this 4 years back). So 32GB should be the norm. That is why we don't have iPhone type games & as apps2sd is unofficial people won't make games like the iPhone for Android.
Also the Milestone is relatively new compared to the iPhone 3GS yet the 3GS has a PowerVR SGX535 GPU whereas the Milestone has an older PowerVR SGX530 GPU. oMg !!!11!!!1
That's pretty poor too.
As much as I hate to say it there are some features of the iPhone that would not go a miss on an Android device.
Also we need a music equaliser !!1!1 Argghhh
Otherwise I love my Android phone. Hero ftw.
The MSM7200 processor in the Hero is based on the earlier ARM11 architecture whilst the processor in the 3GS is a Samsung SoC based on the ARM Cortex A8 architecture. Clock for clock, the Cortex A8 architecture is a fair bit faster than the ARM11 architecture.
Both chips have GPUs for 3D acceleration, but again the 3GS's chip is a more capable unit. In the Qualcomm range, the Snapdragon is closer to the 3GS's chip, as it is also a Cortex A8 core, and has a better GPU.
Also, another reason why iPhone games are "better" than Android games is because all iPhone games are native applications, whereas all Android games are interpreted Java - although the NDK allows certain parts of an Android application to be written in native code, and in the latest NDK this includes the OpenGL ES subsystem.
Regards,
Dave
jUsT2eXy said:
We need at least 8GB internal memory as standard (My N95 had this 4 years back).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the N95 8Gb's internal storage is different than main storage, that was pretty much equal to having an SD card inside the phone you couldn't change
the external storage was slow and the internal storage was fast enough not to lag but there was very little of it but you could store things on the 8gb memory chip it'd just be slow as all hell
I know because I currently still run that phone along with my Hero
THX all
SO now my question is : What is the evolution part for Android to concurrence Iphone in the future?
Which base Android is "fighting" on VS android with?
Happy to be french but my English might me incorrect, sorry!
Hello DuuDe's! 'Sup!?
I know, every device(CellPhone) is best at one department, but i wanna Know: (3 Questions)
1-Wich is the best Device With 512mb of RAM?
2-Wich is the best Device With 768mb of RAM?
3-Wich is the best Device With 1024mb of RAM?
I wanna know all these 3 segments.
The device im seeking, is one that No matter what App or Game i "Trow" to it, it execute it Flawlessly.
And I know, i cant install like 300k apps because that loads the device and lags it, but i know the Ext2/3/4 partition Trick
NOTE: Really dont care too much if its LTE enable or not. If price difference is considerable for just Having LTE i may discard it... All because in my country LTE will arrive in 2016 if not latter :'(
Anyway, if you guys help me with that, I Will be Thankfully
Cheers!
LG Optimus Speed, HTC Sensation, Samsung Galaxy S2
I'd definitely say, the best smartphone (also because it has 1GB RAM) is the Galaxy S2 which runs super smooth and should handle every apps flawlessly (just for some Tegra games you need to install chainfire but the 1.2GHz Dual Core Chip plus Hardware acceleration is awesome).
The number of devices with 768MB RAM isn't that big either, I'd choose the HTC Sensation which also has a 1.2 GHz dual core processor and nice screen and built quality, maybe runs a tiny bit worse that the S2 but it is definitely a great phone which also probably handles apps and games without problems.
The number of devices with 512 MB RAM is endless and the qualities of these devices depend on many things.
They usually handle applications and games (also 3d ones) as they are menu to be- all which is more a matter of the used processor. The best chip in a 512MB RAM phone is in the LG Optimus speed I think (Nvidia Tegra2, dual core) which runs very nice, also with high end Tegra optimized 3d games, and the OS will be even faster if you install CM7. The speed is pretty cheap for a dual core phone btw.
Hope this helps.
Arjoma said:
I'd definitely say, the best smartphone (also because it has 1GB RAM) is the Galaxy S2 which runs super smooth and should handle every apps flawlessly (just for some Tegra games you need to install chainfire but the 1.2GHz Dual Core Chip plus Hardware acceleration is awesome).
The number of devices with 768MB RAM isn't that big either, I'd choose the HTC Sensation which also has a 1.2 GHz dual core processor and nice screen and built quality, maybe runs a tiny bit worse that the S2 but it is definitely a great phone which also probably handles apps and games without problems.
The number of devices with 512 MB RAM is endless and the qualities of these devices depend on many things.
They usually handle applications and games (also 3d ones) as they are menu to be- all which is more a matter of the used processor. The best chip in a 512MB RAM phone is in the LG Optimus speed I think (Nvidia Tegra2, dual core) which runs very nice, also with high end Tegra optimized 3d games, and the OS will be even faster if you install CM7. The speed is pretty cheap for a dual core phone btw.
Hope this helps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks men, i see more clear now.
The HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio, its worth to expect the release of it?
What do you say? Should i spect 2012 for buy the phone?
All those 3 options, or any Dual-Core phone will last 2 year flawless on executing Apps?
I ask because, i see how the phone world is evolving... Like Gaming on PC, in 6 month u cant play the last games... I don't want giving 500/600 and in 1 year or less i have to change it, cuz lag/Don't Execute
2 years is a very long time
It's impossible to pretend how the whole thing will develop in two years, it's just certain that we will at least have Quadcore chips then (Nvidia's quadcore processor will probably come in the first quarter of 2012 and the devices a little later). And I'm pretty sure that there will be games optimized for this Nvidia chipset which may not run anywhere else- like it's today with the Tegra2. But the number of those games is relatively small (at least now) and most current 3d games with nice graphics van be played on current (or even >1 year old 1GHz) phones, look at the SE Xperia play!
The Sensation XE is no bad choice (1.5GHz Dual Core Snapdragon, 768MB of RAM, but that isn't that hugely important for the choice of games). If you can get it for a good price you won't buy a bad phone with a powerful processor- although I think I'd still prefer the Galaxy S2.
I really can't guarantee that a phone you but today will do everything a new phone maybe be able to do in two years, I'm even sure that a 2013/2014 device will be able to handle things a 2011 phone won't but you shouldn't be too sad about that. The device will still run well in two years and it will probably run 97% of all available games- but I still can't look into the future.
I don't know how long you want to wait with the purchase of your next phone, in a few months there will be certainly better phones- e.g. the next Nexus will be unveiled in some days, not sure what to expect from it, also the price of current flagships will drop.
What might be great for you if you love gaming would be a successor to the Xperia Play but I haven't heard anything about it yet.
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:
I know that the ARM architecture is based on low-power mobile processing, but with upcoming release of the new Hardkernel ODROID development boards, at at a price tag of $89 for the ODROID-U2 and a Exynos 4412 Prime CPU, and supporting Ubuntu, I'm almost tempted to try it out as a desktop replacement.
But I'm wondering, how fast would it really be? Compared to Intel? Or is it impossible to say?
mvmacd said:
I know that the ARM architecture is based on low-power mobile processing, but with upcoming release of the new Hardkernel ODROID development boards, at at a price tag of $89 for the ODROID-U2 and a Exynos 4412 Prime CPU, and supporting Ubuntu, I'm almost tempted to try it out as a desktop replacement.
But I'm wondering, how fast would it really be? Compared to Intel? Or is it impossible to say?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I've read around the Odroid forums, the performance of the Prime is supposed to be on par with first gen i3 processors, which is pretty descent for a mobile processor. They are also working on an overclock app that will allow the cpu to scale to 2Ghz per core. I plan on getting the odroid-u2 and I already have the odroid-x:laugh:
jwhisl said:
From what I've read around the Odroid forums, the performance of the Prime is supposed to be on par with first gen i3 processors, which is pretty descent for a mobile processor. They are also working on an overclock app that will allow the cpu to scale to 2Ghz per core. I plan on getting the odroid-u2 and I already have the odroid-x:laugh:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am considering getting one as well for basic testing and developmentment but I also one to use one as a media player it doesn't seem to support many files due to licensing issues
absolutely!
I have been eyeing on these mini-PCs/SBCs(Single board computer) for quite a long time.
Guess I will be getting this sweet little baby soon (ODROID-U2)
Apart from 2GB of RAM (which is ineffect the best at this price point and across all the similar boards) it beats the Tegra 3 by quite a margin
I wanted to make a custom PC build but I wanted to ask you what processor recommended. My search on wallapop is Intel Core i5, but which version recommended? Link to my search
@CzechosDrama,
When looking for anything you want to purchase, build, repair, install, or uninstall. Always do research yourself as that will get you the best results. Luckily, Google has all the information you need for free to do this research, not to mention pricing and availability. Google is your friend.
Thank you!
thisguy12win
Jason Tollakson
If I was to do a PC build though. In regards to a processor I would go with the Intel i7. It's really fast and reliable.
Thank you!
thisguy12win
But you are building a pc for office or a gaming pc? this is very relevant
thisguy12win said:
If I was to do a PC build though. In regards to a processor I would go with the Intel i7. It's really fast and reliable.
Thank you!
thisguy12win
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for your recomendation, gotta check on wallapop to see a low cost and good i7 proccesor.
CzechosDrama said:
I wanted to make a custom PC build but I wanted to ask you what processor recommended. My search on wallapop is Intel Core i5, but which version recommended? Link to my search
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it's not too late, here's some important things to know:
1. The biggest mistake people make is that they always classify processors by i3, 5, 7 and 9. Don't do this. Each processor is different based on its generation. For example, the 12th gen October 2021) i5-12600K is much faster than the 11th gen i9-11900K (March 2021), even though the number is lower.
2. There are always two types of i5 CPUs in each generation:
- i5-#400
- i5-#600
Where # is the generation number.
i5 600 CPUs are better than i5 400 CPUs but are more expensive.
3. Intel has different letters at the end of some CPUs, the main ones to know are:
K - This means that the chip is unlocked, meaning you can overclock it without voiding warranty. For any processor that is 12th gen or newer, it also means they get extra cores.
F - No integrated graphics. If you get a CPU ending with F (e.g: 12400F, 11600KF), your PC will not work unless you brought a separate graphics card (which you probably will). As a return, F CPUs are cheaper than the non-F versions.
On top of all that, i7 and i9 are still options depending on the generation.
It all depends on your budget and what you need from your PC.
I know that seemed way too complicated, so let me help you pick a CPU. Just tell me your budget and what you want your PC for.
A3RNAV said:
If it's not too late, here's some important things to know:
1. The biggest mistake people make is that they always classify processors by i3, 5, 7 and 9. Don't do this. Each processor is different based on its generation. For example, the 12th gen October 2021) i5-12600K is much faster than the 11th gen i9-11900K (March 2021), even though the number is lower.
2. There are always two types of i5 CPUs in each generation:
- i5-#400
- i5-#600
Where # is the generation number.
i5 600 CPUs are better than i5 400 CPUs but are more expensive.
3. Intel has different letters at the end of some CPUs, the main ones to know are:
K - This means that the chip is unlocked, meaning you can overclock it without voiding warranty. For any processor that is 12th gen or newer, it also means they get extra cores.
F - No integrated graphics. If you get a CPU ending with F (e.g: 12400F, 11600KF), your PC will not work unless you brought a separate graphics card (which you probably will). As a return, F CPUs are cheaper than the non-F versions.
On top of all that, i7 and i9 are still options depending on the generation.
It all depends on your budget and what you need from your PC.
I know that seemed way too complicated, so let me help you pick a CPU. Just tell me your budget and what you want your PC for.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My budget is 30€-80€ and I want my pc for gaming, surfing the internet and testing VMs (maybe).
What exactly is your full budget (like for everything)? I would personally recommend spending a bigger part of your budget towards your CPU. Ideally you would want a 6-core CPU, but the best thing I can find under 80 is an Intel i3-10100F from 2019 on sale.
CzechosDrama said:
I wanted to make a custom PC build but I wanted to ask you what processor recommended. My search on wallapop is Intel Core i5, but which version recommended? Link to my search
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would go with a AMD Ryzen CPU, they come with built in Vega graphics that perform really well in gaming, meaning, you won't have to buy a graphics card, if you go with an Intel CPU, you will have to buy a graphics card. AMD is a real cost saver because they are cheaper than Intel and come with excellent built in graphics.
That's actually true. The integrated graphics are really good, and you can easily get a 2nd or 3rd gen Ryzen 3 or 5 for a good price now. If you ever need to upgrade your GPU down the line the older RX series is also dropping in price
13th Gen i5 or i7 if you've got a broader budget. i9 isn't worth it the money.
Ryzen are decent, I've got one, but the Intel 13th Gen outperforms them this round.