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!
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
I always thought that dual cores were supposed to be more efficient and therefore have greater battery life and better multitasking experiences.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Miamicane99 said:
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol, really?
My year old snapdragon runs numerous programs together perfectly smooth with absolutely no hiccups or lag.
I'm willing to bet a stock phone with (as I stated in the OP) optimized 1 or 1.2 ghz processor and GPU, add in a decent amount of ram and you have absolutely everything you need.
The hardware isn't the problem with android, it's the software. For some reason people don't seem to notice that. There remedy is to add unnecessary power to our phones that will more than likely never be used...
If dual core is somehow supposed to increase battery life, then I can understand somewhat the reasoning behind them. But I don't understand how two processors will noticeably help battery life in real time.
Miamicane99 said:
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try, but the purpose is to make apps also run better. Apps can easily be patched to take advantage of multiple cores and enhance its performance and such.
Also, multiple cores allow for higher performance with a lower hit on battery life. That alone is enough of a purpose of multiple cores. Not to mention ability to stream full 1080p videos, etc, which will eventually be the norm. This is specially important when outputting to TVs and the like.
starplaya93 said:
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are absolutely right. While we are at it, shouldn't 64K of memory be enough for anybody?
akarol said:
Also, multiple cores allow for higher performance with a lower hit on battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you get this from?
starplaya93 said:
Lol, really?
My year old snapdragon runs numerous programs together perfectly smooth with absolutely no hiccups or lag.
I'm willing to bet a stock phone with (as I stated in the OP) optimized 1 or 1.2 ghz processor and GPU, add in a decent amount of ram and you have absolutely everything you need.
The hardware isn't the problem with android, it's the software. For some reason people don't seem to notice that. There remedy is to add unnecessary power to our phones that will more than likely never be used...
If dual core is somehow supposed to increase battery life, then I can understand somewhat the reasoning behind them. But I don't understand how two processors will noticeably help battery life in real time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
absolutely right, android sucks when it comes to graphics. No hardware acceleration. Perfect example of why a first gen iPhone can run circles around a evo with half the hardware power when it comes to rendering effects and graphics. These hardware specs are just SPECS anyways. That dual core Tegra LG android phone thats coming out still lags despite how powerful it is.
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Perhaps this is a case of build it and they (new uses) will come? Good points on both side.
No, 3D is a gimmick. Dualcore CPU's, until fully optimized - and even then - is not a gimmick.
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
eh, i wouldnt necessarily call it a gimmick, imagine a dual core android phone that did have hardware acceleration. The possibilities would be crazy!!
But yes I totally agree with you also, until the fix the inherent flaw in every android device, more powerful harware is just going to drain the battery faster, instead of just optimizing the OS. Which sounds easy in practice but when there are hundreds of android devices, its probably not an easy task. ( i could very well be wrong though)
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to my quad core PC!
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
If you build it, they will come.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
starplaya93 said:
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it makes perfect sense , a lot is being asked out of a phone ,console like 3d graphics for gaming and yeah i do like some games on my evo like angry birds once in awhile but overall my main priority of my evo is just communicating and and apps for productivity like wifi tether etc. and the rest is for customizing which im pretty happy that my over clocked processor handles that great with occasional lags buts thats just the software though , if wanted gaming i would go with home consoles or portable gaming , i agree that people are just giving dual core too much hype , Right?
novanosis85 said:
If you build it, they will come.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Good one. lol
I don't think I said exactly what I meant in the OP...
My main point is that android does not need dual core processors at this point. We are still a new OS and there are tons of bugs and things that should be ironed out in the software, etc.
I have no problem with dual core processors if some people feel they will offer better performance and battery life than a 3rd or 4th generation fully optimized 1.2 ghz processor with a beast gpu.
My concern is that android is moving too fast for its own good. The OS has a lot of potential, but if we're just trying to blaze past the competition we're missing out ON A LOT of things.
3d is hands down a gimmick. There is absolutely no justification for that. lol
novanosis85 said:
Tell that to my quad core PC!
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aight, take your quad for example, lets say its 3ghz, now make a 12ghz single core and only run 2~3 apps at a time, I think it will run them better and use less power to do so
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A single core 2GHz CPU would probably be slower and suck up more juice than a dual core 1 GHz CPU.
I personally agree with the mentality of energy efficiency over power. I'm just not certain whether dual cores are better or worse in that regard. Two cores doing a few simple tasks would be more energy efficient than a similarly designed single core doing the same tasks, but firing both cores up at max performance would obviously not be. Right now, aside from gaming, I don't see any apps that would strain a dual core; so if provided with great software support from the kernel/OS, maybe multiple cores are the better option. I don't know, maybe someone more technical could shed some light.
Regardless though, software will evolve and become more complex and resource hungry. Maybe HD video editing (not complex just simple social network / personal stuff) and some other stuff I can't think of but will likely pop up. I definitely see much more value in having a powerful GPU, a big reason why I think the EVO ultimately falls short, but like I said, maybe big phones + big batteries (1900+ mAh) + small CPUs and components + multiple cores + and optimized software is the answer to the battery problems.
NewZJ said:
aight, take your quad for example, lets say its 3ghz, now make a 12ghz single core and only run 2~3 apps at a time, I think it will run them better and use less power to do so
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. No, it wont.
I still can't understand why everyone wants to upgrade processors so quickly. I am not talking about any device or processor in particular but in general. Like our pc's. How many pc's come with a decent amount of memory out of the box. That is usually one of the first things we must do to really enjoy it unless u spent the money on a high end gaming pc. Why don't they beef up the memory on these while they work on dual core stuff.
In no way am I saying I don't think I need a dual core. More is always better with that kind of stuff. I would definitely take a dual over a single core. Just wandering why memory always seems like it could use more. Phones and pc's
Sent from my rooted HTC EVO using the xda app!
Who knows when Ice Cream Sandwich will be released officially. What I HAVE heard though is that ICS is fully GPU driven by default, so hopefully when it comes out Samsung will not disable the Hardware acceleration due to their Touchwiz deal. As soon as 4.0 is released and is hardware accelerated I am buying the Note.
You could still buy it before that. ;-)
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
drgopoos said:
You could still buy it before that. ;-)
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I could, but I won't because I'm selfish and egotistic and want the GPU to drive the entire O/S which, by the way, will save on battery because the CPU will be freed up. Also, the only carrier to have the Note pass through the FCC so far is Att for HSPA+. I'd like to get a full 4g (LTE) version if released.
I have a SGS Epic 4g and my contract is up in June. That will give them time to release 4.0 and for me to see if any other phones release that are close to the power and amazing screen as this one.
ZenInsight said:
I could, but I won't because I'm selfish and egotistic and want the GPU to drive the entire O/S which, by the way, will save on battery because the CPU will be freed up. Also, the only carrier to have the Note pass through the FCC so far is Att for HSPA+. I'd like to get a full 4g (LTE) version if released.
I have a SGS Epic 4g and my contract is up in June. That will give them time to release 4.0 and for me to see if any other phones release that are close to the power and amazing screen as this one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
None of the phone or computer can be fully driven by GPU. CPU is the core component of them but not GPU. GPU will certainly improve the 2D/3D display performance but you still need CPU to response most of the other tasks. ICS is not that kind of magic things. It just an twisted Gingerbread man + Honeycomb.
ZenInsight said:
I could, but I won't because I'm selfish and egotistic and want the GPU to drive the entire O/S which, by the way, will save on battery because the CPU will be freed up. Also, the only carrier to have the Note pass through the FCC so far is Att for HSPA+. I'd like to get a full 4g (LTE) version if released.
I have a SGS Epic 4g and my contract is up in June. That will give them time to release 4.0 and for me to see if any other phones release that are close to the power and amazing screen as this one.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and also u never know wat are the glitches coming up with ICS
siamchen said:
None of the phone or computer can be fully driven by GPU. CPU is the core component of them but not GPU. GPU will certainly improve the 2D/3D display performance but you still need CPU to response most of the other tasks. ICS is not that kind of magic things. It just an twisted Gingerbread man + Honeycomb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
ICS in fact will be magical, awesome, fantastic
No, seriously, GPU acceleration will make the battery long more, drawers will be fasters and @ 60 fps always even in old devices and all the apps animations will be fluid.
Of course the cpu it is important, but this is like when in windows after a format you don't have the gpu drivers and all of them is laggy with slow drawings on screen.
This will be the most remarcable addition to android so far in a lot of time.
ZenInsight said:
Who knows when Ice Cream Sandwich will be released officially. What I HAVE heard though is that ICS is fully GPU driven by default, so hopefully when it comes out Samsung will not disable the Hardware acceleration due to their Touchwiz deal. As soon as 4.0 is released and is hardware accelerated I am buying the Note.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have the patience you should wait since you have expectations that are not yet fulfilled.
Also prices won't go higher on waiting, they would only reduce as a new model comes into the circuit.
For people like me (patience-less) I can only hope that disturbances would delay my future electronic purchases so that i can save for the next best thing ;-) then again a person like me would like to dive right into it and see what can be made out if it perhaps rom cooking on my cards ;-)
From Windows to Android here I (try) to Come!~
ZenInsight said:
. . want the GPU to drive the entire O/S which, by the way, will save on battery because the CPU will be freed up. . .
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Doesn't mean the overall power draw will be less, the GPU will start drawing more power.
The GPU will not drive the OS, only the animations and rendering. The OS will still be driven by the CPU since GPUs are not designed to execute complex instruction sets.
The UI animations and transitions will be faster and smoother and hopefully the hardware acceleration will also be baked into the browser to speed up page rendering and redraws.
But there is no need to wait, since you will have a better phone than you have now which will be able to run ICS when it is available. Samsung will not be shipping the note with ICS anyway, most likely they will always ship it with GB and offer an OTA upgrade.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA App
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.
Dear XDA Community,
1-2 days ago, Intel announced that they had done a big mistake in their CPUs architecture. They say that the problem, or this mistake not individual. ARM, CORTEX also did this mistake. OS developer companies, like Microsoft and Apple say that they will fix the security issue in the chipsets by OS update, but the update will slow down the devices depending on the configuration. As i know, Exynos 8895 contains ARM cores(as a lot of phone). Can someone make it sure, that our phones will slow down by 5-30% as well? I am so disappointed about that.
I wouldn't worry about it, the 5-30% numbers that are floating around and mainly for data center type applications, especially heavy io applications.
peachpuff said:
I wouldn't worry about it, the 5-30% numbers that are floating around and mainly for data center type applications, especially heavy io applications.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So you think that it won't really take any effect on gaming both of my devices? I mean S8, Acer Predator with I7 7700HQ.
mateoo337 said:
So you think that it won't really take any effect on gaming both of my devices? I mean S8, Acer Predator with I7 7700HQ.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is literally no way we could know before we have the fix and can benchmark it. I wouldn't worry to much though. Especially on the phone the performance loss shouldn't be relevant. For gaming, we'll see.
mateoo337 said:
So you think that it won't really take any effect on gaming both of my devices? I mean S8, Acer Predator with I7 7700HQ.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nope nothing to worry about, the january security patch has these fixes, if there were any changes i'm sure pixel owners would be complaining by now.
Thank you for your answers! This morning I got a link that led to ARM's announcement. They made a list of the cores which are expected to slow down. The Cortex A53 can not be found in the list. ARM told that the cores which are not included won't have any issues like security fail or slow down. So our S8 won't have any problem.
mateoo337 said:
Thank you for your answers! This morning I got a link that led to ARM's announcement. They made a list of the cores which are expected to slow down. The Cortex A53 can not be found in the list. ARM told that the cores which are not included won't have any issues like security fail or slow down. So our S8 won't have any problem.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For those who want to read more: The security breaches are called Meltdown and Spectre. Meltdown, which only affects Intel CPUs is the one, which is majorly affected by a slowdown of mostly 2% and only up to 40% in a few applications.
Spectre on the other hand affects not only Intel CPUs, but also a lot CPUs by AMD and ARM. There is little slowdown to be expected and most users won't even notice it.
Also the January security Patches are not the end of the security Patches concerning Spectre. More work is to be done and individual apps need to be patched aswell.
Since I only have articles in german about it and am too lazy to look for good ones in english, I'll leave it to you to google "Meltdown and Spectre", if you want to read more about it
Actually, for anyone really interested in the nitty gritty, security now podcast this week did great coverage of the technical details :good: