Related
Much as I like my Touch Cruise, I think I'm already lusting after my next device. I was looking through Qualcomm stuff to try and find the difference between the MSM7200 (the one in the Touch Cruise) and the MSM7200A. I didn't find the answer to my question but I did stumble across a press release from November last year about the latest chips in the MSM7xxx family (http://www.qualcomm.com/press/releases/2007/071113_Qualcomm_Introduces_Single_Chip.html).
As someone that is very concerned with battery life this is the bit that caught my eye: "Additionally, the three chipsets feature new power-saving innovations to deliver more than 80 hours of music playback, a full day of talk time, and more than a month of standby time."
Wow, those statistics represent a genuine step-change in battery life assuming they're not being stupid and quoting those numbers on the basis of using a car battery to power it! If HTC select one of these chips for their next device in 12 months or so, or a competitor's design with comparable characteristics, then I don't think that I'll be able to resist an upgrade.
- Julian
MSM7200A and MSM7200?
What is the difference? Is the A version the ATI enabled one? Could this be the difference? Could it be that there are actually two versions.
session said:
Is the A version the ATI enabled one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As can bee seen from Brew 2007 PDF presentation both should have ATI Imageon2D/3D chip.
imho the A version will be just a lower voltage binned version of the normal chipset.
Just look at cpus, intel desktop and mobile processors are alle the same, the only difference is, that the mobile versions work with lower voltage.
Hornet331 said:
imho the A version will be just a lower voltage binned version of the normal chipset.
Just look at cpus, intel desktop and mobile processors are alle the same, the only difference is, that the mobile versions work with lower voltage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I suspect, based on the Google hits I did find, that there's more to it than that. There were some hits from Linux hacker forums where people were trying to port stuff to the MSM7200 and they only had code for the 7200A which apparently wasn't compatible (which seems to imply that it's not a 100% identical architecture). Also, interestingly, I found a hit from someone trying to put Android onto an MSM7200 and again the same issue, the Google code was only for a 7200A.
- Julian
I think the 7200A is a direct result of the Broadcomm/Qualcomm lawsuit.
7200 = Qualcomm infringing on Broadcomm patents
7200A = Qualcomm's attempt to longer infringe on Broadcomm patents.
I could be wrong, but I know that the MSM7200 is being redesigned asap after the patent rulings came out in favor of Broadcomm.
njmarchetti said:
I think the 7200A is a direct result of the Broadcomm/Qualcomm lawsuit.
7200 = Qualcomm infringing on Broadcomm patents
7200A = Qualcomm's attempt to longer infringe on Broadcomm patents.
I could be wrong, but I know that the MSM7200 is being redesigned asap after the patent rulings came out in favor of Broadcomm.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That sounds like the most logical explanation. They don't want to lose the 7200 name (or version or whatever) and all the eventually, the community just makes of it what it wants - let's try to think normal, why would they use almost the same name with revolutionary power changes? Both are identical in functionality, but different in implementation or whatever - making sure not to cross the line again
SabbeRubbish said:
That sounds like the most logical explanation. They don't want to lose the 7200 name (or version or whatever) and all the eventually, the community just makes of it what it wants - let's try to think normal, why would they use almost the same name with revolutionary power changes? Both are identical in functionality, but different in implementation or whatever - making sure not to cross the line again
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just to be clear, my first post and the link therein (the one talking about the huge increases in battery life) has absolutely nothing to do with the MSM7200/MSM7200A although it does relate to the MSM7xxx family as a whole. The link I posted is to the successor, or even the successor to the successor, to the MSM7200/MSM7200A.
There are two issues in this thread, both interesting in my view, but they are not related: (i) What the very latest chips fairly recently announced in the MSM7xxx family will be capable of, and (ii) what the heck is the difference between the now rather old (in the fast moving world of mobile techology) MSM7200 and MSM7200A chips.
Re the second issue and the theory that the 7200A is the non-infringing version, I agree that appears plausible but I'm still not convinced. I just found this fairly random link (http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0PIL/is_2007_Feb_20/ai_n18619481) of some random news site picking up a Qualcomm press release from Feb 2007. This press release is for the MSM7225 but what is interesting is that even a year ago it explicitly mentions the MSM7200A. Surely if the A version was a re-design because of the Broadcom issue then they wouldn't have been name-checking it in press releases a year ago?
- Julian
Maybe they hoped the MSM7200 would not be sued ? And they made a backup MSM7200A? I doubt it but hey, we might never find out, or the truth will come out one of these days
MSM7200 versus MSM7200a
The MSM7200a is the 65nm version of the MSM7200 (90nm). The big difference is a speed boost for the ARM11 processor from 400MHz to 528MHz. I assume that there should be some benefits to battery life as well...not sure about any other changes.
Slacker
Also the msm7200a should allow video output up to 800x480.
dara
Qualcomm's own press release of the MSM7500
The ATi Imageon is built into the Main CPU along with the ARM11. Not too clear about the difference between the msm7200 and the msm7500 though.
The theories I've heard are:
MSM7200 has 2 ARM9 cores and ATi's Imageon while the MSM7500 has an ARM11, ARM9, and ATi Imageon
and
MSM7200 is the GSM/HSDPA version of the MSM7500
http://www.ent.eetchina.com/PDF/2007FEB/DTCOL_2007FEB15_AVDE_RFR_AN_01.pdf?SOURCES=DOWNLOAD
Integrated 400 MHz ARM11™ applications
processor and 274 MHz ARM9™ microprocessor
deliver accelerated applications processing and
simultaneous modem processing; the dual-core
implementation provides hardware-based
security domains
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My question about Qualcomm CPU:
Is in Polaris supported CPU scaling or is constant 400MHz?
Is there any software that show CPU speed on device with Qualcomm processor? I only find battery consumption with idle cpu status but this is not 100% answer about scaling.
Have a look at this video as found here:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=1974776&postcount=1430
jyan_osu said:
http://www.engadget.com/2008/02/28/android-gets-handled-now-with-street-view/
About halfway through the video the person shows a demo of Quake.. listen to the chipset he mentions the phone has.. Than shake your fist at whoever won't let us have the driver...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I hate to quote my self but, i'll make an exception...
gnick666 said:
I know Android isn't very popular around here... but i found something interesting
http://www.helloandroid.com/node/22
Original Post: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=1961765&postcount=250
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android is BASED on the Qualcomm chipsets...
lazik said:
My question about Qualcomm CPU:
Is in Polaris supported CPU scaling or is constant 400MHz?
Is there any software that show CPU speed on device with Qualcomm processor? I only find battery consumption with idle cpu status but this is not 100% answer about scaling.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is no app that can scale the dualcore CPU of the MSM 7x000 based devices, yet.
And i don't know if there is any intelligent scaleing function in it...
"Intel Bulverde 520 MHz"
The one in the Universal
OR
"Qualcomm MSM7201A 528 Mhz"
in the new HTC HD unit
I feel they are the same. Am I right?
qualcomm is much better
Its similar the difference between a 2.5ghz Pentium 4 and a 2.5ghz Core2Solo
i don't think that core2solo and pentium4 with ht much differ
l2tp said:
i don't think that core2solo and pentium4 with ht much differ
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Google up "Instructions per second" and you'll understand.
The Netburst architec of P4 is one of the worst example in history of it. A failure by engineering standard.
The PXA270 Processor in the Universal actually runs at 624mhz and is underclocked. The HTC X7500 uses the same CPU running at 624mhz. It is clearly the better CPU.
genetik_freak said:
The PXA270 Processor in the Universal actually runs at 624mhz and is underclocked. The HTC X7500 uses the same CPU running at 624mhz. It is clearly the better CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very, very wrong.
I wouldn't say that the Intel two processors are exactly the same, with one just being underclocked via software. Notice how intel puts out multiple pentiums of a given generation at different speeds? Would you venture to say that all those chips are the same too?
Also, clock speed is a poor metric when comparing chips from different companies. PDADB.Net says that the Intel chip has a ARMv5TE instruction set and the Qualcom chip has a ARMv6 instruction set. The Intel is a generation behind.
Comparing
Wikipedia says
Main article: Megahertz myth
The clock rate of a computer is only useful for providing comparisons between computer chips in the same processor family. An IBM PC with an Intel 486 CPU running at 50 MHz will be about twice as fast as one with the same CPU, memory and display running at 25 MHz, while the same will not be true for MIPS R4000 running at the same clock rate as the two are different processors with different functionality. Furthermore, there are many other factors to consider when comparing the speeds of entire computers, like the clock rate of the computer's front side bus (FSB), the clock rate of the RAM, the width in bits of the CPU's bus and the amount of Level 1, Level 2 and Level 3 cache.
Clock rates should not be used when comparing different computers or different processor families. Rather, some software benchmark should be used. Clock rates can be very misleading since the amount of work different computer chips can do in one cycle varies. For example, RISC CPUs tend to have simpler instructions than CISC CPUs (but higher clock rates), and superscalar processors can execute more than one instruction per cycle (on average), yet it is not uncommon for them to do "less" in a clock cycle. In addition, subscalar CPUs or use of parallelism can also affect the quality of the computer regardless of clock rate.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sonus you are correct about the Mhz comparison. However, the PXA270 in the Universal can be safely "overclocked" to 624Mhz because the chip is designed to max out at that speed.
I would still like to see some benchmark tests between the 624Mhz PXA270, and the 528Mhz Qualcomm MSM7201A.
Generations aside, I can't see the Qualcomm chip outperforming the Intel Chip by much, if any. Also, it should be noted that the PXA270 can be scaled, not sure if that is true for the MSM7201A.
The other catch phrase is "Performance per watt". I bet the MSM7201A has a huge advantage over PXA27x in that, mainly due to newer manufacturing process.
That may be true wuzy, but considering the PXA270 is almost 5 years old and still being used in new devices should tell you plenty about its capabilities and performance.
Not really... It does, however tell a lot about the stinginess of device manufacturers.
As for the overclocking, not every Universal can run 624 MHz without crashing because the CPUs are going through a selection process after manufacturing and there is simply no reason to use the best ones for a device that doesn't need them running at full speed.
The crashes are usually the result of the type of program used to overclock and also the rom. For the most part, people have found that 624mhz is pretty stable, inlcuding myself. Some have even pushed it beyond that speed, but that's another story...
Also take this into consideration:
The Universal has been on the market since 2005, almost 4 years now. By industry standards, it should be obsolete. Why is it not then? Simply, it is quite inexpensive compared to the newer devices having similar features, sometimes less. When it comes to performance vs. price vs. features, you just cannot beat the value of the Universal and its blistering fast 520/624mhz PXA270 CPU! The PXA270's performance is only rivaled by its bigger brother, the 800Mhz PXA320 which has made its way into some newer devices already.
genetik_freak said:
That may be true wuzy, but considering the PXA270 is almost 5 years old and still being used in new devices should tell you plenty about its capabilities and performance.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try out a Diamond/Touch Pro with Opera9.5 the next time you see one and notice the speed difference.
On MSM7201A compared to our PXA27x it's a lot more smoother.
The lack of driver for MSM7200 on a lot of devices released last year tainted our perception on the new generation chips I think.
Touch HD vs. ASUS Galaxy7 at end of the year... hmmm
I think you're missing the point wuzy.
I know there are newer devices out now that can deliver slightly better performance in some areas than the Universal, but considering how old our device is, it is to be expected. All I'm saying is that given the age of the Universal compared to what's out there now, The Universal has held up well. Furthermore, with all the new cooked roms popping up, you can expect the Uni to live even longer!
Take a look at H.264 decompression and real high performance tasks and the PXA270 looses so badly against the PXA320 that it is not even funny anymore...
Why does the Uni keep up with most software? Because most programs are written for the old ARMv4 instruction set, thus wasting a lot of CPU cycles on newer processors that have already moved on. Apart from that the average application simply does not need that much CPU power to begin with.
The Uni held out well in a market that is very slow to adapt new technologies to begin with. The Axim x50v had a dedicated graphics chip at the end of 2004 - how many applications make use of that today? Only some games (ports, emulators) and media players. For those alone the Axim has held out better than the Uni though as it is still one of the best performing PPCs on the market.
Our little one will be around for quite a while, but it is far, far away from what nowadays devices can offer and it shows if you run anything beyond mail and office apps on it.
Which Processor is faster & better
I feel from your input above that "Qualcomm MSM7201A 528 Mhz" has higher performance, clock rete, Instructions per second, & Performance per watt when compared to the "Intel Bulverde 520 MHz" about 2:1 am I right ?
Another Question:
What is the highest speed Processor available for the PDA industry today?
Best Regards.
IMHO the ARM Cortex processors are very far up the ladder when it comes to performance and energy consumption. The Pandora makers claim 10 hours of runtime for their device. Together with its media chip this little bugger is capable of decoding 720p HD video streams (take a look at the Archos 5)
I am not sure if the MSM7201A chipset's CPU alone reaches twice the performance of the Uni, but you will see a huge difference in apps that support and need the latest in CPU architecture (media players & games). If (one way or the other) the 3D capabilities can be put to use you will probably see more than a 2:1 performance boost.
The sad truth is the Universal is one of the slowest VGA devices around. Especially considering lack of the graphical accelerator (which was even present in prototypes).
Too bad the dedicated 3D chip didn't make it into the final design. But it's still better than having a 3D accelerator without drivers! I have a Sharp EM-ONE here with a GoForce 5500 that could theoretically accelerate many video formats. The sad truth is that because there are no drivers no media player can make use of the chip. Even worse: Because the graphics chip still controls the display video is even slower because the optimized X-Scale drivers can't be used. It's like Sharp and NVidia wanted to punish users double So, as bad as it is, the Uni is not the worst device out there!
x86
I wonder why there´re no x86 cpu´s placed in mobile devices yet. maybe because of the high power consumption? x86 cpu´s running at 528mhz would be more powerful than arm cpu´s. furthermore the device could run x86 os like xp embedded with more features and capabilities...
x86 CPU enabled systems are still too much power hungry and too much complicated to be used in such a small device (sounds weird when talking abut HTC Universal, doesn't it).
Is there much of difference beside clock speed. from the msm7200 in the touch pro 2 and the xscale running at 800mhz in the omnia II in terms of performance? ANy help would be appreciated.
If you ask me it (should) make quite a difference. The msm7200 is quite notorious for it's quite allright clockspeed but slow performance.
I used to have a Diamond (with 528 mhz) and then got a Omnia (Marvell 624 mhz) which was already quite a difference. I guess the 800 mhz will make even more of a difference.
Do note that there is a big difference in resolution between the Diamond and the Omnia, so that will also give some speed increase. The Omnia II has a Samsung 800 mhz chip (as far as I know) and I don't know what kind of performance that will give.
Both cpu's are a ARMv6 (afaik), so in that perspective you could say the 800 mhz is faster than the 528 mhz.
See this:
Samsung chip: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a6410&c=samsung_s3c6410
Qualcomm chip: http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=cpu&id=a7200a&c=qualcomm_msm7200a
My old diamond was much slower than my current ipaq 211. The ipaq has a 624mhz marvell and is much faster and more responsive than the diamond. It can also play videos back much better. 800mhz would just increase the performance gap.
The Omnia II is Arm11 which is slightly faster than the iphone 3G(both get blown out of the water by the 3Gs), and should support OpenGL ES 2.0.
Here's Samsungs Data sheet on it: http://www.samsung.com/global/syste.../2008/5/30/785500s3c6410_datasheet_200804.pdf
The msm7200, i BELIEVE(dont quote me), would be faster than the SC36410, if it had proper drivers.. however, thats not the case.
numbers are an indicator and nothing more. They give you a clue but clues can be very misleading. If they were usefull, why would you need benchmarking?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megahertz_myth
(yeah i know wiki is sometimes full of BS but it certainly backs up what I learned in Uni and during my assembler cracking/virus writing days)
The ONLY way to compare CPU's is to run the same application and then run the SAME task in that application. Once you have done so ALL you can say is "For performing task X in application Y, processor ZXY running operating system ABC is faster on the BLAHBLAH platform" and nothing more. It does not mean its faster at everything or indeed, you cannot say its faster than ANYTHING else until you have tested it.
At the end of the day, the processor is affected by drivers, processor design and the operating system and its installaition.
and Software.. if theres no apps that incorporates acceleration, then its wasted.
what about qualcomm 1G snapdragon cpu?
how fast is that compares to current 528mzh? haha
i'm waiting for Acer S200 with 1G cpu.
netnerd said:
what about qualcomm 1G snapdragon cpu?
how fast is that compares to current 528mzh? haha
i'm waiting for Acer S200 with 1G cpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
please re-read and if you still don't understand, i'll try and explain again.
clearly, marvell is better, even the mhz is lesser than what qualcomm offers!
having better decoders also like video playback & multitasking when video is playing!
waiting for devices with marvell cpu pxa168 series.
they use qualcomm chip becoz its cheaper & provide hsdpa to network & GPS module while the rest does not come with it. so individual chip must be used. but its better like GPSone VS SiRF III
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.
Having a droid, I have dug into the details of TI's omap platform and I heard that the Xtreme will have the 3630. I am very impressed with the whole omapzoom.org and the platform itself. I am not at all familiar with the Qualcomm offerings. Anyone up for discussing the differences between these two platforms to include the advantages and disadvantages of each?
Cheers, jdeclue
TI Omap is based on the arm-cortex A8 tech which is supposedly to be more efficient and fast. Qualcomm has a long history of bad graphics support. The GPU is horrible. Well, its not exactly that bad but the drivers that are provided for the use for Qualcomm's GPU is often inadequate and hence underperforming. Sure the snapdragon is a whole lot better than the previous qualcomm SOCs (i.e. msm72xx series). But I feel that the reason for it is due to the higher clockspeed. The 1ghz speed tends to help with the peformance. But for me personally i would prefer the TI OMAP simply because it is a cortexA8 core which is better performing and the much better GPU.
So in a nutshell,
Qualcomm Snapdragon clockspeed maybe higher than the OMAP but the performance wise is comparatively close.
BUT however the OMAP GPU is better than Snapdragon.
With the ongoing increasingly graphically intensive trend, i think the way to go is with TI's OMAP. (Or untill qualcomm releases the 1.5ghz dual core snapdragon, then i would consider it )
There. That's my take.