Which processor is better? Samsung Exynos 4 Quad ARM Mali-400 MP4 OR Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 adreno 225?Much better?
RUSSIAN787 said:
Which processor is better? Samsung Exynos 4 Quad ARM Mali-400 MP4 OR Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 adreno 225?Much better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Better for what? Performance, energy saving, games on mobile phone? Quad-Core vs Dual-Core?
I'd prefer Quad-Core, but have never find a good test or benchmark for it.
Best regards
TT
RUSSIAN787 said:
Which processor is better? Samsung Exynos 4 Quad ARM Mali-400 MP4 OR Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 MSM8960 adreno 225?Much better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is your question in regards to the sgs3? The Mali has a better gpu but processing power they are about equal with all the bench marks. Quad core is nice for aaving battery power (more cores work less as hard as a dual or single core so it it uses less battery) but I think its a a9 architecture but the s4 is a a15 architecture which is much more optimized then a a9 so its a little bit better for battery.
And the s4 allows for 4g lte where as Mali does not.
And the s4 pro is coming out soon and the lg optimus g will have that which will probably destroy both of them out of the water.
S4 pro is a a15 quad core with adreno 320 gpu and will be the first quad to support 4g lte.
The optimus g has all the same specs as sgs3 expect it has the better cpu/gpu. Ram, screen size, resolution as well as internal memory are all the same and I think its SD card slot allows for a 64gb card as well. If it comes out for Verizon then I will be torn between that and the sgs3. Depends on dev support if It comes out on Verizon.
But for the Mali its one up is it gpu. S4 one up is 4g lte. Every thing else is marginal and as an end user you will not see the difference.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda app-developers app
Yes I to sgs3. In terms of what the processor is better? in games for example? In general, whether with MSM8960 Snapdragon S4 go to Exynos?
Hi dude! both processors are good! And dont forget about A6(Iphone5). Sry for iphone 5 but that processor is ammazing!
RUSSIAN787 said:
Yes I to sgs3. In terms of what the processor is better? in games for example? In general, whether with MSM8960 Snapdragon S4 go to Exynos?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The exynos is better for hardcore 3d gaming, but otherwise you won't notice the difference in day to day and casual gaming.
Sent from my DROID2 using xda premium
FEXTEZI said:
Hi dude! both processors are good! And dont forget about A6(Iphone5). Sry for iphone 5 but that processor is ammazing!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't matter because since its an iPhone its scaled back to "improve stability" so you will never get its full potential just like iphone 4s is.
Sent from my Incredible 2 using xda app-developers app
qualcomm did not much inferior to Exynos?
In most of the reviews of US and international S3, Exynos scored more than snapdragon. But I believe, normal user will not feel much difference.
I had one with Exynos in hand. Pretty good.
i think the Exynos is very good
Hello all!
Long time reader, first time poster! I had a quick question... regarding the new 1.5 dual-core processors in the new phones (SIII, RAZR HD, etc., or even the HTC Rezound) vs. the quad-core processors soon to release on the newer phones in the coming months. How much faster is the quad-core vs. the dual-core? Please don't respond with "twice as fast," I get that I was wondering if there would really be any noticeable difference in the speed capabilities of the phone, even when worked to it's limit.
For instance, 1 degree vs. 2 degrees temperature - it's "twice as hot," but you're not going to notice it at all. But 40 degress vs. 80 degrees - "it's twice as hot" has a whole new meaning!
I am wanting to get a new RAZR MAXX HD, but was debating holding off for the LG Nexus or another quad-core phone that's on the horizon... Thanks in advance for all your help!
In Europe SIII has a quadcore too
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
Personally I don't think it's noticeable at all. Maybe when browsing web, rendering goes faster in multi-core optimised browsers. And of course some games would run better. But I can't imagine any other use, unless you want to run SuperPI in the terminal there. It'll probably run nearly twice faster.
Edit: From the other point. There will be more and more optimisations in Android for multi-core SoCs, so quad-core will for sure "last longer".
Rebellos, thanks for the help! Not to open a whole can of worms, but what do you mean "run SuperPI"? Is this an app that I should be familiarizing myself with? (Fairly new to the ROMs, rooting, bootloaders side of things)
When I got my captivate, I had the option of waiting a month to get the atrix which had a dual core processor. I choose to go for the sure-fire "I Know it'll have dev support" single core processor and don't regret it.
This time however, there are like 3 quad core devices coming out. One x+ has a tegra 3, the Note 2 has an exynos. The Optimus G has an S4.
While dev support is still important.. the S4 is an incredibly compelling factor for me personally.
Reply to SuperPI
LifeAsADroid said:
Rebellos, thanks for the help! Not to open a whole can of worms, but what do you mean "run SuperPI"? Is this an app that I should be familiarizing myself with? (Fairly new to the ROMs, rooting, bootloaders side of things)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
SuperPi is nothing more than a benchmark you really don't need to concern yourself with.
Remember when you are talking about cores, it is not simply the number of cores that you need to take into consideration but also the architecture which those new cores are built on. The new A15 Krait chips are dual core, but will blow the door off a quad core CPU with an older architecture. MHZ and Cores are relative. If they put out a modern super phone with a dual core processor you can bet those are two beefy and very fast cores.
There is the valid point that Android is going to continue to specialize in multithread execution but 1 core does not necessarily translate into 1 thread. A hyper-threaded cpu core actually shows up as 2 physical cores to the computer it serves, so if you are running a dual core that is hyper-threaded the PC thinks there is a quad core on board. It also depends on what type of application you are running as to whether a very solid 1 thread computational approach would be superior to a multi-threaded approach.
In short there is not set answer. There are hypothetical road maps defining architecture but these days innovation is so common said road maps could made an abrupt 180 if circumstances change. When if is time to buy a phone, or any computational device, consider what it's primary task is. That could help you decide whehter a multi or single threaded approach could be more effective. Ultimately as mentioned earlier everything is going the way of the multi-core, multi-thread, meaning instead of having 1 processor/thread complete 1 job, muliple processor/threads complete several mini jobs to arrive at the same point. Usually a multi threaded approach is more effective if designed correctly. Then look at what is available, where is your bang for the buck. Ultimately the number of cores and frequency run at has little to do with processing prowess. It's about design, innovation and engineering. Sorry if this didn't help much. It was more designed to give you something to thing about as apposed to pat, here you are, here's your answer as I rarely believe there is 1 approach or 1 answer to a solution. That's what computing is and computers = phones = innovation.
For gaming it makes a difference. For everything else, not really. Comparing the HTC One X vs the One XL (Tegra 3 Quad vs Snapdragon S4 Dual, respectively), the One XL benchmarks as faster than the One X CPU-wise (calculations), but the One X is more powerful graphically because the GeForce GPU inside the Tegra 3 chipset is more powerful than the Adreno 225 inside the Snapdragon S4. I have the Galaxy S3 i9300 while my girlfriend has the AT&T Snapdragon S4 Dual (LTE + 2GB RAM) version. Mine is clearly faster when it comes to heavy gaming, noticeably. Hers jerks on certain games like Beach Buggy Blitz, even on middle-level resolution, while mine runs completely smoothly on the highest resolution.
The only real comparison would be Snapdragon S4 Dual vs Snapdragon S4 Quad, or Exynos Dual vs Exynos Quad. The Galaxy S2 was as smooth as the S3, from personal experience (Sprint, Exynos version vs GS3 International Exynos version). Gaming was also super fast. But the Exynos quad is definitely more powerful.
TL;DR: It depends heavily on the chipsets being compared.
I have a T-Mobile Galaxy S2 running AOKP JB. In my opinion AOKP JB is A LOT faster than CM10. My phone is really fast now. Dual-core is still good.
gaming and browsing
u can feel the difference in gaming and web browsing....
Sometimes Dual Core is better for example the Exynos 5250
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
megafabian03 said:
Sometimes Dual Core is better for example the Exynos 5250
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True, but that's a completely different architecture. Exynos 4412 (the one in the i9300) is based on Cortex A9, whereas the Exynos 5520 is Cortex A15. It's like saying quad-core Pentium 3 vs dual-core Pentium 4. The Pentium 4 is a more advanced architecture, so it would win. It's like comparing apples to oranges.
Yes the 4412 is just double Dualcore
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
megafabian03 said:
Yes the 4412 is just double Dualcore
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exynos 4412 is the quad core version in the Galaxy S3 i9300. The Exynos Dual core inside of the Galaxy S II is the 4212.
Thanks for all the advice and tips everyone! And thanks to fusuikan for the very lengthy explanation of SuperPI and insight into processing chips!
Product F(RED) said:
Exynos 4412 is the quad core version in the Galaxy S3 i9300. The Exynos Dual core inside of the Galaxy S II is the 4212.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But Samsung has just doubled the cores and not founded a new processor
Gesendet von meinem GT-I9300 mit Tapatalk 2
For heavy games it makes difference.
In my opinion, a A15 based dual core may be a better as an overall proposition compared to a quad core A9. The A15 should have approximately 20%-40%+ better single threaded performance. Most of the time you are working in a single threaded mode.
In fact you only need quad core when using a very high multi-threaded load. Not very common on a phone.
If however the choice is between a dual core A15 vs a quad core A15, the choice becomes very straightforward. Get the quad-core in that case.
Dual Core A15 vs Quad Core A9 (of the same type of chipset, like Exynos 4412 Quad in the S3 vs Exynos 5520 in the Nexus 10/Samsung Chromebook), Dual wins. It's more efficient and just overall more powerful. The first A15 chipset are the Snapdragon S4 Pro (Quad only) and the Exynos 5250. It's speculated though that the Galaxy S4 will have an Exynos 5 Quad.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Product F(RED) said:
Dual Core A15 vs Quad Core A9 (of the same type of chipset, like Exynos 4412 Quad in the S3 vs Exynos 5520 in the Nexus 10/Samsung Chromebook), Dual wins. It's more efficient and just overall more powerful. The first A15 chipset are the Snapdragon S4 Pro (Quad only) and the Exynos 5520. It's speculated though that the Galaxy S4 will have an Exynos 5 Quad.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually its Exynos 5250 not 5520 and s4 pro is not based on A15 architecture its quite similar but A15(dual core) gives better performance than s4 pro(quad core) in single threaded operations ,but in multi threaded operations s4 pro is better,but with same number of cores on both ,A15(quad core) would be better than s4 pro(quad core) in both multi threaded and single threaded operations.
sent from my gs3 GT i 9300 using XDA HD premium
----------------------------------
Product F(RED) said:
Exynos 4412 is the quad core version in the Galaxy S3 i9300. The Exynos Dual core inside of the Galaxy S II is the 4212.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Galaxy s2 GT I9100 uses exynos
4210 not 4212
sent from my gs3 GT i 9300
----------------------------------
stock jb 4.1.1 , siyah kernel @1.7 ghz
in octa DDR3 but in snapdragon 600? ddr2?
If I am right then yes. Snap 600 is lpddr2 and snap 800 should be lpddr3
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
Snapdragon 600 supports lpddr3 but im not sure if it supports 800 mhz speed wich Octa does
paorpas said:
in octa DDR3 but in snapdragon 600? ddr2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The one leaked in glbenchmark was supposedly having lpddr3 ram and it was korean variant with s600, also s600 supports ddr3.
I think s600 variant(s) will have lpddr3 ram.
sent from an Galaxy s3 GT I9300
Running perseus kernel 33.1 , XELLA 4.1.2 leaked build
forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1784401
Dont click,you might regret , I won't be responsible if you brick ur head
Since s600 is LPDDR3 capable, and octa version according to benchmarks is using LPDDR3, it should be use '3 version.
Quit buying-selling phones and eat a Paella, Paorpas.
DDR3 for both.
At the announcement it said DDR3 2GB.
If it wasn't, they wouldve said depending on the market DDR2. But they didnt.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using xda premium
Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro (Nexus 7 2013 Version), Adreno 320 with 2GB* of Ram or MediaTek MTK6592 (Octa-Core), Mali-450MP4 with 1GB* Ram?
Just want to know what hardware is better.
*Not GPU dedicated Ram
namertamer101 said:
Qualcomm Snapdragon S4 Pro (Nexus 7 2013 Version), Adreno 320 with 2GB* of Ram or MediaTek MTK6592 (Octa-Core), Mali-450MP4 with 1GB* Ram?
Just want to know what hardware is better.
*Not GPU dedicated Ram
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
go with the 2 gigs, mali and mediatek are terrible GPU's/CPU's snapdragon and adreno beats the crap out of them. octa core means nothing, phones dont need 8 cores xD quad is just fine.
I've some questions...
1) The Indian Note 3 model number SM N900 and not SM N9000. Correct?
2) The EXYNOS 5420 chip that powers the Note 3 is supposed to be an Octa core processor. However, in the phone details (using Antutu benchmark tool / CPUZ) all the 8 cores aren't visible. While it says that there are 4+4 cores, only the Cortex A15 @ 1.9 GHz with "core 0, core 1, core 2 and core 3" is visible. The other one - Cortex A7 @ 1.3 GHz with the remaining 4 cores isn't visible. What is the reason for this? Is my phone a 'wrong piece'? Should I ask for replacement? Or is this normal? If this is normal, why so? Where did the other processor and the remaining 4 cores go?
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
davemihir said:
I've some questions...
1) The Indian Note 3 model number SM N900 and not SM N9000. Correct?
2) The EXYNOS 5420 chip that powers the Note 3 is supposed to be an Octa core processor. However, in the phone details (using Antutu benchmark tool / CPUZ) all the 8 cores aren't visible. While it says that there are 4+4 cores, only the Cortex A15 @ 1.9 GHz with "core 0, core 1, core 2 and core 3" is visible. The other one - Cortex A7 @ 1.3 GHz with the remaining 4 cores isn't visible. What is the reason for this? Is my phone a 'wrong piece'? Should I ask for replacement? Or is this normal? If this is normal, why so? Where did the other processor and the remaining 4 cores go?
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I do not have a Note 3 but the Exynos Octa-core isn't actually a octa-core. There are 4 phisical processors and 4 virtual processor, so that's somehow a fake octa-core and possibly that's why antutu shows you only 4 processors.
1) N900 and N9000 are the exact same thing. Samsung devices have a 5 or an 0 at the end to indicate LTE(5) or 3G(0) devices. With the N9000, they simply dropped the last 0.
2) Benchmark tools can only detect one active CPU at a time (Physical or Virtual), so they automatically detect the first physical one.