Related
I just read this article about Gingerbread and the 1Ghz 512mb requirements. This article says that because the nexus one is clocked at 998mhz and since the rumored HTC vision the first dual core phone with 2 cores at 800mhz, (with a max stated by Qualcomm of 1.2ghz per core) won't qualify for Gingerbread.
How stupid can they possibly be? I really hate it when stupid people write tech articles.
http://www.mobilemag.com/2010/06/30...uire-1ghz-processors-coming-mid-october-2010/
Yeah, N1 will surely get 3.0. 998MHz is less than 3% off from 1024MHz so I wouldn't worry about it.
Also, I'm failing to see how 2 cores is a good idea on a smartphone, unless it has some amazing battery, or I'm wrong about CPU power consumption. Dual cores have been popular on desktops for years now, and few apps actually use more than one core at a time. Android is designed to use as little CPU for background tasks as possible so I can only imagine multi-cores would only help with Flash and maybe video recording. 2 cores at 800Mhz seems like it would be slower than 1 core at 1Ghz for most tasks, and less efficient. I'll probably be proven wrong, but we'll see.
First, the RUMOR is just that. A rumor. It's probably fake.
Second, 1ghz, if anything, is probably a suggestion to mfgrs that Google doesn't recommend you run it on anything less than something that's 1ghz.
It's a rumor that's probably false and someone wrote an article assuming that stars had to mathematically align for things to happen.
That's what I call a TROLL ARTICLE. Just trying to drudge up some hits. Most iphone articles are the same thing. People eat them up, but they contain no real news or useful information.
Gr8gorilla said:
How stupid can they possibly be? I really hate it when stupid people write tech articles.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah me too! but it makes my day easier by giving oe something to hate
Its a good thing a GOOGLE EMPLOYEE just yesterday said the Gingerbread requirement rumors were complete b.s. and made up for the sake of writing an article.
gizmodo.com/5578055/android-gingerbread-rumors-dismissed-by-google-on-twitter
Well the specs on the leaked vision have it using the new dual core qualcomm processors. Qualcomm specs on the processor have it using less power with the 45n process in manufacturing. I am just guessing here but the processor has the ability to be clocked to 1.2ghz but I guess it is clocked down to 800 per core for the battery life.
But anyway it is all speculation until some pics or some test devices get out.
I mean if they were planning on releasing a dual core phone running Gingerbread in less than 4 months, why would the carriers or manufacturer's want you to know? Then you would wait to buy a phone. The way it works now is, you get the best thing going, say an evo or the new samsung phone. Then 3 months from now, a phone drops that blows everything else out of the water, you have got to have the latest and greatest so you drop another 500-600 on that just a few months later. They make a lot more money that way.
Don't you guys follow Romain Guy on twitter? http://twitter.com/romainguy
I love it when people just make stuff up and report it as news. http://goo.gl/cwbf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He already said yesterday that the rumors are fake. Why do you still think this is true?
There's no minimum specs for Gingerbread and i'm 100% sure that N1 will get it.
Even if it doesn't, wouldn't you be tempted to get a dual code device in late fall?
I'll most probably get a device like that with 3.0 on it.
DDM123 said:
Yeah, N1 will surely get 3.0. 998MHz is less than 3% off from 1024MHz so I wouldn't worry about it.
Also, I'm failing to see how 2 cores is a good idea on a smartphone, unless it has some amazing battery, or I'm wrong about CPU power consumption. Dual cores have been popular on desktops for years now, and few apps actually use more than one core at a time. Android is designed to use as little CPU for background tasks as possible so I can only imagine multi-cores would only help with Flash and maybe video recording. 2 cores at 800Mhz seems like it would be slower than 1 core at 1Ghz for most tasks, and less efficient. I'll probably be proven wrong, but we'll see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I agree that dual core on a phone is probably overkill, there are quite a few reasons..
Dual core can be more power efficient, sharing hardware while having overall higher capacity.
Faster processors = Hotter, more power requirements, etc
Multiple cores isn't just for single-app speed, it's for multiple apps running simultaneously without affecting each other. Of course if you need an app to do heavy processing it should multithread and use multiple cores, but I doubt you'll be rendering in Blender on your phone.... But with dual core, you can have two apps using 100% of a CPU without noticing any slowdown. Or... 1 app using 100% CPU and the other CPU free to do other stuff, letting the system stay responsive.
AOSP doesn't have hardware requirements.
Market has hardware requirements.
Even if fake or not, this thread is stupid cause the thread starter thinks the nexus is not a 1 ghz phone cause its only 998. Umm have you never seen Google's official spec page, they quote it at 1 ghz. Geez.
RogerPodacter said:
Even if fake or not, this thread is stupid cause the thread starter thinks the nexus is not a 1 ghz phone cause its only 998. Umm have you never seen Google's official spec page, they quote it at 1 ghz. Geez.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Troll, where in his post does he say that?
These rumors were already denounced.
http://phandroid.com/2010/07/02/dan-morrill-calls-foul-on-whoever-started-that-gingerbread-rumor/
How people could believe them from the beginning is just bonkers to me.
DDM123 said:
Yeah, N1 will surely get 3.0. 998MHz is less than 3% off from 1024MHz so I wouldn't worry about it.
Also, I'm failing to see how 2 cores is a good idea on a smartphone, unless it has some amazing battery, or I'm wrong about CPU power consumption. Dual cores have been popular on desktops for years now, and few apps actually use more than one core at a time. Android is designed to use as little CPU for background tasks as possible so I can only imagine multi-cores would only help with Flash and maybe video recording. 2 cores at 800Mhz seems like it would be slower than 1 core at 1Ghz for most tasks, and less efficient. I'll probably be proven wrong, but we'll see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 GHZ is 1000 Mhz not 1024, this is not Byte or flash memory... so 998Mhz is basically 1GHZ like you said, just even closer
And the whole thing is a scam as the previous poster said...
McFroger3 said:
Troll, where in his post does he say that?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oops i read it as HE was saying that, but he meant the article said that (which i didnt read as you can tell). my bad people
and BTW, stop calling everyone a troll at the drop of a hat. so i mis-read something. doesnt mean troll. troll this, troll that. my post history speaks pretty clearly that i've not once posted such things.
lorin.bute said:
Don't you guys follow Romain Guy on twitter? http://twitter.com/romainguy
He already said yesterday that the rumors are fake. Why do you still think this is true?
There's no minimum specs for Gingerbread and i'm 100% sure that N1 will get it.
Even if it doesn't, wouldn't you be tempted to get a dual code device in late fall?
I'll most probably get a device like that with 3.0 on it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes will get dual core. Point of my post is not the validity of the requirements but the statements about what phones would get the updates if the requirements were true. Anyway, with romain guys post its moot!
http://epicmobiles.com/HTC_to_Launch_Pivotal_Windows_Mobile_7_HD3_Phone_09972831542.html
Sounds very cool, depending on what windows "mobile" 7 is gonna turn out like.
jazzcat55 said:
http://epicmobiles.com/HTC_to_Launch_Pivotal_Windows_Mobile_7_HD3_Phone_09972831542.html
Sounds very cool, depending on what windows 7 is gonna turn out like.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Windows 7 is already out and looks very cool! It has been around for a year. I'm guessing you mean windows phone 7. It is important to get these things right
I just actually read the link and i have to say i need to change my shorts but i do have a question - how do they plan to cool a 1.5GHz dual core CPU? because - for the uneducated - that is 1.5GHz per core! effectively making it a 3GHz chip but if they can pull it off and some clever chef can put port WM 6.5 that device is going to rule the market for a very long time
yeh specs look very good but its still windows...it would be interesting to see what happens..... but i wont make the same mistake again
Quacomm delayed this processor to the end of 2011 so this is all fake
Sent from my X10i using XDA App
I'm a bit annoyed that i signed up for a 24 month contract this year, not even anticipating the release of the HD7!
I'm a bit annoyed that i signed up for a 24 month contract this year, not even anticipating the release of the HD7
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Surely the "not even anticipating" part of your post negates the "I'm a bit annoyed" bit...
First of all 1.5ghz dual core does not mean its 3ghz. What it means is it can do tasks at the sometime clocked at 1500mhz each. As you say its very important to vet this things right
Now I am little ticked of that it won't be out in USA. My guess was dual core 1.3ghz with 1gb ram and HD recording which is standard with 8mp cam. Also not a big fan of WM7 as it seems some what childish. I mean WTF was M$ thinking? I really hope HTC Sense hide that ugly 4 square sector that alone scares me.
HyperNode said:
First of all 1.5ghz dual core does not mean its 3ghz. What it means is it can do tasks at the sometime clocked at 1500mhz each. As you say its very important to vet this things right
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry that was my mistake i meant to say it was effectively 1.5ghz a core meaning it has an effective total clock speed of 3GHz.
It's amazing what dumb things i can say after a few beers
Any info out there about this baby overclocked? Will standard overclocking tools work or does new software need to be devloped?
To overclock the cpu I think you'd need a custom kernel that allows it first. But if the bootloader is locked then custom kernels can't be flashed.
You won't have to worry about performance issues with tegra 2 for while though .
As if you needed to run Crysis on it?
Tough crowd this morning!
This site is here for getting the most out of devices. Rooting and removing bloatware increases performance. Customized ROMS increase perfomance and user experience. I merely asked about another tool for optimizing a device.
bee55 said:
To overclock the cpu I think you'd need a custom kernel that allows it first. But if the bootloader is locked then custom kernels can't be flashed.
You won't have to worry about performance issues with tegra 2 for while though .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Haha,don't underestimate the people who hang out at XDA and other dev sites, we find ways to work these phones to the bone. I know for myself I will have probably 100 apps downloaded and installed in the first 24 hours, and will be testing its limits.
You have the best cpu in a phone ever and you want to over clock. Wow. Why?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
snapdragon was the best @ one time and most roms had overclock built in!
Snapdragon is the worst CPU for 1ghz. Even the TI OMAP is better than Qualcomm. The main reason wont buy anymore HTC phones is because of Qualcomm and there ****ty performance in phone in comparison to Samsung, TI, and now Nvidia.
Recon Freak said:
snapdragon was the best @ one time and most roms had overclock built in!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
Hence why he said 'at one time'.
Sent from my SGH-I897 using XDA App
AllTheWay said:
Snapdragon is the worst CPU for 1ghz. Even the TI OMAP is better than Qualcomm. The main reason wont buy anymore HTC phones is because of Qualcomm and there ****ty performance in phone in comparison to Samsung, TI, and now Nvidia.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon is far from being the worst CPU, clock for clock. First of all, Snapdragon is not a CPU, is a SoC (System on a Chip), and the CPU core inside Snapdragon is called Scorpion. Scorpion is neither a standard ARM Cortex A8 nor A9 core unlike the CPU core inside the Hummingbird/TI OMAP/Nvidia Tegra. But it can be thought of as among the same class as Cortex A8 CPUs. The Scorpion has some big advantage over standard Cortex A8 core in some areas (e.g. floating point). The reason why many found the first generation (in Nexus One and HTC Desire) to be "slow" was that they look only at composite benchmark like Quadrant and/or 3D games. The first generation of Snapdragon has a rather dated GPU (Adreno 200) in it, and Adreno 200's 3D performance is honestly, bad. The second generation Snapdragon (Desire Z/G2, Desire HD) uses a much faster GPU, Adreno 205, making the Snapdragon 3D performance on par with Hummingbird and other current generation SoC.
So before you go again saying Snapdragon is the slowest "CPU", go do some reading, and think, before saying. Here is some good reading for you:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/4
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4165/the-motorola-atrix-4g-preview/5
AllTheWay said:
Snapdragon is the worst CPU for 1ghz. Even the TI OMAP is better than Qualcomm. The main reason wont buy anymore HTC phones is because of Qualcomm and there ****ty performance in phone in comparison to Samsung, TI, and now Nvidia.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
if you blindly trust benchmarks the Scorpion CPU in the 2nd gen snapdragons are quite fast... my G2 benchmarks at...
Quadrant: 2,700ish
Linpack: 52.69
Sunspider:2,257
Neocore:57
infact, all of those benchmarks either match, or surpass the Atrix 4G.
No problems here with my snapdragon 1Ghz. linpacks constant 42+
Now that the phone is rooted can we use setCPU to underclock it so to save battery.
Or does setcpu not support dual core.
Also is what I said above true. if we have root we can underclock without putting custom kernels.
The nvidia tegra 2 kernel does not have a simple method to modify the CPU freq table. The dev working on the gtablet kernel would be a good resource to ask, his name is Pershoot. From my understanding he would have to backport the original ARM scaling which is not trivial in the least.
Maybe someone can figure out another way.
tsekh501 said:
As if you needed to run Crysis on it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually yeah, and who wouldn't? That's probably enough to get you instantly laid in some countries.
Arkasai said:
Actually yeah, and who wouldn't? That's probably enough to get you instantly laid in some countries.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Serious bragging rights right there.
Guy 1: "Damnit, I just got Crysis 2, and I can't even run Crysis 1 on my computer."
Guy 2: "Yeah well I can run it on my cell phone...look."
Guy 1's Girlfriend: "Take me, now, Guy 2!."
You get the picture.
Sorry to go off-topic there. But I do have a question. Isn't the Tegra 2 ARM9 based? And there's nothing wrong with wanting to push a device to it's limits. Overclocking is fun.
dandmcd said:
Haha,don't underestimate the people who hang out at XDA and other dev sites, we find ways to work these phones to the bone. I know for myself I will have probably 100 apps downloaded and installed in the first 24 hours, and will be testing its limits.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol same here. I have about 45 installed on my Galaxy Tab and all of them will be installed on the Atrix immediately and tested. I plan on testing every single game I can find on the market lol biggest being Dungeon Defenders for now...runs a bit slow on the Galaxy Tab and I've heard on Tegra2 it runs *GREAT*.
AllTheWay said:
You have the best cpu in a phone ever and you want to over clock. Wow. Why?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because you can make it better. Why settle for less? My captivate is fast and does everything I need it to do at 1ghz but I have it at 1.3 now; and under volted.
Why? Because it is better.
Captivate 2.2.1 Paragon
Is there a simple way to backup all the apps installed on my phone so I can just dump them instantly into a new phone? Preferably without having to hit "install" for every app on the market.
wow, its a dual core processor and you want OC... ugh, get out... lol
I own this 2 beast and I also quit confusing to compare this smartphone which is the best one. I like the speed of O2X, but dislike it ui or interface if compare to DHD htc sense. I also like DHD aluminum body more than O2X plastic. So, what do you think guys? which one is better?
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Any one? just to know your opinion.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
is there a massive speed difference?
Well the biggest difference is probably that Dual Core processor of the O2X (2 x 1GHz) while the DHD only has a single core (also 1GHz).
The main camera is similar, but the O2X is capable of 1080p video recording AND additionally has a front faced camera for video calls.
It has also got more internal storage (8GB) and a slightly better battery (1500 mAH)
So yeah, I would say that the O2X is better than the DHD.
frosty_ice said:
Well the biggest difference is probably that Dual Core processor of the O2X (2 x 1GHz) while the DHD only has a single core (also 1GHz).
The main camera is similar, but the O2X is capable of 1080p video recording AND additionally has a front faced camera for video calls.
It has also got more internal storage (8GB) and a slightly better battery (1500 mAH)
So yeah, I would say that the O2X is better than the DHD.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeh but it has an extremely buggy ui. the speed test show it beats the dhd in web browsing by 1-2 seconds. also some benchmark test show the dhd scoring higher.
also the dualcore phones dont have 2x 1GHz cpu... the total speed is 1ghz
so its (2x 500mhz) this is more efficient than single core.
olyloh6696 said:
also the dualcore phones dont have 2x 1GHz cpu... the total speed is 1ghz
so its (2x 500mhz) this is more efficient than single core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Say what?!
A 1ghz dual core processor is not 2 processors running at 500mhz!!! It is a single CPU with 2 cores capable of processing separate threads. It runs at 1ghz and technically it is like 2 1ghz processors operating in tandem.
Shoot whoever is spreading the above misinformation lol.
Regards.
lynxboy said:
Say what?!
A 1ghz dual core processor is not 2 processors running at 500mhz!!! It is a single CPU with 2 cores capable of processing separate threads. It runs at 1ghz and technically it is like 2 1ghz processors operating in tandem.
Shoot whoever is spreading the above misinformation lol.
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
olyloh6696 said:
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
frosty_ice said:
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats explain alot why bench mark for stock rom O2X is 2689 and DHD only around 1545.
thanks guys for your info, keep it coming.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
frosty_ice said:
He is definitely right.
You can't just add the speeds of two seperate cores up. The dual core runs at 2 @ 1Ghz. That's like two seperate CPUs, each with a clock speed of 1Ghz. So it is NOT 2 Ghz CPU but rather 2 processors @ 1Ghz. It may sound similar, but it makes a huge difference (for further detail you should look into how a processor works and what threads are).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
so i'm right?
olyloh6696 said:
so i'm right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, lynx is The O2X CPU runs at 1Ghz per core.
olyloh6696 said:
so i'm right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just google about dual core vs single core.
You will find info where dual core freq is same as single core. The only different is that dual core is way better when doing multitasking (avoid hang or jitter) and not to say double speed but can say nearly double speed.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
frosty_ice said:
No, lynx is The O2X CPU runs at 1Ghz per core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Ok guys, it is clearly in term of hardware O2X is the winner. But how about its ui? software? And its unibody design? any opinion i do appreciate.
Thanks.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Im not an expert but correct me if im wrong.
1 CPU with 2 core. Each core have 1 ghz freq. 1 core to do 1 task, another core to do another task. Meaning freq each core still 1 ghz but since its have dual core it can do both task at the same time. More quick than a single core. If we compare to single core with 2 ghz, it can only do task 1 at a time. In term of speed i think dual core 1 ghz should be nearly the same as 1 core 2 ghz. I also read some where saying single core 2 ghz consume more power than dual core 1 ghz.
Just my 2 cent.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Dual Core Processors
olyloh6696 said:
Are you sure?? I have read everywhere it is 500mhz!! Othwise why do manufactureas say it is a 1.2ghz dualcore phone?! Why dont they say it is a 2.4ghz phone? I think you may be wrong
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
olyloh6696 said:
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm 100% sure. Here's a brief history of multi core processors for those who are interested.
In the late 90's and early 000's, processor speed was constantly on the rise. Manufacturers were trying to out-do each other in regards to who had the fastest clock speed.
The way clock speed increases is by actually shrinking the microarchitecture (Semi-Conductors) of the processor, which leads to faster data transfer/processing rates. There was a pattern involved where each new generation of chip architecture yielded almost twice the clock speed of the past generation. However, as processor architecture grew smaller and smaller, eventually we approached a stage where physically, using current materials and manufacturing processes, a limit had been reached. It wasn't possible to continue shrinking the size of the processor, so logically, the next step was to integrate multiple cores on a single chip. This was the birth of the multicore processor.
The way a multicore processor works is by utilising multiple processor cores on a single chip. This way, instead of a higher clock speed, you have multiple cores running at the same speed, 'sharing' the workload. So, a 1ghz Dual Core Processor is a single chip, with 2 cores both clocked at 1ghz. A 3ghz Quad Core Processor is a single chip, with 4 cores all clocked at 3ghz.
This all sounds wonderful, but for a multicore processor to be used efficiently, it requires software to be multithreaded. This is where you have to question the use of dual core processors in smartphones, as none of the applications or the OS utilise multiple threads! So really, as it stands, you'll struggle to see truly improved performance from dual core handsets.
This will all change in the future. Android 2.4 will support dual cores by default and I'm guessing most software will start to aswell.
Anway, hope this was interesting for those wondering how dual core processors work and about clock speed etc.
Regards.
Well i have both phones now... i missed the sence weather and clock from DHD but fancy widget fixed that. O2x still has a few bugs ie black screen and auto reboots but i only had 1 bs a 2 reboots in 2 weeks now . games work better on o2x also with normal lock screen o2x is snapper all over at stock than a oc to 1.2 ghz DHD but the best part is the real HDMI out (no need for a ps3) but i will keep both phones
olyloh6696 said:
thanks, but why does it say for ecample that the htc sensation runs at 1.2 ghz? If they want to be more impressive, why dont they just say its running at 2.4 ghz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because they would be lying. If I have two towers each being 50m tall I can't advertise that I'm selling a 100m tower because I'm not.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
lynxboy said:
I'm 100% sure. Here's a brief history of multi core processors for those who are interested.
In the late 90's and early 000's, processor speed was constantly on the rise. Manufacturers were trying to out-do each other in regards to who had the fastest clock speed.
The way clock speed increases is by actually shrinking the microarchitecture (Semi-Conductors) of the processor, which leads to faster data transfer/processing rates. There was a pattern involved where each new generation of chip architecture yielded almost twice the clock speed of the past generation. However, as processor architecture grew smaller and smaller, eventually we approached a stage where physically, using current materials and manufacturing processes, a limit had been reached. It wasn't possible to continue shrinking the size of the processor, so logically, the next step was to integrate multiple cores on a single chip. This was the birth of the multicore processor.
The way a multicore processor works is by utilising multiple processor cores on a single chip. This way, instead of a higher clock speed, you have multiple cores running at the same speed, 'sharing' the workload. So, a 1ghz Dual Core Processor is a single chip, with 2 cores both clocked at 1ghz. A 3ghz Quad Core Processor is a single chip, with 4 cores all clocked at 3ghz.
This all sounds wonderful, but for a multicore processor to be used efficiently, it requires software to be multithreaded. This is where you have to question the use of dual core processors in smartphones, as none of the applications or the OS utilise multiple threads! So really, as it stands, you'll struggle to see truly improved performance from dual core handsets.
This will all change in the future. Android 2.4 will support dual cores by default and I'm guessing most software will start to aswell.
Anway, hope this was interesting for those wondering how dual core processors work and about clock speed etc.
Regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks for that! it helped me understand it abit more, cheers
but isnt the nexus s the developers phone? so android 2.4 must not just require dual core as the nexus s will be getting the 2.4 update?
letom said:
Because they would be lying. If I have two towers each being 50m tall I can't advertise that I'm selling a 100m tower because I'm not.
Sent from my Desire HD using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i see you logic now
but you could say in total you have 100m tower? so could you say i have a 2.4 ghz clocked phone?
Hi all.
I was questioning myself if the motorola xoom has two cores of 1ghz each one, Or both together have 1Ghz...?
Can Someone answer this?
p.d. Sorry 4 my bad english.
Both cores will be 1 GHZ.
solarnz said:
Both cores will be 1 GHZ.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, it has 2 cores of 500mhz each one?
Ifiuse said:
So, it has 2 cores of 500mhz each one?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1 core / 1ghz.
1 CPU...two cores...1ghz per core...1ghz total
Sent from my Xoom
Thanks u. Regards.
Im an Electronic Engineer so forgive my not understanding peoples confusion with the ghz thing but ...
Frequency is a rate, its speed, this is not a volume or value, were aren't saying they have 2MB of memory, is it 2 each or 1, 1.
Time runs at 1hz for me, as it does for everyone else in the world, do we share the 1hz or is it equal?
The hardware design determines the clock frequency of a cpu core, it doesn't, matter if you have a single for 1ghz, 2 core 1ghz or 20480 core 1ghz,
As long as those cores are they same, they run on the same clock.
To ask if they share the clock time would be like saying I have a guy that can do 2 sums every time the sun rises, now I have 2 guys that can do two sums every time the sun rises, do they do ne each? No, sun rises once a day and each of them does two sums, so you get twice as much work out of them in the same amount of time.
That might raise the question, well, while dont we just have 50 cores?
Well, its expensive to manufacture, its subject to low yield, it expensive and power consuming, also software has to be written to take advantage of all the cores (if you don't have enough sums to give your two guys, they can't give you results, right?)
Anyway, point is, the frequency is a rate, and don't for a moment assume that higher frequency automatically means more powerful processing. (Its true to an extent, but only within the same architecture.)
Macbots drool as I XOOM through the Galaxy to my hearts Desire.
good analogy, I use the car & highway one... 2 cars 1 lane for single core or 2 lanes and 1 car on each lane for dual core..
so? total=1ghz for all or total=2(1ghz) im slow
lchingonl said:
so? total=1ghz for all or total=2(1ghz) im slow
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol, there is no _total_!
1GHz is the frequency that the CPU core clock runs at, they all run the same, on the same clock, 1 core, 2 cores, ten cores.
You need to understand this concept that "total" doesn't apply here.
This is not "1GHz per core", the core clock frequency is 1GHz, and there are two cores, they BOTH run at 1GHz.
This is the first dual core I've had, and I don't know much about the technology.
What's the difference between a dual core cpu running @ 1GHz and a single core running @ 2 GHz?
Psychokitty said:
This is the first dual core I've had, and I don't know much about the technology.
What's the difference between a dual core cpu running @ 1GHz and a single core running @ 2 GHz?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 cores both running at 1ghz still equals 1ghz...1 core running at 2ghz equals 2ghz.
Lets try this:
If two cars are both going down the road at 60mph, how long does it take them to go 60 miles? Even though there is 2 of them, both running the same speed, it still takes 1 hour. Hope this helps you understand.
Am I right in believing that with two 1ghz cores, there would be no benefit in speed unless the app or OS were specifically designed to utilize both cores? My understanding was that if you had two 1ghz cores, and the app was programmed to utilize both cores, each core would handle it's own load. Is this wrong?
Does two 1ghz cores truly equal 2x the speed if the app is programmed to use both?
deepducky said:
Am I right in believing that with two 1ghz cores, there would be no benefit in speed unless the app or OS were specifically designed to utilize both cores? My understanding was that if you had two 1ghz cores, and the app was programmed to utilize both cores, each core would handle it's own load. Is this wrong?
Does two 1ghz cores truly equal 2x the speed if the app is programmed to use both?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it depends on the application's workload more rather than the programming. If the application can split its workload into parts that can be done in parallel, you get a speed increase. However, if the application relies completely on having to have one part that cannot be broken up into parallel-running parts, then you will get absolutely no benefit from a multiple-core processor.
Mostly, dual-core processors are about *efficiency* rather than *speed*. Here's a good analogy. It's about being able to walk and chew gum at the same time, rather than having to walk a bit, stop, chew gum for a bit, stop, walk a bit more, stop, etc.
ydaraishy said:
No, it depends on the application's workload more rather than the programming. If the application can split its workload into parts that can be done in parallel, you get a speed increase. However, if the application relies completely on having to have one part that cannot be broken up into parallel-running parts, then you will get absolutely no benefit from a multiple-core processor.
Mostly, dual-core processors are about *efficiency* rather than *speed*. Here's a good analogy. It's about being able to walk and chew gum at the same time, rather than having to walk a bit, stop, chew gum for a bit, stop, walk a bit more, stop, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In addition, to that analogy, consider the saying "two headsbare better than one." When you have two devs working together, they can get through their to-do list quicker and more efficiently than one dev doing everything alone.