Database Info

[INFO] Benchmark results

Hi
I've been testing and comparing some of the top candidates og android phones on the market now.
The competitors are: Samsung Galaxy SII, Lg Optimus 2x (CM7) and HTC Sensation
And I must say, I'm pretty disappointed with HTC Sensation so far. Don't know if I'm just unlucky, or if we should expect an update on this in the future, but the GPU is way behind in comparison to the two others.
www.antutu.com benchmark results:
4578 - Samsung Galaxy SII
4456 - LG Optimus 2x
3758 - HTC Sensation
Goint through the details, the most worrying is HTC Sensation scores low on 2d/3d graphics, about half of what LG Optimus 2x scores, which is the winner, with a total of 297 + 350 in graphics. Sensation scores about 300 in total.
Qaudrant benchmark goes like this:
3678 - Samsung Galaxy SII
3120 - LG optimus 2x
2170 - HTC Sensation
Basically Samsung wins because of scoring higher on both CPU and memory (1gb ram)
LG Optimus 2x got he best GPU and Database IO (data transfer rate)
HTC Sensation is just way behind
What is your results? Is it just me, or could we hope for an update?
I have heard rumors about HTC Sensation only running on half of the kernels ind the GPU, is this true?

I heard it scores so low because of the Sense 3.0 requiring so much to run.

Maybe HTC should start concerning themselves more with function rather than form. I think everyone hear would rather have a faster device with less eye candy. If you look at what Samsung had done since the Behold II they have progressively toned Touch Wiz down with each iteration. I just hope we get the boot loader unlocked quick.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App

I hated touchwiz, and still hate Samsung.
Always have liked the sense. To.each their own.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA Premium App

Sensation has such low benchmarks because it has qHD screen and Sense 3.0. Take Sense 3.0 away and this thing'll fly!
As I said in my own Sense 3.0 thread, having Sense 3.0 and qHD screen beats having high benchmarks. Benchmarks don't mean ANYTHING unless they're running the same UI overlay. Put them on stock/CyanogenMod and the Sensation will be a lot lot faster!

redbullcat said:
Sensation has such low benchmarks because it has qHD screen and Sense 3.0. Take Sense 3.0 away and this thing'll fly!
As I said in my own Sense 3.0 thread, having Sense 3.0 and qHD screen beats having high benchmarks. Benchmarks don't mean ANYTHING unless they're running the same UI overlay. Put them on stock/CyanogenMod and the Sensation will be a lot lot faster!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this. Sense requires a lot of ram and so does the qHD screen. That's the only reason benchmarks are so low. Get some stock GB on here and you'll see the difference. It also explains why the chip is clocked at 1.2GHz. I wonder how much further it can be pushed, though.

ericc191 said:
I agree with this. Sense requires a lot of ram and so does the qHD screen. That's the only reason benchmarks are so low. Get some stock GB on here and you'll see the difference. It also explains why the chip is clocked at 1.2GHz. I wonder how much further it can be pushed, though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've heard the chip is underclocked to 1.2ghz to save battery...it apparently can go to 1.5ghz, at least.

jrwingate6 said:
Maybe HTC should start concerning themselves more with function rather than form. I think everyone hear would rather have a faster device with less eye candy. If you look at what Samsung had done since the Behold II they have progressively toned Touch Wiz down with each iteration. I just hope we get the boot loader unlocked quick.
Sent from my LG-P999 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you don't like sense then why buy the Sensation? That's like buying car that's a stick and then complaining because it's not an automatic. Yes sense is on the phone, yes sense may cause lower benchmarks, yes it's heavily intergrated. If those things bother you then perhaps purchasing a sensation was a mistake...not trying to start an argument, but really it illogical to complain about something you knew going in was a core part of the phone. I don't like touchwiz...so I don't purchase devices with touchwiz on them...it wouldn't make sense for me to buy a phone with touchwiz knowing I don't like it and then complaining about it.

Some ignorant people just don't get the fact. HTC had been advertised about Sense 3.0 for Sensation and we all do know it is a core part of the phone. So don't get the phone if you are for benchmarks isn't it? this sound silly, doesn't it?

Ah! Of course... the screen res is higher, that should influence on the benchmark for sure. Moto Xoom scores low also, but that too, has a higher res.
Im just concerned if it is still scoring lower when on stock. Does anyone have a true benchmark of the Adreno220, which is within the Sensation?
The benchmarks I found on the internet, the Adreno220/M8660 beats the crap out of LG optimus 2x and SGSII.
Anyone know if there is a truth to the "half cores only support" yet?

larsn84 said:
Ah! Of course... the screen res is higher, that should influence on the benchmark for sure. Moto Xoom scores low also, but that too, has a higher res.
Im just concerned if it is still scoring lower when on stock. Does anyone have a true benchmark of the Adreno220, which is within the Sensation?
The benchmarks I found on the internet, the Adreno220/M8660 beats the crap out of LG optimus 2x and SGSII.
Anyone know if there is a truth to the "half cores only support" yet?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When we get s-off, we'll have some true benchmarks for all devices. Optimus 2x, Galaxy S II, Sensation, and possibly Moto Atrix. Put them all on latest release of CyanogenMod7 and benchmark them using a range of apps.

ImHuge07 said:
I heard it scores so low because of the Sense 3.0 requiring so much to run.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what every other new dual core cpu is set up with.

TheRiceKing said:
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what ever other new dual core cpu is set up with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As other people have stated, this view is nonsense. Scorpion is a parallel development to A9. It has advantages and disadvantages in comparison.

lol if you want to try and call it nonsense... I'm really just trying to help educate you and explain, but you can continue to think that if you wish
Scorpion incorporates some ARM 9 features, its basically like ARM 8 and a half and that is being optimistic -_-'

TheRiceKing said:
Actually its mainly because HTC chose to use old technology and use 2 second gen snapdragon chips which use the arm 8 instruction set, instead of using a cpu based on the new arm 9 technology which is what ever other new dual core cpu is set up with.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your post is wildly inaccurate... First of all there is no ARM 8 instruction set. All A8, A9, and Scorpion processors use the ARMv7 instruction set. Second, Scorpion is Qualcomm's own architecture, it is not based on the A8 design, they created their own design from scratch. It is not as simple as A9 > A8 for this reason. The Scorpion architecture implements features that are not available on A8 but are available on A9. The main difference between the Scorpion and the A9 is the number of pipeline stages. The Scorpion has 13 while the A9 has 8. This is positive and negative for both, as more pipeline stages improves throughput, but is more costly if an instruction has to be aborted and the pipeline flushed.
I have gotten a lot of responses telling me that the Scorpion is based off A8 and tweaked. This is not correct. If it were simply tweaked, it would not be able to have a clock over 1 GHz without overclocking, as that is the limitation of the A8 architecture. It also could not support dual cores, again a limitation of A8. The Scorpion also has partial support of out-of-order processing. This is impossible on an A8 processor, but is fully supported on an A9.
You are correct in saying that every other dual core is based off an A9 processor because the A9 is the only design you can license from ARM that can support dual cores. The only alternative is for a company to license the instruction set itself and design their own architecture (Qualcomm's approach). I should also point out that the A9 processors are synchronous, while the MSM8260 is asynchronous, allowing separate clock speeds and voltages to each core, which can greatly increase battery performance (especially on processes that only utilize 1 core).
I will agree that A9 is more advanced than Scorpion, but it is not by nearly as much as the "Scorpion is A8" argument would indicate. The MSM8260 can also support clock speed up to 1.5 GHz, so the Sensation can be overclocked without actually overclocking the processor.

LittleMerc said:
Some ignorant people just don't get the fact. HTC had been advertised about Sense 3.0 for Sensation and we all do know it is a core part of the phone. So don't get the phone if you are for benchmarks isn't it? this sound silly, doesn't it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly! I don't understand the logic of people that purchase a device that they know has certain features and then complain about it. That's like buying a phone with a slide out keyboard and then complaining saying you don't like the fact that it has a slide out keyboard. My thing is, Sense is not a surprise. Everyone knew going in that it was there, and they know what it is and how it works. If certain people don't like that, then they probably shouldn't have bought the phone. Doesn't make sense to complain about getting exactly what you were paying for.

mpjohns3 said:
Your post is wildly inaccurate... First of all there is no ARM 8 instruction set. All A8, A9, and Scorpion processors use the ARMv7 instruction set. Second, Scorpion is Qualcomm's own architecture, it is not based on the A8 design, they created their own design from scratch. It is not as simple as A9 > A8 for this reason. The Scorpion architecture implements features that are not available on A8 but are available on A9. The main difference between the Scorpion and the A9 is the number of pipeline stages. The Scorpion has 13 while the A9 has 8. This is positive and negative for both, as more pipeline stages improves throughput, but is more costly if an instruction has to be aborted and the pipeline flushed.
I have gotten a lot of responses telling me that the Scorpion is based off A8 and tweaked. This is not correct. If it were simply tweaked, it would not be able to have a clock over 1 GHz without overclocking, as that is the limitation of the A8 architecture. It also could not support dual cores, again a limitation of A8. The Scorpion also has partial support of out-of-order processing. This is impossible on an A8 processor, but is fully supported on an A9.
You are correct in saying that every other dual core is based off an A9 processor because the A9 is the only design you can license from ARM that can support dual cores. The only alternative is for a company to license the instruction set itself and design their own architecture (Qualcomm's approach). I should also point out that the A9 processors are synchronous, while the MSM8260 is asynchronous, allowing separate clock speeds and voltages to each core, which can greatly increase battery performance (especially on processes that only utilize 1 core).
I will agree that A9 is more advanced than Scorpion, but it is not by nearly as much as the "Scorpion is A8" argument would indicate. The MSM8260 can also support clock speed up to 1.5 GHz, so the Sensation can be overclocked without actually overclocking the processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wow, informative post. That should stop the A9 >A8 (Scorpion) because it's a bigger number rubbish, for a while.
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA App

[Q] CPU speed of Sensation

Hi guys,
Had a question, if anyone knows completely.
I spoke to HTC customer support twice, and both times they said the actual CPU speed is 2x 0.6Ghz and NOT 2x 1.2Ghz. (Which 1.2Ghz DualCore would imply)
Have I spoken to two idiots or are they right...?
I dont like the way it is advertised if they are right.
Liroy : Ok then I had one more question
Liroy : The CPU of the Sensation
Liroy : It states it is dual core, however, one of your collegues told me this is 2x 0.6Ghz
Liroy : I figured it would be 2x 1.2Ghz
Liroy : which one is correct?
Georgina: Our specification states: 1.2 GHz, dual core
Liroy : Yes.. So is that 2x 1.2Ghz or 2x 0.6Ghz?
Georgina: Each process will have 1.2 Ghz
Liroy : I'm sorry but I have to ask, is that due to the app splitting up in childs or simply because it can use *one* core of 1.2Ghz and another process can use the second core of 1.2Ghz, basically having 2 cores of 1.2Ghz each?
Liroy : I realise it's a rather technical question and not sure if you guys get such information but it is rather important to me, lol. I use the phone for it's processing capability's to the maximum really
Georgina: They both add up to 1.2GHz
Liroy : Okay, so it's not 1.2Ghz Dual Core but actually 2x 0.6Ghz and thus 0.6Ghz dualcore
Liroy : I'm sorry but the answers you are giving me leave a lot of room for the cores to be either 0.6Ghz each or 1.2Ghz each. If they add up to 1.2Ghz it means they are 0.6Ghz each
Georgina: yes they add up to 1.2GHz
Liroy : Hm... So the specifications of the Sensation device are actually not what HTC is advertising. That's not very nice :/
Georgina: I do apologise and will be passing this information on
Liroy : Ok, thank you and have a nice day
Georgina: Your welcome
Georgina: Thank you
Georgina: And you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

The person you talked to knows nothing about this (and follows the misnomer that you multiply the speed by the number of cores, but in this case, the complete opposite). It's 1.2 GHz per core.and no, youdont multiply or divide by the number of cores.
If HTC advertised by multiplying the core speed by the number f cores, they'd be in a ton of trouble for misleading advertising since no one in the industry does multi core stuff that way.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App

geoffcorey said:
The person you talked to knows nothing about this (and follows the misnomer that you multiply the speed by the number of cores, but in this case, the complete opposite). It's 1.2 GHz per core.and no, youdont multiply or divide by the number of cores.
If HTC advertised by multiplying the core speed by the number f cores, they'd be in a ton of trouble for misleading advertising since no one in the industry does multi core stuff that way.
Sent from my HTC Sensation 4G using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is correct although I did have an old HP which was sold as 2 ghz dual core which turned out to be 2 1ghz cores. Still ubuntu overclocked them to 2ghz per core
Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using XDA App

geoffcorey is right, you cant multiply or divide
Speed is still 1.2Ghz but with 2 cores.
Each core has its own cache and fsb. And can run parallel tasks/processes, which is faster than a single core.
Overclock?
HTC Sensation
Stock ROM - Rooted

Thank you all for your responses
Yes I know you cannot multiply or divide it, it doesnt mean it has 2.4Ghz or anything
Though, in theory it can process nearly twice as much as a 1.2Ghz single core.
But both HTC employees claimed it had 2 cores of 0.6Ghz each, totalling a total strength of 1.2Ghz.
I already thought it was ridicilous but well.. You start having doubts if 2 employees say so

liroyvh said:
But both HTC employees claimed it had 2 cores of 0.6Ghz each, totalling a total strength of 1.2Ghz.
I already thought it was ridicilous but well.. You start having doubts if 2 employees say so
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
judging by the responses you got in the chat, you had some of the lowest level "tech support" you could have possibly found, reading a (quite horrible) script to you. Those people shouldn't even be "helping" people to troubleshoot imho.

geoffcorey said:
judging by the responses you got in the chat, you had some of the lowest level "tech support" you could have possibly found, reading a (quite horrible) script to you. Those people shouldn't even be "helping" people to troubleshoot imho.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, I had the same idea.
She was pretty much dodging the question pretty much showing she didnt really know what was I was trying to ask.
Before that we were discussing the issue with the power button/lock screen (screen flashes) that multiple people have reported and she kept saying: That's unoffical HTC information.
Doh, it's on a discussion forum. And then she kept repeating: HTC does not know about this issue.
Told me to send my phone in for repair while multiple people are having issues since the update to the latest firmware.
Trying to explain this to her was... Well, it didnt solve anything.
Ohwell, hope they fix it sometime soon anyway
Thanks for your replies!

It's 1.2ghz dual core.. guess what?

liroyvh said:
Thanks, I had the same idea.
She was pretty much dodging the question pretty much showing she didnt really know what was I was trying to ask.
Before that we were discussing the issue with the power button/lock screen (screen flashes) that multiple people have reported and she kept saying: That's unoffical HTC information.
Doh, it's on a discussion forum. And then she kept repeating: HTC does not know about this issue.
Told me to send my phone in for repair while multiple people are having issues since the update to the latest firmware.
Trying to explain this to her was... Well, it didnt solve anything.
Ohwell, hope they fix it sometime soon anyway
Thanks for your replies!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't trust half of what HTC 'support' say! If you want some fun and games with what they've said before then check out page four of this thread:
www.tinyurl.com/desiresfirmwareissues
..which also exists purely for the issues since the latest firmware update. You'll see some of the enjoyment we're getting courtesy of HTC.

It is actually 1.5Ghz dual core underclocked to 1.2Ghz, if you don't care about battery life (like me) 1.5 is the way to go , however you need a custom rom so there is a small chance that you might lose the warranty

How can you tell if your using both cpu cores???

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

[q] cpu chipset

does anyone know if setting the CPU SPEED to 1.5 GHz is dangerous while the SENSATION XL has the same chipset as the desire s has (Qualcomm Snapdragon MS8255) and the SENSATION XL's CPU speed is set to 1.5GHz .

sensation has msm8260 (dual core 1.2-1.5 GHz and adreno 220)

Sensation XL indeed has MSM8255.
Just like in PCs, chipsets in phones are binned not only by their type, but also by their target frequency. You don't go overclocking Core2Duo 1.8 GHz to 2.4 GHz because it's "the same CPU", right? Because it isn't the same CPU. The same applies here.

אז זה מסוכן או לא ?

English, please.
Answer - would you run the CPU on your computer at 1.5x the speed it was made to run, because there's CPU with the same name (i3/i5/i7/whatever) that runs at 1.5x the speed?
The same answer applies to your phone.
I expect people to be able to make minimal logic work with their own brains rather than just answering "yes/no". I think that this way people actually understand more than what they've asked for.

i guessed that was the answer but just wanted to be sure...
thanks anyway !

msm8255 should run stable on 1.5GHz (if stock freq is lower)

441Excelsior said:
msm8255 should run stable on 1.5GHz (if stock freq is lower)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No it won't. It depends on the specific part, and few parts run stock 1.5 GHz without stability issues surfacing / burning out very fast (if overvolted).
If you really want - you can try it on T-Mobile G2, that has MSM8255 of the earliest bin, with stock at 800MHz. Good luck, don't forget to write how did you like a phone as a toaster.
I suggest refraining from bad advice, especially when it's in the forum and it's not your phone you're talking about. You can burn your phones as much as you like, but don't go around suggesting it to others. Just let me understand something: you have stock non-rooted ICS and have no idea about such basics as which guide to use to downgrade, but you allow yourself posting about chipset frequencies?

so which speed can i overclock to that shouldn't turn my device into a toaster ?

deanshugan said:
so which speed can i overclock to that shouldn't turn my device into a toaster ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1.2 runs most things with no lag.
Sometimes you're the windshield; sometimes you're the bug.
- Mark Knopfler.

The point is each chip is different even if the same model
What works for me on my device won't necessarily work for you
So test and see if your brave enough, but be aware of the consequences
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium

I overclock my ds to1.5 every time I play games and it doesn't even get warm. So I think it's pretty harmless.
Sent from my Desire S using xda premium

Don't bother with battery comparisons on the i9500, the phone is unfinished.

So I got my i9500 and already did some foolery with it.
Fine device, but I hate the raised lip around the screen edge. Something I definitely did not miss on the S3 and something very annoying.
Other than that small design critique:
THE ****ING PHONE ISN'T RUNNING FINAL FIRMWARE!
Basically the CPU is running on the cluster migration driver, meaning it switches all four cores from the LITTLE to the big cluster, as opposed to the core migration driver who does this in an individual core-pair manner.
You can pretty much throw all battery comparisons out of the window: it's completely unfinished and unoptimal.
I already compiled the kernel and flashed it without the cluster migration tidbit, but the phone won't boot. So yea. Current sources also useless.
Cleverly enough: you can't really distinguish between the two drivers apart from one manner: if /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpufreq/iks-cpufreq/max_eagle_count is present, you're running an IKS driver. If it's not, then you're running the sub-optimal IKCS driver.
So yea. We'll see what Samsung does about this, currently the advantages of big.LITTLE are pretty much unused.
Another nail in the coffin on how rushed and unprepared this phone has been.

Wow, this is seriously turning out to be a fiasco.

ChronoReverse said:
Wow, this is seriously turning out to be a fiasco.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is EXACTLY why at the end I don't care for technical details about socs but was rather waiting for real world usage first. As much I wanted to agree with Andrei Lux on how intelligent BigLittle is, I sort of felt that it wont be same at the end.
Question is now: Is this possible to fix in the near future?? So that maybe buying the Exynos will be beneficial if the devs take over. I wont bet on Samsung introducing mind-blowing improvements in that department in upcoming firmwares

Xdenwarrior said:
Question is now: Is this possible to fix in the near future?? So that maybe buying the Exynos will be beneficial if the devs take over. I wont bet on Samsung introducing mind-blowing improvements in that department in upcoming firmwares
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The code other driver is there in the kernel, it's just not used. No idea. It's not like we need Samsung for it: I already talked to a developer at Linaro about some incomplete switcher code that's being currently getting the green-light to be made public. But who knows how long that will take.
Whatever the case, I gather that they can't just let it be in the current state.

AndreiLux said:
The code other driver is there in the kernel, it's just not used. No idea. It's not like we need Samsung for it: I already talked to a developer at Linaro about some incomplete switcher code that's being currently getting the green-light to be made public. But who knows how long that will take.
Whatever the case, I gather that they can't just let it be in the current state.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any way to just disable cortex a15 altogether yet just to see how well cortex a7 will perform in simple texting, browsing, calling and to see what the battery life will be like on that?? (cause cortex a7 only uses like 200 something mw as opposed to 1000mw for snapdragon). I know u wont be able to game. How often does Cortex A15 hits in? cause I would suspect a much worse battery life with incomplete drivers doing the switching if its very often on. But PocketNow reports very similar battery results to snapdragon variant which I find odd

Xdenwarrior said:
Any way to just disable cortex a15 altogether yet just to see how well cortex a7 will perform in simple texting, browsing, calling and to see what the battery life will be like on that?? (cause cortex a7 only uses like 200 something mw as opposed to 1000mw for snapdragon). I know u wont be able to game. How often does Cortex A15 hits in? cause I would suspect a much worse battery life with incomplete drivers doing the switching if its very often on. But PocketNow reports very similar battery results to snapdragon variant which I find odd
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Use any app to limit the CPU frequency to 600MHz. That'll limit it to the A7 cores running to 1200MHz. Basically you can just use CPU-Spy. Everything <= 600 are A7's mapped at half frequency, everything above it are A15's at 1:1 frequency.
As for PocketNow: irrelevant. The difference is what could be instead of what is, the Snapdragon doesn't play a role in the discussion here.

WOW , thats sucks
Samsung was too rushed and ruined it :/

AndreiLux said:
Use any app to limit the CPU frequency to 600MHz. That'll limit it to the A7 cores running to 1200MHz. Basically you can just use CPU-Spy. Everything <= 600 are A7's mapped at half frequency, everything above it are A15's at 1:1 frequency.
As for PocketNow: irrelevant. The difference is what could be instead of what is, the Snapdragon doesn't play a role in the discussion here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hey thanks, but I don't have the S4 to test it with since i'm still debating on which to get. I live in Canada and so the only version here which I can get a lot cheaper on a contract is LTE snapdragon, but I wont mind getting the Exynos since it got potential. Besides 16GB internal isn't enough for me. So that's why asking if u seen any improvements in battery when only cortex a7 ran? If a7 doesn't do much in power consumption, then no point spending 800 bucks and loosing LTE altogether...

@bala_gamer please see my PM its important...
Sent from my GT-I9500 using xda premium

Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...

AndreiLux said:
Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you elaborate a bit more pls?
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2

that's not what samsung exynos advertised..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6UNODPHAHo

Is it possible that we're having a simpler Exynos 5 system technically closer to Exynis 5 Quad (plus 4 A7 cores) than a real seamless Octa-core system? It was strange reading that "Octa-core manufacturing starts in Q2" (April-June) then see Octa-core versions hitting reviewers early April, that's way too low time frame. Maybe this is a 1st-gen 5410. In any case, performance and current-state battery life beats the Snapdragon version, even if only just.

AndreiLux said:
Basically the CPU is running on the cluster migration driver,
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wtf? Well done Samsung... This is ridiculous...
AndreiLux said:
Oh wow. Just got word (without further in-depth explanation) that this might actually be a hardware limitation. Coming from a reliable source.
No words...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WHAT THE [email protected]??!!
Actually WTF is a massive understatement here....!!!
Please can you give more info about this matter whenever is possible? This is very serious...
Is it a specific hardware limitation? Something that Samsung specificly did in GS4 (I9500) ?
Because this can't be a generic exynos octa limitation. It makes no sense... Unless everything we've read from Samsung and ARM about exynos octa, are completely misleading...

A hardware limitation..? They advertised the functionality and to then release a device without it, is just plain stupid. Hopefully it is a just a kernel issue and can be resolved quickly.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium

Probably Samsung will implement it in their Note 3 device? It's a conspiracy so that people buy their next Note phone but this news is sad.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2

Now what is this all about? Is this a very serious issue?

So its either all A15s or all A7s?
so would the 'octa' really be a better choice than the S600? That should be powerful enough.. and the S600 is pretty power efficient too

rkial said:
So its either all A15s or all A7s?
so would the 'octa' really be a better choice than the S600? That should be powerful enough.. and the S600 is pretty power efficient too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I understood is its either the full cluster of a7 or a15 is used/ functional based on the load, dynamically turning on one or two cores of a15 to work along with a7 may not be possible it seems.
I may be wrong, waiting for an elaborate exp from andrei
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2

bala_gamer said:
What I understood is its either the full cluster of a7 or a15 is used functional based on the load, dynamically turning on one or two cores of a15 to work along with a7 may not be possible it seems.
I may be wrong, waiting for an elaborate exp from andrei
Sent from my GT-I9500 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was always under the impression this was the intention of Samsung's particular implementation of it. I thought it was common knowledge that Samsung's version worked on a 4 or 4 (A15) or (A7) basis.
Maybe he was talking about the ability to change that.