Having a droid, I have dug into the details of TI's omap platform and I heard that the Xtreme will have the 3630. I am very impressed with the whole omapzoom.org and the platform itself. I am not at all familiar with the Qualcomm offerings. Anyone up for discussing the differences between these two platforms to include the advantages and disadvantages of each?
Cheers, jdeclue
TI Omap is based on the arm-cortex A8 tech which is supposedly to be more efficient and fast. Qualcomm has a long history of bad graphics support. The GPU is horrible. Well, its not exactly that bad but the drivers that are provided for the use for Qualcomm's GPU is often inadequate and hence underperforming. Sure the snapdragon is a whole lot better than the previous qualcomm SOCs (i.e. msm72xx series). But I feel that the reason for it is due to the higher clockspeed. The 1ghz speed tends to help with the peformance. But for me personally i would prefer the TI OMAP simply because it is a cortexA8 core which is better performing and the much better GPU.
So in a nutshell,
Qualcomm Snapdragon clockspeed maybe higher than the OMAP but the performance wise is comparatively close.
BUT however the OMAP GPU is better than Snapdragon.
With the ongoing increasingly graphically intensive trend, i think the way to go is with TI's OMAP. (Or untill qualcomm releases the 1.5ghz dual core snapdragon, then i would consider it )
There. That's my take.
Hello forum!
I've found quite a few phones which use the Huawei Hisilicon K3 but I've also found others using a MediaTek MT6516 CPU or a Marvell PXA310 CPU. There were phones running Qualcomm CPUs (like the MSM7200, MSM7225 and the MSM7600) but I think they're crap.
The K3 runs at 460MHz, the MT6516 runs at 416MHz+280MHz (as it's dual-core) and the PXA310 runs at 624MHz. Just for reference the Qualcomm CPUs all run at 528MHz.
Which would be best? (and for me that means speed. )
I'm bumpimg this so it doesn't get lost.
YES Qualcomm low end cpus are crap....all thses MSM7200 7225 7600,actually...MSM7200 OR MSM7XXX are not such bad as you think...PXA310 has quite different structure to MSM7xxx(65NM,45NM not included)
PXA310is better if you just take care of CPU SPEED,and PXA310 integrated video accelerator,more power in media use
MSM7XXX also has its merit,ARM11 and ARM9 CPUs...better than PXA310 in general use and APPS
MTK solution seems to be similar to MSM7XXX....but Qualcomm cpus get better ...
and K3...i haven't use any device with K3 before....so i have no ideal about it..
So it's something like this:
(Qualcomm) MSM7xxx - Best for apps (multi-tasking?)
(MediaTek) MT6516 - Good for apps (considering its price)
(Marvell) PXA310 - Best for media (better decoders?)
(Huawei) K3 - Unknown (for the moment)
Thanks for helping me. It also helps you originate from China since some of these processors and chipsets are more in-market in China.
I won't consider the MT6516 then because it's a 2G chipset and while it's okay it may not be 'the one'.
So out of the K3 (ARM926-based) and the PXA310 (XScale-based) which would be best? (Qualcomm could be considered, I guess.)
bricky149 said:
I won't consider the MT6516 then because it's a 2G chipset and while it's okay it may not be 'the one'.
So out of the K3 (ARM926-based) and the PXA310 (XScale-based) which would be best? (Qualcomm could be considered, I guess.)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you meam just have a choice in MSM7XXX series?
Or you just want better ones?Obviously,45NM products would be more appealing....
for only 65NM and something like that,i would say OMAP cpus(get the least power consumption and Qualcomm get mostly best general performance(ok,if you dont think too much about its GPU and power use)
Some people says Qualcomm 65NM CPUS are damn Low-level performance with a high frequency craps....yes,they R...but as their high frequency they have commendable general use capability....if you are not a cell video fan,just get a Qualcomm cpu for almost all use(in multi-tasking? of course!)
ATM I'm looking into budget(?) smartphones with good specs. China's home to those sort of items I'm looking for so I'd thought I'd look.
Qualcomm's CPUs are okay but from various videos I'm not convinced it's for me. It's mainly due to driver issues so it could be faster in one phone compared to another. It's one reason I'm keeping my choices open.
Regarding the PXA310 I have no idea how well it performs so that's the reason I'm asking.
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
MultiLockOn said:
I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's. However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the ARM chips? Are the A5's, A6's, A11's, (and whatever other A chips out there are), some standard CPU developed by ARM and licensed out to all manufacturers to use in their chipsets?
4: What alternatives are there to the ARM CPU's? Most chipsets I research seem to be using a Cortex A9 chip.
5: What's the difference between the A5, A6, A9, etc. From what I've seen the higher numbers are the newer models, but I feel like that's a very shallow definition. If that is true, why does the newest iPad only use an A5x chip for it's quad core rather than an A9 or something of the sort.
6: Is the chipset in the iPad really the fastest out there? Personally, I can't really stand apple products; let alone the rabid fanboys and the obnoxious advertisements they put out. I can recognize that they very often gloat about their products and overexaggerate; like how they said the dual core in the iPhone 4s is the fastest out there, yet from what I've read the A5 is the worst performing dual core out there. Is the GPU in the tablet really superior to the Xbox? And is the processor really able to outdo the Tegra 3?
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior. You also have to consider how many more pixels the gpu has to power on the iPad 3's display. While high res is nice, it takes more power to render it.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
speedyink said:
1. Dunno right now, it's always changing. I hear the new Qualcomm processors with the new Andreno gpu are supposed to be the ****, but it's not out yet so who knows. The iPad 3 currently has not had any real world tests done yet, we need to wait for release. It is basically the same A5 chip as the iPad 2 but with the PSVita's gpu thrown in.
2. *sigh* The iPad 3 gpu is not more powerful than an Xbox 360. It is better in I believe one aspect (more memory), but this has very little impact on performance/graphics quality. This is Apple shooting wads of **** out it's arse, or whoever made the claim. It's actually using the same GPU found in the PSVita, which we all know is not as powerful as a PS3/Xbox360. However, the PSVita is also using a quad core cpu, whereas the iPad 3 is using the same dual core A5 as the iPad 2, so technically the PSVita is superior.
3. ARM creates a base chip for companies to slap their own GPU's and name on. The naming structure is pretty self explanatory.
4. All CPU's currently in tablets/cellphones are a variant of the ARM. A Cortex A9 is still an ARM chip. This will soon change when Intel releases their tablet/phone chips.
5. You're right, higher numbers do mean newer modeling. I don't know all the exacts, but with the newer ARM series you get higher and/or more efficient clocks, generally some battery savings, and in some series support for more cores. Apple's labeling of their chips has nothing to do with ARM's, it's their own naming scheme. The A5x is just what Apple calls their version of the ARM processor.
6. I believe atm the iPad 3 has the fastest chipset in a tablet..for now. It won't take long for it to be overtaken by other companies, there's so much in the works right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
MultiLockOn said:
Thanks for the reply. It seems weird to me that Apple would rename a CPU to something as similar to one that would already exist, A5x as to A5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
speedyink said:
Because Apple is the type of company to step on someones feet like that, and then sue them later on for copyright infringement. Damn the confusion, Apple starts with A, so will their processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
lesp4ul said:
yeah, apple just simply buy a technology and re-label them, make patent and troll others. so for comparison, apple doesn't count. Also these handheld chipset can't be compared with consoles, consoles have more proccessing power like more RAM bandwidth and polygons.
Anyway.. based on my experience, mali400 exynos has a butterly smooth performance for both UI and 3D graphics. I've tried both Gingerbread GNote and my SGS2.
on the other hand, Google did a great job with TI OMAP for it's Galaxy Nexus, pure HW accelerated 4.0.3.. with very little glitch, but I believe it's software issue.
IMO if you wanna buy a fast and smooth device, follow the current Nexus spec (at least similar) like GNexus, Motorola RAZR, etc. I've seen Tegra 3 4+1 Transformer Prime but never hands-on it. as far as i seen, UI and 3D performance are stunning. 1 extra core advantage is for low power mode when doing light proccessing and standby mode. Today hardwares are fast enough, drivers and OS optimisation are very important thing if you want everything run smoothly.
cmiiw, sorry for bad english
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kmow what you mean. Im extremely happy with my galaxy s2, I cant say I ever recall it lagging on me in any way whatsoever. Im not sure what makes the droid razr and galaxy nexus comparable to the s2. From what Ive read Omap processors tend to lag and consume battery, and the mali 400 is better than what either of those phones have. Id say its ICS but the razr still
Runs gingerbread
I was hoping for some more attention in here :/
I agree, omaps are battery hungry beast. Like my previous Optimus Black, man... i only got 12-14 hours with edge (1ghz UV smartass v2, also ****ty LG kernel haha). Same issue as my friend's Galaxy SL. I dunno if newer soc has a better behaviour.
Sent from my Nokia 6510 using PaperPlane™
After Galaxy Nexus and Razr I don´t see any company announcing that they are going to use their chips.
Thats true that OMAP 4430/4460 (1.0 / 1.5Ghz respectively) with SGX540 are behind, especially behind Qualcomm S4 and quad-core Exynos. They were also supposed to release OMAP 4470 (1.8GHz) with SGX544 but I haven't seen it used in any device.
I'm not sure here, but I think that OMAP's don't feature wireless radio technologies, so phone manufacturesrs have to add additional chips what raises the cost.
TI annonced OMAP 5 long time ago, but I don't know what is the progress. OMAP 5 is suppsoed to have dualcore A15 ("Up to 2GHz") + dualcore M4 and SGX544-MPx.
Well TI is going to release the OMAP 5 soon. One of the pros of this processor is that it is easily customizable, and thats why it's used in the Galaxy Nexus. So who knows? OMAP 5 may appear in the next series of Nexus phones.
Yeah idk, this year has been dominated by qualcomm (i hope thats right) and exynos (in the GS3 international) but that is true, Ti seems unusually absent this year.
They are making the Omap 5. 28nm tech has loads of problems,especially high spoilt counts at the factory. Qualcomm are actually switching factories cause of this. TI have stable chips at relatively lower cost. When it's ready you'll see it everywhere.
Sent from my U8150 using XDA
Texas Instruments withdraws from smartphones
Texas Instruments is dropping from the system-on-chip for smartphones and tablets manufacturing and will give up on its OMAP lineup.
The company’s OMAP boards are less and less popular among mobile manufacturers – most of them bet on Qualcomm, while Samsung and Apple are developing their own solutions (Exynos, A6). The major disadvantage of the OMAP chipset is the lack of on-board 3G/4G modem.
That forces manufacturers who rely on OMAP chipsets to use additional radio chips, which increases battery consumption and production costs. Now you understand why smartphone manufacturers prefer Qualcomm’s complete solutions, rather than this expensive process.
TI says its focus will shift on “to a broader market including industrial clients like carmakers”, though it did not announce specifics and the investors were left wondering.
Anyway, TI will continue to support its current clients, but will significantly reduce efforts on developing new OMAP chipsets.
The news might come shocking for some, as the TI OMAP 5 was expected to be the first chipset with dual Cortex-A15 CPU, and now it's fate is uncertain. Nonetheless, TI OMAP's presence was barely felt on the market, so the company's exit won't create too much of a disturbance.
http://www.gsmarena.com/texas_instruments_backtracks_from_smartphones_goodbye_omap-news-4861.php
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/09/25/texasinstruments-wireless-idUSL1E8KP5FN20120925?irpc=932
They had great power management on their chips. Too bad.
Sent from my U8150 using XDA
Eight cores, in a mobile processor? Balderdash! But according to EETimes, that's just what Samsung's planning on unveiling in February at the International Solid-State Circuits Conference (that sounds so exciting).
Now before you get too excited, this isn't - technically speaking - an eight-core processor. It's a dual quad-core, which is to say, a two-processor chip. The design is based on a reference architecture thought up by ARM themselves, dubbed "big.little," and is designed to combine the light-load battery life of a high-efficiency quad-core 28nm ARM A7 chip with a super-hi-po A15 processor for heavy lifting. The exact specifications, for our nerdier readers, are: 1 quad-core ARM A7 chip clocked at 1.2GHz for everyday tasks, and 1 quad-core ARM A15 chip clocked at 1.8GHz w/ 2MB L2 cache for processor-intensive tasks like video games.
ARM itself has said the "big.little" project is delivering benefits beyond those expected when the architecture was initially announced, and Samsung's chip should be the first on the market based on the concept. So yes, this will be a new Exynos of some sort.
Should you expect this chip in the Galaxy S IV (or whatever Samsung's going to call it - because that's far from a given)? It's possible, but not necessarily likely. The gap between chip announcement and tape-out (mass-production readiness) can be lengthy. With the first batch of Exynos 5 Dual devices just now hitting the market in the form of the new Samsung Chromebook and Nexus 10, this eight-core beast may not be ready in time for the next "next big thing." Samsung could very well specifically be targeting this chip for Chromebooks and Windows RT / Android tablets before taking a dive into smaller form factors, too.
Either way, it's exciting business - I can't say I ever tire of technology getting faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
to be honest lately i have started to lose interest in Samsung due to the whole exynos issue and lack of support for developers but if this is to be true then i feel comfortable in making my next device a Samsung (only with this chip ovcourse) lets hope we see this chip come to more devices if it is infact released we will have to wait and see what samsung brings us in 2013 to decide if our loyalty to samsung is acctually worth it
courtesy of android police
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium