Related
hey guys,
i just wanted to ask if its worth buying a dual core phone right now .. since no apps that are out now, really make use of the dual core processor.
i was thinking of buying either the SAMSUNG GALAXY R or the SONY ERICSSON XPERIA NEO V ..
so i was wondering if i really need the galaxy R (1GHZ dual core and 1GB of RAM).. or should i just stick to neo V(1GHZ single core and 512MB ram) as i'd be saving about a 60$.. other than that both phones are very similar .. i.e both are getting ICS .. both a 5MP camera.. etc..
please give me your suggestions as i just cant make up my mind !!
GALAXY R or NEO V ??
I think it really depends. I think Android ICS for example could handle the dual core chips a bit better than Gingerbread, but OEMS do try to customize the OS so it can handle resources as needed. All it does really is to speed up multitasking and other resource intensive apps. My biggest concern is how much more bloatware the OEMs and wireless carriers put onto the device, thus making it buggy and slower than it should. So in the end it wouldn't matter if u had a dual core or single core, 512 or 1GB RAM, it would depend how buggy you want the phone to be. It may not be buggy out of the box, but once u begin using it in the real world (downloading apps, making calls while surfing the web, playing games, etc) it could begin to run a bit slower.
Personally, I don't really think a dual core chip is needed if the OS is streamlined enough where it can handle and allocate resources when it needs them. With the combination of dual core chips, 4G HSPA+ and LTE, i would argue that you would be sacrificing some battery life.
If you are going with Android, i would say to spring for the dual core chipset since it seems thats where software is headed. As a WP7 user, it doesn't bother me using a single core chip. The OS runs very fluid and it can intelligently manage its resources. I trust ICS will manage resources as needed too.
As far as RAM, it is always good to have more RAM in the device. If you go with the phone with beefier specs then u know that it will last you longer as far as support for the device, updates, etc.
Hope u r not bothered by me being a WP7 user and giving u advice for Android. I do have an Android tablet that i do use from time to time. It has a sinlge core chipset and it does run fairly smooth, for an Android device that is. My friend has a MyTouch 4G and it runs fairly smooth, but at times i notice it lags.
I would say to play around with them in the store and compare the two side by side.
I would hold off until after the MWC where everyone will be showing the new quad core phones that will become the standard.
@TKETZ196
thanks a lot that kinda did clear a few things..
so i'm starting to lean towards the dual core phone.. guess there's no arguing its more future proof..
insane91 said:
@TKETZ196
thanks a lot that kinda did clear a few things..
so i'm starting to lean towards the dual core phone.. guess there's no arguing its more future proof..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not really future proof with quadcore phones coming out. Once they do we will all be in the same boat we are in now. Apps and OS updates will be tailored for the quadcore instead of the dual core.
ok but they do stand a better chance compared to the single core ones right ! i'm looking at a phone that should last me another year and a half atleast.
given the choices that i have in the mid range budget i want to know if the GALAXY R is a good candidate to place my money on.. given that its one of the very few nice dual core phone in the price bracket other than optimus 2x.
insane91 said:
ok but they do stand a better chance compared to the single core ones right ! i'm looking at a phone that should last me another year and a half atleast.
given the choices that i have in the mid range budget i want to know if the GALAXY R is a good candidate to place my money on.. given that its one of the very few nice dual core phone in the price bracket other than optimus 2x.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will they last. Oh of course. Just like the single core does now. It still works and you can still get apps for it. Will it be upgradable to newer OSs maybe maybe not. Can't know for sure. Only Google knows that for sure. If upgrades are what you are worried about then get a nexus as it will get them for sure. Anything else is up to the carriers or running a custom rom. I am waiting for a quadxore myself this way I know I would t have to worry about to many hardware restrictions. But all in all do some research before making a choice. Mainly keep an eye on MWC. Remember phones are already outdated by the time we get them and the next Gen are already being worked on.
Dual-Core is imo just Marketing. Nobody needs the power in normal use of the phone. If you play games this will be different, but at least playing games on 4" Devices isn't the funniest thing.
Tablets with Dual-Core and Quad-Core SoC's are the future, and to be state of the Art Dual-Core Smartphone SoC's will be Standard 2012.
phuxus said:
Dual-Core is imo just Marketing. Nobody needs the power in normal use of the phone. If you play games this will be different, but at least playing games on 4" Devices isn't the funniest thing.
Tablets with Dual-Core and Quad-Core SoC's are the future, and to be state of the Art Dual-Core Smartphone SoC's will be Standard 2012.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree, but going multi-core is the future. it all depends on what apps you intend to run on your device. i just hope that battery technology can cope up with the rapid pace of mobile with multi-processors.
your unit may be uber quad-core fast, but would that last you for a day?
It's just a question of use.
If you only use your phone to text, phone, and a little web surfing, just stay on a single core.
If you want to have an advanced use of it, playing games, web surfing fluently with flash plugins, an interface with smooth scrollings...And with evolving capacities, like said before, on new versions of ROMS with plenty of possibilities, just go for it. May be you will keep your device longer, and it will worth your extra 60 bucks.
You just have to find the good ratio use/long lasting/short lasting/speed.
A non dual core phone is like buying a non dual core computer only do it if it's your only option.
IMHO
Sent from my MB855 using xda premium
dual core advantages
Dual core definitely has its advantages especially running ICS where there is a demand for more power
GPU,s respond better with dual core tech..will be quite a while before quad core takes hold so dual is the way to go for at least a year..more like six months though I would expect.
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™
I just have ordered a Tablet PC, but not pay it yet. because it is 7 Inch Capacitive Screen Android 4.0 and only $79.5 , free shipping
I do not know whether it's worth!
looking forward more ideas!
Can you say more about this tablet? What is CPU, GPU, RAM etc?
the review looks good
Model
ICOO D50 Deluxe Edition II
CPU
All Winner A13, 1.0GHz; GPU: Mali 400
Operation System
Android 4.0.3
RAM
512MB
Nand Flash
4GB
Shell Material
Plastic
Screen Size
7 Inch (16:9)
Type
Capacitive Screen
Resolution
800 x 480
Visible Angle
150°
3G
Not built in, support 3G/WCDMA dongle
Extend Card
Support TF card up to 16GB
Camera
0.3 Megapixels
Mali 400 is very good GPU in this GPU you can run most games!
And CPU A13 1GHz is too very good for this price! You can in this tablet watch fullHD movies and i think web browsing in for example Opera Mobile would be nice
I've got one of these similar devices. Trust me, they might sound good, but they fall apart if you plan to use it extensively. Mine randomly doesn't install apps for some reason, I have to install apps 3 - 5 times before they will install correctly. Pathetic.
The deal-breaker would be 512Mb RAM and 4GB Storage. If there's no expendable storage, you shouldn't buy.
by the way, check this one out
Code:
http://www.uplaytablet.com/ainol-novo-7-aurora-ultra-thin-android-4-0-tablet-pc-7-inch-ips-hd-screen-1gb-ram-camera-hdmi-white-8gb/
Hmmmmm..the other specs seems too good for the price..but..the resolution seems tooooo low for a tablet. 480x800 looks good on only smartphones. It will look ugly on a 7 inch tablet
Sent from my GT-i9100 equipped with Grenade Launcher and Remote Explosives
Tablet would be a good for development to test your apps. Not sure about daily usage though, might be a little janky......
That tablet sucks.
Cheapest tablet for the money is the Ainol Aurora. Anything cheaper will disappoint.
Sent from my U8150 using XDA
thanks, everyone!
this is one of the many models of the Chinese market. a 2-fold lower price it's a gimmick. Look on the characteristics of the tablet is mnogo.protsessor A13 is the cheapest right now.
There are a bunch of different models of the ICOO D50.
You have to read the specifications very carefully.
The one with 1024 x 600, HDMI out and 8 GB doesn't look bad.
Ainol Novo 7 Aurora II
Cortex A9 1.5 Ghz CPU, dual core Mali400 GPU, 7 inch LG IPS screen with 1024x600 resolution.
www dot ainol-novo dot com
I can't post links yet
it depends on how you use it,don't expect it can work like ipad.
however the price is not good for this chinese tablet, maybe you can add a little to get a refurb. nook
good luck
here is a video of the tablet.... looks pretty good to me. main thing i worry about is the battery life.... 2600 ma.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=In635nKlMfo&feature=related
I use a phone with single core yet and I managed to buy a new phone recently, do you think it is meaningful to have 2-cores, 4-cores, or 8-cores in the phone?
doubleelec said:
I use a phone with single core yet and I managed to buy a new phone recently, do you think it is meaningful to have 2-cores, 4-cores, or 8-cores in the phone?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
with the abundance of quad cores nowadays flooding the market, developers and apps would surely catch on optimizing apps to take advantage of
4 cores. As for octa cores, if you're seriously into multi tasking or using your phone/tablet for number crunching, then 8 cores would help.
...
I think today Quad core is must, and even better if it comes with 2GB ram.
The prices keep dropping and if it fits the budget it better.
For the Octa core- I think it's the same stupid race like with the Camera MP - "look!- I have 30MP!"
Strong Quad core with 2GB ram in enough I think.
The Bigger. The Better
I had a dual core phone with half a gig of ram until a few months ago..then i switched to quad core & a gig ram..i really didnt notice much of difference..until last week, when i switched back to my old phone(as it has beautiful AMOLED screen..i just love that)..i realized that my old is quite slow n can't keep up to me speed..
so..there u go..the bigger the better..
Same thing happened in PC industry.
The software, especially video games will use every bit of your cores,no matter how many they are.
Xperia-Ray said:
For the Octa core- I think it's the same stupid race like with the Camera MP - "look!- I have 30MP!"
Strong Quad core with 2GB ram in enough I think.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
totally agree with you! :good:
I think that the Quad-Core cpu is the best, it will works perfectly for years and years (that s my opinion)
But the software optimization is even more important
Sorry for my bad english
Lenovo:
Quad core, 1500 MHz, ARM Cortex-A53, 64-bit cpu,
Mali-T760 MP2
http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Lenovo-TAB-2-A10-70_id9273
Samsung:
Quad-core 2.3 GHz Krait 400
Qualcomm Snapdragon 800
Adreno 330
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_galaxy_tab_pro_8_4-5946.php
I currently own both and must return one. My subjective impressions are that the Samsung has much better color balance and runs a little smoother, but oddly, with two different Gameloft games (Spiderman, Nova 3), the textures are noticably less detailed on the Samsung (perhaps a trade off for the Samsung's much higher resolution?)
Based on the specs, which do you think should be better for gaming overall, now and in the future?
I bought a Lenovo Tab 2 A10-70 and I'm rather disappointed in it. The GPU benchmarks are pretty weak, and the killer problem is it maxes out at 720p when streaming video. Otherwise it's a pretty nice tablet but that 720p video problem is super irritating. The only reason I haven't returned it yet is Lenovo is supposedly pushing out a Lollipop update soon and I'm hoping that maybe, just maybe, it'll play better-than-720p video with the update. But I doubt it.
Thanks for responding! Missed this earlier.
I did end up going for the Samsung, mainly because the sound was much better both through speakers and headphones. ATMOS may be a real thing for home theater, but for this tablet it just seemed like a gimmick.