Why flashing none official ICS might be a BAD IDEA

Why flashing none official ICS might be a BAD IDEA - Galaxy Note GT-N7000 General

Guys who hack for a hobby, or who work on Android development can probably pass on this thread, as they will, or should already know the following.
For everyone else:
Not all Galaxy Note smart-phones are equal. The same applies to every other smartphone, computer, computer chip, computer component, or aeroplane. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kHa3WNerjU This aeroplane was hard-bricked because the programmers didn't understand how we fly aircraft, and the pilot not understanding the programming logic, probably because he was never told. BUT, there might be another reason. Quality control of the computer chip. In the days I'm talking about, every chip was manufactured as a 486 or 386 chip, under-testing, if it failed, it would then be tested as an SX chip (the math co-processor disabled) if it passed the lesser test, it would pass as a SX chip, instead of the premium DX chip. So if anyone bought a computer with a SX chip, they bought a failed chip. Just like the guys who built that aeroplane, it had 6 or 7 SX (failed) chips driving the whole thing. Of course, the chip and plane makers insist there was nothing wrong with the product, it must be the pilots fault. In a way they are correct, the components met specification, but when the pilot pulls up, and commands full power.....and it still hard-bricks itself....hmmm...someones lying.
Quality control over chips is pretty much the same today as it was then. To expect 100% perfect chips to be installed into 100% smartphones would result in most chips winding up in landfill and your phone costing £$kk. So we have to compromise, and find acceptable limits. When your phone was made and software loaded for the first time and tested, it worked, but doesn't mean it will work the next time upgrade software is loaded. That is one reason for hard bricking a phone or aeroplane. So when you flash up the latest software, a warranty would be nice.
The next reasons for hard-bricking your phone is many fold, and many will be familiar with this. I'm now talking about peripheral devices, magnetometers, giros, accelerometers and on... The same still applies to these devices as the chips when it comes to quality control. So that's another point. But are ALL devices in your phone exactly the same, from the same manufacturer, in EVERYONES phone? Personally I doubt it. Buy any make and model of computer you want, and I'll guarantee that I can find differences in components for that brand and model. So what? Well this is what, those different devices may well have differing driver requirements. The same applies to your smart phone.
Case Study:
I speced up my own faster than me PC, had the component list checked by an expert. We all felt happy and I bought it, it was also assembled by experts. It powered up, passed all the tests, memory, bench marking, you name it, we did it. All passed. Happy? NO! In use I got random BSOD. fault traced to an instruction sent from the chip to the mobo which the driver did not recognise. Found offending setting in the BIOS and stopped the instruction being sent. Now have a very stable and fast PC. Both Intel and the mobo makers said their product was perfect. They are correct, but with certain combinations of hardware, this glitch comes up. Guess what, its the same for your smart phone.
There are many reasons why Samsung and all the other makers 'regionalise' the product. Language comes top of the list to most people, but it goes further. Because the components wont all be the same, from the same factory, or the same maker, phones will be made in batches. All the phones with giro 'A' go to the USA, all phones with giro 'B' go to India and so on. Assume Giro 'A' needs a different driver to giro 'B'. When we upgrade to a new android version, the USA will get a different upgrade to India, and one will be released before the other. Translate this to all of the other peripheral devices, and you can then begin to understand why there are so many different ROMs out there, and why Samsung roll out in slow time. They have to make sure, as best they can, that the upgrade has the correct coding for your phone, because your phone is different.
There are some misconceptions about what is an official ROM. To me, an official ROM is one that Samsung selected for me, via KIES. A ROM destined for users in say, Australia, is not an official ROM for me with an EU phone, otherwise, why would Samsung make life hard for themselves by having extra ROM releases? Just pause and think, that's all.
One more point. It would be helpful for those that can, post a hardware list when they spot faults, bugs and hard bricks. No one seems to do that, but on PC forums, that is the norm. Maybe we could get much more accurate with our hack and so on if we could do this. here is what's under my bonnet:
Sensor - Accelerometer: K3DH Acceleration Sensor, Vendor: STMicroelectronics, Version: 1, Power: 0.2, Resolution: 0.0048, Max Range: 19.6.
Sensor - Gyroscope: K3G Gyroscope Sensor, Vendor: STMicroelectronics, Version: 1, Power: 6.1, Resolution: 0.0003, Max Range: 8.7.
Sensor - Pressure: BMP182 Pressure Sensor, Vendor: Bosch, Version: 1, Power: 0.1, Resolution: 0.0100, Max Range: 1100.0.
Sensor - Magnet: AK8975 Magnetic field Sensor, Vendor: Asahi Kasei Microdevices, Version: 1, Power: 6.0, Resolution: 0.0600, Max Range: 2000.0.
Sensor - Orientation: AK8975 Orientation Sensor, Vendor: Asahi Kasei Microdevices, Version: 1, Power: 7.8, Resolution: 0.0156, Max Range: 360.0.
Sensor - Light: GP2A Light Sensor, Vendor: Sharp, Version: 1, Power: 0.8, Resolution: 1.0, Max Range: 3000.0.
Sensor - Proximity: GP2A Proximity Sensor, Vendor: Sharp, Version: 1, Power: 0.8, Resolution: 5.0, Max Range: 5.0.
Sensor - Gravity: Gravity Sensor, Vendor: Google Inc., Version: 1, Power: 0.2, Resolution: 0.0048, Max Range: 19.6.
Sensor - Linear Acceleration: Linear Acceleration Sensor, Vendor: Google Inc., Version: 1, Power: 0.2, Resolution: 0.0048, Max Range: 19.6.
Sensor - Rotation: Rotation Vector Sensor, Vendor: Google Inc., Version: 1, Power: 6.2, Resolution: 0.0000, Max Range: 1.0.

Awesome post man! I too always wondered why there were so many different "official ROMs". Very nice post.
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA

So, based on your reasoning, we should assume that the German LPY firmware should be more safe for German phones.
Could we test such assumption? Did superbricked devices come most likely from non-German devices?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

debernardis said:
So, based on your reasoning, we should assume that the German LPY firmware should be more safe for German phones.
Could we test such assumption? Did superbricked devices come most likely from non-German devices?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is how the reasoning works. Thats why its important to post hardware detail and the Samsung pre-installed version ROM. We have to know the start point, know the success, and the failures, to get some reasoning into why some phones brick, and others don't.

long read, but after the first paragraph.. i think u are FOS! if sx chips are failed dx chips then that would mean the manufacturer would have go check every chip to make to find out if it's sx or dx.. FOS! it's more likely there was a separate manufacturing process for the sx and dx chip.. i couldn't be bothered reading the rest

Interesting argument, but I think a simpler reason for there being multiple ROMs is purely due to ease of distribution OTA by the carriers on specific national networks rather than due to hardware differences.
It's certainly true that not all smartphones of the same name all have identical components inside (the US version of the S3 is a case in point), but this current issue with ICS seems to be due to a revision of firmware causing damage to flash chips. I would guess that all flash chips on all variants of the Note are susceptible until proven otherwise - e.g. no issues with those who have "German" Notes flashing LPY.
Coincidentally, I have a "German" Note, but I have no interest in being a guinea pig. I'll wait for the software fix .

Replying to the OP... While you are somewhat correct about CPUs 20 years ago it's not quite the same today. Generally CPUs are speed tested and you are more likely to grade a CPU on reliable clock frequency rather than retarding it's functionality in any way. A lot more effort is put into manufacturing processes for reliability than 20 years ago and the small % of devices that fail nowadays are more likely to be thrown away or recycled.
Your case study is flawed and somewhat insulting to engineers. To suggest you stringing a few components together and calling it a well designed PC because an 'expert' had given it a thumbs up and then installing a generic OS on it is the same as a mobile phone that has been bespoke designed by a team of engineers, with firmware especially developed to work with that hardware is way off. And, yes, you are getting a bespoke build of Android on the Note.
I'm not suggesting that our phones will be bug free, but all the hardware and firmware will have been exhaustively tested on multiple examples of the device under different loads.
Apple v Microsoft is a classic example here. MS designed the OS and left component manufacturers to do the drivers. Result, nobody really knows how well the components will work together and the solution is only as good as the combination of drivers, etc. Apple decided to strictly control what hardware is in their machines and could optimise the OS to work reliably with that hardware.

bamboo12 said:
long read, but after the first paragraph.. i think u are FOS! if sx chips are failed dx chips then that would mean the manufacturer would have go check every chip to make to find out if it's sx or dx.. FOS! it's more likely there was a separate manufacturing process for the sx and dx chip.. i couldn't be bothered reading the rest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, FOS, that's just your opinion and that's your right. BUT that's EXACTLY how it used to happen. I'm not going to start writing up history lessons here, I'll leave the research to you. Maybe you'll learn something along the way, including some manners. I'm always up for reasoned discussion, but personal insult just hits a brick wall with me.

emuX said:
............
Your case study is flawed and somewhat insulting to engineers. ......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not sure how I insult engineers, that is not my intent. So if there are any engineers out there who feel insulted, I apologise.

bamboo12 said:
long read, but after the first paragraph.. i think u are FOS! if sx chips are failed dx chips then that would mean the manufacturer would have go check every chip to make to find out if it's sx or dx.. FOS! it's more likely there was a separate manufacturing process for the sx and dx chip.. i couldn't be bothered reading the rest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as the 386/486 DX/SX goes, it is true. I guess even today's lower cache processors are defect chips where they turn off specific part of the memory and brand as medium/entry level chips.

So what's the thread title have to do with this? It should read: (THEORY) Flashing ICS Region Other than Original Manufacturer POSSIBLY Dangerous
Or
(THEORY) Samsung Bins Parts ....like everyother manufacturer out there
I'm not knocking what you're saying. Look at Intel, most cpus cut from the same wafer but just binned according to their resistance and that's how you get a $200 processor vs a black box $1000. They will even turn off cores

Related

Hardware Upgrading

To my knowledge many hardware upgrades can be made to the Universal.
Seeing earlier posts of Universal Motherboards and chipsets...
It is possible to solder and upgrade the Universal.
Upgrades Include:
1. RAM - Suggested Hynix DDR / SDR RAM
2. Processor - nVidia (includes video card upgrade) if you are lucky or the new Intel PXA29x Monahans or Intel Bulverade x270 650mhz processor.
3. Wifi upgrade to Atheros ABG
All these upgrades are possible. If anyone is successful on doing these upgrades or has any ideas from where these parts can be obtained.. we are looking at the next generation pocket pc's and mobile devices to be created on xda-developers.

nuclear said:
To my knowledge many hardware upgrades can be made to the Universal.
Seeing earlier posts of Universal Motherboards and chipsets...
It is possible to solder and upgrade the Universal.
Upgrades Include:
1. RAM - Suggested Hynix DDR / SDR RAM
2. Processor - nVidia (includes video card upgrade) if you are lucky or the new Intel PXA29x Monahans or Intel Bulverade x270 650mhz processor.
3. Wifi upgrade to Atheros ABG
All these upgrades are possible. If anyone is successful on doing these upgrades or has any ideas from where these parts can be obtained.. we are looking at the next generation pocket pc's and mobile devices to be created on xda-developers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not suggest this to a real company like Pocket PC Techs: http://www.pocketpctechs.com/main~unit~O2_XDA_Exec-500~area~repairs.htm
They already have a repair section for the Universal. It might be easier for them to acquire everything, plus it would give us the option of having trained professionals handling our Universal.
But I read sometime ago, someone already tried this and did not work.

Mobile SDR/DDR RAM
I will consult Pocket PC Techs as you say they are professionals.
I will consult Intel, Atheros and Hynix on obtaining the parts. I am highly trained with soldering since i recently upgraded the video card on my motioncomputing LE1600 tablet pc ($5000). This phone Universal costed me $1200 from expansys and I would not like it to get busted. But i am pretty sure i can do it myself. If successful i will post pictures of the new chipset. Most certainly it will fit into the same body. Device Driver flashing will need a new ROM... i guess Helmi's/Ivans/Jwrights ROMS wont work. Anyways this will take me a week to a month to obtain the parts. And a few days to solder.
The hard part is making the ROM. Maybe my new project of Windows Crossbow i can integrate the device drivers into the ROM since they will be provided by the manufacturer for sure. So its not impossible i would say. Getting help from Pocket PC Techs really sounds good.

nuclear
I have already done this operation on Universal.
Now I have
CPU -Intel P4
Video- NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2
RAM- Nynix -10TB.
OS-Photon
You foolish and tell the delirium!

arc said:
nuclear
I have already done this operation on Universal.
Now I have
CPU -Intel P4
Video- NVIDIA GeForce 7950 GX2
RAM- Nynix -10TB.
OS-Photon
You foolish and tell the delirium!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Please do not spam on the forum with false information. If you have really performed the upgrades post the picture of your new chipset and the Photon OS.

added foto

Again Spam
The Hynix RAM is not at the bottom right. It is supposed to be on the left. This is what the image is. Which i got from another thread! The RAM is supposed to be soldered on the top right. Right beside those 3, 2 slots are left for RAM to be soldered. And there is no Intel P4 processor. I guess people can use this as a reference to solder.
Anyways i am not going to keep mentioning about your spam. Because wind just adds more to the fire. The rest is upto the forum administrators.

get a sense of humour, man

It makes me cringed to see a naked Universal like that. It is like throwing $1000 to the trash.

not if you know what you're doing.
i for one would love a GeForce Go and faster WiFi in there. But isn't there a problem with RAM addressing over 64Mb?

r3bel said:
not if you know what you're doing.
i for one would love a GeForce Go and faster WiFi in there. But isn't there a problem with RAM addressing over 64Mb?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly what i was thinking. Upgrade the RAM and the processor (processor upgrading i think is impossible). And then the video card <-- not great chance of upgrading.
Currently i can only give confirmation based on my skills that i can upgrade the RAM. Getting hands on the hynix SDR/DDR RAM will not be easy either.
I am also sure that these upgrades shall keep our Universals tuned in for another 5 - 10 years along with Windows Mobile Crossbow and Windows Photon. Just like the Windows Vista that will be up and running for 10-15 years.
Anyways after these upgrades are successful i plan on marketing my product of research and upgrade for twice the same price as the universal. I shall post pictures of the device once it is upgraded and what the new ROM recognises.
I am currently working on Windows Crossbow and Windows Photon as well.
Now i base my research on facts from wiki so there is no chance of failure.

nuclear said:
Exactly what i was thinking. Upgrade the RAM and the processor (processor upgrading i think is impossible). And then the video card <-- not great chance of upgrading.
Currently i can only give confirmation based on my skills that i can upgrade the RAM. Getting hands on the hynix SDR/DDR RAM will not be easy either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
would would the CPU be impossible to ugrade? I believe the RAM is the most difficult because, I think, Win Mo doesn't recognize more than 64MB... but I don't have facts for that. would be awesome to have 128MB or even 256, 512 would be tha sh1t! I checked those chips and I have a PDF 'bout it... if it helps. but I haven't seen such low capacity
Now the processor would be awesome to upgrade, too... but why not? maybe pin configuration? or would they be able to compile WinMo for just one speed of a processor? or are we talking 'bout different processors altogether?
I was checking the internet 'bout such things, reflow stations(pro, DIY) and solder paste, but I'm afraid to try with my Universal as I haven't done it before. any ideas?

Yubastard said:
would would the CPU be impossible to ugrade? I believe the RAM is the most difficult because, I think, Win Mo doesn't recognize more than 64MB... but I don't have facts for that. would be awesome to have 128MB or even 256, 512 would be tha sh1t! I checked those chips and I have a PDF 'bout it... if it helps. but I haven't seen such low capacity
Now the processor would be awesome to upgrade, too... but why not? maybe pin configuration? or would they be able to compile WinMo for just one speed of a processor? or are we talking 'bout different processors altogether?
I was checking the internet 'bout such things, reflow stations(pro, DIY) and solder paste, but I'm afraid to try with my Universal as I haven't done it before. any ideas?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
1. Steps to upgrade the processor.
a. Remove the existing soldered chip off the motherboard (most likely will damage the motherboard while removing the existing processor chip)
b. Obtain the next processor chip. Probably will be from the same family of processors or any other compatible chip and solder it on.
c. Make a ROM that supports this hardware.
Higher End processors:
PXA27x (The universal one)
The PXA27x family (code-named Bulverde) consists of the PXA270 and PXA271-PXA272 processors. This revision is a huge update to the XScale family of processors. The PXA270 <-- (((this one is ours))) is clocked in four different speeds: 312 MHz, 416 MHz, (((520 MHz))) and (((624 MHz <-- (((this is what we can upgrade to most likely))) and is a stand-alone processor with no packaged memory. The PXA271 can be clocked to 312 MHz or 416 MHz and has 32 MiB of 16-bit stacked StrataFlash memory and 32 MiB of 16-bit SDRAM in the same package. The PXA272 can be clocked to 312 MHz, 416 MHz or 520 MHz and has 64 MiB of 32-bit stacked StrataFlash memory.
Now this is the processor we are aiming for:
In August 2005 Intel announced the successor to Bulverde, codenamed Monahans. They demoed it showing its capability to play back high definition encoded video on a PDA screen. The new processor was shown clocked at 1.25 GHz but Intel said it only offered a 25% increase in performance (800 MIPS for the 624 MHz PXA270 processor vs 1000 MIPS for 1.25 GHz Monahans). An announced successor to the 2700G graphics processor, code named Stanwood, has since been cancelled. Some of the features of Stanwood are integrated into Monahans. For extra graphics capabilities, Intel recommends third party chips like the Nvidia GoForce chip family <-- ((NOT AUTHORIZED BY NVIDIA)).
******NOW CHECK THIS OUT:: YOU THOUGHT THE PROCESSOR WAS EVERYTHING RIGHT? WELL SEEMS LIKE YOU WERE WRONG::READ WHAT WE CAN DO WITH THE RAM********
This is why i chose Hynix and not Samsung
Hynix Semiconductor Inc. (Hangul: 하이닉스 반도체) KSE: 000660 is an electronics company founded in 1983 as Hyundai Electronics Industries Co., Ltd. In the 1980s and 1990s it was mainly focusing on marketing DRAM, and then later SDRAM. In 2001 the business sold their TFT LCD assets for $650m, of the same year they developed the world's first 128MB DDR SDRAM for graphics.
Hynix is among the Worldwide Top 20 Semiconductor Sales Leaders.
In 2004-2005 an investigation was carried out into a worldwide DRAM price fixing conspiracy during 1999-2002 that damaged competition and raised PC prices. As a result, Samsung <-- (SEE SAMSUNG IS A LOSER) is to pay $300 million fine, Hynix was to pay $185 mln in 2005, Infineon: $160 mln in 2004. Micron Technology cooperated with prosecutors and no fine is expected.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
And now getting to the RAM
The RAM is an addon in the universal and not a replacement. Replacements are very damaging to the device and decreases the life of the device.
So all we got to do is addon the RAM.
Now i am going to personally speak to a Hynix manager and ask him if our devices are upgradable. I will also ask him about the pricing and how we can make bulk orders. I will read on more about RAM and what should we buy exactly? They manufacture so many products and you dont want to pick the wrong one.
Ah yes and they also manufacture better LCD screens for the Universal. In case some one wants to take on that project most welcome to. I would love a Anti-glare glass screen for my universal.

RAM,processor or WiFi of Universal cannot be upgrated,though RAM of HP4700 can be upgrated to 128MB.but the camera of Universal can be upgrated to 3.0MP.It costs only RMB200(USD25).There are already many people(except me) upgrated their camera of Uni.I will post the pictures later

yinfo said:
RAM,processor or WiFi of Universal cannot be upgrated,though RAM of HP4700 can be upgrated to 128MB.but the camera of Universal can be upgrated to 3.0MP.It costs only RMB200(USD25).There are already many people(except me) updated their camera of Uni.I will post the pictures later
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
$25 USD Sounds too unreal for a 3MP camera upgrade for Universal. What is the optical zoom/digital zoom/lens mm? We here at xda-developers.com are looking into technical and specific details. I dont want a 3MP camera with barely any optical/digital zoom and images that cant be taken in a sunny day.
Also RAM upgrade is possible. Why else do you think those two empty solder spots are left on the motherboard?
I was sure that the camera can be upgraded too. I will find out more camera details and keep the forum posted. Since i am a professional SLR photographer i can provide the best camera's to the Universal device.
This means a stronger high beam flash can also be upgraded.

nuclear said:
$25 USD Sounds too unreal for a 3MP camera upgrade for Universal. What is the optical zoom/digital zoom/lens mm? We here at xda-developers.com are looking into technical and specific details. I dont want a 3MP camera with barely any optical/digital zoom and images that cant be taken in a sunny day.
Also RAM upgrade is possible. Why else do you think those two empty solder spots are left on the motherboard?
I was sure that the camera can be upgraded too. I will find out more camera details and keep the forum posted. Since i am a professional SLR photographer i can provide the best camera's to the Universal device.
This means a stronger high beam flash can also be upgraded.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe $25 USD Sounds unreal for you,but in China,it's real.But now I can't find out the pictures of it on Chinese forum. It has optical zoom.
The battery costs only $25 in China,the imitated one costs only $7.And the 3200mAh battery costs less than $15 now,though I bought it for $19 5 months ago.I bought my T-Mobile MDA Pro for about $530.
Two empty solder spots are left on the motherboard is because the Universal was fist made for Windows Mobile 2003,which must has 128MB RAM.Do know CeBIT 2005?CeBIT 2005 had a Universal(T-Mobile MDA PRO) on show,which has WM2003 and 128MB RAM.
But someone had his HP4700 upgrated to 128MB RAM said that the Universal couldnot be upgrated to 128MB.He didn't tell me the reason.And so far,I have never seen any one have his Universal upgrated to 128MB RAM.

Battery and Camera
yinfo you might be correct about the battery. I actually bought my Universal for around the same price as yours. Just $100 more. My 3200mAh battery also costed around the same price as yours. All my items came ofcourse from Shanghai and Ho Chi Minh and Hong Kong.
But my RAM is going to come from South Korea, Seoul.
Some good stuff is also being sold at Hanoi in Vietnam. Better check that place out.
Camera upgrade cannot be so cheap. It really sounds too unreal. I mean camera is not equal to battery. Maybe $100-$200 will be more realistic. Anyways I am still looking into this camera upgrade on the net, will find some results soon and keep the forum posted.

hehe, it all sounds so exotic! I got my universal for £150 on a rainy high street in the UK!
loving the chance for a camera replacement, though. also, i had a browse through the universal's disassembly manual, and the flash LED is just stuck-down then plugged in. i bet even I could upgrade that!

r3bel said:
hehe, it all sounds so exotic! I got my universal for £150 on a rainy high street in the UK!
loving the chance for a camera replacement, though. also, i had a browse through the universal's disassembly manual, and the flash LED is just stuck-down then plugged in. i bet even I could upgrade that!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I want to upgrade the flash LED to the flash in the SLR digital camera. So that i get better image quality while taking photographs in the public. Also i would like a 3MP camera. I have printed images on photo paper before and they came out nice. But 3MP would be the best.

nuclear You foolish !!
You absolutely do not understand in electronics and PPC.
1) You can not change the processor since this not PC. Mobile processors PXA 270 and PXA2XX to have other points and other auxiliary elements.
2) Such reasons and about graphic chip.
3)The Camera can be theoretically modernized -but if have an alike connector and electrically parameters.
We conducted the modernization on typhoon c500 cameras. This device was delivered on european and chinese market with miscellaneous camera.
When installation of the other camera -you need other ROM with the other driver for this cameras. You can not simply change this driver - necessary to build in this in ROM.
I did this on typhoon c500. But this in a complicated way.
4) Theoretically you may add on Universal RAM - my friends conducted modernization and tried to enlarge RAM - but you may use only such RAM as it is used in Universal.
My friends concern with the repair PPC to have specialized device. In home condition you will not be able this do.
After they were added chip RAM - a system does not see these chips. We thought that probably system does not see additional RAm since does not enter the signal CS ( chip select ) -we have found this signal on board. But probably system does not see RAM since is not installed specific driver which will be able to service additional RAM.
nuclear
Be enough to carry the foolishness and tell about that that you do not understand - you probably foolish young person who wants to raise its rating in this forum.

[Q] Video driver solution... coming this year by Pharos?

I was surfing around wmpoweruser.com and saw this article: http://wmpoweruser.com/?p=2252. It says that Pharos will release this PDA in the Q1 of 2009 and it will rival the HTC Touch HD.
In fact, the specs of the phone are very similar to the HD, but what calls my attention is one really interesting fact: the Pharos phone uses the very same processor as the Touch HD (Qualcomm MSM 7201A 528MHz).
I would like to ask the experts: if the Pharos payed for the video drivers to use hardware acceleration, will it be easy or, at least, possible to import them to Touch HD and we´ll finally have decent video playback?
Thanks!

I think if the drivers for WM existed we would have them by now. I think the GPU is broken and simply doesnt work properly in the Qualcomm CPU or Qualcomm themselves cant get it to work properly, thats why there is only partial support for all its functions.

HTC Touch HD/Diamond/Touch Pro all three of them have video drivers but they are used only with inbuilt players(WMP and video player in gallery). What we need now is to Coreplayer use those DS filters or gain access straight to QTv 'chip' and they said that they finally came to terms with qualcomm about it and now they can start working on it. So one of the upcoming updates(which one I don't know) should finally end this problem but I don't know when it will come.
Here you have link to the topic regarding QTv situation.

The simple test is whether ANY devices on any platform that use the CPU have decent video performance. If not then its clearly a problem with the CPU itself, rather than just the phone manufacturers being cheap.
Qualcomm has other, cheaper CPUs that are just as fast in general terms, but without the GPU, so why fit a CPU with a GPU if your not going to use it?
Sure the HTC Album App can play some files with acceleration, but that is not offering full QTv support and is not providing us with everything the GPU is capable of in theory.
In my view the GPU is broken (or qualcomms implementation is) and therefore writing drivers to fully utilise it is very difficult, which is why there are no fully featured drivers.

Acceleration clearly works - you can play 800*480 high bitrate files in h264 via wmp, but they're a slideshow through other players.

Yes, but its only partial, its not accelerating everything it should. I still say such drivers do not exist, even at qualcomm. Their recent request for windows mobile driver specialists and developers speaks volumes.
It wouldn't be the first time a technology company has launched a broken product on the unsuspecting world, or talked up a product when it really isnt capable of what they claim.

Back to this Traveler 137, it does have impressive specs, looks, gps, and best of all 3G for us T-Mobile USA users! It just won some innovation awards at CES: http://www.pcworld.com/article/1563...ne_offers_navigation_no_network_required.html

I still think that the drivers are here but I think that winmo itself can be blamed for the situation too(using drivers by the system). WinMo should be rewritten for the multimedia so it would bring some universal standards for all video solutions that SoC has to offer. Something like openCL but for mobiles.
The fact that they are looking for programmers and enginners is a good thing and it means that they want to improve the way their products handle wm but it doesn't mean that they don't have people now.
Until somebody gives me concrete proof that the drivers arent there I won't change my opinion. And please don't start talking about GPU problem(which problem I think lies in faulty use or implementation of drivers and that HTC can be blamed cause they take full responsibility of how they configure the device and not SoC maker). I'm only talking here about video acceleration.

Its just that ive seen the same thing happen before, and its usually graphics drivers or memory controllers that suffer. Almost every graphical device we have has some element of broken hardware in it that requires a work around. It may not be the GPU itself, but the interconnect to the CPU, or the way the CPU and GPU interact is just not optimal. Either way something is not right as it is right now.
I very much doubt that there is a driver sitting on a PC in Qualcomm labs that will fix all the issues. I dont believe that no one has been bothered to buy it or that Qualcomm has priced it so high that it wont be used, that makes no sense at all.
HTC are not responsible for the poor driver performance, in fact they have clearly done their own work to work around the issue. What they are responsible for is using the chipset in the first place.
Im waiting to see exactly what Coreplayer ends up like after their improved QTv suport is out. Im willing to bet that it wont make a great deal of difference to anything but H.264 that is already accelerated by the HD native player, but not by Coreplayer currently.

rovex, you might have a point here btw...
I know that the Touch HD runs H264's inloop deblocker in hardware for example. Switching it on or off has no effect on CPU. For pure software decoders it has about 15-25% effect.
Since you can't really apply that specific acceleration to other types of video, it will be interesting to see what other media will be sped up by implementing QTV.

[Q]QSD8250 chipset - How bad is it?

According to Microsoft QSD8250 is the chipset. Now how bad is it? I see people are saying it'd be better than HD2 since it'll have the perfect drivers from MS, but still wonder how this compare with the phone I am planning to get, Captivate, or an iPhone 4.
What prompted MS to choose this over so many newer (and possibly better) options?

rexian said:
What prompted MS to choose this over so many newer (and possibly better) options?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess: WP7 has been in development for quite some time, so at the start of development they choose the top processor that was available. But I think that this forum focuses to much on the processor and specifications, because in the end, the whole package must be convincing and that includes the operating system that has been optimized for this processor.
Furthermore, the current specifications will be the lowest common denominator for quiet some time (perhaps until WP8) and all apps will be optimized to run satisfactory on this specification (AFAIK the 20 second start-up rule for apps will be measured with the current specification). Newer processors may speed some things up, but the current hardware will be the target platform...

The development must have started before this chipset was launched, but you are right - this was most likely the target platform.
There are not many 3D games available though, the basic working will be fluid I know when I check at the store in few days. My worries are about the 3D games that will be launched later. If the experience with those is not as good as other platforms, MS will be in trouble. Better hardware will fix the issue in future but the reputation will be ruined and be stuck for a while.

Captivate is more powerful, mainly due to its GPU being about 4 times more powerful than the qsd8250s adreno200 gpu. Though, all WP7 devices will have better looking games since Captivate runs android... And everyone knows android games look crap, no matter how how powerful the hardware is (due to devs having to make their devices run on low end hardware to get more sales)
The IP4 is a better comparison because it's hardware and software have been fully engineered to run along each other, very much like WP7 devices. While it does have a more powerful GPU compared with the QSD, there wouldn't be much difference; the adreno 200 pushes about 22million triangles per sec, where as the sgx535 pushes about 28million triangles per sec. Whether developers even use all those polygons, I'm not sure I've seen.
Though epic citadel on iOS as well as this upcoming game called Aralon sure looks good.
Aralon link: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/10/oh-man-aralon-for-ios-is-gonna-be-good/

Thanks Cruzer. Now it makes sense. 22 mil vs 28 mil is not a big difference. Were they running at the same clock-speed? I hear A4 processor in iPhone 4 runs at ~800MHz, so may be they both perform in a similar manner.

Not sure how much the GPU is affected by the CPU. I think it's more to do about the speed of the actual GPU, but don't take me on that quote lol.

I have a Captivate and an iPhone 4. Im getting rid of both of them to get a HD7 or Focus. The iphone works flawlessly and isnt buggy in the slightest bit, the captivate is very choppy and i couldnt take it after a while with the lagging even after i upgraded to froyo. I would go with wp7 to be different and because it looks fun even if it uses an older processor. The hummingbird and A4 are both top of the line and its going to be hard to compete especially with each having a different os.
Writing this from my iphone 4

S4 backwards compatible?

So qualcom realeased their new S4 chips that are said to be backwards compatible with S1 hardware/software... Would that mean the HD2 that has S1 can be replaced with a newer one? In theory anyways...
Just a random thought
sent from my Rezound

Thatz a promising thought. But who will take such a risk? After all its soldered into pcb. And removing it is a hell job. U r dealing with something like brain transplanting...
send from my hd2 @ miui 1.12.2

True, but in this community there are some crazy people roaming around
But then the question comes up, how would somebody get a hold of that chip
.. Dreams
sent from my Rezound

noup, not a chance.
backwards compatibility mostly refers to the software platform/applications or the instruction set that particular cpu must execute.
For example, x86 - is a platform (PC) defined by a specific instruction set executed by all cpu's in that family. Any x86 cpu must be able to execute those specific instructions in the same manner, thus making it easier for software developers to create programs for that platform. So, either if you have an AMD or Intel chip inside, from the software point of view, it's just the same deal.
To place it in a more familiar context a Pentium 4 class CPU is x86 compatible. But so is a Core2Duo chip. Therefore, even if the C2D chip supports aditional features, at it's core, it's still x86 compatible. So you can still run your older programs on it. However, at hardware level, things are different since those 2 chips have different hardware layout, different number of pins, require different motherboards etc. Furthermore, for the sake of example an Intel 486 chip and a core I7 chip are both x86 compatible (you can.. in fact run windows 7 on a 486 chip, but... it will take some ..time) , but other then this, they are totally different chips.
In the case of HD2, it's just the same. You cannot simply swap one chip and solder another, for the same reason. They require different hardware layouts - specific motherboards and I/O interfaces.

Galaxy S III Processor Information

Disclaimer:
I make no assertion of fact on any statement I make except where repeated from one of the official linked to documents. If it's in this thread and you can't find it in an official document, feel free to post your corrections complete with relevant link and the OP can be updated to reflect the most correct information. By no means am I the subject matter expert. I am simply a device nerd that loves to read and absorb information on such things and share them with you. The objective of this thread is to inform, not berate, dis-credit, or otherwise talk trash about someone else's choice. Take that to a PM or another thread please.
There is a LOT of misconception in the community over what hardware is the more capable kit. They are not the same. Therefore comparing them in such a way can be difficult at best. The Ti White Sheet speaks to the many aspects of attempting to do such a thing. It is no small undertaking. Therefore I ask you trust their data before my opinion. However, I felt it necessary to have something resembling a one-stop thread to go to when you are wondering about how the hardware differs between the two devices.
One thing you won't see me doing is using pointless synthetic benchmarks to justify a purchase or position. I use my device heavily but not for games. Web browsing, multiple email, etc......I use LTE heavily. A device can get a bajillion points in but that doesn't make me any more productive. Those into gaming will probably be more comfortable with the EU Exynos Quad, I'll just say that up front....it has a stronger GPU, but this isn't about that. It would be nice to keep this thread about the technology, not synthetic benchmark scores.
Dictionary of Terms (within thread scope):
SGSIII: Samsung Galaxy S 3 smartphone, variant notwithstanding
Samsung: manufacturer, proprietor of the Galaxy S III smartphone. Also responsible for designing the Exynos cpu used in the International variant of the SGSIII.
ARM: Processor Intellectual Property Company, they essentially own the IP rights to the ARM architecture. The ARMv7 architecture is what many processors are based upon at the root, this includes the Exynos by Samsung and the Krait S4 by Qualcomm, as used in the SGSIII as well as many others. It's like the basic foundation with the A9 and A15 feature sets being "options" that Samsung and Qualcomm add on.
Qualcomm: Like Samsung, they are a manufacturer of processors, their contribution here is the S4 Krait cpu used in the US/Canadian market SGSIII smartphone.
CPU: processor, central processing unit, it's the number crunching heart of your phone, we are interested in two here, Samsung's Exynos and Qualcomm's Krait.
As most everyone knows by now, the EU and US variants of the SGSIII come with two different cpu's in them. The EU has the Samsung Exynos, the US the Qualcomm S4 Krait. One major reason if not the only reason I am aware of is the inability of Exynos to be compatible with LTE radio hardware. Qualcomm's S4 Krait however has the radio built into the package. It's an all in one design where Exynos is a discreet cpu and has to depend on secondary hardware for network connectivity. Obviously there are power implications any time you add additional hardware because of redundancy and typical losses.
However the scope of this thread is to point out some differences between the two very different cpu's so that you, the consumer, can make an educated decision based on more than a popularity contest or the "moar corez is bettar!" stance.
Anyone who is into computers fairly well knows the "core counting" as a determination of performance is risky at best. Just as with the megahertz wars of the 1990's....hopefully by now you all know not every 2Ghz CPU is the same, and not every CPU core is the same. You cannot expect an Intel 2Ghz CPU to perform the same as an AMD 2Ghz CPU. It's all about architecture.
Architecture for the purpose of this thread is limited to the ARMv7 architecture and more specifically the A9 and A15 subsets of the architecture. Each architecture supports certain features and instruction sets. Additionally the internal physical parts of the core vary from one architecture to the next.
A9 is older technology in general while A15 is much newer. Exynos is A9 based, Krait S4 is A15 based. Lets look at the differences.
When looking at the two, one must understand that some of the documentation available is comparing what was available at the time they were written. In most cases A9 info is based on the 40nm manufacturing process. Samsung's Exynos is built using newer 32nm HKMG manufacturing processes. Qualcomm S4 Krait is built on a diferent smaller TSMC 28nm manufacturing process. Generally speaking, the smaller the process, the less heat and power loss. There is also power leakage, etc......not going to get into it because frankly, I haven't read enough to speak to it much. But don't take my word for it.
There is a lot of information out there but here are a few links to good information.
Exynos 32nm Process Info
Qualcomm S4 Krait Architecture Explained
Ti A15 White Papers
ARM Cortex A9 Info
ARM Cortex A15 Info
Samsung Exynos 4412 Whitesheet
Exploring the Design of the A15 Processor
I could link you to all sorts of web benchmarks and such, but to be honest, none of them are really complete and I have not yet found one that can really give a unbiased and apples to apples comparison. As mentioned previously most of them will compare the S4 Krait development hardware to the older 40nm Samsung Exynos hardware......which really doesn't represent what is in the SGSIII smartphones.
Now a few take aways that to me stood out from my own research. If you are unable to read someone's opinion without getting upset please don't read on from here.
The Exynos EU variant that does not support LTE is on paper going to use more power and create more heat due to it simply needing to rely on additional hardware for it's various functions where the S4 Krait has the radio built in. This remains to be seen but battery life would be the biggest implication here. Although Samsung's latest 32nm HKMG process certainly goes a long way towards leveling the playing field.
The Exynos variant is built on older A9 core technology and when comparing feature sets, does not support things such as virtualization. Do you need VT for your phone? Only if the devs create an application for it, but I believe the ability to dual boot different OS'es is much easier done with VT available.
In contrast the S4 Krait core does support this feature. I would like to see about dual booting Windows Phone 8 and Android and I hope having the hardware support and additional ram (EU version has 1GB ram, US has 2GB ram) will help in this area. Actual VT implementation may be limited in usefulness, to be seen.
The S4 Krait/Adreno 225 package supports DirectX 9.3, a requirement for Windows RT/Windows 8 Phone(not sure if required for Phone version). In contrast Exynos Quad/Mali400 does not support DirectX 9.3 and may or may not be able to run Windows RT/Windows 8 Phone as a result. From what I understand Windows Phone 8 may be an option.
Code compiled for the A9 derived Exynos has been around for quite some time as opposed to A15 feature code. I really don't know much about this myself, but I would expect that the A15 based solution is going to have much longer legs under it since it supports everything the Exynos Quad does plus some. My expectation is that with time the code will be optimized for the newer A15 architecture better where the Exynos A9 is likely much more mature already. It could be we see a shift in performance as the code catches up to the hardware capabilities. Our wonderful devs will be a huge influence on this and where it goes. I know I would want to develop to take advantage of the A15 feature sets because they are in-addition-to the A9 feature sets that they both support.
My hope is that anyone who is trying to make a good purchasing decision is doing so with some intent. Going with a EU SGSIII when you want to take advantage of LTE data is going to cause you heartache. It cannot and will not work on your LTE network. Likewise, if you live somewhere where LTE doesn't exist or you simply don't care to have that ability, buying the US SGSIII may not be the best choice all things considered. So in some cases you see the CPU might not be the gating item that causes you to choose one way or another.
Todays smartphones are powerful devices. In todays wireless world many times our hardware choice is a two year long commitment, no small thing to some. If you have specific requirements for your handset, you should know you have options. But you should also be able to make an educated decision. The choice is your's, do with it what you will.

{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

SlimJ87D said:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
One thing you won't see me doing is using pointless synthetic benchmarks to justify a purchase or position. I use my device heavily but not for games. Web browsing, multiple email, etc......I use LTE heavily. A device can get a bajillion points in <insert your choice of synthetic benchmark> but that doesn't make me any more productive. Those into gaming will probably be more comfortable with the EU Exynos Quad, I'll just say that up front....it has a stronger GPU, but this isn't about that. It would be nice to keep this thread about the technology, not synthetic benchmark scores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is not a benchmark comparison thread, as simply put in the OP. Please create a synthetic benchmark thread for synthetic benchmark comparisons. Please read the OP before commenting. I was really hoping you were going to offer more technical information to contribute as you seem to be up to date on things. I expected more than a cut and paste "me too" synthetic benchmark from you....congrats, you can now run Antutu faster....

Thanks for info but Qualcomm's architecture is not quite following ARM's blueprint/guideline. They did huge modification on their first AP(Snapdragon 1) to push over 1GHz and it causes low power efficiency/application compatibility/heat issue compared to Sammy's legit 1Ghz Hummingbird. And for some reason Qualcomm decide to improving their mal-functioning architecture(scorpion) instead of throwing it away and their inferiority continues through all scorpion chips regardless of generation. Their only sales point and benefit was one less chip solution, and LTE band chip nowadays.
Personally I don't think S4 based on A15 architecture and it is slower than International note's exynos in many comparing benchmarks/reviews.
Exynos in GS3 is made on 32nm node, which is better than 45nm one in note. I don't think Sammy figured out yet the ideal scheduler that android system and applications to use those four core efficiently, but it will show significant performance boost over coming updates as shown on GS2 case.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium

Radukk said:
Thanks for info but Qualcomm's architecture is not quite following ARM's blueprint/guideline. They did huge modification on their first AP(Snapdragon 1) to push over 1GHz and it causes low power efficiency/application compatibility/heat issue compared to Sammy's legit 1Ghz Hummingbird. And for some reason Qualcomm decide to improving their mal-functioning architecture(scorpion) instead of throwing it away and their inferiority continues through all scorpion chips regardless of generation. Their only sales point and benefit was one less chip solution, and LTE band chip nowadays.
Personally I don't think S4 based on A15 architecture and it is slower than International note's exynos in many comparing benchmarks/reviews.
Exynos in GS3 is made on 32nm node, which is better than 45nm one in note. I don't think Sammy figured out yet the ideal scheduler that android system and applications to use those four core efficiently, but it will show significant performance boost over coming updates as shown on GS2 case.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The fact both cpu's are modified versions of their ARM derived variants is captured in the OP, as is the fact that most if not all comparisons reference the 40nm Exynos as opposed to the newer 32nm process, also mentioned in the OP.
Thanks

Why would windows environment even matter at this moment?
Isn't MS setting the hardware specs for the ARM version of the devices?
As for LTE compatibility, it's getting released in korean market with LTE and 2GB of RAM supposedly and this was the speculation from the beginning.

spesific discussion of the processors is different to general discussion on comparison.
thread cleaned. please keep to this topic?

jamesnmandy said:
When looking at the two, one must understand that some of the documentation available is comparing what was available at the time they were written. In most cases A9 info is based on the 40nm manufacturing process. Samsung's Exynos is built using newer 32nm HKMG manufacturing processes. Qualcomm S4 Krait is built on a newer smaller 28nm manufacturing process. Generally speaking, the smaller the process, the less heat and power a cpu will generate because of the much denser transistor count. There is also power leakage, etc......not going to get into it because frankly, I haven't read enough to speak to it much.
Software written for the A9 derived Exynos has been around for quite some time as opposed to A15 feature code. I really don't know much about this myself, but I would expect that the A15 based solution is going to have much longer legs under it since it supports everything the Exynos Quad does plus some. My expectation is that with time the code will be optimized for the newer A15 architecture better where the Exynos A9 is likely much more mature already. It could be we see a shift in performance as the code catches up to the hardware capabilities. Our wonderful devs will be a huge influence on this and where it goes. I know I would want to develop to take advantage of the A15 feature sets because they are in-addition-to the A9 feature sets that they both support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
First of all, Samsung's 32nm HKMG process is superior and more power efficient than TSMC's 28nm that's being used in Krait right now, even if the feature size is slightly bigger. HKMG overall is absolutely big step in transistor leakage, and on top of that Samsung integrated a lot of low level electrical engineering tricks to lower the power usage as load biasing. The quadcore with last generation architecture is toe-to-toe with the dual-core Kraits in maximum power dissipation if you normalize for battery size as per Swedroid's tests: http://www.swedroid.se/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-recension/#batteri
And the Kraits and A15 are supposed to be much more power efficient in W/MHz, so it just proves how much of a manufacturing advantage Samsung has here.
Secondly, that paragraph about software written for A15 is absolutely hogwash. You don't write software for A15, the compiler translates it into instruction code which the A15 is equal to an A9, i.e. ARMv7-A. The only difference is the SIMD length which is being doubled/quadrupled, again something you don't really program for in most cases. A15 is mostly IPC improvements and efficiency improvements, not a new instruction set to warrant difference in software, else nothing would be compatible.
DX9.3 compliance is senseless in that regard too as until we'll need any of that the new generation of SoCs will be out so I don't know why we're even bringing this up as nobody's going to hack Windows 8 into their Galaxy S3.
I really don't see the point of this thread as half of it is misleading and the other half has no objective.

AndreiLux said:
First of all, Samsung's 32nm HKMG process is superior and more power efficient than TSMC's 28nm that's being used in Krait right now, even if the feature size is slightly bigger. HKMG overall is absolutely big step in transistor leakage, and on top of that Samsung integrated a lot of low level electrical engineering tricks to lower the power usage as load biasing. The quadcore with last generation architecture is toe-to-toe with the dual-core Kraits in maximum power dissipation if you normalize for battery size as per Swedroid's tests: http://www.swedroid.se/samsung-galaxy-s-iii-recension/#batteri
And the Kraits and A15 are supposed to be much more power efficient in W/MHz, so it just proves how much of a manufacturing advantage Samsung has here.
Secondly, that paragraph about software written for A15 is absolutely hogwash. You don't write software for A15, the compiler translates it into instruction code which the A15 is equal to an A9, i.e. ARMv7-A. The only difference is the SIMD length which is being doubled/quadrupled, again something you don't really program for in most cases. A15 is mostly IPC improvements and efficiency improvements, not a new instruction set to warrant difference in software, else nothing would be compatible.
DX9.3 compliance is senseless in that regard too as until we'll need any of that the new generation of SoCs will be out so I don't know why we're even bringing this up as nobody's going to hack Windows 8 into their Galaxy S3.
I really don't see the point of this thread as half of it is misleading and the other half has no objective.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So i am happy to make corrections when unbiased data is presented. I will look into some of your claims for myself and update accordingly but as mentioned in the OP if you would like to cite specific sources for any thing, please include links. Thank you for your input. The entire point of the thread is to document the differences because a lot of people seem to be looking at the choice as simply 4 or 2 cores and in similar fashion they gravitate to the bigger number without understanding what they are buying into. Some of your statements claim "hogwash", as mentioned I am learning myself and hope to rid the post of any hogwash asap. I for one will be trying to get Windows 8 Phone to boot on it if possible, I tried to clarify in the OP Windows Phone 8 while Windows 8 RT certainly looks to be a stretch. Thanks
Sent from my DROIDX using xda premium

VT has nothing to do with dualbooting. That only requires a bootloader and of course the operating systems supporting sharing their space.
It might allow with a lot of work to get Android to run under WP8 or WP8 to run under Android in a virtual machine.
The most interesting feature you could achieve with VT is to have two copies of the same operating system running with their own data, cache and storage partitions each. This would allow corporta BYOD to remain more-or-less secure and enforce corporate policies on Exchange clients without requiring the user's private part of the phone to be affected by these restrictions.
However after years of development 3d performance on x86 (desktop) platforms is mediocre at best with imho Microsoft Hyper-V being the current winner.
Additionally you claim that WP8 will work on the Qualcom chip.
This is simply not true: it MIGHT work if a build for that exact SoC is produced (somewhat unlikely).
Since WP8 is closed-source and the hardware is proprietary binary too it won't be portable.
This is due to ARM not being like x86 a platform with extensible capability and plg&play support but rather an embedded system where the software has to be developed for each device individually.

nativestranger said:
Which test on that review shows the 32nm 4412 being more efficient than the 28nm 8260 on the one s?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have the full load test and the temperature, in the link that I posted. Normalize them for battery size, for example to the Asus Padphone (Or the One S for that matter, they similar in their result) at 3.7V*1520mAh = 6.1Wh and the S3 at 3.8V*2100mAh = 7.98Wh >> 30.8% increase. Nomarlize the S3's 196 minutes by that and you get 149 minutes. Take into account how the S3's screen is bigger and higher resolution and the result will be more skewed towards the S3. So basically a four core last generation at full load on all four cores is arguably toe-to-toe in maximum power dissipation to a next-generation dual core. The latter should have been the winner here by a large margin, but it is not. We know it's not due to architectural reasons, so the only thing left is manufacturing. HKMG brings enormous benefits in terms of leakage and here you can see them.

d4fseeker said:
VT has nothing to do with dualbooting. That only requires a bootloader and of course the operating systems supporting sharing their space.
It might allow with a lot of work to get Android to run under WP8 or WP8 to run under Android in a virtual machine.
The most interesting feature you could achieve with VT is to have two copies of the same operating system running with their own data, cache and storage partitions each. This would allow corporta BYOD to remain more-or-less secure and enforce corporate policies on Exchange clients without requiring the user's private part of the phone to be affected by these restrictions.
However after years of development 3d performance on x86 (desktop) platforms is mediocre at best with imho Microsoft Hyper-V being the current winner.
Additionally you claim that WP8 will work on the Qualcom chip.
This is simply not true: it MIGHT work if a build for that exact SoC is produced (somewhat unlikely).
Since WP8 is closed-source and the hardware is proprietary binary too it won't be portable.
This is due to ARM not being like x86 a platform with extensible capability and plg&play support but rather an embedded system where the software has to be developed for each device individually.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Changed text to read
From what I understand Windows Phone 8 may be an option.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and
Actual VT implementation may be limited in usefulness, to be seen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

TSMC is struggling with their 28nm node and failed to bring up yield rate through High-K Metal Gate process, so they announced they will keep 28nm SiON for now. The problem is when node become more dense, voltage leakage rate increases geometrically. HKMG itself reduces that leakage to about 100 times less as stated by Global Foundry and Samsung. That is why 32nm HKMG is way more superior than 28nm SiON. You can easily find related article, PR data and detailed chart about this.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium

Radukk said:
TSMC is struggling with their 28nm node and failed to bring up yield rate through High-K Metal Gate process, so they announced they will keep 28nm SiON for now. The problem is when node become more dense, voltage leakage rate increases geometrically. HKMG itself reduces that leakage to about 100 times less as stated by Global Foundry and Samsung. That is why 32nm HKMG is way more superior than 28nm SiON. You can easily find related article, PR data and detailed chart about this.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Will update with linkage when i can, kinda busy with work, if you have links to share please do,
Sent from my DROIDX using xda premium

jamesnmandy said:
Will update with linkage when i can, kinda busy with work, if you have links to share please do,
Sent from my DROIDX using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-k_dielectric
http://www.chipworks.com/en/techni...resents-dualquad-core-32-nm-exynos-processor/
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium

Radukk said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-k_dielectric
http://www.chipworks.com/en/techni...resents-dualquad-core-32-nm-exynos-processor/
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Interesting reading. Thanks! :thumbup:
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium

Radukk said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-k_dielectric
http://www.chipworks.com/en/techni...resents-dualquad-core-32-nm-exynos-processor/
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For future reference I would never use wikipedia as a source of fact. Thanks for the other link, will update as soon as i can.
Sent from my DROIDX using xda premium

jamesnmandy said:
For future reference I would never use wikipedia as a source of fact. Thanks for the other link, will update as soon as i can.
Sent from my DROIDX using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know, there's always the sources at the bottom of every Wikipedia article...

AndreiLux said:
You know, there's always the sources at the bottom of every Wikipedia article...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you are of course correct, which is why I always drill down and link to the sources not the article, just personal preference I suppose, but this isn't my idea, I think linking to wikipedia as a source of fact is generally frowned upon
no worries

Database Users

welcome