Can somebody explain me, how it is possible, that my Desire HD processor can run at 1,9Ghz, and it has got no cooling? Or how is it cooled?
I have got a notebook with Pentium 3 running at 1,0 Ghz, and it produces a lot of heat.
Is it because of new nm technology or what?
Thanx for explaining me that. Because i really don't understand it
Simple answer: a phone processor doesn't use as much power, therefore putting off less heat.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App
The Mhz numbers can be pretty irritating
Even on the desktop, you can't rely on a 1.8Ghz processor actually being able to do more than another that's only clocked at 1.6Ghz. And that's with processors that are part of the same family.
The trick is that the instruction sets are different. Even though they may be able to process the same number of instructions in a given timeframe, a given problem may take a single instruction on one platform and a hundred on another.
Power consumption comes rises with the number of instructions available. ARM processors have only a very limited instruction set, so they need a lot less power finding out which instruction is coming it.
An example: all x86 (since the 486) chips are able to perform floating-point math, while ARM only gained that ability recently. So 1.1+1.1 is very simple on x86 (it's not actually a single instruction, but that's not the point here), but takes a lot of cycles on ARM (since it needs to implement all of this in software).
And a phone processor is smaller .
p0cait said:
And a phone processor is smaller .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's debatable. The dies are pretty close in size, for compareable ARM and x86 cpus.
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using XDA Premium App
Related
Hi,
i recently return my samsung (4th time) galaxy s2 becouse of various defects , i been looking at the sensation however i have a few questions , firstly for all its issues i like how fast and responsive the galaxay was however when i tryed the sensation i noticed its not as smooth as the galaxy or that much smoother then the desire hd.
One possible reason for this i noticed was that the sensation uses a asmp cpu , which seems a bit cheeky to me. I mean im buying a dual core phone so i would like both cores to work at the same time as opposed to one working then the second kicking in when the first is loaded. From what ive read ics should have better support for this setup , so i was curious does anyone think we will see that much of a difference bearing in mind the sensation is asmp.
I notice there`s a lot of talented devs from the desire development and hd which is encouraging so i was hoping to learn from various users how much of a performance increase there seeing in custom roms ie is the browser jerky like stock ??
Appreciate any / all feedback thank you
I'm interested in some more more info on this topic as well.....
Sent from my Sensation using xda premium
Read up!
ok so aSMP doesn't really work in the method of core 0 gets loaded then core 1 kicks in, thats way off.
basically SMP cpus like Tegra and Samsung's both cores run at the same speed, so core 1 follows core 0. This doesn't mean that core 1 is actually processing anything. In most cases due to gingerbread the phone is still mainly running on one core unless the app supports multicore.
aSMP allows the cores to run completely independent. This is great for battery life. Core 0 can do things like play games and stuff at full speed while core 1 handles background data.
so playing angry birds while syncing photos on flickr:
core 0 could be running at full 1.5Ghz
core 1 could be running at 500Mhz just do handle the syncing
This is basically the idea. We will get better support with ICS for full and proper support for multiple cores and the kernels will only get better as devs learn.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1233103
Hi,
Thank you for you detailed reply ive been following the thread you posted which is what led me to posting question here , i obviously misunderstood what was being said. That being said im no expert but if i buy a dual core phone id rather have both cores committed to one task like pc ... this is one of the things thats making me hold back on sensation. Althougth its a great phone with great ui and fantastic potential with future updates and dev support to the touch at present the galaxy s2 just seems smoother with the way its doing thing.
As i say thou im not expert i can appreciate theres other factor to take into account such as kernal etc, im just going with hands on usage and trying to evaluate the future potential for both devices before making a decision to which i should choose
tonnytech said:
Hi,
Thank you for you detailed reply ive been following the thread you posted which is what led me to posting question here , i obviously misunderstood what was being said. That being said im no expert but if i buy a dual core phone id rather have both cores committed to one task like pc ... this is one of the things thats making me hold back on sensation. Althougth its a great phone with great ui and fantastic potential with future updates and dev support to the touch at present the galaxy s2 just seems smoother with the way its doing thing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The sensation's CPU works in a much more power efficient way, while still offering the speed of any other dual core CPU. It allows different clock speeds for different cores so applications using only a single core will be able to clock it differently to those using the other in the background. Computers, especially laptops work in a similar way, as there is a need for power efficiency. Realistically the Galaxy SII runs smoother due to it running a much less resource hungry skin on top of android, but both the CPU of the sensation and the Galaxy SII are both of a similar calibre, so it is very difficult to say which is better.
again thanks for the reply , defintly understand how this asmp buisness works more now which has given me some stuff to think about
tonnytech said:
Hi,
Thank you for you detailed reply ive been following the thread you posted which is what led me to posting question here , i obviously misunderstood what was being said. That being said im no expert but if i buy a dual core phone id rather have both cores committed to one task like pc ... this is one of the things thats making me hold back on sensation. Althougth its a great phone with great ui and fantastic potential with future updates and dev support to the touch at present the galaxy s2 just seems smoother with the way its doing thing.
As i say thou im not expert i can appreciate theres other factor to take into account such as kernal etc, im just going with hands on usage and trying to evaluate the future potential for both devices before making a decision to which i should choose
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Neither architecture, SMP or aSMP, will commit both cores to one task unless the app is multithreaded and it currently needs the use of both cores. This is the same way that multicore pc's operate. That's why when quad core CPU's first came out people said that they didn't feel any faster than comparable dual core chips - most existing apps at that time were written for single or dual threaded use so the third and fourth cores largely sat unused. The pc doesn't just force the use of the extra cores just because they are there (regardless of how they scale, aSMP or SMP).
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using xda premium
Also the new firmware has made it smoother due to extra optimisations. Web browser is not as good as the galaxy S 2 due that being GPU accelerated. Power wise the Sensation you will get somewhat more out of your battery life wise.
hardensm said:
Realistically the Galaxy SII runs smoother due to it running a much less resource hungry skin on top of android, but both the CPU of the sensation and the Galaxy SII are both of a similar calibre, so it is very difficult to say which is better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you look at my thread and see the post:
MSM8x60:
Adreno 220 GPU
2x Cortex A8 Based Cores
512KB L2 Cache
45nm
upto 333Mhz LPDDR2
Exynos 4210:
Mali 400 GPU
2x Cortex A9 Based Cores
1MB L2 Cache
45nm
support for LPDDR2/DDR3
Tegra 2:
ULP Geforce GPU
2x Cortex A9 Based Cores
1MB L2 Cache
40nm
support for 600Mhz LPDDR2
So the biggest thing is is that the Exynos is based on a new core micro-arch then the Snapdragon 2, also it has the ability to support DDR3 memory. To go into more detail about ARM Cortex.
Items that A8 and A9 have in common:
Jazelle RCT for JIT Compilation
Neon SIMD Instruction Set (Optional)
Thumb2 Instruction set
VFPv3 Floating Point Unit (Optional)
Cortex A8:
Superscalar Dual-Issue Micro-Arch
2.0 DMIPS/Mhz
Cortex A9:
Out-Of-Order Superscalar Micro-Arch
2.5 DMIPS/Mhz
Jazelle DBX for Java Execution
Dual-Core Processing Built In
The SGSII has a new generation architecture as so does the Tegra
This thread is iteresting. I want to continue that.
my cpu0 and cpu1 arrive at 1,7 ghz. so cpu1 doesnt arrive up to 500 mhz
Are there really that many things out there that can take advantage of a dual-core cpu? It seems to me that a decent cpu/gpu can go really far, but idk.
I'd imagine it'd be similar to a desktop. It will initially help with general smoothness of the user experience. Eventually apps will catch up with the hardware and be multithreaded.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using xda premium
i can see the use for dual core phones
but quad core or penta core phones is simply too much
AllGamer said:
i can see the use for dual core phones
but quad core or penta core phones is simply too much
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More cores = better efficiency = longer battery life. It's not all about performance.
On any os aside from android, no.
Currently no. Seeing as software has yet to catch up to hardware, and really never has in this technological era. >.>
So with such info, one can make the statement to say the latest hardware is never needed, atleast in its time. Sooo... lets all throw away our core i7's, 1080p displays, Radeon HD 6990, and go back to the good ol' pentium 4 with integrated Intel graphics.
the new android os (ice cream sandwich) is supposed to support dual-core processors. If this does end up happening, it won't be long till there are apps such that do make use of the dual-core as well.
smooth azz budda
sent from planet atrix
Yea! Try web browsing on a dual core. You'll never go back.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
All depends on the software taking advantage of dual-core or not.
Similar scenario happened on desktop PC few years ago, and dual core cpu performed worse than similar clocked single core cpus when running non-optimized software. Took a period of time for the software to take up.
How can you tell if your using both cpu cores???
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
Or the flip side of that coin, can I power down one of my cores?
From my understanding both cores run in sync, meaning they both run all the time at the same speed. It is the tegra 2 design. Other dual core chip sets run asynchronous
jcbofkc said:
From my understanding both cores run in sync, meaning they both run all the time at the same speed. It is the tegra 2 design. Other dual core chip sets run asynchronous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure that answers either question - just because both cores are running on the same clock doesn't mean they are both doing work. Obviously, two cores can't work on the same thread or process at the same time. Some executive has to manage the work load and the associated resource sharing. Does GB really do any multi-core? Does ICS?
All good questions. I was wondering the same thing.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA Premium App
namklak said:
I'm not sure that answers either question - just because both cores are running on the same clock doesn't mean they are both doing work. Obviously, two cores can't work on the same thread or process at the same time. Some executive has to manage the work load and the associated resource sharing. Does GB really do any multi-core? Does ICS?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Excellent points. I found this.
http://www.tested.com/news/dual-core-vs-single-core-arm-what-does-an-extra-core-really-get-you/2337/
In Android 2.2 Froyo, there are no dual-core optimizations at all. The system just sees a fast SoC, but Is unable to thread processes effectively. Even in the newer Gingerbread build of Android, there is virtually no support for dual-core SoCs. The ext4 file system added to Android 2.3 sill see a modest boost in the area of I/O performance, but that's about it. Right now, Android on phones does not understand dual-core chips.
A dual-core device might be a really snappy experience, but that's not because of the number of cores per se. The SoC is just fast, even without proper process threading. You can get a similarly responsive device with a regular old single-core SoC. Yes we know, how quaint.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is a hardware question, I have a friend who owns a Desire HD, now he goes on and on about how Single core phones are just as powerful as Dual core phones because, and this is his theory, a Dual core phone that says it is clocked at 1 GHz actually has either core clocked at 500 MHz, whereas the core in a Single core phone is clocked at 1 Ghz flat.
This just honestly seems like a frankly rubbish argument that doesn't make much sense to me, however I want to know if he's right, is there any literature out there that proves either way. Is he right? Or is he just being a boner?
Kryptyle said:
This is a hardware question, I have a friend who owns a Desire HD, now he goes on and on about how Single core phones are just as powerful as Dual core phones because, and this is his theory, a Dual core phone that says it is clocked at 1 GHz actually has either core clocked at 500 MHz, whereas the core in a Single core phone is clocked at 1 Ghz flat.
This just honestly seems like a frankly rubbish argument that doesn't make much sense to me, however I want to know if he's right, is there any literature out there that proves either way. Is he right? Or is he just being a boner?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
long story short, he is wrong. keep in mind dual core s different from dual processor. the processor of a dual core simply allows 2 instructions to be carried out at onece adding performance to programs that have lots going on at the same time, but is still the same otherwise. They seriously help with multitasking so on android they would really help .
lkrasner said:
long story short, he is wrong. keep in mind dual core s different from dual processor. the processor of a dual core simply allows 2 instructions to be carried out at onece adding performance to programs that have lots going on at the same time, but is still the same otherwise. They seriously help with multitasking so on android they would really help .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct! It allows 2 different "threads" to be computed at the same time. Your friend isn't all wrong though. Any app has to fully support dual threading. If it doesn't you will see the same performance from a 1ghz dual core phone and a 1ghz single core. Also remember the architecture of the CPU is important. In many cases a 1ghz phone may perform better than a 1.2ghz phone.
Sent from my MB865 using XDA
Well, almost.
Dual core means there are two independent processing units on the same chip. The chip itself operates at 1gigahertz, and that generally applies to anything on that die.
so your friend is wrong, as both cores run at 1 gig, but a lot more factors relate to actual performance.
In most cases, single core will not perform as well as a dual core at the same speed. (assuming they are the same arch)
Sent from my MB865 using XDA
Some dishonest Chinese sellers will do things like this.
Some places you'll see dual core NEC EV2 based tablets as "1ghz" even though it's two ~500mhz cores.
Other places you'll see a single core device deceitfully advertised as "dual core" as it includes a GPU in addition to the CPU.
They'll then add the GPU and CPU frequencies together and sell a 1.1ghz device as 1.5ghz.
(And don't get me started about seeing "Cortex A10" in the specs)
So long as we're discussing legitimate specifications, your friend is wrong
The most important thing is.... To tell your friend he is totally true.. When he revises his theory somedays later, then listen to him.
Sent from my ME865 using XDA
It really depends on the apps that you are running. Gingerbread does not fully support dual core processors but the Android (linux) kernel does. So if the apps you are running are written to take advantage of the extra core, they will run faster on a dual core phone. Where it does help to have an extra core is multitasking, with a dual core phone you will be able to smoothly run more apps at one time. But if you benchmark an app that only utilizes one core on both a single core and a dual core phone, the results will not automatically favor the dual core phone.
I got my hopes up for nothing as the Charge did not make the list
http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/24/samsung-rolling-jelly-bean-toward-most-of-its-smartphone-tablet/
It has already been said that jb and touchwiz would never fit on our system partition.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
I think the bigger issue here besides getting 4.1 is... the mobile market needs to follow the model of the PC for the enduser.
I would be willing to pay some money to upgrade to the next major OS updates for my devices. Whether its my tablets or my phone. I wouldn't mind if I could only get vanilla android either.
It would put the power in the consumers hands. For example, I bought a laptop with windows vista and later upgraded it to windows 7 since my laptop could run it well. I hope someday android is able to do this as well. And sooner rather than later.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
bubarub said:
I think the bigger issue here besides getting 4.1 is... the mobile market needs to follow the model of the PC for the enduser.
I would be willing to pay some money to upgrade to the next major OS updates for my devices. Whether its my tablets or my phone. I wouldn't mind if I could only get vanilla android either.
It would put the power in the consumers hands. For example, I bought a laptop with windows vista and later upgraded it to windows 7 since my laptop could run it well. I hope someday android is able to do this as well. And sooner rather than later.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that upgrading a phone will never be as straightforward as upgrading a PC. There's no one "Android Operating System" that exists as a general purpose OS. AOSP is the base, but even Google does more work to it before it goes on a Nexus device. Every phone has different hardware, which requires different drivers, and often, different close-source software and libraries, which means that every version of Android is a different embedded OS that is based on core Android. Making it generalized enough to run across the board on all hardware on the market would bloat it. It would make it memory, CPU, and power inefficient. We like to think of our phones as powerful miniature computers, but in reality, they don't even match the processor and memory capabilities of the average netbook. It's only through careful optimizations that it is able to run the way it runs, and you can't just slap a generic version of Android on a device and expect the same results.
Its not impossible...
And isn't every computer different from one another just like a phone or tablets?!
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
bubarub said:
Its not impossible...
And isn't every computer different from one another just like a phone or tablets?!
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As Shrike said - the phones are too small and don't have the capacity that computers do for memory, disk and processor. Even if they did, the power draw would be excessive. Everything is extremely customized to fit within the phone's tiny footprint.
BTW - every computer has it's own limits with respect to memory and cpu capacity. Yes, you can upgrade, but there is a point of diminishing returns. What's the point of installing the fastest processor if the bus can't handle it? It goes on and on.
Lastly, it will never be in their best interests (profits, new sales) to adopt the computer model. They don't like that you keep a computer for years. They want churn. They want planned obsolescence.
bubarub said:
Its not impossible...
And isn't every computer different from one another just like a phone or tablets?!
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Impossible? No. Highly impractical? Yes
A computer has enough memory, storage, and processor power that the larger footprint of the "everything and the kitchen sink" model doesn't bog it down the way it would a phone. Just look at storage space alone...when you don't know exactly what hardware you're going to encounter, you have to account for all possibilities. Just the extra storage is going to add tangibly to the cost. Then you have the extra power drain required for the more efficient processors that will be needed to run the more generic OS correctly, and the extra RAM needed to load all of it's parts. A smartphone is a modern example of the classic embedded system. When you have limited resources to work with, your OS has to be more focused, customized, and efficient to work in an acceptable way.
So, yes, it's possible in the broadest sense, but do you want to pay $1500+ for the device that can be upgraded at will and be out of date within 2 years? Or would you rather pay $100-$500 every two years for the latest hardware and OS, at the expense of a more limited upgrade path? Personally, I know where I'll put my money.
Haha good point on that last paragraph! I agree.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda app-developers app
Specs
It doesn't take much to look at the default off the shelf Dell box's specs and compare them to that of any phone. The Intel Core i7 or AMD FX-8150 processors would smoke any ARM on the market for mobiles. Memory in the desktop is 4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1600MHz. Again crushing the Droid Charge and every other phone. 1TB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive, nuff said man won't be there for mobile for a while now. The power consumption would drain your mobiles battery in the time it takes to boot up. Let us also not forget that GHz and GB and TB don't all perform the same across the board. For instance a 1TB parallel ATA drive, 1TB SATA, and 1TB SSD differ vastly in performance. The NVIDIA Tegra 3 Quad core, 1.2 GHz, ARM Cortex-A9 processor in the Nexus 7 just doesn't hold a candle to the Intel Core i7-640UM Dual Core 1.2 GHz. It's about more than cores and clock speeds.
MikeAGriffey said:
It doesn't take much to look at the default off the shelf Dell box's specs and compare them to that of any phone. The Intel Core i7 or AMD FX-8150 processors would smoke any ARM on the market for mobiles. Memory in the desktop is 4GB Dual Channel DDR3 SDRAM at 1600MHz. Again crushing the Droid Charge and every other phone. 1TB 7200RPM SATA 3.0Gb/s Hard Drive, nuff said man won't be there for mobile for a while now. The power consumption would drain your mobiles battery in the time it takes to boot up. Let us also not forget that GHz and GB and TB don't all perform the same across the board. For instance a 1TB parallel ATA drive, 1TB SATA, and 1TB SSD differ vastly in performance. The NVIDIA Tegra 3 Quad core, 1.2 GHz, ARM Cortex-A9 processor in the Nexus 7 just doesn't hold a candle to the Intel Core i7-640UM Dual Core 1.2 GHz. It's about more than cores and clock speeds.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could take the time to pick apart your post and make fun of you, but there isn't any point.
Kind of like your post.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using xda premium
Time to just give up on JB or ICS for charge. I just upgraded to galaxy nexus. I love it and highly recommend it. Cheers!
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda app-developers app