Related
Hi everyone
For quite a long time i've been thinking about the whole "galaxy s can do 90mpolys per second" thing.
It sounds like total bull****.
So, after many, many hours of googling, and some unanswered mails to imgtec, i'd like to know-
Can ANYONE provide any concrete info about the SGX540?
From one side i see declerations that the SGX540 can do 90 million polygons per second, and from the other side i see stuff like "Twice the performance of SGX530".
...but twice the performance of SGX530 is EXACTLY what the SGX535 has.
So is the 540 a rebrand of the 535? that can't be, so WHAT THE HELL is going on?
I'm seriously confused, and would be glad if anyone could pour light on the matter.
I asked a Samsung rep what the difference was and this is what I got:
Q: The Samsung Galaxy S uses the SGX540 vs the iPhone using the SGx535. The only data I can find seems like these two GPU's are very similar. Could you please highlight some of the differences between the SGX535 and the SGX540?
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
I also tried getting in contact with ImgTec to find out an answer, but I haven't received a reply back. It's been two weeks now.
Also, the chip is obviously faster than snapdragon with the adreno 200 gpu. I don't know if Adreno supports TBDR, I just know it's a modified Xenon core. Also, Galaxy S uses LPDDR2 ram. So throughput is quite a bit faster, even though it's not *as* necessary with all the memory efficiencies between the Cortex A8 and TBDR on the SGX540.
thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think that is the cue, for cost saving for Samsung
besides who will need a 2D Accelerator, with a CPU as fast as it's already.
The HTC Athena (HTC Advantage) failed miserably at adding the ATI 2D Accelerator which no programmers were able to take advantage of, in the end the CPU did all the work.
I'd imagine its a 535 at 45nm. Just a guess, the cpu is also 45nm
Having tried a few phones the speed in games is far better, much better fps though there is a problem that we might have to wait for any games to really test its power as most are made to run on all phones.
This was the same problem with the xbox and ps2, the xbox had more power but the ps2 was king and so games were made with its hardware in mind which held back the xbox, only now and then did a xbox only game come out that really made use of its power....years later xbox changed places which saw 360 hold the ps3 back (dont start on which is better lol) and the ps3 has to make do with 360 ports but when it has a game made just for it you really get to see what it can do...anywayits nice to know galaxy is future proof game wise and cannot wait to see what it can do in future or what someone can port on to it.
On a side note I did read that the videos run through the graphics chip which is causing blocking in dark movies (not hd...lower rips) something about it not reading the difference between shades of black, one guy found a way to turn the chip off and movies were all good, guess rest of us have to wait for firmware to sort this.
thephawx said:
A: SGX540 is the latest GPU that provides better performance and more energy efficiency.
SGX535 is equipped with 2D Graphic Accelerator which SGX540 does not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
smart move sammy
voodoochild2008-
I wouldn't say we'd have to wait so much.
Even today, snapdragon devices don't do very well in games, since their fillrate is so low (133Mpixels)
Even the motorola droid (SGX530 at 110mhz, about 9~ Mpoly's and 280~ Mpixels with that freq) fares MUCH better in games, and actually, runs pretty much everything.
So i guess the best hardware is not yet at stake, but weaker devices should be hitting the limit soon.
bl4ckdr4g00n- Why the hell should we care? I don't see any problem with 2D content and/or videos, everything flies at lightspeed.
well I can live in hope, and I guess apples mess (aka the iphone4) will help now as firms are heading more towards android, I did read about one big firm in usa dropping marketing for apple and heading to android, and well thats what you get when you try to sell old ideas...always made me laugh when the first iphone did like 1meg photo when others were on 3meg, then it had no video when most others did, then they hype it when it moves to a 3meg cam and it does video.....omg, ok I am going to stop as it makes my blood boil that people buy into apple, yes they started the ball rolling and good on them for that but then they just sat back and started to count the money as others moved on.................oh and when I bought my galaxy the website did say "able to run games as powerfull as the xbox (old one) so is HALO too much to ask for lol
wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??
The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby
he 535 is a downgrade from the 540. 540 is the latest and greatest from the PowerVR line.
Samsung did not cost cut, they've in fact spent MORE to get this chip on their Galaxy S line. No one else has the 540 besides Samsung.
Like i said, its probably just a process shrink which means our gpu uses less power and is possibly higher clocked.
p.s. desktop gfx haven't had 2d acceleration for years removing it saves transistors for more 3d / power!
This worries me as well... Seems like it might not be as great as what we thought. HOWEVER again, this is a new device that might be fixed in firmware updates. Because obviously the hardware is stellar, there's something holding it back
Pika007 said:
The droid X still uses the SGX530, but in the droid x, as opposed to the original droid, it comes in the stock 200mhz (or at least 180)
At that state it does 12-14Mpolygons/sec and can push out 400-500Mpixels/sec
Not too shabby
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.slashgear.com/droid-x-review-0793011/
"We benchmarked the DROID X using Quadrant, which measures processor, memory, I/O and 2D/3D graphics and combines them into a single numerical score. In Battery Saver mode, the DROID X scored 819, in Performance mode it scored 1,204, and in Smart mode it scored 963. In contrast, the Samsung Galaxy S running Android 2.1 – using Samsung’s own 1GHz Hummingbird CPU – scored 874, while a Google Nexus One running Android 2.2 – using Qualcomm’s 1GHz Snapdragon – scored 1,434. "
The N1's performance can be explained by the fact it's 2.2...
But the Droid X, even with the "inferior" GPU, outscored the Galaxy S? Why?
gdfnr123 said:
wait so what about the droid x vs the galaxy s gpu?? i know the galaxy s is way advanced in specs wise... the droid x does have a dedicated gpu can anyone explain??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same here. I want to know which one is has the better performance as well.
Besides that. Does anyone know which CPU is better between Dorid X and Galaxy S?
I knew that OMAP chip on the original Droid can overclock to 1.2Ghz from what, 550Mhz?
How about the CPU on Droid X and Galaxy S? Did anyone do the comparison between those chips? Which can overclock to a higher clock and which one is better overall?
Sorry about the poor English. Hope you guys can understand.
The CPU in the DroidX is a stock Cortex A8 running at 1GHz. The Samsung Hummingbird is a specialized version of the Cortex A8 designed by Intrinsity running at 1Ghz.
Even Qualcomm does a complete redesign of the Cortex A8 in the snapdragon cpu at 1GHz. But while the original A8 could only be clocked at 600Mhz with a reasonable power drain, the striped down versions of the A8 could be clocked higher while maintaining better power.
An untouched Cortex A8 can do more at the same frequencies compared to a specialized stripped down A8.
If anything the Samsung Galaxy S is better balanced, leveraging the SGX 540 as a video decoder as well. However, the Droid X should be quite snappy in most uses.
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.
TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.
Pika007 said:
TexUs-
I wouldn't take it too seriously.
Quadrant isn't too serious of a benchmark, plus, i think you can blame it on the fact that 2D acceleration in the SGS is done by the processor, while the DROID X has 2D acceleration by the GPU.
I can assure you- There is no way in hell that the SGX540 is inferior to the 530. It's at least twice as strong in everything related to 3D acceleration.
I say- let's wait for froyo for all devices, let all devices clear from "birth ropes" of any kind, and test again. with more than one benchmark.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The SGS might be falling behind in I/O speeds... It is well known that all the app data is stored in a slower internal SD-card partition... Has anyone tried the benchmarks with the lag fix?
Also, if only android made use of the GPU's to help render the UI's... It's such a shame that the GPU only goes to use in games...
Using the GPU to render the UI would take tons of battery power.
I preffer it being a bit less snappy, but a whole lot easier on the battery.
thephawx said:
At the end of the day. You really shouldn't care too much about obsolescence. I mean the Qualcomm Dual-core scorpion chip is probably going to be coming out around December.
Smart phones are moving at a blisteringly fast pace.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.
TexUs said:
Smart phones aren't but batteries are.
IMO the only way we haven't had huge battery issues because all the other tech (screen, RAM power, CPU usage, etc) has improved...
Dual core or 2Ghz devices sound nice on paper but I worry if the battery technology can keep up.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think so. The battery will be the biggest issue for the smart phone in the future if it just remain 1500mAh or even less.
The dual-core CPU could be fast but power aggressive as well.
I'm probably the only person on this planet that would ever download a 20.5-meg, 2426-page document titled "S5PC110 RISC Microprocessor User's Manual", but if there are other hardware freaks out there interested, here you go:
http://pdadb.net/index.php?m=repository&id=644&c=samsung_s5pc110_microprocessor_user_manual_1.00
As you may or may not know, the S5PC110, better known as Hummingbird, is the SoC (System on a Chip) that is the brain of your Epic. Now, when you have those moments when you really just gotta know the memory buffer size for your H.264 encoder or are dying to pore over a block diagram of your SGX540 GPU architecture, you can!
( Note: It does get a little bit dry at parts. Unless you're an ARM engineer, I suppose. )
Why arent you working on porting CM6 or gingerbread via CM7?? lol
now we can overclock the gpu
/sarcasm
cbusillo said:
Why arent you working on porting CM6 or gingerbread via CM7?? lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hah, because I know exactly squat about Android development. Hardware is more my thing, though if I find some spare time to play around with the Android SDK maybe that can change.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
This actually is really exciting news. RISC architectures in general, especially the ARM instruction set is great and honestly it would so the works a lot of good kicking the chains of x86
Sent from my Nexus S with a keyboard
Interesting - the complete technical design of the Hummingbird chips.
After reading your blog as to how Hummingbird got its extra performance, I still wonder at times - did we make the right choice in getting this phone the Epic 4G (I bought one for $300 off contract and imported it to Canada) knowing that there are going to be ARM Cortex A9 CPUs coming around in just a couple of months? We know that in the real world, Hummingbird is more powerful than Snapdragon and the OMAP 3600 series, while benchmark scores tend to not reflect real world performance.
Performance-wise: It's know that the out of order A9 parts are at least 30% faster clock for clock in real world performance. There will be dual and maybe quad core implementations. What's really up in the air is the graphics performance of the A9 parts. There's now the Power VR SGX 545, the Mali 400, and the Tegra 2.
Edit: There is also the successor, the Mali T-604. I don't expect to see this in a phone in the near future. Nor do I expect the Tegra 3. Maybe close to this time next year though.
sauron0101 said:
Interesting - the complete technical design of the Hummingbird chips.
After reading your blog as to how Hummingbird got its extra performance, I still wonder at times - did we make the right choice in getting this phone the Epic 4G (I bought one for $300 off contract and imported it to Canada) knowing that there are going to be ARM Cortex A9 CPUs coming around in just a couple of months? We know that in the real world, Hummingbird is more powerful than Snapdragon and the OMAP 3600 series, while benchmark scores tend to not reflect real world performance.
Performance-wise: It's know that the out of order A9 parts are at least 30% faster clock for clock in real world performance. There will be dual and maybe quad core implementations. What's really up in the air is the graphics performance of the A9 parts. There's now the Power VR SGX 545, the Mali 400, and the Tegra 2.
Edit: There is also the successor, the Mali T-604. I don't expect to see this in a phone in the near future. Nor do I expect the Tegra 3. Maybe close to this time next year though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your always going to be playing catchup..I personally think the Epic has great hardware for the time...I mean on Samsung's roadmap for 2012/13 is their Aquila processor which is a quad-core 1.2ghz..its going to be endless catchup..every year there will be something that completely over shallows the rest..
gTen said:
Your always going to be playing catchup..I personally think the Epic has great hardware for the time...I mean on Samsung's roadmap for 2012/13 is their Aquila processor which is a quad-core 1.2ghz..its going to be endless catchup..every year there will be something that completely over shallows the rest..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, but I mean, if you buy the latest technology when its released, you'll be set for quite some time.
For example, if you were to buy the one of the first Tegra 2 phones, its unlikely that anything is going to be beating that significantly until at least 2012 when the quad core parts begin to emerge.
It takes a year or so from the time that a CPU is announced to the time that it gets deployed in a handset. For example, the Snapdragon was announced in late 2008 and the first phones (HD2) were about a year later. IF you buy an A9 dual core part early on, you should be set for some time.
Well, I got the Epic knowing Tegra 2 was coming in a few months with next-gen performance. I was badly in need of a new phone and the Epic, while not a Cortex A9, is no slouch.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
sauron0101 said:
No, but I mean, if you buy the latest technology when its released, you'll be set for quite some time.
For example, if you were to buy the one of the first Tegra 2 phones, its unlikely that anything is going to be beating that significantly until at least 2012 when the quad core parts begin to emerge.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats relative, in terms of GPU performance our Hummingbird doesn't do so badly..the GPU the TI chose to pair with the dual core OMAP is effectively a PowerVR SGX540..the Snapdragon that is rumored to be in the dual cores next summer is also on par with our GPU performance...so yes we will loose out to newer hardware..which is to be expected but I wouldn't consider it a slouch either...
It takes a year or so from the time that a CPU is announced to the time that it gets deployed in a handset. For example, the Snapdragon was announced in late 2008 and the first phones (HD2) were about a year later. IF you buy an A9 dual core part early on, you should be set for some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The first phone was a TG01, that said I guarantee you that a year if not less from the first Tegra release there will be a better processor out...its bound to happen..
Edit: Some benchmarks for Tablets:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4067/nvidia-tegra-2-graphics-performance-update
Though I am not sure if its using both cores or not...also Tegra 2 I think buffers at 16bit..while Hummingbird buffers at 24bit..
gTen said:
Thats relative, in terms of GPU performance our Hummingbird doesn't do so badly..the GPU the TI chose to pair with the dual core OMAP is effectively a PowerVR SGX540..the Snapdragon that is rumored to be in the dual cores next summer is also on par with our GPU performance...so yes we will loose out to newer hardware..which is to be expected but I wouldn't consider it a slouch either...
The first phone was a TG01, that said I guarantee you that a year if not less from the first Tegra release there will be a better processor out...its bound to happen..
Edit: Some benchmarks for Tablets:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4067/nvidia-tegra-2-graphics-performance-update
Though I am not sure if its using both cores or not...also Tegra 2 I think buffers at 16bit..while Hummingbird buffers at 24bit..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
AFAIK, dual-core support is only fully supported by Honeycomb. But if you feel like buying into NVIDIA's explanation of Tegra 2 performance, check this out: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/t...-Multi-core-CPUs-in-Mobile-Devices_Ver1.2.pdf
Electrofreak said:
AFAIK, dual-core support is only fully supported by Honeycomb. But if you feel like buying into NVIDIA's explanation of Tegra 2 performance, check this out: http://www.nvidia.com/content/PDF/t...-Multi-core-CPUs-in-Mobile-Devices_Ver1.2.pdf
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I see I actually read before that Gingerbread would allow for dual core support but I guess that was delayed to honeycomb...
either way this would mean even if a Tegra based phone comes out it wont be able to utilize both cored until at least mid next year.
I can't open pdfs right now but I read a whitepaper with performance of hummingbird and Tegra 2 compared both on single core and dual core..is that the same one?
One thing though is Nvidia and ATI are quite known for tweaking their gfx cards to perform well on benchmarks...I hope its not the same with their CPUs :/
gTen said:
Edit: Some benchmarks for Tablets:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4067/nvidia-tegra-2-graphics-performance-update
Though I am not sure if its using both cores or not...also Tegra 2 I think buffers at 16bit..while Hummingbird buffers at 24bit..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here are some additional benchmarks comparing the Galaxy Tab to the Viewsonic G Tablet:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4062/samsung-galaxy-tab-the-anandtech-review/5
It's possible that the Tegra 2 isn't optimized yet. Not to mention, Honeycomb will be the release that makes the most of dual cores. However, there are lackluster performance gains in terms of graphics - most of it seems to be purely CPU gains in performance.
I'm not entirely sure that Neocore is representative of real world performance either. It's possible that it may have been optimized for some platforms. Furthermore, I would not be surprised if Neocore gave inflated scores for the Snapdragon and it's Adreno graphics platform. Of course, neither is Quadrant.
I think that real world games like Quake III based games are the way to go, although until we see more graphics demanding games, I suppose that there's little to test (we're expecting more games for Android next year).
Finally, we've gotten to a point for web browsing where its the data connection HSPA+, LTE, or WiMAX that will dictate how fast pages load. It's like upgrading the CPU for a PC. I currently run an overclocked q6600 - if I were to upgrade to say a Sandy Bridge when it comes out next year, I don't expect significant improvements in real world browsing performance.
Eventually, the smartphone market will face the same problem that the PC market does. Apart from us enthusiasts who enjoy benchmarking and overclocking, apart from high end gaming, and perhaps some specialized operations (like video encoding which I do a bit of), you really don't need the latest and greatest CPU or 6+ GB of RAM (which many new desktops come with). Same with high end GPUs. Storage follows the same dilemna. I imagine that as storage grows, I'll be storing FLAC music files instead of AAC, MP3, or OGG, and more video. I will also use my cell phone to replace my USB key drive. Otherwise, there's no need for bigger storage.
gTen said:
I see I actually read before that Gingerbread would allow for dual core support but I guess that was delayed to honeycomb...
either way this would mean even if a Tegra based phone comes out it wont be able to utilize both cored until at least mid next year.
I can't open pdfs right now but I read a whitepaper with performance of hummingbird and Tegra 2 compared both on single core and dual core..is that the same one?
One thing though is Nvidia and ATI are quite known for tweaking their gfx cards to perform well on benchmarks...I hope its not the same with their CPUs :/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Gingerbread doesn't have any dual-core optimizations. It has some JIT improvements in addition to some other minor enhancements, but according to rumor, Honeycomb is where it's at, and it's why the major tablet manufacturers are holding off releasing their Tegra 2 tablets until it's released.
And yeah, that paper shows the performance of several different Cortex A8s (including Hummingbird) compared to Tegra 2, and then goes on to compare Tegra 2 single-core performance vs dual.
Electrofreak said:
Gingerbread doesn't have any dual-core optimizations. It has some JIT improvements in addition to some other minor enhancements, but according to rumor, Honeycomb is where it's at, and it's why the major tablet manufacturers are holding off releasing their Tegra 2 tablets until it's released.
And yeah, that paper shows the performance of several different Cortex A8s (including Hummingbird) compared to Tegra 2, and then goes on to compare Tegra 2 single-core performance vs dual.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I looked at:
http://androidandme.com/2010/11/new...u-will-want-to-buy-a-dual-core-mobile-device/
since I can't access the pdf..does the whitepaper state what version they used to do their tests? for example if they used 2.1 on the sgs and honeycomb on their tests it wouldn't exactly be a fair comparison...do they also put in the actual FPS..not % wise? for example we are capped on the FPS for example...
Lastly, in the test does it say whether the Tegra 2 was dithering at 16bit or 24bit?
gTen said:
I looked at:
http://androidandme.com/2010/11/new...u-will-want-to-buy-a-dual-core-mobile-device/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm one of Taylor's (unofficial) tech consultants, and I spoke with him regarding that article. Though, credit where it's due to Taylor, he's been digging stuff up recently that I don't have a clue about. We've talked about Honeycomb and dual-core tablets, and since Honeycomb will be the first release of Android to support tablets officially, and since Motorola seems to be holding back the release of its Tegra 2 tablet until Honeycomb (quickly checks AndroidAndMe to make sure I haven't said anything Taylor hasn't already said), and rumors say that Honeycomb will have dual-core support, it all makes sense.
But yes, the whitepaper is the one he used to base that article on.
gTen said:
since I can't access the pdf..does the whitepaper state what version they used to do their tests? for example if they used 2.1 on the sgs and honeycomb on their tests it wouldn't exactly be a fair comparison...do they also put in the actual FPS..not % wise? for example we are capped on the FPS for example...
Lastly, in the test does it say whether the Tegra 2 was dithering at 16bit or 24bit?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android 2.2 was used in all of their tests according to the footnotes in the document. While I believe that Android 2.2 is capable of using both cores simultaneously, I don't believe it is capable of threading them separately. But that's just my theory. I'm just going off of what the Gingerbread documentation from Google says; and unfortunately there is no mention of improved multi-core processor support in Gingerbread.
http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.3-highlights.html
As for FPS and the dithering... they don't really go there; the whitepaper is clearly focused on CPU performance, and so it features benchmark scores and timed results. I take it all with a pinch of salt anyhow; despite the graphs and such, it's still basically an NVIDIA advertisement.
That said, Taylor has been to one of their expos or whatever you call it, and he's convinced that the Tegra 2 GPU will perform several times better than the SGX 540 in the Galaxy S phones. I'm not so sure I'm convinced... I've seen comparable performance benchmarks come from the LG Tegra 2 phone, but Taylor claims it was an early build with and he's seen even better performance. Time will tell I suppose...
EDIT - As for not being able to access the .pdfs, what are you talking about?! XDA app / browser and Adobe Reader!
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?
hey all
i thought id share with you for those who would be interested in my first hands on experience with the samsung galaxy s2
well i went round my friends house after work, as he was waiting for one to be delivered as an upgrade, anyway he rang me to say that it was here,
so i thought id go up and have alook.
the first thing i did when he gave it me was.... drop it lol
he passed it me and it slipped right through my fingers it was so thin
it bounced on his hard laminated floor a few times but he just laughed.
it is a nice device, very slim altho abit wider than the play
the brightness on the screen was great
and it was very very snappy scrolling across homescreens and loading up apps,
exploring the memory with astro. i was impressed
and alot lighter than the play aswell
the quadrant scores were off the chart getting something like 3k+
linpack he was getting 48
i did notice that when running quadrant some of the textures were just plain solid shapes no actual textures. i thought maybe thats got something to do with that mali chipset that i heard didnt support certain texture compression but anyway.
i told him to fire up fpse to see what that ran like with the new fpse.
mines runs great hovering around at around 45-50fps
on most games. until i put on screen filtering
and that has a massive impact on fps it drops to around
27-30fps and games become unplayable even with frame skip on max
enhanced 3d rendering has little effect on fps so i keep that on
anyway i thought that the galaxy s 2 with the 1.2 dualcore and the mali 400mp
would power along when putting screen filtering on.
so i tried tekken 3 loaded it up. ran it but without screen filtering on
and it was buttery smooth stuck at 60fps.
then i turned on screen filtering and it dropped to 30/35fps
and was the same unplayable state mine was.
i was gob smacked surely a dualcore would best this???
my mate said, so looks like your not missing much gaming wise then compared to mine. i just smiled ,he hasnt got his for gaming mind.
i dont know if there was summat goin on, or a imcompatability with fpse
but it was an interesting discovery. i tried afew other games and they all were the same.
so as far as emulation and fpse goes were not getting left behind because we have no dualcore cpu.
Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.
I have both, well sort off, play dead gone for repairing with sony, so bought S2 in the mean time, to tell you, S2 with 1gb RAM and Dual core Processor which can be overclocked to stable 1.66 ghz is way fast as compared to play, trust me, graphic wise both have 16m colors, but s2 with super amoled does it somehow better...i miss playing games the play way...thats all...I guess S2 is the world's fastest stable phone for now.....atleast I have both so know it...
shotgunfool said:
Someone please correct me here if im wrong but what your saying is that a dual core cpu is the same speed as a single core cpu on single core programming, well yes that is going to be the obvous result, yes different single core speeds will have various results.
But unless a program has been coded for use with more than one processor then it will not make use of a dual core processor.
for example
a single core processor can work out
x = 5
y = ?
x * y = 15
this equation would take as much time on a single core processor as it would a dual core processor as you are waiting for the result of 15/x to work out what y is.
so until FPSE is programmed to allocate for dual core processors you will end up with the same speed of use, or very similar.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu
crispyduckling said:
your forgetting about the more onboard ram the s2 has plus it has the mali 400mp Gpu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.
I tried tekken on it, could see puches coming at me my thumbb was always in the way. I told the owner to uninstall as gaming on something like that was a joke. He didnt agree until he tried my play.
Sent from my R800a using XDA Premium App
RacecarBMW said:
The tegra2 bests that GPU in every possible way.
Also doesn't the SGS II have an FPS limit.
Also Exynos as a whole is not all that more powerful than tegra2 I mean the reason the SGS II does so well on benchmarks is because of android 2.3 look at the Atrix 2.3 leak its benchmarks are off the charts as well.
And my last point. There is no need for all this power if it is not going to be used. I mean games need that type of power and games are best played with a gamepad. Why sony ericsson didn't put a tegra in the play is beyond me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2
crispyduckling said:
yea I tried to play tekken and I just couldn't on the touch screen
IM so glad I have a play
its a great phone tho the gs2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Reason I switched too.
Sent from my R800i using XDA App
Touchscreens suck for gaming.
No amount of processing power in the World will overcome this fact.
Bell points the finger at chipset makers - "The way it's implemented right now, Android does not make as effective use of multiple cores as it could, and I think - frankly - some of this work could be done by the vendors who create the SoCs, but they just haven't bothered to do it. Right now the lack of software effort by some of the folks who have done their hardware implementation is a bigger disadvantage than anything else."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think about this guys?
He knows his stuff.
Sent from my GT-I9300
i would take it with a pinch of salt, though there are not many apps that takes advantage of multi core processor lets see what intel will tell when they have thier own dual core processor out in the market
Pretty good valid arguments for the most part.
I mostly agree though, but I think android makes good use of up to 2 cores. Anything more than that it doesn't at all.
There is a huge chunk of the article missing too.
Sent from my GT-I9300
full article
jaytana said:
What do you think about this guys?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.
Reckless187 said:
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?
Actually is a totally fail but in android 5 I think it's can be solved
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA
This was a serious problem on desktop Windows OS as well back when multi cores first starting coming out. I remember having to download patches for certain games and in other cases, having to set the CPU affinity to run certain games/apps with only one core so that it wouldn't freeze up. I am sure Android will move forward with multi-core support in the future.
simollie said:
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a harsh but fair punishment imo. They need to sort that sh*t out as its totally unacceptable or they're gonna get a taste of the Cat o Nine Tails.
Android kernel is based on Linux. So this is suggesting the Linux kernel is not built to support multi-core either. Not true. There is a reason the SGS3 gets 5000+ in Quadrant, the the San Diego only gets 3000+. And the San Diego is running 200MHz faster.
Just look at the blue bar here. http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/31/orange-san-diego-benchmarks/ . My SGS3 got over 2.5K on just CPU alone.
What Intel said was true. Android is multicore aware but the os and apps aren't taking advantage of it. When this user disabled 2 cores on the HTC one x it made no difference at all in anything other than benchmarks.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=26094852&postcount=3
Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?
I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3
916x10 said:
I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay folks... firstly linux kernel, which android is based on, is aware of multicore (its obvious) but most the applications are not aware, thats true!.. but is not the android which to blame neither the SoC makers. This is like the flame intel made that they wanted to say their single core can do faster to a dual core arm LOL, (maybe intel will make 1 core has 4 threads or 8 threads) <- imposibruuu for now dunno later
you will notice the core usage while playing HD video that require cpu to decode (better core decode fastly)... and im not sure single core intel does better to arm dual core.. ~haha~
but for average user the differences are not noticable.. if intel aiming for this market yes that make sense... but android user are above average user.. they will optimize its phone eventually IMO
What they have failed to disclose is which SoC they did their test on and their methodology. Not much reason to doubt what he's saying but you gotta remember that Intel only have a single core mobile SoC currently and are aiming to get a foothold in the mobile device ecosystem so part of this could be throwing salt on competing products as it's something that should be taken care of by Google optimising the CPU scheduling algorithms of their OS.
The problem is in the chip set. I currently attend SUNY Oswego and a professor of mine Doug Lea works on many concurrent structures. He is currently working on the ARM spec sheet that is used to make chips. The bench marks that he has done shows that no matter how lucky or unlucky you get, the time that it takes to do a concurrent process is about the same where on desktop chips there is a huge difference between best case and worse case. The blame falls on the people that make the chips for now. They need to change how it handles concurrent operations and then if android still cant use multi-core processors then it falls on the shoulders of google.
that is my two cents on the whole situation. Just finished concurrency with Doug and after many talks this is my current opinion.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA
Flynny75 said:
Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't mean daily task doesn't need the cpu power. When I put my sgs 3 in power save mode which cut back the cpu to 800mHz, I feel the lag instantly when scrolling around and navigating the internet. So I can conclude that performance per core is still much more important than number of cores. There isn't any performance difference either with the dual core sensation xe running beside the single core sensational xl.
The hardware needs to be out for developers to have incentive to make use of it. It's not like Android was built from the ground up to utilize 4 cores. That said, once it hits enough hand it and software running in it will be made to utilize the new hardware.