ARM Quad-Core up to 2.5 Ghz - General Topics

Has anybody besides me already read those news?
http://phandroid.com/2010/09/09/arm-quad-core-2-5-ghz-cortex-a-15-is-definitely-happening/
Pretty exciting! Even though we'll have to wait.. but I guess in about 10 to 20 years.. we'll laugh about 1Ghz CPUs in our mobiles! Maybe even about 4Ghz+

I see you haven't learned about the CPU war over the past decade, have you? Pushing Mhz was really the only way chip developers felt like they could increase speed until AMD chose a different approach i.e. made chips more efficient per clock rather than just pushing Mhz like Intel carried on doing. Both both companies realised that they could re-develop their chips to be more efficient then the whole 'multi-core' race started.
While 2.5Ghz sounds impressive, 4 cores @ 1 Ghz doesn't sound that bad either and I see that being more practical in 10 years time, not 4Ghz+.

20 years ago Intel released the 80486DX processor, look at how far processing power has come since then.
Heck I still look back and laugh at my XT with it's 8088 CPU running at a stonking 4.77MHz! 0.33MIPS
So given how much CPUs in general have developed in the last 10-20 years, and they're talking about releasing a quad core 2.5GHz CPU in 2012, I don't think it's too much to think that in 2030 as processors will be so much more powerful that looking back to the CPUs of 2015 we'll view them as slow and pathetic.
Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i980EE 147,600 MIPS at 3.3 GHz, compare that with 30 years ago the 8088 giving only 0.33MIPS at 4.77MHz!

Related

Tegra or Snapdragon

Hi everybody, I just have some questions.
I plan to change my HTC Hermes next year but I don't know which based-device will be the best...
Snapdragon or Tegra.
Tegra seems to have 8core of execution for great graphics but not a big frequency(600-800Mhz). Snapdragon got the Ghz and is supposed to reach 1.3Ghz in 2010. There is also a dual core snapdragon 2x1.5Ghz supposed to be available this year but will it be for smartphones?
These are the questions I have because a PDA is a lot of money for me and I wanna choose the right device...
Thanks
Well snapdragon is multi core SoC just like Tegra but what nvidia is so proud of is power island. It means that they can shut off unneeded module(ex. turn off all modules except of modem when in standby). Tegra uses ARM11 CPU where snapdragon is based on improved cortex A8 besides it is clocked at 1Ghz so tegra can't win this one. GPU is better on tegra and probably video performance is better too but when it comes to brute force snapdragon wins hands down.
I think that is all you need to know about tegra and snapdragon. About that 2x1,5Ghz snapdragon it is designed to be used on smartbooks. It would be an overkill for smartphone at least for now.
Thanks that's all I wanted to know
also a Mhz is not just a Mhz
first of all a qualcomm mhz could mean more or less performance boots then a OMAP mhz
not to mention it don't really matter if the cpu is super fast if the ram and storage and other IO of a device can't keep up
joplayer said:
Tegra seems to have 8core of execution for great graphics but not a big frequency(600-800Mhz). Snapdragon got the Ghz and is supposed to reach 1.3Ghz in 2010.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra is just like the Snapdragon a SoC. If we use the same logic that Nvidia used, then the Snapdragon is also a multi core SoC ( CPU, GPU, DSP, ... ). But its just marketing to make it look to people that they get a 8 Cpu system
Like Wishmaster89 pointed out, there is a major difference between the CPU's used on both system.
The 600Mhz Arm11 ( ArmV6 ) on the Tegra is capable off executing, about 1/3th what the Snapdragon's ArmV7 1Ghz Cpu can do.
The GPU on the other hand, is more powerful in the Tegra. There is a little list being used to compare the overall ( theoretical ) strengths off each platform's GPU
Nintendo DS: 120,000 triangles/s, 30 M pixels/s
PowerVR MBX-Lite (iPhone 3G): 1 M triangles/s, 100 M pixels/s
Samsung S3C6410 (Omnia II): 4 M triangles/s, 125.6 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon (Qualcomm MSM72xx): 4 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 530 (Palm Pre): 14 M triangles/s, ___ M pixels/s
ATI Imageon Z430 (Toshiba TG01): 22 M triangles/s, 133 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 535 (iPhone 3GS): 28 M triangles/s, 400 M pixels/s
Sony PSP: 33 M triangles/s, 664 M pixels/s
PowerVR SGX 540 (TI OMAP4): 35 M triangles/s, 1000 M pixels/s
Nvidia Tegra APX2500 (Zune HD): 40 M triangles/s, 600 M pixels/s
ATI Imageon _ (Qualcomm QSD8672): 80 M triangles/s, >500 M pixels/s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, the Tegra's GPU is about twice as powerful as the Snapdragon's ATI Z430 ( looking at Triangles ). The reason why i use the term theoretically is because a lot off factors can make or break a GPU ( many more then on a CPU ). Bad drivers, bandwidth limitations, to little memory, bad mix off texture units, vertex units etc..
Problem with Nvidia is, they have always had the habit off exaggerating things ( a lesson learned more then a few times in the past ).
Another problem is, are the GPU's actually being used on the PDA/Smartphone's? A lesson i learned in the past from the x50v, with its own dedicated powerful ( in that time ) 2700g ( 800.000 Triangles in that time ). The reality is, most applications rely the most on the CPU.
At best, if you have dedicated games, written for the PDA/Smartphone market, very few will tap in to all the power that the Tegra has to offer.
Even the PSX Emulators ( who run great ( full speed 50/60fps pal/ntsc games ) ) on the Snapdragon. Forget about running a lot off psx games on a Arm11 without tweaking ( and frame skipping ). Because it relies the most on brute force cpu power ( and this is where the Snapdragon shines ).
So? What is there besides games? Video playback? Sure... The Tegra can supposedly do 1080p, while the TI OMAP & Snapdragon's only do 720p. But from what i have read, its more to the DSP that does the work. The snapdragon's DSP runs at 600Mhz, i don't find any information about the Tegra's DSP? Does it even have any? Anybody with more info how they even handle things?
When it comes down to PDA/Smartphone's... take it from me. The most important thing is first the CPU. Then the amount off memory ( and memory speed ). Then the GPU.
Lets just say i like to see a fair comparison between both systems, to see there real power ( and not some nvidia fake PR where a lot off people still fall in ).
Like i said, i don't exactly trust Nvidia's numbers when there PR posts crap like this:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Those numbers are what you can call a pure lie. When people from the OpenPandora project ( what uses a TI Omap3630 @ 600Mhz, with a slower GPU ), is able to run quake3 at 35+ fps... Yet, Nvidia claims 5fps for the Snapdragon, thats actually more powerful then the TI Imap3630... I love those little [*] next to the text... Small text below: "* NVIDIA estimates". In other words, how much trust can somebody place in the specs from a company that that pulls stunts like that.
Also... Snapdragon is used in the following smartphones that i know off: Toshiba TG01, Asus F1 ( S200 ), HTC HD2 ( Leo ), and a few more that are on the way. Where is the Tegra? The MS Zune... Thats it...
You think that HTC, Toshiba, Asus will all have looked at the different available SOC providers ( TI, qualcomm, Samsung, Nvidia etc ). Yet ... Who do they pick for there new top off the line products...
I hope this helps...
OP, therw isn't much to add after all that expert info, but I can make it easy for you. SD = raw power, Tegra = fancy graphics. I prefer power, because of the better overall performance.
as i see it the tegra chip has 2 600mhz cores + 6 other cores to do video, audio etc.
so a 1ghz snapdragon would have to split it mhz to deal with any audio, video etc whilst the tegra chip would have separate cores dealing with this stuff leaving 2 600mhz cores free.
this would make tegra a lot faster than snapdragon.
one thing which would be interesting would be batt life
in various situations
and excluding the atom as it's not really a phone cpu
one thing of note is that every snapdragon phone, although seems fast still has the standard wm lag at times (probably more wm that the cpu).
whilst the zune hd looks super smooth and very fast.
we will have to wait for the first tegra wm phone to see if it has the wm lag as its hard to tell by comparing a mp3/4 player (which has a os which was probably made from the ground up to run on the chip) to a phone.
Ganondolf said:
as i see it the tegra chip has 2 600mhz cores + 6 other cores to do video, audio etc.
so a 1ghz snapdragon would have to split it mhz to deal with any audio, video etc whilst the tegra chip would have separate cores dealing with this stuff leaving 2 600mhz cores free.
this would make tegra a lot faster than snapdragon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You're completely wrong! As I said both are multi core SoC's. Both snapdragon and tegra have separate cores for video and audio! The only difference is that tegra can shut off unneeded module where snapdragon can't. Besides they know that their CPU is slow so they have to give people something that will make them forget about CPU so they decided that talking about 8 cores on something as small as their SoC would be a good choice.
As I said before raw CPU power of snapdragon is at least 3x greater than tegra and zune HD is smoother because all the work is done on the GPU(besides the whole Zune OS 4.0 was probably designed on tegra so don't expect it to lag) where WM is only CPU driven. Besides wait for HTC Leo to see almost lag free device(show me device that never lags).
For the last time. For know tegra has slow CPU where Snapdragon has a beast for CPU. Things should change with tegra2 and snapdragon2.
Ganondolf said:
as i see it the tegra chip has 2 600mhz cores + 6 other cores to do video, audio etc.
so a 1ghz snapdragon would have to split it mhz to deal with any audio, video etc whilst the tegra chip would have separate cores dealing with this stuff leaving 2 600mhz cores free.
this would make tegra a lot faster than snapdragon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
*uch* So much misinformation... I may not be a expert, but you just claimed that the Snapdragon needs to split its mhz, to do ... video? Did you even read that snapdragon's specs. Dedicated ... GPU. GPU = Video!
Another wrong point, is that both cores are not at 600Mhz. One core is at 600Mhz, and one Core is at 400Mhz. The 600Mhz core is a ARM11 core, and the 400Mhz, is a Arm7 core ( not to be confused with the ArmV7 aka Cortex A8 ).
The basic idea is, when a phone is in standby, that the 400Mhz Arm 7 core, does the basic staying alive stuff. Where as the 600 Arm11 core, is only used for the big stuff. The basic idea is good.
But, the Snapdragon 1Ghz ArmV7 Cpu is able to downscale, and reduce its power footprint also. What solution is the better one ... We will needs to see.
To put things in perspective:
Tegra:
* ARM 11
* ARM 7
* GPU
* 2D Engine
* HD Video Encoder
* HD Video Decoder
* Audio
* Imaging
Snapdragon
* ARM v7 ( Cortex A8 )
* GPU
* DSP
* HD Video Decoder
* ...
Now... You will say. Hey, look at all those extra cores that the Tegra has. Must be a power house... No ... It does not work like that.
The Snapdragon's 600Mhz DSP has several capabilities, including dedicated Image processing, etc. The question is, how fast is the Image processor for the Tegra? If its a separate core, it has its own frequency. This alone make a big difference, because the slow that core, the longer it takes to do the job ( and the more power drain ).
The 600Mhz Tegra that we are comparing here, has only a 720p output capability. Just like the Snapdragon. As far as i can tell, the Tegra 600 is used in the Zune. Something tells me that the Tegra 650 is more for notebooks.
HD Encoding / HD decoding. By any definition, that is part off the GPU. Just like the ATI Z430 has its own dedicated HD capabilities. And any GPU these days has the ability to disable part off its to save power. So we can assume that the same capability is in the mobile variant. The Z430 is based on the GPU found in the x360. It has its own HD, audio, media, etc processing capabilites ( aka, if you like to call it in Nvidia's term... HD, Audio, Media Core's ).
So, from a technical point of view, the Snapdragon has also 8 cores. Hell, we can trump that, because the DSP is capable off more then just Image processing. So, how many extra cores can be gain from that?
To be honest, there is so much misinformation that people jump on... Its actually kinda incredible ( and frightening )... While i need to admit, when looking at the Google links, Nvidia did a good job at spreading the FUBAR information. Most sites took over the information, without questioning it one little bit...
Lag?
And Ganondolf regarding the lag that you report? To be honest, i have shown several movies to a friend with WM6.5 + Touchflow backported on older HTC devices ( devices with the same slow cpu's, like the Tegra uses ). Guess what... Beyond a bit off lag on the Image viewer, they had no lag.
Take a look at the Video's off the HTC HD2 ( Snapdragon ) ... And find the lag there please...
I have seen a few people like you before on other forum's, going around all high & mighty about the Tegra. At first i was impressed by its general specs. Until you start to look deeper, and discover that the CPU is slow as hell ( and the second one is even worse ) compared to the Snapdragon / Cortex A8 / ArmV7 design. That the "extra" cores, are just functionality provided from the GPU. And that its 1080p claim, does not come from the version now used.
In fact, Snapdragon also has 1080p capability. See the QSD8672. But you will not find that SmartPhone's just yet. Just like the Tegra 650 with its 1080p. Has anybody even seen a Tegra 650 on the market? I don't think so ( for good reason ). Looks like another Paper launch from Nvidia.
Simply put:
As of July, 2009 or Oct 2009 for that matter:
Snapdragon mobile phones = shipping.
Tegra mobile phones = vapourware. (not even any firm rumours)
Benjiro said:
Lag?
And Ganondolf regarding the lag that you report? To be honest, i have shown several movies to a friend with WM6.5 + Touchflow backported on older HTC devices ( devices with the same slow cpu's, like the Tegra uses ). Guess what... Beyond a bit off lag on the Image viewer, they had no lag.
Take a look at the Video's off the HTC HD2 ( Snapdragon ) ... And find the lag there please...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the lag i was talking about was on the toshiba tg01 which i have played with. there is no point saying look at videos of the htc hd2 as i saw vids of the tg01 which looked like it was lag free, till the hd2 comes out and i have a play i (we) wont be able to tell if its lag free or not. as i can see u are making your argument about lag on a phone that has not been released which i think is a rubbish argument, as someone could say a tegra phone could teleport you across the world (there is no proof).
Also im not on the tegra bandwagon as i like snapdragon just as much, i was going by what i had heard on the net. maybe like you said information has been made to look like the tegra chip is super powerful compared to all the other phone cpu's, what is not true but till i see a phone with a tegra chip in it how would we know?
agitprop said:
Simply put:
As of July, 2009 or Oct 2009 for that matter:
Snapdragon mobile phones = shipping.
Tegra mobile phones = vapourware. (not even any firm rumours)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
By far the most important point.
Far more important than the MHz number which may or may not even indicate greater or lesser performance or battery life than a competitor with an entirely different architecture.
There is one piece of info that I haven't been able to find. Which one of the two has better performance when it comes to battery power usage?
Anyone?
Tegra is right on the ball.
Yes, the ARM11 cpu is theoretically 1/3 the speed of the Cortex but don't forget there's an ARM7 offloading network traffic, 2D acceleration separate from the CPU and GPU, dedicated HD encoding hardware (decoding is common on both) and sound acceleration. Many of the processing bottlenecks in a mobile device are successfully offloaded in the tegra, ultimately giving the ARM11 less tasks to cope with in the first place, and no need for thread balancing which, fingers crossed, leads to more stable os performance. Another thing to note is that nVidia's official specs say ARM11 MPCore, which means that various tegra chips could have anywhere from 1 to 4 ARM11 cores (the tegra chipset used in the Microsoft Zune player was a duel-core ARM11).
The main point though I think is the power. You don't need a massive CPU in a mobile device, what you need is battery life, which although we haven't received final figures, the tegra is looking infinitely more impressive than anything else on the market. If my iPhone 3GS is anything to go off even x2 the battery life would be welcome, this thing dies in no time at all be it browsing the web, playing video or music; reviews show snapdragon phones to be even worse than this. The nVidia specs regarding battery in earlier posts are mostly accurate but based on a netbook battery. The Zune HD running the tegra has 33hours of audio, 8.5 hours of video, however uses only a 660mAh battery; this is half the size of the battery on the iPhone 3GS and HTC Touch HD2 for example.
The tegra GPU is a powerful CUDA based design and will allow for GPGPU acceleration of the only major computationally intensive task that phones are likely to do in the future which is image processing for augmented reality.
They've provided on-chip support for most modern input/output devices.
nVidia have covered all the bases, I'm seriously looking forward to tegra phones.
Yes, but as I've learned (the hard way) from my Touch Pro, all the features in the world mean nothing if they're not used. Touch Pro was supposed to have video acceleration and double the speed of my old Tytn. Where are those? Nowhere. Why? Some say "there aren't any drivers for the GPU", others say that TPs processor may be 500MHz, but its design is worse than the one in my older Tytn...
I don't care. As a customer, user and buyer, I know that my older phone was faster than my new one. If in the near future we have a Snapdragon 1GHz phone that does everything in its CPU and a Tegra phone that ballances cpu-gpu-physics-whatever in different parts of its design, history says that the Snapdragon will be the better choice. You see, WM Solitaire, Word Mobile, RSS Readers, Twitter clients and all existing software, at least for WM, is written to run on a single processor. I've yet to see a good program/game that will actually take advantage of any devices GPU - and that won't happen while the market is split, for a developer would need to create his program for a specific device (meaning less profit) or simply forego any acceleration and create something "that runs anywhere". We can thank Microsoft for going the Linux way and advocating device makers doing whatever they want, whichever way they want, without some standard way of using different hardware parts (like, say, DirectX in Windows).
very interesting informations.
Battery life is really important, that's at the moment the only advantage of the Tegra vs SN.
I am really keen to know if Manila works also fast with less CPU-Power of the Tegra-Chip as the Leo.
There must be some driver or software problem I would say - because there's no PDA out with the Tegra.
Also no announcement... otherwhise it could be also a strategy from HTC that they didn't get a problem in selling the Leo and oncoming Android-device.
So we must w8...
I think you guys should see PGR on the Zune HD.
Stunning graphics.
For me the processor speed will come 2nd place to functionality. I have recently started to use the remote desktop on my HD, but wish it had a TV out like my Touch Pro.
I was thinking about upgrading to a Leo but that has no TV also.
Discussing advanced graphics for a Snapdragon is not helpful if you are restricted to 4 inches.
Hopefully HTC will put HDMI or at least video out on all future devices. The resolution of the devices is upto it, so why not.

Tegra 3 = Beast!

Wow, just reading this and watching the video got me really excited!
Quote: "...its benchmark puts Kal-El at a higher performance bracket than even Intel's Core 2 Duo full-on-PC processors."
Enjoy: http://pocketnow.com/android/nvidia-quad-core-kal-el-in-android-devices-this-summer
I guess my next phone will somewhere on par with my [email protected], nah not quite but still impressive.
Its freakin ridiculous isn't it, I can't imagine how powerful wayne, logan, or even stark will be.
By the way, those are the architectures coming after Kal-El as seen in the roadmap here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4181/...-a9s-coming-to-smartphonestablets-this-year/1
Can't wait for my Q6600 to have a little brother as well.
dreadlord369 said:
Its freakin ridiculous isn't it, I can't imagine how powerful wayne, logan, or even stark will be.
By the way, those are the architectures coming after Kal-El as seen in the roadmap here
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4181/...-a9s-coming-to-smartphonestablets-this-year/1
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow sick! I had a feeling the technology was gona explode once dual core starts being implemented into phones but this is just ridiculous. I wander which C2D they are comparing to though. Can't wait to play some Crysis on my phone !!
omg it looks so cool!
7
Its lie, arm can not beat intel dual core cpus for next three year
It might be better then atom dual...
Sent from my LG-SU660 using XDA App
uhh three years is too long if they havent already beat some dual core chips, least thats what i think...specially since the kal-el and omap 5 cpus and whatever qualcomm have planned are gunna be freaking awesome!
OMG!!!! Its amazing
Mobile phones better than my first PC
Well since nvidia is supposedly releasing quad core in q4 of this year I say that computers will prolly eventually die out. Especially since this year smartphone sales beat computers...just a thought
HTC HD2 w/ 2.3 : )
CTR01 said:
Well since nvidia is supposedly releasing quad core in q4 of this year I say that computers will prolly eventually die out. Especially since this year smartphone sales beat computers...just a thought
HTC HD2 w/ 2.3 : )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Funny you mention that, I was just in uni talking about networking (my major) and technology and a classmate said the same thing. I would say it could happen in maybe 20+ years.
I would like to see a Tegra 3 rendering a complex 3D scene or something like that which would really show it's performance.
Is this the Q6600 club or what? <3
Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk
I have an Athlon X3 435 at 3.6 ghz. Can go up to 3.8 ghz as well. But too much v-core.
Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?
icecold23 said:
Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I don' think the battery technology is on par or evolving on par with the processors. At this rate, we'll have "stationary" tablets with the current battery technology.
icecold23 said:
Although they are saying these newer processors are supposed to be much more efficient, are these dual and quad core processors going to be a viable option with the today's battery technology?
Or is it going to be more of a "use it if it is available" for the app devs, and therefore negating any positive improvements in battery life?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.
vbetts said:
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
agreed...while im no cpu expert i do know the slight basics and did a little reading that agrees with vbetts. they said the 4 core kal-el nvidia cpu is supposed to have ~12 hours of play back for hd video...least thats what someone on a thread of mine posted...
vbetts said:
It just really depends on how optimized these cores are for power. It's not adding cores that gives a higher TDP, it's the vcore of the core and the frequency the cores run at. But really, I can't see cpus going any other way but multicore or multithread. It's more efficient for power and performance to have 2 cores running at 1 ghz each, instead of having a cpu at 2ghz that will have a higher tdp and vcore to keep it stable. If the cores are a smaller die size, then it works out perfectly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah exactly, I personally thought the move to dual core would be sooner with a 2 500mhz core cpu or lower since that would still be better then a single 1Ghz chip.
Battery is definitely a issue, with today's technology I wonder how much these chips will consume at 100% load or when playing a game which use most of the devices grunt. On my DHD I can take it up to 1.9Ghz stable and if i'm playing FPse while at that frequency current widget show consumption of around 425mA, while at 1Ghz it's around 285mA. That's quiet a difference! So in order for these chips to be efficient they shouldn't use much more battery then todays chips.
I love my Q6600, max OC I could get was 4Ghz but it required 1.6v Vcore and on air that was HOT. Still I made it into Windows and did some benching, 13.110s on a 1MB SuperPI/1.5 XS mod
CTR01 said:
agreed...while im no cpu expert i do know the slight basics and did a little reading that agrees with vbetts. they said the 4 core kal-el nvidia cpu is supposed to have ~12 hours of play back for hd video...least thats what someone on a thread of mine posted...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I read that as well or heard it somewhere.
Yeah exactly, I personally thought the move to dual core would be sooner with a 2 500mhz core cpu or lower since that would still be better then a single 1Ghz chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the app is multithreaded capable, then yes. Easily better. But 2 500mhz cpus would probably be best for multitasking.
Battery is definitely a issue, with today's technology I wonder how much these chips will consume at 100% load or when playing a game which use most of the devices grunt. On my DHD I can take it up to 1.9Ghz stable and if i'm playing FPse while at that frequency current widget show consumption of around 425mA, while at 1Ghz it's around 285mA. That's quiet a difference! So in order for these chips to be efficient they shouldn't use much more battery then todays chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Battery has always been an issue though, even on my old Moment the battery sucked. But that's what you get with these I guess. But man, 1.9ghz stable from 1ghz! For a small platform, that's pretty damn impressive.
I love my Q6600, max OC I could get was 4Ghz but it required 1.6v Vcore and on air that was HOT. Still I made it into Windows and did some benching, 13.110s on a 1MB SuperPI/1.5 XS mod
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ouch, how long did the chip last? I've got my 435 at 1.52vcore. I can go higher but I need this chip to last me for a year or so.
I can't believe that they set the time-frame for the release as early as they did. Hopefully they will live up to this standard

Exactly how good is this Qualcomm Processor?

Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Read the thread "Those of your who are waiting too compare GSIII to HTC One X" in this forum. It only has about 6 pages but has a ton of information. Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
shaboobla said:
Short answer is that the Qualcomm chip kicks serious ass.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes and no, the tegra 3 does have a better gpu so in theory, better games. however, game makers cater to the mass. most androids that are active are mid-range, android 2.2 or 2.3, have a resolution of 480x800, and last years (or older) processors. although most will be made to work on the t3 and s4, it will be compatibility issues, not optimization. nvidia will have a couple games "t3 only" but even those will be made to work on other phones. now that ics is cleaning up some of the splintering of apps, we'll see some better options on both fields.
in short, yes the t3 is a better gaming chip. but for the battery life, games available, and current bugs i would suggest the s4. i may change my mind when the refreshs come out q3-4, we'll see.
MattMJB0188 said:
After reading through that thread I'm still not entirely clear. Seems the Tegra is better for gaming?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct. However, most games are not optimized to utilize the Tegra to its fullest potential. That should change by the end of the year. The other point is that the S4 is just as good as the Tegra un terms of gaming performance. IMO, you should decide between these 2 processors by looking at the main area where the S4 truly has the advantage thus far, and that is battery life. So far, the battery life advantage goes to the S4. Just read the battery life threads in this forum and for the international X. It took a few updates to the Transformer Prime to start having pretty good battery life. The One X, will get better in that department with a couple more updates for battery optimization. The S4 starts with great battery life and will get even better in that department.
Sent from my HTC Vivid using XDA app
I say the snapdragon S4 is a better chip right now. The tegra 3 gpu is great and with the tegra zone games it really looks great. But he 4 cores CPU is really for heavy multitasking so you candivise the work between all four cores. They are A9 cores vs the custom qualcomm which is close to A15. It mans that for single threaded task and multi threaded task the snapdragon will whoop tegra 3' ass. Opening an app, scrolling through that app sect... also browser performance is slightly better on the qualcomm chip. Basically tegra 3 can do lots of things at the same time with decent speed vs the S4 chip which can do 1 or few more things at lighting speed.
The S4 is almost 2x faster than any other dual core out there. Anandtech did a few nice articles on the S4, including benchmarks vs tegra 3.
In real use, the S4 should be much better, because not all apps are multithreaded for 4 cores. The S4 completely kicks the Tegra 3's ass in singlethreaded benchmarks. I also expect the S4 to be better at power management, because it is made on 28nm node, instead of 40 nm, so its more compact and efficient.
About 23 I'd say
Sent from my SGH-I997 using xda premium
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
tehdef said:
Here is a comparison benchmark by someone from Reddit.
Benchmark S4 Krait Tegra 3
Quadrant 5016 4906
Linpack Single 103.11 48.54
Linpack Multi 212.96 150.54
Nenamark 2 59.7fps 47.6fps
Nenamark 1 59.9fps 59.5fps
Vellamo 2276 1617
SunSpider 1540.0ms 1772.5ms
Sadly, can't do much for the formatting. Enjoy.
The difference in DMIP's is where the S4 really whomps on the T3. All the T3 has going for it at the moment is it's GPU. If you don't care about some additional gaming prowess, the S4 is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to add to that and to be fair, S4 is at around 7000 at antutu benchmark while tegra 3 is at around 10000. I still prefer the S4
Eh...
It wins in 1 benchmark specifically enabled to take advantage of more than 2 cores. So if you want to play tegrazone games and have some basic lag, the T3 is for you. If you want to have a near flawless phone experience, and have decreased graphical performance in some wanna be console games, then the S4 is the way to go.
Actually you wont really notice the lack of graphics performance on the snapdragon s4. Its about 10% slower in most benchmarks but outperforms the tegra3 in a few as well. However i have a sensation xl with the adreno 205 which is only a quarter as fast as the adreno 225 and all games including deadspace, frontline, blood glory runs smoothly on it. To say the snapdragon s4 is inferior because of the slower Adreno 225 is really nit picking to me. For me bigger reason to choose one graphics chip over another is flash performance and this is where the exynos mali 400 kicks the adreno 225 in the balls. It handles 1080p youtube videos in browser without a hiccup while the 225 chokes even on 720p content.
Let me answer this. How good is it? More than good enough. Almost all apps and games are catered to weaker phones so the T3 and S4 are both more than good enough.
And my two cents, the S4 beats tegra 3
MattMJB0188 said:
Seems with every smartphone that comes to the USA it gets some sort of Snapdragon Processor by Qualcomm and people do nothing but complain. So how does this Snapdragon S4 processor compare to every other dual-core processor out there and even the Tegra 3? Looked up some benchmarks and both seem to have their advantages and disadvantages. But what I really want to know is which one is better for real world performance, such as battery life, transitional effects, and launching apps. Couple people said Sense 4 is very smooth and "has LITTLE to no lag"? How does this processor display web pages in Chrome?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
The S4 compared to the Tegra3 says it all. dualcore that beats a quadcore in almost everything.
Intel released the first native dual core processor in 2006 and shortly thereafter released a quad core which was basically two dual cores fused together (this is what current ARM quads are like).
That was 6 years ago and these days pretty much all new desktop computers come with quad cores while laptops mostly stick with dual. Laptops make up the biggest share of PC sales so for your everyday PC usage, you'll be more than comfortable with a dual core.
You really can't assume mobile SoCs will follow the same path, but it's definitely something to consider. I think dual core A15-based SoCs will still rule the day this year and next at the very least.
I was really on the fence about the X or the XL. But the S4 got me. Not having 32GB is already bugging me. But the efficiency (and my grandfathered unlimited data paired with Google Music) is definitely worth the sacrifice. Very happy so far! Streaming Slacker, while connected to my A2DP stereo, running GPS was great. I'm not a huge gamer though. I miss Super Mario Bros being the hottest thing!
krepler said:
Let me start by saying I'm not a pro when it comes to electronics but I do have an understanding on the subject.
The thing to realize about these processors, and most other processors available today, is that the s4 is based on the cortex a15 while the tegra 3 along with the new Samsung are based on the a9. The a15, at the same Hz and die size is 40% faster than the a9.
S4 = dual core Cortex A15 @ 1.5GHz - 28NM
Tegra3 = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 40NM
Exynos 4(Samsung) = quad core Cortex A9 @ 1.5GHz - 32NM
S4 so far, in theory, is 40% faster per core, but having two less. Individual apps will run faster unless they utilize all four cores on the tegra3. Because the s4 has a smaller die size, it will consume less energy per core.
The actual technology behind these chips that the manufacturers come up with will also affect the performance output, but the general idea is there. Hope that helps to understand a little better how the two chips will differ in performance.
Sent from my shiny One XL
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Tankmetal said:
correct me if im wrong but all 3 are A9 based including the S4. the first A15 will be the Exynos 5250, a dual core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is inaccurate.
The Exynos 4 and the Tegra 3 are based on the ARM A9 reference design.
The Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 is "roughly equivalent" to the A15, but not based on the A15. The same was true for Qualcomm's old S3 (which was equivalent to something between the A8 and A9 design)
One thing that most people don't realize is that Qualcomm is one of the very few companies that designs its own processors based on the ARM instruction set, and while S4's is similar to the A15 in terms of architecture, it's actually arguably better than the ARM reference design (e.g. asynchronous clocking of each core which is a better design than the big.LITTLE or +1 design).

TEGRA 4 - 1st possible GLBenchmark!!!!!!!! - READ ON

Who has been excited by the Tegra 4 rumours?, last night's Nvidia CES announcement was good, but what we really want are cold-hard BENCHMARKS.
I found an interesting mention of Tegra T114 SoC on a Linux Kernel site, which I've never heard of. I got really interested when it stated that the SoC is based on ARM A15 MP, it must be Tegra 4. I checked the background of the person who posted the kernel patch, he is a senior Nvidia Kernel engineer based in Finland.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/12/20/99
"This patchset adds initial support for the NVIDIA's new Tegra 114
SoC (T114) based on the ARM Cortex-A15 MP. It has the minimal support
to allow the kernel to boot up into shell console. This can be used as
a basis for adding other device drivers for this SoC. Currently there
are 2 evaluation boards available, "Dalmore" and "Pluto"."
On the off chance I decided to search www.glbenchmark.com for the 2 board names, Dalmore (a tasty whisky!) and Pluto (Planet, Greek God and cartoon dog!) Pluto returned nothing, but Dalmore returned a device called 'Dalmore Dalmore' that was posted on 3rd January 2013. However the OP had already deleted them, but thanks to Google Cache I found the results
RESULTS
GL_VENDOR NVIDIA Corporation
GL_VERSION OpenGL ES 2.0 17.01235
GL_RENDERER NVIDIA Tegra
From System spec, It runs Android 4.2.1, a Min frequency of 51 MHz and Max of 1836 Mhz
Nvidia DALMORE
GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt HD C24Z16 - Offscreen (1080p) : 32.6 fps
iPad 4
GLBenchmark 2.5 Egypt HD C24Z16 - Offscreen (1080p): 49.6 fps
CONCLUSION
Anandtech has posted that Tegra 4 doesn't use unified shaders, so it's not based on Kepler. I reckon that if Nvidia had a brand new GPU they would have shouted about it at CES, the results I've found indicate that Tegra 4 is between 1 to 3 times faster than Tegra 3.
BUT, this is not 100% guaranteed to be a Tegra 4 system, but the evidence is strong that it is a T4 development board. If this is correct, we have to figure that it is running beta drivers, Nexus 10 is ~ 10% faster than the Arndale dev board with the same Exynos 5250 SoC. Even if Tegra 4 gets better drivers, it seems like the SGX 544 MP4 in the A6X is still the faster GPU, with Tegra 4 and Mali T604 being an almost equal 2nd. Nvidia has said that T4 is faster than A6X, but the devil is in the detail, in CPU benchmarks I can see that being true, but not for graphics.
UPDATE - Just to add to the feeling that that this legit, the GLBenchmark - System section lists the "android.os.Build.USER" as buildbrain. Buildbrain according to a Nvidia job posting is "Buildbrain is a mission-critical, multi-tier distributed computing system that performs mobile builds and automated tests each day, enabling NVIDIA's high performance development teams across the globe to develop and deliver NVIDIA's mobile product line"
http://jobsearch.naukri.com/job-lis...INEER-Nvidia-Corporation--2-to-4-130812500024
I posted the webcache links to GLBenchmark pages below, if they disappear from cache, I've saved a copy of the webpages, which I can upload, Enjoy
GL BENCHMARK - High Level
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...p?D=Dalmore+Dalmore+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
GL BENCHMARK - Low Level
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...e&testgroup=lowlevel&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
GL BENCHMARK - GL CONFIG
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...Dalmore&testgroup=gl&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
GL BENCHMARK - EGL CONFIG
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...almore&testgroup=egl&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
GL BENCHMARK - SYSTEM
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...ore&testgroup=system&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
OFFSCREEN RESULTS
http://webcache.googleusercontent.c...enchmark.com+dalmore&cd=4&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6550/...00-5th-core-is-a15-28nm-hpm-ue-category-3-lte
Is there any Gpu that could outperform iPad4 before iPad5 comes out? adreno 320, t Mali 604 now tegra 4 aren't near it. Qualcomm won't release anything till q4 I guess, and tegra 4 has released too only thing that is left is I guess is t Mali 658 coming with exynos 5450 (doubtfully when it would release, not sure it will be better )
Looks like apple will hold the crown in future too .
i9100g user said:
Is there any Gpu that could outperform iPad4 before iPad5 comes out? adreno 320, t Mali 604 now tegra 4 aren't near it. Qualcomm won't release anything till q4 I guess, and tegra 4 has released too only thing that is left is I guess is t Mali 658 coming with exynos 5450 (doubtfully when it would release, not sure it will be better )
Looks like apple will hold the crown in future too .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There was a great article on Anandtech that tested the power consumption of the Nexus 10's Exynos 5250 SoC, it showed that both the CPU and GPU had a TDP of 4W, making a theoretical SoC TDP of 8W. However when the GPU was being stressed by running a game, they ran a CPU benchmark in the background, the SoC quickly went up to 8W, but the CPU was quickly throttled from 1.7 GHz to just 800 Mhz as the system tried to keep everything at 4W or below, this explained why the Nexus 10 didn't benchmark as well as we wished.
Back to the 5450 which should beat the A6X, trouble is it has double the CPU & GPU cores of the 5250 and is clocked higher, even on a more advanced 28nm process, which will lower power consumption I feel that system will often be throttled because of power and maybe heat concerns, so it looks amazing on paper but may disappoint in reality, and a 5450 in smartphone is going to suffer even more.
So why does Apple have an advantage?, well basically money, for a start mapple fans will pay more for their devices, so they afford to design a big SoC and big batteries that may not be profitable to other companies. Tegra 4 is listed as a 80mm2 chip, iPhone 5 is 96mm2 and A6X is 123mm2, Apple can pack more transistors and reap the GPU performance lead, also they chosen graphics supplier Imagination Technologies have excellent products, Power VR Rogue will only increase Apple's GPU lead. They now have their own chip design team, the benefit for them has been their Swift core is almost as powerful as ARM A15, but seems less power hungry, anyway Apple seems to be happy running slower CPUs compared to Android. Until an Android or WP8 or somebody can achieve Apple's margins they will be able to 'buy' their way to GPU domination, as an Android fan it makes me sad:crying:
32fps is no go...lets hope it's not final
hamdir said:
32fps is no go...lets hope it's not final
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It needs to, but it will be OK for a new Nexus 7
still faster enough for me, I dont game alot on my nexus 7.
I know I'm taking about phones here ... But the iPhone 5 GPU and adreno 320 are very closely matched
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
italia0101 said:
I know I'm taking about phones here ... But the iPhone 5 GPU and adreno 320 are very closely matched
Sent from my Nexus 4 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From what I remember the iPhone 5 and the new iPad wiped the floor with Nexus 4 and 10. The ST-Ericsson Nova A9600 is likely to have a PowerVR Rogue GPU. Just can't wait!!
adityak28 said:
From what I remember the iPhone 5 and the new iPad wiped the floor with Nexus 4 and 10. The ST-Ericsson Nova A9600 is likely to have a PowerVR Rogue GPU. Just can't wait!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That isn't true , check glbenchmark , in the off screen test the iPhone scored 91 , the nexus 4 scored 88 ... That ksnt wiping my floors
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
Its interesting how even though nvidia chips arent the best we still get the best game graphics because of superior optimization through tegra zone. Not even the a6x is as fully optimized.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
ian1 said:
Its interesting how even though nvidia chips arent the best we still get the best game graphics because of superior optimization through tegra zone. Not even the a6x is as fully optimized.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I727 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What sort of 'optimisation' do you mean? un optimised games lag that's a big letdown and tegra effects can also be used on other phones too with chain fire 3d I use it and tegra games work without lag with effects and I don't have a tegra device
With a tegra device I am restricted to optimised games mostly
The graphic performance of NVIDIA SoCs is always disappointed, sadly for the VGA dominanting provider on the world.
The first Tegra2, the GPU is a little bit better than SGX540 of GalaxyS a little bit in benchmark, but lacking NEON support.
The second one Tegra 3, the GPU is nearly the same as the old Mali400Mp4 in GALAXY S2/Original Note.
And now it's better but still nothing special and outperformed soon (Adreno 330 and next-gen Mali)
Strongest PowerVR GPUs are always the best, but sadly they are exclusive for Apple only (SGX543 and maybe SGX 554 also, only Sony ,who has the cross-licencing with Apple, has it in PS Vita and in PS Vita only)
tegra optimization porting no longer works using chainfire, this is now a myth
did u manage to try shadowgun thd, zombie driver or horn? the answer is no, games that use t3 sdk for physx and other cpu graphics works can not be forced to work on other devices, equally chainfire is now outdated and no longer updated
now about power vr they are only better in real multicore configuration which is only used by apple and Sony's vita, eating large die area, ie actual multicore each with its own subcores/shaders, if tegra was used in real multi core it would destroy all
finally this is really funny all this doom n gloom because of an early discarded development board benchmark, I dont mean to take away from turbo's thunder and his find but truly its ridiculous the amount of negativity its is collecting before any type of final device benchs
adrena 220 doubled in performance after the ICS update on sensation
t3 doubled the speed of t2 gpu with only 50% the number of shaders so how on earth do you believe only 2x the t3 scores with 600% more shaders!!
do you have any idea how miserable the ps3 performed in its early days? even new desktop GeForces perform much less than expected until the drivers are updated
enough with the FUD! seems this board is full of it nowadays and so little reasoning...
For goodness sake, this isn't final hardware, anything could change. Hung2900 knows nothing, what he stated isn't true. Samsung has licensed PowerVR, it isn't just stuck to Apple, just that Samsung prefers using ARMs GPU solution. Another thing I dislike is how everyone is comparing a GPU in the iPad 4 (SGX554MP4) that will NEVER arrive in a phone compared a Tegra 4 which will arrive in a phone. If you check OP link the benchmark was posted on the 3rd of January with different results (18fps then 33fps), so there is a chance it'll rival the iPad 4. I love Tegra as Nvidia is pushing developers to make more better games for Android compared to the 'geeks' *cough* who prefers benchmark results, whats the point of having a powerful GPU if the OEM isn't pushing developers to create enhance effect games for there chip.
Hamdir is correct about the GPUs, if Tegra 3 was around 50-80% faster than Tegra 2 with just 4 more cores, I can't really imagine it only being 2x faster than Tegra 3. Plus its a 28nm (at around 80mm2 just a bit bigger than Tegra 3, smaller than A6 90mm2) along with the dual memory than single on Tegra 2/3.
Turbotab said:
There was a great article on Anandtech that tested the power consumption of the Nexus 10's Exynos 5250 SoC, it showed that both the CPU and GPU had a TDP of 4W, making a theoretical SoC TDP of 8W. However when the GPU was being stressed by running a game, they ran a CPU benchmark in the background, the SoC quickly went up to 8W, but the CPU was quickly throttled from 1.7 GHz to just 800 Mhz as the system tried to keep everything at 4W or below, this explained why the Nexus 10 didn't benchmark as well as we wished.
Back to the 5450 which should beat the A6X, trouble is it has double the CPU & GPU cores of the 5250 and is clocked higher, even on a more advanced 28nm process, which will lower power consumption I feel that system will often be throttled because of power and maybe heat concerns, so it looks amazing on paper but may disappoint in reality, and a 5450 in smartphone is going to suffer even more.
So why does Apple have an advantage?, well basically money, for a start iSheep will pay more for their devices, so they afford to design a big SoC and big batteries that may not be profitable to other companies. Tegra 4 is listed as a 80mm2 chip, iPhone 5 is 96mm2 and A6X is 123mm2, Apple can pack more transistors and reap the GPU performance lead, also they chosen graphics supplier Imagination Technologies have excellent products, Power VR Rogue will only increase Apple's GPU lead. They now have their own chip design team, the benefit for them has been their Swift core is almost as powerful as ARM A15, but seems less power hungry, anyway Apple seems to be happy running slower CPUs compared to Android. Until an Android or WP8 or somebody can achieve Apple's margins they will be able to 'buy' their way to GPU domination, as an Android fan it makes me sad:crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well said mate!
I can understand what you feel, nowdays android players like samsung,nvidia are focusing more on CPU than GPU.
If they won't stop soon and continued to use this strategy they will fail.
GPU will become bottleneck and you will not be able use the cpu at its full potential. (Atleast when gaming)
i have Galaxy S2 exynos 4 1.2Ghz and 400mhz oc mali gpu
In my analysis most modern games like MC4,NFS:MW aren't running at 60FPS at all thats because GPU always have 100% workload and CPU is relaxing there by outputing 50-70% of total CPU workload
I know some games aren't optimize for all android devices as opposed to apple devices but still even high-end android devices has slower gpu (than ipad 4 atleast )
AFAIK, Galaxy SIV is likely to pack T-604 with some tweaks instead of mighty T-658 which is still slower than iPAddle 4
Turbotab said:
There was a great article on Anandtech that tested the power consumption of the Nexus 10's Exynos 5250 SoC, it showed that both the CPU and GPU had a TDP of 4W, making a theoretical SoC TDP of 8W. However when the GPU was being stressed by running a game, they ran a CPU benchmark in the background, the SoC quickly went up to 8W, but the CPU was quickly throttled from 1.7 GHz to just 800 Mhz as the system tried to keep everything at 4W or below, this explained why the Nexus 10 didn't benchmark as well as we wished.
Back to the 5450 which should beat the A6X, trouble is it has double the CPU & GPU cores of the 5250 and is clocked higher, even on a more advanced 28nm process, which will lower power consumption I feel that system will often be throttled because of power and maybe heat concerns, so it looks amazing on paper but may disappoint in reality, and a 5450 in smartphone is going to suffer even more.
So why does Apple have an advantage?, well basically money, for a start iSheep will pay more for their devices, so they afford to design a big SoC and big batteries that may not be profitable to other companies. Tegra 4 is listed as a 80mm2 chip, iPhone 5 is 96mm2 and A6X is 123mm2, Apple can pack more transistors and reap the GPU performance lead, also they chosen graphics supplier Imagination Technologies have excellent products, Power VR Rogue will only increase Apple's GPU lead. They now have their own chip design team, the benefit for them has been their Swift core is almost as powerful as ARM A15, but seems less power hungry, anyway Apple seems to be happy running slower CPUs compared to Android. Until an Android or WP8 or somebody can achieve Apple's margins they will be able to 'buy' their way to GPU domination, as an Android fan it makes me sad:crying:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Typical "isheep" reference, unnecessary.
Why does apple have the advantage? Maybe because there semiconductor team is talented and can tie the A6X+PowerVR GPU efficiently. NIVIDA should have focused more on GPU in my opinion as the CPU was already good enough. With these tablets pushing excess of 250+ppi the graphics processor will play a huge role. They put 72 cores in there processor. Excellent. Will the chip ever be optimized to full potential? No. So again they demonstrated a product that sounds good on paper but real world performance might be a different story.
MrPhilo said:
For goodness sake, this isn't final hardware, anything could change. Hung2900 knows nothing, what he stated isn't true. Samsung has licensed PowerVR, it isn't just stuck to Apple, just that Samsung prefers using ARMs GPU solution. Another thing I dislike is how everyone is comparing a GPU in the iPad 4 (SGX554MP4) that will NEVER arrive in a phone compared a Tegra 4 which will arrive in a phone. If you check OP link the benchmark was posted on the 3rd of January with different results (18fps then 33fps), so there is a chance it'll rival the iPad 4. I love Tegra as Nvidia is pushing developers to make more better games for Android compared to the 'geeks' *cough* who prefers benchmark results, whats the point of having a powerful GPU if the OEM isn't pushing developers to create enhance effect games for there chip.
Hamdir is correct about the GPUs, if Tegra 3 was around 50-80% faster than Tegra 2 with just 4 more cores, I can't really imagine it only being 2x faster than Tegra 3. Plus its a 28nm (at around 80mm2 just a bit bigger than Tegra 3, smaller than A6 90mm2) along with the dual memory than single on Tegra 2/3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Firstly please keep it civil, don't go around saying that people know nothing, people's posts always speak volumes. Also calling people geeks, on XDA is that even an insult, next you're be asking what I deadlift:laugh:
My OP was done in the spirit of technical curiosity, and to counter the typical unrealistic expectations of a new product on mainstream sites, e.g. Nvidia will use Kepler tech (which was false), omg Kepler is like GTX 680, Tegra 4 will own the world, people forget that we are still talking about device that can only use a few watts, and must be passively cooled and not a 200+ watt, dual-fan GPU, even though they both now have to power similar resolutions, which is mental.
I both agree and disagree with your view on Nvidia's developer relationship, THD games do look nice, I compared Infinity Blade 2 on iOS vs Dead Trigger 2 on youtube, and Dead Trigger 2 just looked richer, more particle & physics effects, although IF Blade looked sharper at iPad 4 native resolution, one of the few titles to use the A6x's GPU fully.The downside to this relationship is the further fragmentation of the Android ecosystem, as Chainfire's app showed most of the extra effects can run on non Tegra devices.
Now, a 6 times increase in shader, does not automatically mean that games / benchmarks will scale in linear fashion, as other factors such as TMU /ROP throughput can bottleneck performance. Nvidia's Technical Marketing Manager, when interviewed at CES, said that the overall improvement in games / benchmarks will be around 3 to 4 times T3. Ultimately I hope to see Tegra 4 in a new Nexus 7, and if these benchmarks are proved accurate, it wouldn't stop me buying. Overall including the CPU, it would be a massive upgrade over the current N7, all in the space of a year.
At 50 seconds onwards.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iC7A5AmTPi0
iOSecure said:
Typical "isheep" reference, unnecessary.
Why does apple have the advantage? Maybe because there semiconductor team is talented and can tie the A6X+PowerVR GPU efficiently. NIVIDA should have focused more on GPU in my opinion as the CPU was already good enough. With these tablets pushing excess of 250+ppi the graphics processor will play a huge role. They put 72 cores in there processor. Excellent. Will the chip ever be optimized to full potential? No. So again they demonstrated a product that sounds good on paper but real world performance might be a different story.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry Steve, this is an Android forum, or where you too busy buffing the scratches out of your iPhone 5 to notice? I have full respect for the talents of Apple's engineers & marketing department, many of its users less so.
hamdir said:
tegra optimization porting no longer works using chainfire, this is now a myth
did u manage to try shadowgun thd, zombie driver or horn? the answer is no, games that use t3 sdk for physx and other cpu graphics works can not be forced to work on other devices, equally chainfire is now outdated and no longer updated
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Looks like they haven't updated chain fire 3d for a while as a result only t3 games don't work but others do work rip tide gp, dead trigger etc . It's not a myth but it is outdated and only works with ics and tegra 2 compatible games . I think I (might be) unfortunate too but some gameloft games lagged on tegra device that i had, though root solved it too an extent
I am not saying something is superior to something just that my personal experience I might be wrong I may not be
Tbh I think benchmarks don't matter much unless you see some difference in real world usage and I had that problem with tegra in my experience
But we will have to see if the final version is able to push it above Mali t 604 and more importantly sgx544
Turbotab said:
Sorry Steve, this is an Android forum, or where you too busy buffing the scratches out of your iPhone 5 to notice? I have full respect for the talents of Apple's engineers & marketing department, many of its users less so.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No I actually own a nexus 4 and ipad mini so I'm pretty neutral in googles/apples ecosystems and not wiping any scratches off my devices.

Does Android prefer cores or clock speed?

Sorry if this has been asked in the past, but I'm a bit curious. I'm asking in context of the same IPC/Instructions per clock(same processor architecture, so that the actual speed of say, 1GHz is identical).
For example, for gaming PCs, its generally optimal to have a 4 core processor, with a higher clock speed(usually thru overclocks) such as say 4GHz, rather than say, an 8 core processor at 2GHz, or maybe a dual core processor at 8GHz(even tho 8GHz is kinda not that practical and/or possible ATM).
So for Android, what would be preferred? Of course, it does depend on what the main focus of the device is(like above, gaming). Would say, an 4 core 2.6 GHz processor be better in general, or an 8 core 1.3GHz? I feel that the clock:core ratio isn't exactly proportional, and so the 4 core processor would probably be better.
Are there any videos/articles with this comparison?
If it's possible, could someone test this out? Downclock all the cores by half for the first time, and the second time, disable half the cores on the second time.
YeshYyyK said:
Sorry if this has been asked in the past, but I'm a bit curious. I'm asking in context of the same IPC/Instructions per clock(same processor architecture, so that the actual speed of say, 1GHz is identical).
For example, for gaming PCs, its generally optimal to have a 4 core processor, with a higher clock speed(usually thru overclocks) such as say 4GHz, rather than say, an 8 core processor at 2GHz, or maybe a dual core processor at 8GHz(even tho 8GHz is kinda not that practical and/or possible ATM).
So for Android, what would be preferred? Of course, it does depend on what the main focus of the device is(like above, gaming). Would say, an 4 core 2.6 GHz processor be better in general, or an 8 core 1.3GHz? I feel that the clock:core ratio isn't exactly proportional, and so the 4 core processor would probably be better.
Are there any videos/articles with this comparison?
If it's possible, could someone test this out? Downclock all the cores by half for the first time, and the second time, disable half the cores on the second time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is kinda difficult to answer.
Number of cores and clock speed are not everything.
There are examples of fewer cores with lower clock being faster than more cores with higher clock.
I DO NOT PROVIDE HELP IN PM, KEEP IT IN THE THREADS WHERE EVERYONE CAN SHARE

Categories

Resources