Database Info

What is all the obsession over dual core phones?

I have to ask: Why does everyone want a dual core phone which cant even currently be used?
I say it cant be used because dual core processors cant be used on Android 2.3 Gingerbread/Linux kernel 2.6.35, there is only multi-core processor support in A3H/L2.6.36 (only avaliable (officially) on tablets). We will see problably support in in "A4I"/"L3.6.37" for both phones and tablets.
So whats everyones obsession? The only thing you are problably gaining is a SLIGHT speed boost (not even close when a kernal that supports it is released) and more battery drain.
On a counterside this could bring good marketing to Google: They release "A4I", current dual core phones get a HUGE speed boost and everyone praises Google. Could work good for them.

Interesting, I never knew Gingerbread couldn't support dual cores on phones. Good info, I guess I'll keep my Evo for another year.

It's pretty easy to compile the kernel to use multi core processors. The current one may not, but hold your judgement until it's actually released.

crazy25000 said:
It's pretty easy to compile the kernel to use multi core processors. The current one may not, but hold your judgement until it's actually released.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So true............. Currently 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of users AND developers of applications can and are willing to complie a custom kernel not used by the rest and use/make multi core supported applications with its multi core supported kernel.

I guess progress has to begin somewhere?

i don't think i'll ever need / want a dual core phone for my daily rutine, my SGS is perfect for me, what more could you need from a phone? don't think they'll be able to fit jet packs on them any time soon...

riahc3 said:
So true............. Currently 0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of users AND developers of applications can and are willing to complie a custom kernel not used by the rest and use/make multi core supported applications with its multi core supported kernel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What I'm saying is the kernel can easily be compiled by Google or Samsung and used as the stock kernel on the GSII.

maranello69 said:
i don't think i'll ever need / want a dual core phone for my daily rutine, my SGS is perfect for me, what more could you need from a phone? don't think they'll be able to fit jet packs on them any time soon...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah its logical to think like that but 3 years ago who thought you need phone with such big screen and processor/RAM almost match PC speed?
As someone said somewhere they have to start but interesting thought by thread creator

ksavai said:
Yeah its logical to think like that but 3 years ago who thought you need phone with such big screen and processor/RAM almost match PC speed?
As someone said somewhere they have to start but interesting thought by thread creator
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Honestly those arent needs either. But as of right now the only purpose of a dual core phone is to brag.

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.

Samsung Caught Manipulating Galaxy S4 Benchmark Results (I9500)

I found that while browsing news so I though I'd share it here.. I'm disappointed because Samsung actually cheating us. :/
--
Smartphone benchmarks never really indicate how a device will ultimately perform, yet tech enthusiasts exalt results like they’re the end all, be all. Check any review; the nebulous collection of numbers are always held in high regard despite them never really doing much to affect the overall experience. Still, companies take them quite seriously—in Samsung’s case, a little too seriously.
According to a new report from AnandTech, Samsung might be fibbing its way to more favorable Galaxy S4 benchmarks. Has your device suddenly come to a crawl? Of course it hasn’t; benchmarks shouldn’t change your perception of a flagship as powerful as the S4. Still, it’s embarrassing that Samsung would resort to such technical tactics, like allegedly using code dubbed “BenchmarkBooster.” Yes, your device takes steroids.
AnandTech found that Samsung set the GPU of the Exynos 5 Galaxy S4 to run higher when benchmarked—higher than normal everyday use. When engineers tested the device, the S4’s Exynos 5 ran at 533MHz during benchmarking, and only ran at 480MHz during regular use. Not an enormous difference, but large enough to call shenanigans.
In addition, AnandTech found that when running CPU benchmarks with apps such as AnTuTu and Quadrant, the device’s Cortex A15 clocked at 1.2GHz; an unofficial benchmarking app, GFXBench 2, revealed that the device actually runs at 500MHz when it’s not juicing. Seems fishy, no?
AnandTech’s findings should in no way effect your final opinion on the Galaxy S4, though it does highlight some shady Samsung tactics. It’s likely the Korean company isn’t the only one to fib benchmarking tests, though; the company is just the one that got caught
Source : http://www.technobuffalo.com/2013/07/30/samsung-caught-manipulating-galaxy-s4-benchmark-results/

Gsmarena clearly stated that Samsung is Cheater?
They played the game with the emotion of common consumer...and ...now i am thoroughly dissapointed by Sammy's behaviour

The manipulation of Benchmarks for me confirms the rumors about the Octacore:
SamMobile News from 30 May 2013
Regards

Tanis64 said:
The manipulation of Benchmarks for me confirms the rumors about the Octacore:
SamMobile News from 30 May 2013
Regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So they released an unfinished chip into the market. Only reason could be marketing. The look at us we have eight core phones angle. People go wow eight is more than four and buy it. So lame.
-- Sent from the mighty Note 2 --

Already mentioned by @AndreiLux few decades ago.
Sent from my iPotato

LegendJo said:
I found that while browsing news so I though I'd share it here.. I'm disappointed because Samsung actually cheating us. :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So is Intel cheating you to when the Intel Core i5-2500k CPU have anormal speed of 3.3 GHz, but have a turbo speed of 3.7 GHz?

Tom-Helge said:
So is Intel cheating you to when the Intel Core i5-2500k CPU have anormal speed of 3.3 GHz, but have a turbo speed of 3.7 GHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if that speed is only available if your running prime95 or intel burn then....yep.
You can't compare the two, they are totally different.

Tom-Helge said:
So is Intel cheating you to when the Intel Core i5-2500k CPU have anormal speed of 3.3 GHz, but have a turbo speed of 3.7 GHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, because Intel didn't mislead anyone. Samsung clearly did.

yeahmann said:
No, because Intel didn't mislead anyone. Samsung clearly did.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Really??
Have you not read this research paper?
http://www.abiresearch.com/press/intel-apps-processor-outperforms-nvidia-qualcomm-s
A modified version of AnTuTu was used to cheat in benchmark.
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1318857
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2330027

CLARiiON said:
Really??
Have you not read this research paper?
http://www.abiresearch.com/press/intel-apps-processor-outperforms-nvidia-qualcomm-s
A modified version of AnTuTu was used to cheat in benchmark.
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1318857
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2330027
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That paper had nothing to do with what he's saying. Turbo is still valid and not misleading.
Secondly, you can blame AnTuTu, not Intel, for that benchmark discrepancy. And then again it was only due to compiler change and no actual cheating per se in the conventional matter.

CLARiiON said:
Really??
Have you not read this research paper?
http://www.abiresearch.com/press/intel-apps-processor-outperforms-nvidia-qualcomm-s
A modified version of AnTuTu was used to cheat in benchmark.
http://www.eetimes.com/author.asp?section_id=36&doc_id=1318857
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2330027
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
From Exophase:
But frankly, I blame AnTuTu in all of this. They allowed themselves to be manipulated (probably for a price), despite constantly warning against other people cheating their numbers. I don't know if they're displaying a complete lack of integrity or a complete lack of understanding of how their own software works, or something in between the two, but whatever the case I hope they lose all credibility and whatever revenue the program brings them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

[Q] Is swapping out the Snapdragon CPU possible?

With the Nexus 6 announced, I was quite disappointed, as I was expecting Google to release an updated version of Nexus 5, just like they did with Nexus 7 back in 2013. I'm not a fan of phablets, and 6 inches seems too big for a phone, while Nexus 5 sure hit that sweet spot.
So I had this idea - would it be possible to replace the old existing Snapdragon 800 with 801/805? What about the new 808/810 models? Problems that come to my mind are:
Do the newer processors have the same pin layout as the 800 version? I managed to find information that the 801 is, but I'd like to know about 805 or even 808/810.
Do different Snapdragon 8** series processors use the same instruction-set? If not, are the newer versions backwards-compatible with old versions, like for example Intel's x86?
Would the Nexus 5 chipset be able to take advantage of a faster processor? I know ROMs with custom kernels allow overclocking up to 3 GHz, although that's just stupid. With a 805/808/810 though... Would it be as simple as getting for exapmle CyanogenMod, "overclocking" the 805 to 2.7 GHz (what it's actually rated at), and that would be the end of the story? Or am I missing something?
How hard would it be physically to replace the processor? I imagine a skilled engineer with a soldering station would be able to do the job, or are the connections so small that it's practically impossible to do by hand?
How does one obtain a stand-alone Snapdragon processor? I can't seem to find any on Amazon. Do they even sell retail, like Intel/AMD? If not, how do I get hold of one?
What else am I missing? How feasable is this idea really?

Zombekas said:
With the Nexus 6 announced, I was quite disappointed, as I was expecting Google to release an updated version of Nexus 5, just like they did with Nexus 7 back in 2013. I'm not a fan of phablets, and 6 inches seems too big for a phone, while Nexus 5 sure hit that sweet spot.
So I had this idea - would it be possible to replace the old existing Snapdragon 800 with 801/805? What about the new 808/810 models? Problems that come to my mind are:
Do the newer processors have the same pin layout as the 800 version? I managed to find information that the 801 is, but I'd like to know about 805 or even 808/810.
Do different Snapdragon 8** series processors use the same instruction-set? If not, are the newer versions backwards-compatible with old versions, like for example Intel's x86?
Would the Nexus 5 chipset be able to take advantage of a faster processor? I know ROMs with custom kernels allow overclocking up to 3 GHz, although that's just stupid. With a 805/808/810 though... Would it be as simple as getting for exapmle CyanogenMod, "overclocking" the 805 to 2.7 GHz (what it's actually rated at), and that would be the end of the story? Or am I missing something?
How hard would it be physically to replace the processor? I imagine a skilled engineer with a soldering station would be able to do the job, or are the connections so small that it's practically impossible to do by hand?
How does one obtain a stand-alone Snapdragon processor? I can't seem to find any on Amazon. Do they even sell retail, like Intel/AMD? If not, how do I get hold of one?
What else am I missing? How feasable is this idea really?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
while just swapping out the cpu is most likely possible, if not extremely difficult. getting it to run on the nexus 5 would be nearly impossible. where are you going to get the drivers to make everything work? they need to be exactly for the nexus 5 and only for the nexus 5.

simms22 said:
while just swapping out the cpu is most likely possible, if not extremely difficult. getting it to run on the nexus 5 would be nearly impossible. where are you going to get the drivers to make everything work? they need to be exactly for the nexus 5 and only for the nexus 5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Does it need any drivers though? If the processor instruction set doesn't change, I don't see why any software changes would have to be made...
Sorry if I don't understand what I'm talking about, I'm a PC developer and know close to zero about android / snapdragon. I'm just thinking of it as if it was a soldered-in PC cpu with built-in graphics.

Zombekas said:
Does it need any drivers though? If the processor instruction set doesn't change, I don't see why any software changes would have to be made...
Sorry if I don't understand what I'm talking about, I'm a PC developer and know close to zero about android / snapdragon. I'm just thinking of it as if it was a soldered-in PC cpu with built-in graphics.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
of course itll need drivers, its a completely different piece of hardware. youll need drivers for everything.

I think it's safe to say that it will probably never, ever happen.

You can't. It's a SoC meaning the CPU is integrated and can't be replaced
Project ARA will be the first phone able to swap core components
Sent from my Nexus 5 using XDA Free mobile app

12GB RAM ???

For my usage even 6GB ram in my S9+ is enough, so the 8GB version of OP7 Pro should be more than enough. The question is: is 12GB RAM going to be FASTER than the 8GB in any way when only using ONE app\benchmark\game at a time?? Cus I want the FASTEST.
As far as I know about how PCs work, more Ram only helps if you are using it... but then why did OP ''leak'' the cpu benchmark from the 12GB variant? https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/05/...isting-confirms-12-gb-ram-and-snapdragon-855/

sensationvsgalaxy said:
For my usage even 6GB ram in my S9+ is enough, so the 8GB version of OP7 Pro should be more than enough. The question is: is 12GB RAM going to be FASTER than the 8GB in any way when only using ONE app\benchmark\game at a time?? Cus I want the FASTEST.
As far as I know about how PCs work, more Ram only helps if you are using it... but then why did OP ''leak'' the cpu benchmark from the 12GB variant? https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/05/...isting-confirms-12-gb-ram-and-snapdragon-855/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
More RAM = More App memory

sensationvsgalaxy said:
For my usage even 6GB ram in my S9+ is enough, so the 8GB version of OP7 Pro should be more than enough. The question is: is 12GB RAM going to be FASTER than the 8GB in any way when only using ONE app\benchmark\game at a time?? Cus I want the FASTEST.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You already know the answer.
By the time you need 12 gigs- you will probably become some 3 years older from now -- when a different SoC, GPU and the OS would actually want to make use of it on extremely intensive tasks.
sensationvsgalaxy said:
but then why did OP ''leak'' the cpu benchmark from the 12GB variant? https://www.gizmochina.com/2019/05/...isting-confirms-12-gb-ram-and-snapdragon-855/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't know why "leaked" but all I can think of a phone having 12 gigs of RAM for now & also competitors following suit is all about BRAGGING RIGHTS.

Virgo_Guy said:
You already know the answer.
By the time you need 12 gigs- you will probably become some 3 years older from now -- when a different SoC, GPU and the OS would actually want to make use of it on extremely intensive tasks.
Don't know why "leaked" but all I can think of a phone having 12 gigs of RAM for now & also competitors following suit is all about BRAGGING RIGHTS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THANKS ..thats what I thought too..only that this video made me wonder: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs_sCYQ8C3s& (starting 2:42..until then it's not interesting)

Virgo_Guy said:
You already know the answer.
By the time you need 12 gigs- you will probably become some 3 years older from now -- when a different SoC, GPU and the OS would actually want to make use of it on extremely intensive tasks.
Don't know why "leaked" but all I can think of a phone having 12 gigs of RAM for now & also competitors following suit is all about BRAGGING RIGHTS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps - but if you get 2-3 Andiiod upgrades and you pass your phone on to kids, grandma or someone who's less of a power user, having a phone that works can be better than buying them a new one.
Or if things keep going the way they're going, you keep the phone yourself because there's no significant upgrade that merits buying a whole new phone as long as the current one still works fine.

Superguy said:
Perhaps - but if you get 2-3 Andiiod upgrades and you pass your phone on to kids, grandma or someone who's less of a power user, having a phone that works can be better than buying them a new one.
Or if things keep going the way they're going, you keep the phone yourself because there's no significant upgrade that merits buying a whole new phone as long as the current one still works fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In both cases I doubt how much of a role the 12 gigs would play(highly doubtful) at all in comparison to 8 gigs, as that "additional" 4 gigs will have little to do with the system but a newer redesigned SoC definitely WILL - which will be absent.
I mean just adding some "Access gigs Of RAM " will not make the phone futureproof.

How many nand chips make up the 8Gb and the 12 GB?
If there are more chips in the 12gb version then it will eat more battery.

Just ordered the blue 12 G version ?

Unfortunate that 12GB is only available in blue.

Im about to order the 12GB version just for bragging rights. Does the 12GB actually make a difference to the performance? Unlikely if say. I have a 6T Mclaren and the 10GB makes zero difference over the ordinary 6T but with the Snapdragon maybe the extra ram is utilised who knows. Anyway Im hesitant as I don't want what Happened to the 6 to happen again a special edition Red color soon after. That really makes me angry. I was lucky to get the McLaren when I did. Don't want to spend over €800 and see that happening all over again.
Sent from my [device_name] using XDA-Developers Legacy app