Database Info

[Q] Dual core phones… advantages?

So we all remember when dual core CPUs for computers first became mainstream back in about 2004… Everyone had to have one but almost no software was written to use them. So it was almost all bragging rights and no real world performance. Then 1 to 2 years later when software did come out that could take advantage of multiple cores those first dual cores CPUs were obsolete and a joke.
Will the same thing be true with dual core phones or will they be useful right away? Can Android currently utilize dual cores?
And this is not a guy with a single core phone trying to feel better about it. I have an old droid 1 and am ready to buy a new phone now; I am all but set to wait for the Bionic but I'm questioning if the dual core will really mean that much when it’s out.

Theres absolutely no advantage. they're nothing more but a placebo effect and all of the hundreds of benchmarks showing the brute strength of dual cores are fake. you're better off buying a first gen snapdragon like the toshiba tg01, xperia x10, nexus one, etc., or sticking with your droid pro. don't buy into the hype. id say wait until we have an octa-core THEN it'll be worth it.

HawkStream said:
So we all remember when dual core CPUs for computers first became mainstream back in about 2004… Everyone had to have one but almost no software was written to use them. So it was almost all bragging rights and no real world performance. Then 1 to 2 years later when software did come out that could take advantage of multiple cores those first dual cores CPUs were obsolete and a joke.
Will the same thing be true with dual core phones or will they be useful right away? Can Android currently utilize dual cores?
And this is not a guy with a single core phone trying to feel better about it. I have an old droid 1 and am ready to buy a new phone now; I am all but set to wait for the Bionic but I'm questioning if the dual core will really mean that much when it’s out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As of right now, only in some small circumstance with certain games. I say wait until Android is really ready to utilize dual core and for second gen hardware. Right now it's mostly hype and bragging rights....
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.

Hmm. I want the Incredible 2!

Um, hate to break it to you, but Android is multi core optimized in the first place, so dual cores will have a pretty major impact on the flow and operation of the OS itself.

op has a very good point.
Goodthing I can be content with my HD2 for a few years.
IMO it's really for the games, and I'd rather play hi def games on my computer at home.

sonsofblades said:
Um, hate to break it to you, but Android is multi core optimized in the first place, so dual cores will have a pretty major impact on the flow and operation of the OS itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes. True. But as of now no apps (with the exception of the Tegra Zone (whatever) none are taking advantage. It really still is only bragging rights. Maybe in the next
year when everyone else catches up.
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.

wattttttttt

Android 3.0, the kernel itself lacks true understanding of both cores. It can see them, and code can be launched to either available CPU thread, but it is as yet not managing those threads, and the queue manager launches ALL applications to core 1 regardless of its load. It manages threads on core 1 just fine, but it does not manage core 2. (This explains my point perfectly quote from a poster on ars technica)
Sent from either my Nexus S, N1 or telepathically using two tin cans and some string.

lude219 said:
Theres absolutely no advantage. they're nothing more but a placebo effect and all of the hundreds of benchmarks showing the brute strength of dual cores are fake. you're better off buying a first gen snapdragon like the toshiba tg01, xperia x10, nexus one, etc., or sticking with your droid pro. don't buy into the hype. id say wait until we have an octa-core THEN it'll be worth it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you might be right

* pats his thunderbolt* meh I'm perfectly satisfied with this one.
Sent from my HTC Thunderbolt.

Well,there is much more to dual-core chipsets than just the CPU itself.Much more powerful GPUs,faster or dual-channel memories(RAM),larger RAM,usually a BETTER CPU(Not mentioning the second core,rather the fact that the cores themselves are evolutions of the single core ones) and the list can go on.Don't just hear only about the two CPU cores,that's a small piece of the mosaic.

The core count dilemma

I had an iPhone 3GS. After I lost it now I have a HTC Desire.
My contract is expiring in a few months time and looking for another phone that will last me another 2 years. If I am going to use the phone for another 2 years, the hardware has to be up to the task. However I have problem with the latest crop of dual cores Android phones.
- LG Optimus 2x (despise the fake iPhone UI)
- Samsung Galaxy S II (despise the fake iPhone UI)
- Motorola Atrix (not available here)
- HTC Sensation (considering the Incredible S, not sure if it is rootable)
I could probably use a third party home screen for the Korean phones, I have tried most of them out there, IMO none of them are perfect. Zeam is not buggy, but doesn't scroll very smooth. Launcher Pro is very smooth, but occasionally pause to re cache (keep in memory doesn't quite work). ADW's elastic effect (so is Launcher Pro's) sometimes doesn't show up. IMO their features are superior in quantity but not in quality compared to vanilla Android or HTC's Sense.
On my Desire the AOSP ROMs tends to not fully utilise the hardware like the camera. I hope there are good AOSP ROM for them.
The phones that actually attracted me are:
- HTC Desire Z (has keyboard)
- SE Xperia Arc / Pro (Gigantic screen and pretty / has keyboards)
- Nexus S (I can imagine using it unrooted)
However they being all single core are kind of a side step from what i have now and worry they might get a little long in the tooth.
I considered the iPhone 5, on most aspect iPhone 4 is very nice to me, but it doesn't allow me to do simple things like USB file transfer, which is important to me. I also have a few Linux PC that doesn't do iTunes.
Thoughts?

There's no dilemma; buying a single-core in 2011 is downright stupid.

I bet my thunderbolt will give those dual core phones a run for there money...

liquid0624 said:
I bet my thunderbolt will give those dual core phones a run for there money...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
other than the LTE speed, it can't touch a dual core. thats so stupid that its beyond comprehension. do you also prefer a single core pentium4 over an i7?

lude219 said:
There's no dilemma; buying a single-core in 2011 is downright stupid.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I wouldn't say it's stupid. Single-core devices will be pushed downmarket quickly and be more accessible. But I agree, anyone who tells me that a single-phone is a range-topping device is just trying to get a laugh

theomega said:
I wouldn't say it's stupid. Single-core devices will be pushed downmarket quickly and be more accessible. But I agree, anyone who tells me that a single-phone is a range-topping device is just trying to get a laugh
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I dont think economy of scales has anything to do with single or dual cores, but rather that's the natural progression of electronics. Every handset will go down eventually toward their End-of-Life (EOL) cycle before they're replaced with newer ones.

lude219 said:
other than the LTE speed, it can't touch a dual core. thats so stupid that its beyond comprehension. do you also prefer a single core pentium4 over an i7?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dude you don't have to be offensive.
Besides the gap between a dual and single core snapdragon is no where near between a processor today and one from a decade ago.
I don't play games, but I expect smooth UI. So the hardware is only part of the equation. As much as I like my Desire it is not as smooth as an iPhone 4 which is similarly spec'ed.
But if a dual core is what it takes to get that kind of smoothness on Android I'll pay for it. But once I paid for it I expect it to deliver as a package and not bogged down by some third rate software. Which is why I considered the Nexus S, which is as clean as it gets. The new Xperia line seems not bad from what I have seen even though they are single core.
Although the dual core Xperia will be a killer. But SE's history of software update may be a cause for concern.

lude219 said:
I dont think economy of scales has anything to do with single or dual cores, but rather that's the natural progression of electronics. Every handset will go down eventually toward their End-of-Life (EOL) cycle before they're replaced with newer ones.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
We are in agreement but thats not what I meant to suggest lol. Having dual-core phones at the subsidized $200-300USD top end will force carriers/manufacturers to price down single-core devices to occupy lower price points regardless of how competitive they are on performance.
OP - Looking at all the hands-ons lately with the Atrix, G2x, SGS2, etc. it seems like having 2 cores amounts to a fairly dramatic difference in smoothness of the UI. I guess the question is what constitutes "smooth enough"

Dual Core = Overkill

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...

[Q] Is a dual-core Windows Phone coming this year?

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

Is it meaningful to have 2-cores, 4-cores, or 8-cores in the phone?

I use a phone with single core yet and I managed to buy a new phone recently, do you think it is meaningful to have 2-cores, 4-cores, or 8-cores in the phone?

doubleelec said:
I use a phone with single core yet and I managed to buy a new phone recently, do you think it is meaningful to have 2-cores, 4-cores, or 8-cores in the phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
with the abundance of quad cores nowadays flooding the market, developers and apps would surely catch on optimizing apps to take advantage of
4 cores. As for octa cores, if you're seriously into multi tasking or using your phone/tablet for number crunching, then 8 cores would help.

...

I think today Quad core is must, and even better if it comes with 2GB ram.
The prices keep dropping and if it fits the budget it better.
For the Octa core- I think it's the same stupid race like with the Camera MP - "look!- I have 30MP!"
Strong Quad core with 2GB ram in enough I think.

The Bigger. The Better
I had a dual core phone with half a gig of ram until a few months ago..then i switched to quad core & a gig ram..i really didnt notice much of difference..until last week, when i switched back to my old phone(as it has beautiful AMOLED screen..i just love that)..i realized that my old is quite slow n can't keep up to me speed..
so..there u go..the bigger the better..

Same thing happened in PC industry.
The software, especially video games will use every bit of your cores,no matter how many they are.

Xperia-Ray said:
For the Octa core- I think it's the same stupid race like with the Camera MP - "look!- I have 30MP!"
Strong Quad core with 2GB ram in enough I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
totally agree with you! :good:

I think that the Quad-Core cpu is the best, it will works perfectly for years and years (that s my opinion)
But the software optimization is even more important
Sorry for my bad english