Related
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?
Yep so I just found out that the atrix has an 8 core GPU thanks to the forum members below.
This seems amazing considering the SGSII has a quad core GPU
Check this out:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html
bigdog_nick said:
Check this out:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-2.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OMG 8 cores?
So it is better than the SGS2
8 core GPU
Seems like so. From what i'm reading just now, the SGSII has a Mali-400MP4 which is only a quad core. Wow, Nvidia you outdid yourself. lol
Why dont they advertise the 8 core GPU?
RacecarBMW said:
Why dont they advertise the 8 core GPU?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
probably cause not many people know or even care what it is and moto and att didnt see it as a selling point
Dang, and to think I was always of the opinion that the Galaxy S phones had more GPU power than my Atrix.. Damn you AT&T.
not surprised as it's a geforce core
brian2220 said:
probably cause not many people know or even care what it is and moto and att didnt see it as a selling point
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well they advertise the dual core CPU
Says it supports 12mp primary camera?
The next tegra is a quad core cpu, 12 core gpu. Its going to be a monster.
RacecarBMW said:
well they advertise the dual core CPU
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that is always a big selling point in todays market
RacecarBMW said:
OMG 8 cores?
So it is better than the SGS2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Holy Moly. 8 core GPU?
And the SGSII only has 4 core GPU?
The Atrix wins overall. No question about it.
[/s]
Extra cores do not necessarily translate to win. Tegra is awesome, but has its limits, which are far more apparent than in the new Galaxy 2, which appears to be the most powerful Android phone to date.
YAY! 8 CORE GPU! what ever that means? lol
as far as i know. the SGS2 oxynes or whatever its called is more powerful than tegra 2.
not my much tho.
however Nvidia has an advantage of Tegra zone. games specific to take advantages of the Tegra 2.
and that alone is way better than playing the same game the nexus S plays well only smoother.
this makes Tegra 2 a better GPU imho hands down. but not the most powerful.
jivemaster said:
Extra cores do not necessarily translate to win. Tegra is awesome, but has its limits, which are far more apparent than in the new Galaxy 2, which appears to be the most powerful Android phone to date.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What drugs are you on? SGS II? The most powerful to date? No ways Laydee
The Atrix hasn't even shown its true colours yet. Wait till Gingerbread is released. This will be the REAL test.
Only then will it be clear whether Atrix or SGS II is the better handset.
ll_l_x_l_ll said:
as far as i know. the SGS2 oxynes or whatever its called is more powerful than tegra 2.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its called Exynos, and NO, the reports out there peg the Tegra 2 to be better clock for clock.
Why do you think Samsung overclocked the Exynos to 1.2Ghz? To be competitive, because at 1Ghz it wasn't.
Samsung has won the Quadrant war for the moment, but lets see what the Tegra 2 overclocked to 1.2Ghz (unlock that bootloader damit!) and with AOS 2.3.3 can do. And the hardware war can't be won on just a SAMOLED+ screen thats still can't be viewed in direct sunlight, and is heavily pixelated at 4.3" & 800x480 resolution (I certainly prefer qHD).
The Geforce ULV GPU in the Tegra 2 SoC is based on the Nvidia Geforce 6 series GPU architecture from 2004.
Computer GPU's at the time where still using "pipelines" before introduction of "unified shaders" (those are easier to be called multi-core) with the release of the nvidia G80 GPU in late 2006.
Piplines architecture has dedicated instructions shaders (nvidia like to call them cores for marketing reasons and to piss off Intel!) for each of pixel and vertex processing tasks. A GPU of this kind can't help itself if the load was heavier at one side of those tasks.
Where in "unified shaders" architecture those shaders can morph to handle any instructions tasks based on the load.
So it's more correctly to say the nvidia GPU in the Atrix has 8 shaders, But and it's a big BUT.. 4 of them must be preserved for the pixel processing and the other 4 must be preserved for vertex processing.
In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
2GB will help with multitasking while the faster processor will help with gaming and to a degree, faster apps.
If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu. In android, I doubt there will be an app released in the next year or two that realistically benefits from the quad core's gpu vs the dual core's.
Both the dual and quad core will have all of the software optimizations Samsung has done for web browsing. The 2gb memory is probably overkill at this point, but in theory it means that apps will never close in the background since there will be no need to free up new memory.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
lepapirriky said:
In real phone scenario what we could benefit more? Will a quad-core be faster the 2gb of ram? Or will a 2gb will perform better against quad-core?
Pocketnow did a video between the gs2 and gs3 and both were opening apps really quick, they were really close on browsing, gaming. Do you think the 2gb will make a difference on the phone compare to the international? What are your thoughts?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
muyoso said:
If it were an iPhone, then the quad core would be much better because apps will actually make use of the amazing gpu.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.
Extra RAM. It's going to be a while before the apps/software catches up with having two more cores. Meanwhile even old stuff can benefit from extra memory. Also see it as more future proof as you won't get the lame ass excuses from Samsung about it not having enough RAM to run whatever the latest release of Android is like we got with ICS and the Epic 4G.
XxLostSoulxX said:
1. Well the whole android cant handle 4 cores i think is false because its derived from Linux and i know those who use 4,6,8 core processor's and use Linux. so if android isn't im sure its all in code is all.
2. More Ram does mean things will run much faster. For Example: playing gta 4 with 4GB of DDR3 Ram @ 1333MHz plays decent but my pc setup that plays gta 4 with 8Gb of DDR2 Ram @ 1333MHz plays faster and loads faster but GPU does factor those speeds too so, in a sense you cant bottleneck them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You've misunderstood. Android can use 4 cores, of course. What it can't do is use them effectively in a way that creates any sort of advantage. But just as a mention, being derived from Linux source does not make it a full-fledged Linux OS by far.
And on your second point, again, you're comparing to a full PC operating system. Up until now, apps have been designed for phones with far less than 1GB of ram. It really depends on how you use your phone as to how much ram is needed. If you have a video editor running in the background, while playing pandora, and emulating Mario 64 you'll need more than simply browsing the web. But the processor, bus speeds, operating system, etc. all factor into how effectively more ram can be used. For Example: A 32 bit computer can't even use more than 4GB of ram. More ram does not simply mean 'much' more more speed, there are many other limiting factors. You can throw all the ram you want at a netbook, it will never run GTA4.
Off-Topic Edit: I vote 2GB ram over Quad-Core.
I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
lepapirriky said:
I guess then the only thing that will "improve", not that the int'l lacks of, is on the multitasking??
The few videos I saw, they were really fast but that's of course without all the apps that a normal user install. Like I have 38 apps install on my phone and most of the time I open between 9 to 13 apps everyday. Most of the time I have to close it...I guess more for the habit of doing it and of courses need it when playing games.
I read the answer and I kinda feel its true, maybe android is not yet ready for such hardware just yet, does it feels the hardware manufacture is going too fast compare to the software?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There will be improvement between the dual-core, faster processor, and more ram, rest assured!
Although I still recommend closing apps unnecessarily opened to save battery.
2 A15s > 4 A9s.
Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
theking_13 said:
2 A15s > 4 A9s. Also, the A15 use less power. I'd take the 2 GBs of RAM with the newest CPU anyday.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+9000
RandomKing said:
Here's my thoughts:
1. Still on the Epic 4G I've never had any real lag.
2. Lack of ram can stall a device, but an excess of ram will not make it faster.
3. Mobile quad-cores are new and untested.
4. Android is not designed for quad-core processors.
5. The dual-core US version should easily match the quad-core international.
6. More ram means more easily multitasking/app-switching.
Check out this article.
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You don't have any lag on our epic 4g's? What ROM are you running? I've tried every rom out there and am friends with several other rooted epic owners, none of our phones are remotely comparable to the modern phones like s2 and above.
I'd love to see a video of you opening and running netflix, facebook, web browsing on chrome and stock, or whatever if you have time because this blows my mind. i'm doing something horribly wrong.
Too bad we don't have a samsung developed a15
I don't know why but I don't like qualcomm chips
Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15. More instruction per clock is better than stacking cores which a phone doesn't even use. I think the 2 gb of ram has more performance advantage.
They also increased the memory bandwidth with new SOC by adding a new dual channel memory controller which the exynos had all along... They fixed alot of the shortcoming of snapdragon processor with the this gen product
gtuansdiamm said:
[...]Also whenever I hear snapdragon I automatically think worse than hummingbird[...]
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's because Hummingbirds rape Snapdragons. See the following:
Either way if you want LTE at the moment you are stuck with dual core. So the 2GB of RAM is a nice enhancement. The EVO 1x ended up as two models the 1X which is quad core with no LTE and the 1XL which is dual core with LTE.
Sent from my PantechP4100 using xda premium
RandomKing said:
Amazing gpu? The Galaxy S I opposed the iPhone 4. The Epic 4G has a better gpu than the iPhone 4, the PowerVR SGX 540 vs the iPhone's PowerVR SGX 535. Just thought I'd mention it since you're in an Epic 4G forum.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where the hell did the epic4g or the iPhone 4 come into the question? My point was that iPhones actually make use of their gpu's better than android phones do, so the difference between the quad core and the dual core gs3 should be minimal in that regard, at least for a while.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA
noobnl said:
I would take the dual core Krait hands down because it is designed from cortex a15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.
jnadke said:
This is wrong.
The Krait is very much designed from the Cortex A9. While it shares similarities with the A15, it is not quite as powerful.
Krait is about 60% of the way between the A9 and A15.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Qualcomm has a license to mess around with ARMs designs and make their own CPUs, not just copy and slap an "A4" on them like Apple does.
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2
theking_13 said:
No, where'd you even get that from? Krait is slightly below an A15, Qualcomm derived their design from it. Yes, its not a true A15 core. But its the best right now in production.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting how someone "Likes" wrong information.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4940/qualcomm-new-snapdragon-s4-msm8960-krait-architecture
Designing a processor takes an extremely long amount of time. A15 was just barely released a few months ago. No way Krait was designed from it.
Now, Krait borrows some features from A15, but it's missing some important features as well. Krait does feature an extended instruction pipeline over the A9 (11 vs 9 cycles), but it's nowhere near as long as the A15 (15 cycles). Strictly speaking, lengthening a pipeline is less work than shortening it, hence Krait was not designed from the A15.
It's more likely Krait is an evolution of the Scorpion than anything.
As far as Apple, they have no place in this conversation, but if you must.... while they do have a "processor-only" license with ARM, they do farm out to a company to change some transistor signaling to make it more power efficient (they later bought them).
2 years ago, Apple bought Freescale, the only remaining PowerPC processor design company. (aside: The defense industry was largely concerned, as they rely on PowerPC for their power-efficient but high-speed applications). Anyhow, I wouldn't be surprised if they have an architecture license now so they can design their own ARM processors, Qualcomm-style. The main advantage would be integrating LTE radios like Qualcomm does.
Coincidentally it takes about 2 years to fully design a processor.
Which processow will be better, Exynos 5 Octa or A simple Snapdragon 600 quad?
In my POV, Octa will be useless since it will be a battery hog and no apps really use that much cores and power. The S600 will be more efficient for day-to-day use since it consumes less power and will actually be used.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Sent from a dark and unknown place
Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 P3100
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
AndreiLux said:
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
I hope that the overclocking or higher clock rate doesn't produce Moment-esque results.
Alsybub said:
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
crawlgsx said:
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I see. Different hardware for different regions. Like the One X.
Even though it's eight cores it is probably complete overkill. Yet another bigger number to put on marketing. How many apps will actually use that? How many apps use four cores at the moment?
There have been some articles about multiple cores being more for point of sale than for the end user. Even if you're signing up for a contract right now I doubt that much would be making use of it in two years time. So, the future proofing argument is moot.
It'll be interesting to see. Of course the galaxy builds of Android will use the cores. With things like the stay awake feature and pip it is useful. Outside of the OS I can't see it being necessary.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD
The "octa" core processor is complete bullsh*t. Imo, 2/4 cores are perfectly fine as long as they optimize it and perfect the hardware, why stack 8 cores when only 4 work at one time and no app will use all that power.
They should've focused on design to make it look less like a toy phone and use better finish, instead.
Oh the marketing..
Not HTC or whatever fanboy, just stating my opinion.
rotchcrocket04 said:
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good read, thanks for taking the time to post it. Surprised no-one has mentioned that we need this in our Ones. Would certainly help with the battery.
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Squirrel1620 said:
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Nekromantik said:
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with the one and wait for the 4.2 update. By then we should have custom kernels to overclock ourselves
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Here you go
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know all 8 can run at the same time? Has Samsung demonstrated that already? Any links?
Also what would be the speed if all 8 are running at the same time?
Also did you see that an Intel dual core @2GHz beat the Exynos Octa in benchmarks!!! So all 8 cores running at slower speed might not be very good actually. It might even slow down things even more...
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
joslicx said:
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
backfromthestorm said:
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about bragging rights really. Same as Samsung is doing with regards to Octa.
The the chip that could run at 3GHz could also very well run at 1GHz at just 0.6V (so consuming far lesser power than anything else in the market). A dual core at 1GHz is still good enough for all mundane tasks like playing videos or internet browsing etc. So in practice it would have been a very efficient solution. It was a real innovation really. Sadly the company did not have money to pour more funds into the program and has shut it.
It was demonstrated at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in february this year.
Anyway point is, we did not need extra set of power efficient cores like Samsung is doing. We ran the same cores that could do crazy high speeds and even crazier power efficient mode! Thats a very neat solution.
Heres a press link: http://www.itproportal.com/2013/02/25/mwc-2013-exclusive-dual-core-st-ericsson-novathor-l8580-soc-crushes-competition-benchmarks/
To quote the article:
A continuous running test monitored by an infra-red reader showed that the 3GHz prototype smartphone remained cooler as it uses less energy and in some scenarios, it could add up to five hours battery life in a normal usage scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no. At least not in my opinion. Octacore means 8 cpu cores on one cpu-chip.
I would see it like this:
You have 2 houses on your lawn which are beside each other. Every house has 4 rooms. You have to switch houses to open up the rooms. Just like the Exynos "Octa" has to, since it cannot run both CPU's at the same time.
If you are in a house with 8 rooms, you cannot simply be in all 8 rooms at once. You can connect the open doors between all the rooms, and since your in that house, you can freely walk in every room. But not with that implementation.
I wouldn't call the Exynos "Octa" an Octacore, its a dual CPU system with a 2x4 cores, with the difference that regular desktop dual CPU systems can use both CPU units at once, but not like the Exynos "Octa". Still, dual quad system comes closer than a pure octacore system.
This is kind of a hybrid. Nice technology for a mobile device, but at the same time, kind of unneeded / inefficient, compared to regular quadcore systems. Even the Tegra 3 system with 4 active cores and 1 companion core for standby tasks seems more efficient (in terms of "used space" and ressources).
Ah well let's see how the supposed and so called "octacore" will score in the future...
processor differences
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
dawg00201 said:
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should be identical. I think its just a manufacturer choice. But it could also be associated to termals or battery.
Cause Samsung took the higher frequency chips, there is the possibility that they also get the "better" chips: Lower Voltage for the same frequency. But thats just an assumption.