Are really stupid. Between the governor differences, ram differences, thermal limit tweaks and whatever other little tweaks per phone/soc, what is the difference between Samsung or x OEM modding their phone to run full throttle and the consumer putting the phone in performance governor and running it full throttle? The benchmarks between phones with similar soc's have less merit than guaging against phones with different SOC's and checking performance against different generation SOC's. I think it is best that OEM' tweak their phones to run full throttle on benchmarks as it leaves less question about what is better/best. The benchmarks aren't all that scientific anyways with all the variables anyways. It was funny at first when people were crying about it but now it's just frustrating and another stupid first world problem for all the peeps with little weiners.
Now I do have a problem with tweaks that aren't available as a preset like running a cpu or GPU above frequency that the soc isn't rated for. That itself is deceiving. But running benchmarks similar to running a performance governor I have no problem with. Some of these big review sites need to get together and come up with a standard that leaves little question if the OEM is running the benchmarks above spec. Just smdh. Simple solution.
To me Samsung just makes the phone do what the so called benchmark app is supposed to do anyway...make the phone run full throttle. There is no difference than setting your gov to performance and running the test.
@rbiter said:
Are really stupid. Between the governor differences, ram differences, thermal limit tweaks and whatever other little tweaks per phone/soc, what is the difference between Samsung or x OEM modding their phone to run full throttle and the consumer putting the phone in performance governor and running it full throttle? The benchmarks between phones with similar soc's have less merit than guaging against phones with different SOC's and checking performance against different generation SOC's. I think it is best that OEM' tweak their phones to run full throttle on benchmarks as it leaves less question about what is better/best. The benchmarks aren't all that scientific anyways with all the variables anyways. It was funny at first when people were crying about it but now it's just frustrating and another stupid first world problem for all the peeps with little weiners.
Now I do have a problem with tweaks that aren't available as a preset like running a cpu or GPU above frequency that the soc isn't rated for. That itself is deceiving. But running benchmarks similar to running a performance governor I have no problem with. Some of these big review sites need to get together and come up with a standard that leaves little question if the OEM is running the benchmarks above spec. Just smdh. Simple solution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Totally agree, if they over clocked it that would be one thing, but this is no different from intel or amd binning thier chips for reviewers to make sure the fastest chips go
Thread closed as its essentially a duplicate of this >>> http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2465518
Related
Hello everyone.
Despite the fast native CPU speed of the HD2, there is still some lagging under many circumstances that could be aided with a bump in CPU speed, for which I thing the Snapdragon Processor has lots of headroom for. The HD2 rarely gets warm even under heavy loads.
Equally, I've noticed that there is some sort of a clear thermal throttling process going on because when doing large operations (like searching for files or moving large items around), the progress bar gets progressively slower and so does the operation of the phone. After a few seconds its faster again.
I'd like to submit a feature request for a simple app that hopefully control/prevent thermal throttling to kick-in and that can also overclock/underclock (for battery saving situations) the Snapdragon Processor on the HD2.
Not sure how easy it is or not, but this is the single wish list. There a few generic CPU optimization applications but they really don't work for the HD2 specifically. The HD2 would benefit tremendously of a little bit extra Processor speed.
Thanks to all
Man it was one thing when we all had 400mhz processors and we were looking to see if we could get a little more out of our phones but 1024mhz and still asking for more? I mean I don't disagree with you. I've noticed the same thing but lets not get greedy here.
dharvey4651 said:
Man it was one thing when we all had 400mhz processors and we were looking to see if we could get a little more out of our phones but 1024mhz and still asking for more? I mean I don't disagree with you. I've noticed the same thing but let's not get greedy here.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but the load of today's applications is exponentially higher than the speed at which CPUs have been scaling. My 3 year old Palm Treo 680 is blazing fast compared to my HD2 at everything it does, because both the OS and the apps are minimal footprints, yet the Treo's CPU is a turtle. That is why it is still my main phone. Its instant in all it does, feel great to use. The Snapdragon CPU is to be upped to 1300MHz or 1500MHz this year and multi-core designs are all on the way. The HD2 with all animations and bells and whistles on can certainly use more speed and by the end of this year, this phone will be completely prehistoric at all levels.
My request stands and we could all benifit from it
It seems like every review I read tells me the Hummingbird processor is much better and a more capable processor then the snapdragon. If this is true why hasn't HTC produced a phone with a Hummingbird CPU? HTC is way ahead in the android game experience wise but they haven't seemed to make any major hardware changes other then upping the rom and ram and speed of the cpu. Would someone please tell me that samsungs new CPU isn't as good as all the reviews say it is
I can't comment on the CPUs but I would just like to mention that costs, failure rate etc. all play a role in the decision about what CPU to use. There may be reasons for HTC not using the Hummingbird yet other then performance.
The Hummingbird is a little faster CPU-wise, which does surprise me as the Snapdragon has higher quoted instructions per clock. However, its GPU is really in a different league to that in the current Snapdragons and that's where the big difference lies in benchmarks (though that will, of course, only help GPU-accelerated things).
HTC don't necessarily use the chip that benchmarks the best on any given day - they have a relationship with Qualcomm and presumably get preferential rates from them, and they have an established platform. The good news for them is that Qualcomm are bringing out new Snapdragons with higher clockspeeds and better GPUs (and dual cores, though it remains to be seen if/when they arrive on phones) so they should equalise and quite probably turn the tables soon.
Competition is good - we were stuck with 5-600MHz XScales and ARM11s for ages, and now things are finally moving along.
i was fiddling with clockspeeds on my galaxy s3 and i managed to get the cpu to run at 1.8ghz (from the default 1.4) and the gpu at 660mhz (from the default 440) with barely having to touch voltages. didn't run any stability tests, just played some batman to test it and ran some benchmarks.
i was surprised at how much headroom both had, with no active cooling at that. at those speeds, it crushes almost anything on the market by a pretty big margin. actually i think it beats my old laptop at some things (it's old and was already crap when i bought it ). Anyways, it reminded me of extreme pc overclock, with ln2 and all that crap.
which brings me to my question: has anyone ever "extreme overclocked" an android cellphone? You know, with active cooling (doesn't even have to be ln2 or dry ice), really trying to push it to it's limits? i imagine a gs3 could breach 2ghz with ease on the cpu and maybe 1ghz on the gpu. useless and expensive as hell to do but it would be interesting to see.
ps: i don't use my gs3 overclocked. i was just testing. i put it back to stock speeds and undervolted it instead after that to get better battery life. just saying.
I've thought about this before, and if I had more disposable income I might try it out
Sent from my SPH-L710 using xda app-developers app
As there are much newer technology,some of them are enough for us or even overpowered.But the main problem is,Do we really need more than 4 cores?
Yes,some of them are about marketing,but i promise it won't be to much. From i know people around me thinks more cores means a better,faster phone...
There,Let's discuss why quad cores are better(if you stand at octa it's fine,just a little technical discuss),And why market prefers.
So we use a more simple way to explain why octa core is not better than a quad core phone.
"Uses a right,lower power processor to do some simple jobs"
No go away please.If 2/4 cores could handle flawlessly,why do we need those spare cores for?
Energy Consumption
Yes,refers to above,useless cores wastes more energy and your battery will drain faster if system/cpu governor is not totally optimized.
Heat problem
This happens not only on Snapdragon 810,Also Exynos 5420...etc
Well,it's nothing but a feeling of keeping a furnace in your pocket.
Application Design
Actually,not many apps could take all 8 cores,and because based on big.LITTLE,those 8 cores can't be running at the same time.
But,It still have advantages:
Maybe,Benchmarking.
Yeah probably you will get a higher mark on core benchmarking,but so what?Experiences is on your own,benchmarking means nothing.
Using android as a workstation
Yeah that Maybe helps if you are using adobe clip editing tool on an android phone...
And Marking side makes more complicated.
Most of users which doesn't have/or having very little tech skills will just prefer an octa core phone because they will think the performance on a 8 core chipset is doubled.
And it may sounds cool,but there's too much drawbacks.
So,Conclusion:
Since nowadays phone are having too much spare power,and "fast"includes a lot of other parts in the chipset or phone like GPU,RAM,EMMC..etc
NONONO....We doesn't need more core,we need a BETTER core.
Think an apple i6 .Although i hate it,but there are only 2 cores and they performed pretty well.
And last,optimization is important in the first place,because if you even have 1000 cores,fail optimization makes it useless.
Reserved
The problem is that application development in order to use the extra cores is difficult. Multithreading in applications increases complexity a great deal, introduces hard-to-reproduce bugs and worst of all - trying to use more cores may actually make the app slower.
While multithreaded applications might be able to get a boost with extra cores, I think the real benefit is better handling of multiple tasks (such as playing music and running navigation, with Bluetooth audio). I'm not sure that having more than four offers all that much benefit, though. I've certainly found quad-core phones to be more responsive compared to the dual-core models I've used.
Bobby Tables said:
While multithreaded applications might be able to get a boost with extra cores, I think the real benefit is better handling of multiple tasks (such as playing music and running navigation, with Bluetooth audio). I'm not sure that having more than four offers all that much benefit, though. I've certainly found quad-core phones to be more responsive compared to the dual-core models I've used.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Based on big.LITTLE,You could just split works to 2 different designed cpu,one is high density and one is more "Energy saving"(Actually it was just 4+4)
And for your example,i have found out that Bluetooth audio(Because communicating with more components on the phone,so it is considered as a high density work)
Also same as navigating.It is hard to program these applications to use the lower power cores.
Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Look at the hands on videos. You won't be worried about performance after that. Looks like Google has done a lot of optimization. Benchmarks don't tell the whole story.
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The 821 shows a peak cpu frequency spec a bit higher than 820, but this doesn't mean that everyone who uses it is obligated to use the highest frequency.
So here is a little bit of information about CPU manufacturing;
Every CPU core is a little bit different. Some of them are stable at lower voltages and higher frequencies than others. The CPU specification indicates a MINIMUM frequency that it MUST be stable at while operating within the designed power envelope. In other words, another CPU may be able to operate at the higher frequency, but it won't do so within the designed power envelope -- it will require OVER VOLTING.
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Don't worry about benchmarks! What it matters is the SoC you have, how well disipated is the SoC, and most important, how the software is done (kernel, drivers, android, binaries, etc).
There could be many devices with same SoC and better scores, but at the end, they lag more etc.
For instance, my previous Z5 Compact (with Sony Android, which is similar to AOSP) and a much better SoC than my current N5X, imo lags more than my current Nexus 5X with a worse SoC.
There's no way you can choose a device based on the benchmark, you must try both devices by yourself (ideally with your apps) and see the difference.
Giving another example...A Nexus 5 2013, is extremely fast in KK (with ART) and even in MM (but not in Lollipop).
However, it still throttles much more than a 5X because of the frequency, nm, and many other things.
doitright said:
Well, seeing as the 821 is to an 820 the same as an 801 is to an 800... i.e., its the same damned chip, not really sure why you would expect there to be a dramatic performance change?
The CPUs are separated according to their levels of stability. Call that "binning". One of these CPUs that bins poorly might be called a Snapdragon 820, and one that bins well will be called a Snapdragon 821. Within each model name, there are further levels of distinction that are used to set the baseline voltages being applied, in order to minimize the voltage that they are fed, such that you can reduce the power consumption as much as possible.
So you can think of an underclocked Snapdragon 821 as a SUPER DUPER AWESOME binned Snapdragon 820, operating at a lower voltage, and therefore consuming less power.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Good info, thanks guys!
We know nothing yet, time will tell obviously. The videos in the early previews look great, but we'll see under heavy load how these perform.
jbrooks58 said:
Hey guys I just currently pre-ordered the Pixel and am a little worried about the benchmarks that have been released. Do you guys think these are accurate? On some of the articles I have read the clock speeds they are claiming it is running are the speeds of the 820 not the 821. I mean the 6p scored higher on benchmarks than the pixel. How can these be right with the newest processor?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd like it if you could actually find something that claims that the 6p is anywhere near pixel in performance benchmarks. Reality is that it is more than 2x faster across the board.
As far as comparing it with 820, there are two things you can accomplish with the "1" -- more speed, or less power. They seem to be opting for the latter.
All the benchmarks I could find show it against either apple, or samsuck. Samsuck is well known for building TO the benchmarks (sometimes even *cheating*), which causes their scores to be unnaturally high, and comparing against apple is just stupid, since there is no baseline between them due to architectural differences and a complete lack of a common software stack. In other words, in a comparison between pixel and anything made by apple, you could have a smaller number, despite *actually* being considerably higher. The number doesn't equate across platforms.
---------- Post added at 08:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:09 PM ----------
jbrooks58 said:
Thanks for all the replies guys. I was just confused as to why a chip the snapdragon says should have a 10% increase in performance over the 820 is benchmarking lower than most 820's.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That 10% is an interesting figure.
The SD820 has clock rates of 2.15 GHz on 2 cores, and 1.59 GHz on the other 2 cores.
Multiply by 1.1 (add 10%) and you get 2.365 and 1.749 GHz.
The SD821 has clock rates of 2.34 GHz on 2 cores and 2.19 GHz on the other 2 cores.
On those first two cores, that is marginally more the 10% higher clock rate. On the other 2 cores, it is considerably more than 10%. Note that a system's performance does NOT scale linearly with CPU frequency.
The other thing to note is that the pixel specs show it operating at 2x2.15+2x1.6 GHz, just like the SD820.
So what we can read from that, is that the pixel's CPUs are **underclocked**. That will allow it to use less battery power, and run cooler, while still running *really really fast*. If you want more, unlock and clock it up to 821 spec, I think you will find that this phone is an "overclocker's" dream, even if it isn't really overclocking.
That 10% figure comes directly from Qualcomm's publications on performance for the 821 vs 820.
craig0r said:
There actually are some differences in the 821 vs the 820. It's not the same chip exactly. A pretty great breakdown is here: https://www.gizmotimes.com/comparison/snapdragon-821-vs-snapdragon-820/16403
But essentially, slightly better power savings, improved camera performance, and a VR SDK.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good read, thanks.