Related
I know what the stated requirements for it are and the Fuze/ Touch Pro won't get an official rom, but do you think it will be possible for one of our expert chefs here to cook one? I know there is no multitouch and a relatively slow processor and graphics, and no WVGA screen but it has enough rom and ram, has GPS, accelerometer, and enough buttons. I'm inclined to think that, barring some weird lockout Microsoft does, we should be able to get it to work. Thoughts?
winmobo 7 isn't out
No we won't. Minimum 1GHz processor onboard is requierd and capacitive display, so automatically our Raphael is disqualified of getting WM7
needmoney said:
No we won't. Minimum 1GHz processor onboard is requierd and capacitive display, so automatically our Raphael is disqualified of getting WM7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all, nobody knows what the "hard" requirements of Windows Mobile 7 are.
Second, there have been documented instances from LinkedIn (and other sites) stating development projects including developing, implementing and optimizing WinMo 7 for MSM7k chipsets (I'd know, as that's what my phone, the Vogue, uses)--and the MSM7k chipset never supported a 1Ghz chip, let alone even a 600 Mhz chip, nor a capacitive screen.
I know it's not out and I know what the supposed requirements are for chassis 1 http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=2752, but I believe we got wm 6.5 on some old phones that don't meet the specs for thatso I would think we could do it with wm 7 as well with the Touch Pro. The one thing that concerns me is the requirement for multitouch as that could gimp the interface.
@Shidell: That's interesting; that makes me even more hopeful. Do you think this thread should have been in the rom section where some of the chefs might see it? I really think worst case would be that it works slowly without multitouch.
Winmo6&6.5(and 5?) are CE5 based, the seventh will be "CE6" based. (That will also mean we kick the ass of 32 process limit.) This means fundamental changes so the risk for 7 is high not to be suitable for older devices
I guess that's true; I hope you are wrong though.
http://wmpoweruser.com/?p=12237
I know i'm gonna get burned at the stake for this one, since this is a tech forum, but dual core is just overkill AT THE PRESENT MOMENT. It's like computers. They are all now dualcore, most come with almost 4 gigs of ram. What in the hell would 95% of the population need AT THE MOMENT with something more powerful than that? LIke a quadcore with 8 gigs? NOTHING. It's just a ploy to get more money. Our 1ghz phones can run everything just fine. This isn't like the early days of android where it always felt like more ram and raw power was needed. We have hit a plateau where the current cellphone landscape fits MOST peoples needs. Can i really be the only one who thinks that it's just unnecessary?
Remember, xda only represents .0000000001% of actual real world use. I am talking about the layman who is actually gonna fall for the "OMFG ITS GONNA DO EVERYTHING SO MUCH BETTER AND FASTER", um no it's not. Most people dont even max out there current hardware.
Edit: Seriously people get a grip on reality. I'm not pushing my views on anyone. It's a ****ing forum, you know, one of those places where people discuss things??? The debate that has come out of this has been fantastic, and i have learned alot of things i didnt know. I'm not gonna change my original post to not confuse people reading the whole topic, but i can now understand why dual core does make some sense. Quit attacking me and making stuff so personal, it's uncalled for and frankly i'm about to ask a mod to close this topic cause it's getting so ridiculous. Learn how to have a debate without letting all the emotion get in the way or GTFO. YOUR the one with the problem, not me.
Xda doesn't care. We like specs, maxing out our devices, and most of all, benchmarking
redbullcat said:
Xda doesn't care. We like specs, maxing out our devices, and most of all, benchmarking
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well as do i! I'm talking about the uneducated masses.
more cores mean;
more threads
meaning better apps
meaning better FPS
meaning HD everything
meaning more capabilities
meaning more fun with less devices.
Do you remember the days you had a cell phone, a PDA, an MP3 player, a digital camera AND a laptop? All that was missing is your bat symbol and cape. I like not having to have a utility belt of gadgets on my person.
I would rather see them work on battery saving and density technologies to eventually allow for one week [heavy usage] times.
iamnottypingthis said:
I would rather see them work on battery saving and density technologies to eventually allow for one week [heavy usage] times.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hard for you to believe, i know, but that's what having a multi-core does, it helps improve battery life (both in standby and in usage). Sure it's not a definitive answer to our battery problems, but it's a first.
Hey Lude219, I thought I'd post this as I thought you gave a good explanation on battery life and usage (fifth one down).
It really all comes down to the person's requirements. If someone requires to run several apps at once, or requires to watch movies at a higher frame rate, or requires to have the 'best phone on the market', then they'll buy a dual-core phone, no-one else will care (much). Most people I talk to agree and think that Dual-Core in a phone is unnecessary ('dual-core phone' it even sounds ridiculous lol), but, I must admit that I was surprised at how laggy my DHD was out the packet, and don't get me wrong, I know once it's rooted it will be much better just because the SW is cleaner, but most people will not even contemplate rooting their phone, so if it's not an option for them, dual-core will surely help.
Dual-core procs don't have a higher power consumption than single-core procs (or at least they won't if they design/implement them properly), so it shouldn't (fingers crossed) make power consumption any worse.
Personally, I'd also rather they put they're time and effort into making better batteries and improving general power consumption.
It'll be the next marketing point after the dual-core hype has ebbed (Now with Three Days Standby!! YEY!!)
Well i think most people who do buy these "powerful" devices have one important reason to buy, and that is to future proof themselves. But ey, i'm looking at the perspective of a tech savy guy, I suppose the masses simply want the next best thing.
But you are right however, it is a ploy to make money, but everything in business is, so there's no difference between dual core, one core, 8 mp camera, 5 mp, 720p. 1080p, it's all business. If there was no business then.. well, where'd we get our smartphones?
lude219 said:
Hard for you to believe, i know, but that's what having a multi-core does, it helps improve battery life (both in standby and in usage). Sure it's not a definitive answer to our battery problems, but it's a first.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can easily go into why you're wrong, but I won't waste the calories. Other things besides just adding a core are done to get those gains. If more cores equaled more power savings, ULV cpus would be octo-core.
Just a matter time when they get battery life ironed out in smartphones and to the OP i would agree in some aspect, but they are smartphones why not just keep improving them. Else if someone never thought outside box we would still stuck with dumb phones =no fun.
here a link for next gen snap dragons sounds promising.
I won't lie, right now dual core is overkill. But in time like everything else has computer wise, it will be the normal and will be the way all devices go, that's not just considering dual core. I'm talking pure multicore threading. It's not just the number of cores you're buying as well, it's the difference core to core when you compare say arm cortex a8 to the Tegra II's Arm Cortex a9, single core the a9 will be faster and more efficient and also produce less heat thanks to the die shrink, which then also means less power draw per core. Right now for phones, dual core is futureproofing a bit for when we do have android that is fully multithreaded, and apps that are as well.
There's also something you need to remember, XDA isn't really a big fraction of people using android devices and what not, but not every android user is on XDA. I also disagree with everyone maxing out their hardware, just running my Evo with a few of the aosp live wallpapers my evo runs terrible, and web browsing isn't the greatest either depending on the website.
Oh dude you should so post this one overclock.net, the beat down you would get would be hilarious. But anyway back one topic, as for phones, well for some people dual core is nice, for example me and my friends, when we head off to lecture, all we can do is browse the web on our phones, all of us, for some odd reason like to have at least 6-8 tabs open at the same time and for the phones we have (I have an iphone 3gs, theres a couple captivates, Droid Inc 2, and some others), they sometimes tend to slow down with all of the tabs open. Also when you open up numerous applications, you have to sometimes close out of some of them because the one that is open starts to slow down. Thats a couple reasons that dual core is nice, with massive multitasking. But with the computer part, where you say that no one needs a quad core processor, well think about it, there are a lot of people who want performance (not just XDA, theres overclock.net, techpowerup, EVGA, HardOCP, etc) and just random people who want fast computers for reasons such as video processing, gaming (this is probably a big reason), ridiculous multitasking (I fall into this category cause I have over 125 tabs open in chrome right now and I actually needed to upgrade to 8 gb's of ram because it was saying I was running out of ram with only 4), and some people that want just plain snappiness from their computer. So I would not say that a quad core processor is overkill for most people as the demographic I mentioned above does include a decent amount of people.
Oh and I forgot to mention watching Hi def videos, your average intel integrated graphics card cannot play a 1080p video without issues so thats why you might need a faster processor and a faster GPU to play those videos in an HTPC.
But yes for your average everyday joe, a simple nehalem based dual core would suffice for everyday tasks such as web browsing and such but it cannot do much else.
xsteven77x said:
I know i'm gonna get burned at the stake for this one, since this is a tech forum, but dual core is just overkill AT THE PRESENT MOMENT. It's like computers. They are all now dualcore, most come with almost 4 gigs of ram. What in the hell would 95% of the population need AT THE MOMENT with something more powerful than that? LIke a quadcore with 8 gigs? NOTHING. It's just a ploy to get more money.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is why netbooks took off for a while there (until people realized those were a bit too slow)
Our 1ghz phones can run everything just fine. This isn't like the early days of android where it always felt like more ram and raw power was needed. We have hit a plateau where the current cellphone landscape fits MOST peoples needs. Can i really be the only one who thinks that it's just unnecessary?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I completely disagree. The difference between dual and single core for mobile devices is *huge*. There is a *huge* difference between everything running "fine" and everything running "great". The biggest difference is for games and web browser, which most people absolutely care about. There is also the wide range of more powerful apps it enables, which for now is more important on the tablet, but that will come to phones as well.
Dual core is not overkill, for one, its future proofing your phone, most ppl buy the phones on contract and in a couple of months dual cores will be the standard for high end smartphones, second, it allows for better GPU performance which leads to better games and overall experience, there are many benefits to it, too many for me to list...
iamnottypingthis said:
I can easily go into why you're wrong, but I won't waste the calories. Other things besides just adding a core are done to get those gains. If more cores equaled more power savings, ULV cpus would be octo-core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, it's better if you don't, because I dont think you have any substantial knowledge on the matter to go against the research and knowledge of all the computer engineers out there. The reason why it's not octo-cores yet is because it's called a BUSINESS. But I wont waste the calories in telling you why that is until you go and read up on "economy of scales."
It'll be interesting at least to see what develops. See if they'll start doing proper separate GPU Die's or if they'll dedicate GPU cores on the proc (i.e quad core chip with 2 CPU cores and 2 GPU cores).
Hope people don't start to get burnt when they begin maxing out/overclocking their cores.
Funny, if you stop developing you get nothing because you are satisfied with nothing.
Us at XDA are techies and you give us more core more ram more battery we will figure what to create with the new abilities. That is how progress is done.
As far as the masses, let marketing depts do their thing to them........we do not care, never did. As for me, I have a 12 core motherboard with 32 gigs of ram.etc and I jack it to 85% demand almost every day, and I am sure that there are very very few computers that have this capabilities.
The funny thing more innovation make more efficiencies my computer under a full load uses less than most of the gaming rigs out there and has 50% more muscle.
On the phone dual core allow one to create algorithms that will make the battery use way more efficient.
More cores more ram === win win win for everyone, but us in XDA and other forums like this it is just great great great for us.......... don't worry we will use what ever is created 110% and make it better.
If dual core in your Nokia 3210, yes it's overkilling, but if dual core in your cad workstation, it's been overkilled. All depends on the user, usage, and design of the device.
Actually it's an arueable question whether dual-core cpus are an overkill today, they have several advantages but most of those can be applied to netbooks and tablets rather than phones.
1. When there are several CPUs, multi-threaded applications can be really run concurrently (and basically, even if one application is performing, the scheduling overhead for multi-core system is lower and background tasks like gui/hardware drivers can be executed on a separate core).
2. Another use case (although this is a misuse and abuse of CPU anyway) is the use of multi-core systems for encoding/decoding media. It brings absolutely no advantages to the end user, but when the CPU is powerful enough to handle the media stream, one may use it instead of a proper DSP processor which Google will likely be doing for VP8/WebM
3. SMPs can be useful in tablets and netbooks - for example, tegra2 will outperform intel atom in most cases (first of all, it is dual-core. and secondly, it has a very powerful GPU). I am personally using debian on my tablet (in chroot though) and many people are using ubuntu on toshiba ac100 - arm SoCs are a fun to hack and give an incredible battery life. But this is IMHO only acceptable for geeks like us and I think dual-core (or x-whatever-core) ARM CPUs will be useful for consumers (hate this word but whatever) if some vendor releases a device which will run a full-fledged linux distro with LibreOffice, math packages like octave/maxima, development environments like kdevelop so that it can be used as an equal replacement of an x86 netbook.
As for the popular arguement about power consumption - surprisingly, but there is little correlation between the number of cores and power drain. Newer SoCs are more energy efficient because they have improvements in technical process (literally the length of wires inside the chip), more devices are integrated into one chip, more processing blocks can be put to sleep states. Even if you compare a qualcomm qsd8250 running at 1GHz with a GPU enabled, it will use less power than an old 520 MHz intel pxa270. Besides, as I have already mentioned, a multiprocessor system can execute tasks concurrently which means that the computation will take less time and the processor will spend more time in a power-saving state.
Basically multi-cores are a popular trend and is a good way to make consumers pay for new toys. For me personally the reasons to change a device have always been either the age of the device (when it literally began to fall apart) or the real improvements in hardware (I updated from Asus P525 to Xperia X1 because ever since I had my first pda I was frustrated by the tiny 32 or 64 mb ram and awful screens with large pixels that were really causing pain in eyes if one used them for long) but unfortunately the situation now is the same as it is in the desktop world - software quality is getting worse even faster than hardware improves. Hence we see crap like java and other managed code on PDAs and applications that require like 10 Mb ram to perform simple functions (which were like 100 Kb back in winmo days). I do admit that using more ram can allow to use more efficient algorithms (to reduce their computational complexity) and managed code allows for higher portability - but hey, we know that commercial software is not developed with the ideas of efficiency in mind - the only things corporations care about are writing the application as quick as possible and hide the source code.
lude219 said:
Yea, it's better if you don't, because I dont think you have any substantial knowledge on the matter to go against the research and knowledge of all the computer engineers out there. The reason why it's not octo-cores yet is because it's called a BUSINESS. But I wont waste the calories in telling you why that is until you go and read up on "economy of scales."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That and yields for Nehalem 8 cores aren't so high. Bulldozer yields are working out okay so far, but then again it's not a real 8 core cpu...
I thought one of the main disadvantages of WP7 has been inferior hardware.
For the original release Microsoft only supported the old snapdragon CPU with 1Ghz and Adreno 200.
Now for Mango, they did obviously update their support
for 8X55 and 7X30.
None of those are actually dualcore SoC's.
How are they going to keep up with Android if they continue offering inferior hardware specs? Or did I miss something?
I wish they do relase one which does. but they dont need dual core for the os so why burden the battery
"inferior hardware"
wow really?
dude, 1ghz, on a phone, thats everything else but inferior
it may be the truth that andoid is goin to need dual cores to give users a good looking and fluid experience, but windows phone is not.
no matter what handset you get, its working faaaast. no lags, no hickups, almost no loading times (and with mango its getting better)
so why would windows phone need it ?
However I would really like to have dual core phone,jut like to think that I have one of the fastest phones. But its true windows os is so smooth it wont make a perfermonce differnece, only thing that can help is using NAND memory instead of SD. Howver I want a better GPU so we can play faster games with good FPS and better quality, not saying that the quality is poor atm its great but it can always improve.
webwalk® said:
"inferior hardware"
wow really?
dude, 1ghz, on a phone, thats everything else but inferior
it may be the truth that andoid is goin to need dual cores to give users a good looking and fluid experience, but windows phone is not.
no matter what handset you get, its working faaaast. no lags, no hickups, almost no loading times (and with mango its getting better)
so why would windows phone need it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but the problem is it's not about "why would WP need it".
The average consumer, who is used to buying PCs based on their specs, will look at an Android phone and a WP and compare them. If they don't know the difference between the two OS then they'll be looking at the specs.
What do you think they're going to choose..?
Casey_boy said:
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but the problem is it's not about "why would WP need it".
The average consumer, who is used to buying PCs based on their specs, will look at an Android phone and a WP and compare them. If they don't know the difference between the two OS then they'll be looking at the specs.
What do you think they're going to choose..?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be frank, the average customer knows a superficial knowledge of cell phones...and many still market dumb phones as the approach for all user needs. Nokia has addressed the h/w issues ad nauseum, so it wouldn't surprise me if Nokia would be the first wp7 with a dual core. In fact, I would love to grab a Nokia phone...
i thought of your point too
its true the specs are taken in consideration
but currently im not aware of any device that stand out..
i think the average people would think
2x cores = 2x power needed = half the battery
battery is a major aspect
so still, why build a dual core if nothing is using it, besides the battery
like i said, android may be able to to make their os fast & fluid
but why cant they do it on the current specs
you simply dont need heavy processin unit on your mobile device, as long as you wont do heavy processin on the device. the phone wont need it, but the tablet does.
the average user is used to windows
the average user uses the phone for not much more then phone, text, surf, game.
last but not least, the price, i dont know much about dual core phones (do they already exists?) but double the cores, may raise the price by a lot.
this year we wont need no dual cores....
To be honest, I never really felt the need of such a powerful processor in a phone. What can you use it for apart from games with high graphics?
I'm sure opening office docs, web pages, utility apps, music...everything at once still won't slow down the processes. It's a phone guys. Not a desktop PC.
Many years ago, I had a 1.2 GHz CPU running windows XP, which in fact ran heavy programs without any lag. And today, our phones have 1GHz CPU running a phone OS and apps that hardly go above 50mb.
What's the need, seriously?
I don't care about dual core yet, but would like to see some higher end devices. All first gen releases were very generic.
Newer Gen CPU/GPU (dual core not necessary till things are coded for it)
High Quality Material/build
32GB or 64GB Internal ROM
Super AMOLED/next gen if avail
512MB RAM
Good Battery
Good Quality Optics (iPhone4 or better (like Nokia N8))
Thats all I want. Maybe a FFC just for ****s n' giggles, but thats not high on my priority list.
[email protected] said:
Now for Mango, they did obviously update their support
for 8X55 and 7X30.
None of those are actually dualcore SoC's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well just like you said they have added support for new processors but neither of the new ones are dual core. We've heard rumors that ST-Ericsson will be supplying dual core chips for Nokia's Windows Phones but for now Qualcomm says they're the only WP7 manufacturer.
I don't doubt Windows Phone will see dual core support in the future. I have a feeling that Nokia won't be launching their Windows Phone alongside the others in September/October, but later in November or even December. That's when I think we'll see the first dual core Windows Phone. (Just speculation. No evidence for this.)
dtboos said:
I don't care about dual core yet, but would like to see some higher end devices. All first gen releases were very generic.
Newer Gen CPU/GPU (dual core not necessary till things are coded for it)
High Quality Material/build
32GB or 64GB Internal ROM
Super AMOLED/next gen if avail
512MB RAM
Good Battery
Good Quality Optics (iPhone4 or better (like Nokia N8))
Thats all I want. Maybe a FFC just for ****s n' giggles, but thats not high on my priority list.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well you just described Nokia N9 except for the screen ... only Sammy can put Super-AMOLED and the RAM is 768MB
PS. I though someone from Microsoft or Nokia I can't recall said that WP7 is already dual-core ready, so maybe it doesn't need new coding or I'm terribly wrong
kainy said:
Well you just described Nokia N9 except for the screen ... only Sammy can put Super-AMOLED and the RAM is 768MB
PS. I though someone from Microsoft or Nokia I can't recall said that WP7 is already dual-core ready, so maybe it doesn't need new coding or I'm terribly wrong
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Aye Why I know the phone I want is easily within reach. That would be more than powerful enough for the next couple years. This is also why I was excited about the Nokia deal because they have some excellent quality hardware & optics in some of their phones.
Android needs dual-core because the OS is so cluttered and filled with junk. WP7 phone have "inferior hardware" yet still run smoother than any Android phone would.
yea it should b strong
Hey guys,
Could someone please let me know which tablets are being/have been released in 2011 sporting the Tegra 3 (Kal-El) processor? Especially if they're out/easily importable to the UK! Thanks
*EDIT* The one I'm aware of atm is the Asus Transformer Prime - does anyone have a definite release day for this?
Prime is the only one that's anounced yet!
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/transformer-prime-detailed-10-inch-super-ips-display-12-hour
"December" is still all I've heard of a release date. But it supposed to be a worldwide release so I'm assuming shortages will be a given.
mordbane said:
http://www.engadget.com/2011/11/09/transformer-prime-detailed-10-inch-super-ips-display-12-hour
"December" is still all I've heard of a release date. But it supposed to be a worldwide release so I'm assuming shortages will be a given.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah cool, so I'll be able to order it from the UK? Hoping to get it by xmas ya know
Prime in december
Cyrano4 said:
Prime in december
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not for the UK though?
Nice Tegra 3 is very good
Ant38 said:
Nice Tegra 3 is very good
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why? beacuse of 4 cores?
You won't use the power of them... at the moment Android doesn't use 2 cores properly
2, 4 or idk 16 cores doesn't mean that system will be faster
look at HTC 7 Mozart with WP7.5 - 1 core snapdragon with 512 MB and system is very smooth and fast
I think that producers must focus at optimization of their version of Android
making smartphones with better hardware is not a solution - it only makes more problems
darasz89 said:
why? beacuse of 4 cores?
You won't use the power of them... at the moment Android doesn't use 2 cores properly
2, 4 or idk 16 cores doesn't mean that system will be faster
look at HTC 7 Mozart with WP7.5 - 1 core snapdragon with 512 MB and system is very smooth and fast
I think that producers must focus at optimization of their version of Android
making smartphones with better hardware is not a solution - it only makes more problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agree with you when you say about Android, which doesn't take full advantage of 4 cores.
But the main feature in the quad-core technology is the battery life saving.
Eventually, in the next year when there will be optimized app for dual and quad- core CPU, this tablet ( or any other 4cores phone) will rock for many, many months.
yukinok25 said:
But the main feature in the quad-core technology is the battery life saving.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
4 core CPU takes less energy than 1 core? you are wrong
yes its true that power use per 1 core in tegra3 is low but overall its larger that single or dual core
darasz89 said:
4 core CPU takes less energy than 1 core? you are wrong
yes its true that power use per 1 core in tegra3 is low but overall its larger that single or dual core
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, its' use less power for normal usage.
It's obvious that if you use ALL 4 cores, the drain would be more than a single core CPU:
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/hi...n-actually-use-less-power-than-dual-core/7976
Qualcomm as well is claiming that his next generation quad core phones will save 65% of battery life compare to the current ARM CPU:
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer...debuts-single-dual-quad-core-snapdragon-chips
speculations and promises of manufacturers
the major factor of power usage is system resources managment
at start new 4-core CPU will consume more energy beacuse of lack efficient support for 4 cores - but someday it will be optimized well
but the question is: do we really need 4 cores? i think that we need better optimized sotfware
did I loose my mind? look at devices running WP7.5 and tell me that Android is smoother [I'm not a M$ fanboy ]
now with 2cores we have big computing power and it should be use efficiently
darasz89 said:
speculations and promises of manufacturers
the major factor of power usage is system resources managment
at start new 4-core CPU will consume more energy beacuse of lack efficient support for 4 cores - but someday it will be optimized well
but the question is: do we really need 4 cores? i think that we need better optimized sotfware
did I loose my mind? look at devices running WP7.5 and tell me that Android is smoother [I'm not a M$ fanboy ]
now with 2cores we have big computing power and it should be use efficiently
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I really hope is not speculation, cause we need battery life saving for our devices.
I am agree about the lack of apps optimized for a 4 cores CPU, however my I7-740Qm use less battery (I repeat on normal usage) than my old AMD Athlon XP, because of the improvement in architecture and technology such as Turbo Boost or Hyperthreading that Intel has implemented.
I believe the new 28nm CPU from Qualcomm and Nvidia will bring similar helpful features.
you're comparing normal CPU's
all the time I was talking about CPU on smartphones
difference between those two CPUs you mentioned is comparable to difference between Ford T and Ferrari Enzo
on smartphones we have limited resources - you cannot easily add f.e. 512 MB of RAM, change CPU or GPU
we have more limited hardware compared to PC
the goal is optimalization of software not adding cores to CPU or more RAM
Edit
Tegra2 and Tegra3 both have 40 nm process
Source
@OP
2011 is not a good year for hunting Tegra 3.
With only one product Asus TF Prime out, it could happen like the Xoom launch.
Although the prime seems like a very nice upgrade, I'm already reading about Lenovo and Acer bringing 1920*1200 res screens.
I know you may have your preference on your Manufacturer, I do too, but it's better to wait a bit to see all the players then choose.
I waited a bit and got a Galaxy Tab 10.1 one of the best tegra 2 tablets. Really interested in what Samsung can bring in 2012.
darasz89 said:
you're comparing normal CPU's
all the time I was talking about CPU on smartphones
difference between those two CPUs you mentioned is comparable to difference between Ford T and Ferrari Enzo
on smartphones we have limited resources - you cannot easily add f.e. 512 MB of RAM, change CPU or GPU
we have more limited hardware compared to PC
the goal is optimalization of software not adding cores to CPU or more RAM
Edit
Tegra2 and Tegra3 both have 40 nm process
Source
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yup that was just an example darasz89
Why do you think we have limited resources? Would you expect 2 years ago that one day we would use a smartphone big like 2 packs of cigarettes combined together, with a full OS installed, 4 cores, and 1GB of RAM?
Mobile technology is the future. We will see much more hopefully...
Yup, only Qualcomm for now will use 28nm technlogy.
priority of Android devices should be optimized software before hardware
I don't think that way you see the future of Android is bad, but first we should use all of "given power" of 2 core CPU and after that extend to 4core
funny summary: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Just pre-ordered prime from my local Future Shop. *Anxiously awaiting*
darasz89 said:
priority of Android devices should be optimized software before hardware
I don't think that way you see the future of Android is bad, but first we should use all of "given power" of 2 core CPU and after that extend to 4core
funny summary: "With great power comes great responsibility."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually that should be the priority of software in general, but wrriting good code is hard enough. Right now, ever since the software crisis, hardware has always been two three steps ahead of software, and right now it is in a way a good thing. You don't want a software to be lagging on your computer because its not powerful enough right? You'd rather have the extra juice to power any software with ease.
Hey guys!! According to bestbuy canada, the expected warehouse delivery date is December 5, 2011. Not going to check elsewhere, but just an FYI to all who asked.
Link
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
MultiLockOn said:
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior. You also have to consider how many more pixels the gpu has to power on the iPad 3's display. While high res is nice, it takes more power to render it.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
speedyink said:
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 gpu is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
MultiLockOn said:
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
speedyink said:
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
lesp4ul said:
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kmow what you mean. Im extremely happy with my galaxy s2, I cant say I ever recall it lagging on me in any way whatsoever. Im not sure what makes the droid razr and galaxy nexus comparable to the s2. From what Ive read Omap processors tend to lag and consume battery, and the mali 400 is better than what either of those phones have. Id say its ICS but the razr still
Runs gingerbread
I was hoping for some more attention in here :/
I agree, omaps are battery hungry beast. Like my previous Optimus Black, man... i only got 12-14 hours with edge (1ghz UV smartass v2, also ****ty LG kernel haha). Same issue as my friend's Galaxy SL. I dunno if newer soc has a better behaviour.
Sent from my Nokia 6510 using PaperPlane™