Database Info

The OMNI's coming soon!

just hav a look at the latest HTC upcoming!
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=790
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/umpc/htc-omni-revealed-umpc+like-but-runs-windows-mobile-6-275023.php

If this CPU is better than current one on Qtek9000?

actually it looks like it's gonna be 400mhz, against 520Mhz of the uni.. apart from this, it's the ideal heir to it. looks very fascinating, specially the external display which is showing all the important informations without having to open the lid

cyberpunk627 said:
actually it looks like it's gonna be 400mhz, against 520Mhz of the uni.. apart from this, it's the ideal heir to it. looks very fascinating, specially the external display which is showing all the important informations without having to open the lid
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Clock speed is not a great indicator of Actual Processing Power
Consider:
A similarly clocked Intel Celeron vs Pentium vs Core Duo
It appears a lot of manufacturers are switching to the Qualcomm's which, from my research, have similar power to our XScales, but the graphics chips they are packaged with are more powerful.
(Also, I believe it is the same chipset as the HTC Kaiser)

i wonder if it will be possible to install the omni's rom on an universal...

kalimah said:
i wonder if it will be possible to install the omni's rom on an universal...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wonder if the Omni's ROM has even been developed....
Seriously though two problems:
The Omni is still a 'tentative' device (ie no actual model number given) so it is unlikely that any work would have been done with it
The Omni has _COMPLETELY_ different hardware - a different processor, graphics chip, wireless chip, phone chip, etc
The Omni ROM is likely to be based on the one for the HTC Kaiser - since their hardware is almost identical

TehPenguin said:
Clock speed is not a great indicator of Actual Processing Power
Consider:
A similarly clocked Intel Celeron vs Pentium vs Core Duo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Disagree .. because samsung with its processor proved that miracles in terms of productivity in the arm are impossible ... in any case, omni step backward in productivity

mo3ulla said:
Disagree .. because samsung with its processor proved that miracles in terms of productivity in the arm are impossible ... in any case, omni step backward in productivity
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats where you are false
ARM stands for Advanced Risc Machine (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_architecture)
If you look in the "Advanced Details" for the Omni provided in PDA DB (http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=specs&id=790&view=1) You will notice that it has a ARM processor
So, the Intel XScale is an ARM
And the Qualcomm MSM 7200 is an ARM
The reason they are using the Qualcomm is that the chipset it comes with supports HSDPA\HSUPA, GPS, Wireless G, etc - which the XScale does not
For more info, PDA DB has some basic details:
Qualcomm: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a7200
XScale: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a272

Thread moved to appropriate forum.

Nice, but 81 mm is too wide.
Why dont they stick with 60+ mm???
130 mm height is no problem, but 81 mm width is to big for pocketable device.
16 mm depth is wonderful.

HTCClassAction.org - Intel Xscale VS Qualcomm MSM7200 (ATOM V vs T.DUAL,TYTN2,KS20)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1T4UY-8kG_w
compare of ATOM V with Intel chip while the rest HTC Tytn II/Touch Dual/LG KS20 with qualcomm.
playing back the same video file on memory card at the same time but you can see that ATOM V with intel (marvell) performance better.

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/mobiles/0,39029453,49296230,00.htm
Knowing what i now know, about all the issues and the crap support from HTC, I regret purchasing my touch cruise. If I could go back in time, I would definately get the atom V. Oh well. Heindsight is always 20/20.

I think this is so skewed/biased.
I've got the 8525 and using BetaPlayer and can play smooth converted movies flawlessly. Without tweaking or optimizing Betaplayer, I can duplicate the stop/start effect. Yes, there are some tweaks that needs to be done, but BetaPlayer needs to be optimized for each PDA device it's installed on -just like everyone needs to adjust the seats on any rental car before they can feel comfortable in it.

myknyte said:
I think this is so skewed/biased.
I've got the 8525 and using BetaPlayer and can play smooth converted movies flawlessly. Without tweaking or optimizing Betaplayer, I can duplicate the stop/start effect. Yes, there are some tweaks that needs to be done, but BetaPlayer needs to be optimized for each PDA device it's installed on -just like everyone needs to adjust the seats on any rental car before they can feel comfortable in it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T2j9snCPPk
This another link by tatsdiy compare of INTEL vs SAMSUNG
O2 Zinc with yr 8525 aka HTC Hermes playing back same video also while zinc intel chip with speed step managed to run the video even at 312mhz while hermes cant perform well with its samsung 400mhz

Intel > qualcomm, samsung...
just from my own experience with using devices built on those chipsets, I can tell you that it's true..I had an apache (samsung 400mhz), currently have a touch cruise (qualcomm msm7200 400 mhz), and have used intel based ppcs before as well. The qualcomm chips are definately garbage, and are at the bottom of the barrel. The apache, I miss...I think it's def. faster than the touch cruise. I guess I regret my purchase :|
But as for the intel ones go, I would have to say that I think theyre better than both of those...just from using it for a little while..just normal email, web, etc. apps..no benchmarks, just personal opinon though.

Which Processor is faster & better

"Intel Bulverde 520 MHz"
The one in the Universal
OR
"Qualcomm MSM7201A 528 Mhz"
in the new HTC HD unit
I feel they are the same. Am I right?

qualcomm is much better
Its similar the difference between a 2.5ghz Pentium 4 and a 2.5ghz Core2Solo

i don't think that core2solo and pentium4 with ht much differ

l2tp said:
i don't think that core2solo and pentium4 with ht much differ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google up "Instructions per second" and you'll understand.
The Netburst architec of P4 is one of the worst example in history of it. A failure by engineering standard.

The PXA270 Processor in the Universal actually runs at 624mhz and is underclocked. The HTC X7500 uses the same CPU running at 624mhz. It is clearly the better CPU.

genetik_freak said:
The PXA270 Processor in the Universal actually runs at 624mhz and is underclocked. The HTC X7500 uses the same CPU running at 624mhz. It is clearly the better CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very, very wrong.
I wouldn't say that the Intel two processors are exactly the same, with one just being underclocked via software. Notice how intel puts out multiple pentiums of a given generation at different speeds? Would you venture to say that all those chips are the same too?
Also, clock speed is a poor metric when comparing chips from different companies. PDADB.Net says that the Intel chip has a ARMv5TE instruction set and the Qualcom chip has a ARMv6 instruction set. The Intel is a generation behind.
Comparing
Wikipedia says
Main article: Megahertz myth
The clock rate of a computer is only useful for providing comparisons between computer chips in the same processor family. An IBM PC with an Intel 486 CPU running at 50 MHz will be about twice as fast as one with the same CPU, memory and display running at 25 MHz, while the same will not be true for MIPS R4000 running at the same clock rate as the two are different processors with different functionality. Furthermore, there are many other factors to consider when comparing the speeds of entire computers, like the clock rate of the computer's front side bus (FSB), the clock rate of the RAM, the width in bits of the CPU's bus and the amount of Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 cache.
Clock rates should not be used when comparing different computers or different processor families. Rather, some software benchmark should be used. Clock rates can be very misleading since the amount of work different computer chips can do in one cycle varies. For example, RISC CPUs tend to have simpler instructions than CISC CPUs (but higher clock rates), and superscalar processors can execute more than one instruction per cycle (on average), yet it is not uncommon for them to do "less" in a clock cycle. In addition, subscalar CPUs or use of parallelism can also affect the quality of the computer regardless of clock rate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Sonus you are correct about the Mhz comparison. However, the PXA270 in the Universal can be safely "overclocked" to 624Mhz because the chip is designed to max out at that speed.
I would still like to see some benchmark tests between the 624Mhz PXA270, and the 528Mhz Qualcomm MSM7201A.
Generations aside, I can't see the Qualcomm chip outperforming the Intel Chip by much, if any. Also, it should be noted that the PXA270 can be scaled, not sure if that is true for the MSM7201A.

The other catch phrase is "Performance per watt". I bet the MSM7201A has a huge advantage over PXA27x in that, mainly due to newer manufacturing process.

That may be true wuzy, but considering the PXA270 is almost 5 years old and still being used in new devices should tell you plenty about its capabilities and performance.

Not really... It does, however tell a lot about the stinginess of device manufacturers.
As for the overclocking, not every Universal can run 624 MHz without crashing because the CPUs are going through a selection process after manufacturing and there is simply no reason to use the best ones for a device that doesn't need them running at full speed.

The crashes are usually the result of the type of program used to overclock and also the rom. For the most part, people have found that 624mhz is pretty stable, inlcuding myself. Some have even pushed it beyond that speed, but that's another story...
Also take this into consideration:
The Universal has been on the market since 2005, almost 4 years now. By industry standards, it should be obsolete. Why is it not then? Simply, it is quite inexpensive compared to the newer devices having similar features, sometimes less. When it comes to performance vs. price vs. features, you just cannot beat the value of the Universal and its blistering fast 520/624mhz PXA270 CPU! The PXA270's performance is only rivaled by its bigger brother, the 800Mhz PXA320 which has made its way into some newer devices already.

genetik_freak said:
That may be true wuzy, but considering the PXA270 is almost 5 years old and still being used in new devices should tell you plenty about its capabilities and performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try out a Diamond/Touch Pro with Opera9.5 the next time you see one and notice the speed difference.
On MSM7201A compared to our PXA27x it's a lot more smoother.
The lack of driver for MSM7200 on a lot of devices released last year tainted our perception on the new generation chips I think.
Touch HD vs. ASUS Galaxy7 at end of the year... hmmm

I think you're missing the point wuzy.
I know there are newer devices out now that can deliver slightly better performance in some areas than the Universal, but considering how old our device is, it is to be expected. All I'm saying is that given the age of the Universal compared to what's out there now, The Universal has held up well. Furthermore, with all the new cooked roms popping up, you can expect the Uni to live even longer!

Take a look at H.264 decompression and real high performance tasks and the PXA270 looses so badly against the PXA320 that it is not even funny anymore...
Why does the Uni keep up with most software? Because most programs are written for the old ARMv4 instruction set, thus wasting a lot of CPU cycles on newer processors that have already moved on. Apart from that the average application simply does not need that much CPU power to begin with.
The Uni held out well in a market that is very slow to adapt new technologies to begin with. The Axim x50v had a dedicated graphics chip at the end of 2004 - how many applications make use of that today? Only some games (ports, emulators) and media players. For those alone the Axim has held out better than the Uni though as it is still one of the best performing PPCs on the market.
Our little one will be around for quite a while, but it is far, far away from what nowadays devices can offer and it shows if you run anything beyond mail and office apps on it.

Which Processor is faster & better
I feel from your input above that "Qualcomm MSM7201A 528 Mhz" has higher performance, clock rete, Instructions per second, & Performance per watt when compared to the "Intel Bulverde 520 MHz" about 2:1 am I right ?
Another Question:
What is the highest speed Processor available for the PDA industry today?
Best Regards.

IMHO the ARM Cortex processors are very far up the ladder when it comes to performance and energy consumption. The Pandora makers claim 10 hours of runtime for their device. Together with its media chip this little bugger is capable of decoding 720p HD video streams (take a look at the Archos 5)
I am not sure if the MSM7201A chipset's CPU alone reaches twice the performance of the Uni, but you will see a huge difference in apps that support and need the latest in CPU architecture (media players & games). If (one way or the other) the 3D capabilities can be put to use you will probably see more than a 2:1 performance boost.

The sad truth is the Universal is one of the slowest VGA devices around. Especially considering lack of the graphical accelerator (which was even present in prototypes).

Too bad the dedicated 3D chip didn't make it into the final design. But it's still better than having a 3D accelerator without drivers! I have a Sharp EM-ONE here with a GoForce 5500 that could theoretically accelerate many video formats. The sad truth is that because there are no drivers no media player can make use of the chip. Even worse: Because the graphics chip still controls the display video is even slower because the optimized X-Scale drivers can't be used. It's like Sharp and NVidia wanted to punish users double So, as bad as it is, the Uni is not the worst device out there!

x86
I wonder why there´re no x86 cpu´s placed in mobile devices yet. maybe because of the high power consumption? x86 cpu´s running at 528mhz would be more powerful than arm cpu´s. furthermore the device could run x86 os like xp embedded with more features and capabilities...

x86 CPU enabled systems are still too much power hungry and too much complicated to be used in such a small device (sounds weird when talking abut HTC Universal, doesn't it).

Fastest & Most Responsive VGA PPC Phone?

Hi everyone,
I was just wondering what are the fastest & most responsive VGA-screen PPC Phones out there (or coming by end 2009)? I quantify performance in terms of 2D graphics, and I've been using SPB Benchmark Graphics benchmark. Of course, one can always argue there's more than 2D graphics in terms of speed, but slow phones really pissed me off. I used to had a HTC Universal and that was a steaming pile of junk. Switched to HTC Hermes 2-3yrs back... and it's been barely tolerable.
Right now, I've only found 2 "fast" VGA PPC Phones - ASUS P565 and Samsung Omnia II. However ASUS P565 is a questionable VGA phone since it's screen is a puny 2.8" size (might as well get a ASUS P552W). Both have a graphics benchmark of around ~2500, which is quite sad since that's equivalent to the Eten M600 speed (ok it runs as a QVGA). Compare this to Samsung Omnia I (~5000) or the ASUS P552W (~11,000) both of which uses the slower Marvel 624MHz CPU, Monahans and Tavor generation respectively.
I read that Toshiba TG01 Snapdragon is coming soon, but are there any concrete benchmarks done on it?
So, does anyone know if there is any fast & responsive VGA PPC Phones out there? Or do we have to wait for Snapdragon, Tegra or Marvell's 1GHz CPU? Can we expect such CPUs to make VGA screened phones fast enough? Or should I just get the ASUS P552W which means giving up my QWERTY keyboard , and wait for another 2-3years?

Hi
I can think on Tosh tg01 that is already on sale as the fastest to this date (I believe)
On december some snapdragon tosh models will be launched! perhaps HTC also...
Other ones not so fast but also good options are:
Touch pro 2
Hero

Acer M900?

YOu cannot treat a processors MHz as the be-all-end-all. Its an indicator and nothing more. You cannot compare processor speeds across diferent manufacturers either.
And no matter how fast the processor, if the drivers/design around it is sh*t, the phone will suffer greatly. A good example of this, Acer Shell to access contacts can be a little slow, SPB Shell however, is instant.
You can only compare by running the same app performing the same task on each phone. Benchmarks try to do this but can become far too specific at times. Again, they are a (good) indicator but not the be-all-end-all.
On a side note, I have an m900 and if you turn off Acer Shell (coz it sucks!) it is VERY fast.
When you want speed, why do you need speed exactly? Are you talking about accessing contacts etc? Are you talking about screen orientation or maybe playing games?
Your best bet is try and get hold of devices, install the required game/software and THEN see how responsive it is.

Monty Burns said:
YOu cannot treat a processors MHz as the be-all-end-all. Its an indicator and nothing more. You cannot compare processor speeds across diferent manufacturers either.
And no matter how fast the processor, if the drivers/design around it is sh*t, the phone will suffer greatly. A good example of this, Acer Shell to access contacts can be a little slow, SPB Shell however, is instant.
You can only compare by running the same app performing the same task on each phone. Benchmarks try to do this but can become far too specific at times. Again, they are a (good) indicator but not the be-all-end-all.
On a side note, I have an m900 and if you turn off Acer Shell (coz it sucks!) it is VERY fast.
When you want speed, why do you need speed exactly? Are you talking about accessing contacts etc? Are you talking about screen orientation or maybe playing games?
Your best bet is try and get hold of devices, install the required game/software and THEN see how responsive it is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Easier said than done, I would love to have a try out by to replicate real-life performance one has to install all the apps one normally use, so it's not practical unless you have a dozen friends with different PPC Phones. While benchmarks aren't perfect, I don't see anything better to replace it. Sure, there is software optimizations and driver stuff, but if it sucks... no matter how much you cook your ROM and optimize, it sucks.
Take for example HTC Universal. That is one slow piece of junk. No matter how much optimization you do, you're not going to beat say the current HTC Hermes that I am using in terms of responsiveness. Another example is the last 1-2 yrs of HTC <Insert Model> running Qualcomm CPUs. So many users have reported the unbearably slow speed, and it doesn't help that many of them come with VGA resolution screens. Almost all evidence point to date that VGA phones are slow and crappy... and I was wondering if technology has advanced the point whereby this can be rectified.
Speed? It's the most importing thing when dealing with PPC Phones. For many years now, I the name Pocket PC is a real misnomer, as previous generation and maybe even current generation of phones acts in no way like a real personal computer.
What is acceptable? Fast 2D graphics. Instant response when I click on something, as I was using a laptop. No lag. No lag when rotating the screen. Faster loading of webpages instead of waiting for ages... and then it crashes. And btw I use Phone Weaver, Pocket Plus and SPB Diary on my Today screen, which makes it more taxing on the 2D system. Sure the HTC Universal with a fresh install can rotate screen in 1-2 seconds when optimized, but load in all my Today plugins it takes like 10-20 seconds!
Next comes fast 3D graphics and the ability to play movies. Right now my HTC Hermes can't play normal sized video files, i.e. 640x480, XVID/DIVX. Of course you can always recode with a lower res, but what's the point? It's all extra work.

Ronnie,
Have you thought about doing the 128MB memory upgrade, and overclocking the CPU on the Universal? May help things a bit.
Some other devices that may be faster:
Xperia X1
Acer F1
02 XDA Flame
Asus P835
Here is a site that test floating point and OGL performance in smartphones. Donot know how legit it is however.
http://www.glbenchmark.com/latest_results.jsp?benchmark=glpro

Most certainly don't look to HTC.
e.g. Kaiser - even if the CPU/GPU supports faster performance, they don't deem that necessary and don't include the required drivers.
The video 'hack' to speed up 2-D performance for the Kaiser proves that there are even more inefficiencies/missing drivers for that HTC phone.

I would suggest that the new Acer Tempo range and new Samsung Omnia's are a good way to investigate. Both these brands are selling the fact that there chips have built in 3d graphics and I believe the Samsungs even come with a free 3d game - could be wrong though. Either way, you wouldnt sell the fact you have a 3d games capability if you haven't programmed proper 3d drivers - something HTC have never really done afaik.
Again, the Acers are only showing a 528mhz (something like that anyway) but don't be fooled by a mhz rating. For example, just because a snapdragon is showing a 1ghz processor doesn't means its faster than a 528mhz Samsung... if you use google you will find plenty of winmob experienced people that feel its not as fast as it should be.
edit: Im sure the Samsung Omnia II's come with a Need For Speed Variant?

msm7200 520mhz vs. xscale 800mhz?

Is there much of difference beside clock speed. from the msm7200 in the touch pro 2 and the xscale running at 800mhz in the omnia II in terms of performance? ANy help would be appreciated.

If you ask me it (should) make quite a difference. The msm7200 is quite notorious for it's quite allright clockspeed but slow performance.
I used to have a Diamond (with 528 mhz) and then got a Omnia (Marvell 624 mhz) which was already quite a difference. I guess the 800 mhz will make even more of a difference.
Do note that there is a big difference in resolution between the Diamond and the Omnia, so that will also give some speed increase. The Omnia II has a Samsung 800 mhz chip (as far as I know) and I don't know what kind of performance that will give.
Both cpu's are a ARMv6 (afaik), so in that perspective you could say the 800 mhz is faster than the 528 mhz.
See this:
Samsung chip: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a6410&c=samsung_s3c6410
Qualcomm chip: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a7200a&c=qualcomm_msm7200a

My old diamond was much slower than my current ipaq 211. The ipaq has a 624mhz marvell and is much faster and more responsive than the diamond. It can also play videos back much better. 800mhz would just increase the performance gap.

The Omnia II is Arm11 which is slightly faster than the iphone 3G(both get blown out of the water by the 3Gs), and should support OpenGL ES 2.0.
Here's Samsungs Data sheet on it: http://www.samsung.com/global/syste.../2008/5/30/785500s3c6410_datasheet_200804.pdf
The msm7200, i BELIEVE(dont quote me), would be faster than the SC36410, if it had proper drivers.. however, thats not the case.

numbers are an indicator and nothing more. They give you a clue but clues can be very misleading. If they were usefull, why would you need benchmarking?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth
(yeah i know wiki is sometimes full of BS but it certainly backs up what I learned in Uni and during my assembler cracking/virus writing days)
The ONLY way to compare CPU's is to run the same application and then run the SAME task in that application. Once you have done so ALL you can say is "For performing task X in application Y, processor ZXY running operating system ABC is faster on the BLAHBLAH platform" and nothing more. It does not mean its faster at everything or indeed, you cannot say its faster than ANYTHING else until you have tested it.
At the end of the day, the processor is affected by drivers, processor design and the operating system and its installaition.

and Software.. if theres no apps that incorporates acceleration, then its wasted.

what about qualcomm 1G snapdragon cpu?
how fast is that compares to current 528mzh? haha
i'm waiting for Acer S200 with 1G cpu.

netnerd said:
what about qualcomm 1G snapdragon cpu?
how fast is that compares to current 528mzh? haha
i'm waiting for Acer S200 with 1G cpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
please re-read and if you still don't understand, i'll try and explain again.

clearly, marvell is better, even the mhz is lesser than what qualcomm offers!
having better decoders also like video playback & multitasking when video is playing!
waiting for devices with marvell cpu pxa168 series.
they use qualcomm chip becoz its cheaper & provide hsdpa to network & GPS module while the rest does not come with it. so individual chip must be used. but its better like GPSone VS SiRF III