Bell points the finger at chipset makers - "The way it's implemented right now, Android does not make as effective use of multiple cores as it could, and I think - frankly - some of this work could be done by the vendors who create the SoCs, but they just haven't bothered to do it. Right now the lack of software effort by some of the folks who have done their hardware implementation is a bigger disadvantage than anything else."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think about this guys?
He knows his stuff.
Sent from my GT-I9300
i would take it with a pinch of salt, though there are not many apps that takes advantage of multi core processor lets see what intel will tell when they have thier own dual core processor out in the market
Pretty good valid arguments for the most part.
I mostly agree though, but I think android makes good use of up to 2 cores. Anything more than that it doesn't at all.
There is a huge chunk of the article missing too.
Sent from my GT-I9300
full article
jaytana said:
What do you think about this guys?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.
Reckless187 said:
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?
Actually is a totally fail but in android 5 I think it's can be solved
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA
This was a serious problem on desktop Windows OS as well back when multi cores first starting coming out. I remember having to download patches for certain games and in other cases, having to set the CPU affinity to run certain games/apps with only one core so that it wouldn't freeze up. I am sure Android will move forward with multi-core support in the future.
simollie said:
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a harsh but fair punishment imo. They need to sort that sh*t out as its totally unacceptable or they're gonna get a taste of the Cat o Nine Tails.
Android kernel is based on Linux. So this is suggesting the Linux kernel is not built to support multi-core either. Not true. There is a reason the SGS3 gets 5000+ in Quadrant, the the San Diego only gets 3000+. And the San Diego is running 200MHz faster.
Just look at the blue bar here. http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/31/orange-san-diego-benchmarks/ . My SGS3 got over 2.5K on just CPU alone.
What Intel said was true. Android is multicore aware but the os and apps aren't taking advantage of it. When this user disabled 2 cores on the HTC one x it made no difference at all in anything other than benchmarks.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=26094852&postcount=3
Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?
I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3
916x10 said:
I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay folks... firstly linux kernel, which android is based on, is aware of multicore (its obvious) but most the applications are not aware, thats true!.. but is not the android which to blame neither the SoC makers. This is like the flame intel made that they wanted to say their single core can do faster to a dual core arm LOL, (maybe intel will make 1 core has 4 threads or 8 threads) <- imposibruuu for now dunno later
you will notice the core usage while playing HD video that require cpu to decode (better core decode fastly)... and im not sure single core intel does better to arm dual core.. ~haha~
but for average user the differences are not noticable.. if intel aiming for this market yes that make sense... but android user are above average user.. they will optimize its phone eventually IMO
What they have failed to disclose is which SoC they did their test on and their methodology. Not much reason to doubt what he's saying but you gotta remember that Intel only have a single core mobile SoC currently and are aiming to get a foothold in the mobile device ecosystem so part of this could be throwing salt on competing products as it's something that should be taken care of by Google optimising the CPU scheduling algorithms of their OS.
The problem is in the chip set. I currently attend SUNY Oswego and a professor of mine Doug Lea works on many concurrent structures. He is currently working on the ARM spec sheet that is used to make chips. The bench marks that he has done shows that no matter how lucky or unlucky you get, the time that it takes to do a concurrent process is about the same where on desktop chips there is a huge difference between best case and worse case. The blame falls on the people that make the chips for now. They need to change how it handles concurrent operations and then if android still cant use multi-core processors then it falls on the shoulders of google.
that is my two cents on the whole situation. Just finished concurrency with Doug and after many talks this is my current opinion.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA
Flynny75 said:
Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't mean daily task doesn't need the cpu power. When I put my sgs 3 in power save mode which cut back the cpu to 800mHz, I feel the lag instantly when scrolling around and navigating the internet. So I can conclude that performance per core is still much more important than number of cores. There isn't any performance difference either with the dual core sensation xe running beside the single core sensational xl.
The hardware needs to be out for developers to have incentive to make use of it. It's not like Android was built from the ground up to utilize 4 cores. That said, once it hits enough hand it and software running in it will be made to utilize the new hardware.
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!
As we all know, the new trend in smartphones now is moving towards the new cortex a9 chips such as the tegra 2, orion, QSD 8960 (I think), etc. However, is all this raw horsepower really necessary? I mean, sure, apps open up 1 sec. faster, web pages load 4-5 seconds faster, and I understand the concept on future proofing, but single core devices are just as capable. To me, 500 is not worth not being able to wait 5 seconds. And don't forgot about Google's new baby, the Nexus S. What is your opinion? Are you getting a dual core? Personally, I am waiting for the quad cores!
Everything will drop in price over time. Right now, of course it's expensive, it's a new feature.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Do we really NEED a computer/HD-TV that fits in your pocket, has wireless data, apps, wifi hotspot capability, and even makes phone calls/texts?...
I say yes. Plus, don't forget the potential battery life gains out of multi-core. But hey.... I carry around a spare battery, and that works pretty well for me.
No, we don't, BUT, they'll make us THINK we WANT it and that's ($$$) what's important to them.
Like you said, those 4-5 seconds load up time, worth it for $500? Naaa.
I'll stick with my Vibrant and let others be the beta testers.
These such things are not really our NEEDS, but our WANTS.
XPLANE9 said:
As we all know, the new trend in smartphones now is moving towards the new cortex a9 chips such as the tegra 2, orion, QSD 8960 (I think), etc. However, is all this raw horsepower really necessary? I mean, sure, apps open up 1 sec. faster, web pages load 4-5 seconds faster, and I understand the concept on future proofing, but single core devices are just as capable. To me, 500 is not worth not being able to wait 5 seconds. And don't forgot about Google's new baby, the Nexus S. What is your opinion? Are you getting a dual core? Personally, I am waiting for the quad cores!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You kind of contradicted yourself with the last sentence.
personally, i only use my device to make calls, txt'g, listen to music and maybe surf the web (rarely). i don't think i would benefit THAT much from a dual core, but on the other hand, if the battery life is better......
aside from that, i'm getting great battery life out of the rom i'm running now, so that isn't much of an issue now.
XPLANE9 said:
As we all know, the new trend in smartphones now is moving towards the new cortex a9 chips such as the tegra 2, orion, QSD 8960 (I think), etc. However, is all this raw horsepower really necessary? I mean, sure, apps open up 1 sec. faster, web pages load 4-5 seconds faster, and I understand the concept on future proofing, but single core devices are just as capable. To me, 500 is not worth not being able to wait 5 seconds. And don't forgot about Google's new baby, the Nexus S. What is your opinion? Are you getting a dual core? Personally, I am waiting for the quad cores!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"You will never need more than 640K" -BG
It's inevitable. Power will become better, apps written for dual cores and so on. This is pretty much an open ended question with an infinite answer. In short Yes.
There's no such thing as "too much" in the technology world.
You may not need it right now, but the apps will advance and become even better, since the multi-threading will bring new possibilities.
Also, I never thought I would need 6 cores on my desktop PC. And look at me. I'm playing for a Dual 6-core Xeon server to fall from the sky right on my yard.
Apple/AT&T can answer this question better since they are good at convincing people they do not need more than 2GB of data or flash on their smartphones
Why would anyone need more then a 2400 baud modem
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
VICosPhi said:
Apple/AT&T can answer this question better since they are good at convincing people they do not need more than 2GB of data or flash on their smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yet they are killing the market so far, maybe the OP has a point, do we really need all this processing power? what we need from phones is for them to utilize what they already have more efficiently. If Team Whiskey can make roms that takes me from 8-12 hours a day battery life to 20-24hours on the SAME hardware, I think that's where manufacturers should be spending their time. Zero lag anytime, excellent battery life and even a 600-800mhz processor will be blazing on Android.
Apple has done a great job with that for the most part..hope Google does follows suite soon!
Dual cores will improve battery life.
Sent from my HTC Vision using Tapatalk
Not only that but there is an overwhelming trend away from laptops to tablets and smart phones. The more horse power these phones have the more we will be able to do with them. In addition Frany1029 is right, dual cores will drastically improve battery life over what we have now. Plus itll be cool to have a phone that is more powerful than most netbooks.
VICosPhi said:
Apple/AT&T can answer this question better since they are good at convincing people they do not need more than 2GB of data or flash on their smartphones
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I LOLd hard.
And yeah, I think that progression is inevitable. Its always been that way with everything. Evolve or get left behind. Simple as that.
Yes.
I want system on chip with dual core cpu and dual core gpu. You wanna talk bout battery life? Lol.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
jamesd86 said:
Yes.
I want system on chip with dual core cpu and dual core gpu. You wanna talk bout battery life? Lol.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can't say I really want system on a chip. Might lead to some severe lock down of the OS.
Do we need dual cores? Depends. For heavy media devices, PMPs and such I can see the need for dual cores. For a smartphone? Not really.
A 1.4 GHz Single Core with a 1900 mAh battery and 4" Super LCD/AMOLED screen would do me just fine.
I prefer backgrounding (iOS/WP7) with push notifications (WP7-style) to 3rd-party preemptive multitasking. System apps can multi-task, those that need to (media player, browser, etc.).
I am actually starting to question the value of Adobe Flash on a smartphone now, after seeing how terribly it performs on this one. I also question the value of ridiculous 4G speeds for users who don't tether their computer to their phone...
dungeon defenders will answer your question.
Do I NEED my BMW? No. But it's always nice to have. Same can be said of pretty much any luxury, and right now, that's exactly what the dual core processors are.
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
I always thought that dual cores were supposed to be more efficient and therefore have greater battery life and better multitasking experiences.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Miamicane99 said:
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol, really?
My year old snapdragon runs numerous programs together perfectly smooth with absolutely no hiccups or lag.
I'm willing to bet a stock phone with (as I stated in the OP) optimized 1 or 1.2 ghz processor and GPU, add in a decent amount of ram and you have absolutely everything you need.
The hardware isn't the problem with android, it's the software. For some reason people don't seem to notice that. There remedy is to add unnecessary power to our phones that will more than likely never be used...
If dual core is somehow supposed to increase battery life, then I can understand somewhat the reasoning behind them. But I don't understand how two processors will noticeably help battery life in real time.
Miamicane99 said:
I would say you don't know the purpose of dual core processors. At this point in time their purpose would be to support all of the multitasking rather than making one program run better (since most programs at this point are not programmed to take advantage of multiple cores). With simultaneous programs running on separate cores you would avoid the slow down that you would experience if you were running them all on the same core. I would agree with focusing more on battery life to some extent though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nice try, but the purpose is to make apps also run better. Apps can easily be patched to take advantage of multiple cores and enhance its performance and such.
Also, multiple cores allow for higher performance with a lower hit on battery life. That alone is enough of a purpose of multiple cores. Not to mention ability to stream full 1080p videos, etc, which will eventually be the norm. This is specially important when outputting to TVs and the like.
starplaya93 said:
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are absolutely right. While we are at it, shouldn't 64K of memory be enough for anybody?
akarol said:
Also, multiple cores allow for higher performance with a lower hit on battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Where did you get this from?
starplaya93 said:
Lol, really?
My year old snapdragon runs numerous programs together perfectly smooth with absolutely no hiccups or lag.
I'm willing to bet a stock phone with (as I stated in the OP) optimized 1 or 1.2 ghz processor and GPU, add in a decent amount of ram and you have absolutely everything you need.
The hardware isn't the problem with android, it's the software. For some reason people don't seem to notice that. There remedy is to add unnecessary power to our phones that will more than likely never be used...
If dual core is somehow supposed to increase battery life, then I can understand somewhat the reasoning behind them. But I don't understand how two processors will noticeably help battery life in real time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
absolutely right, android sucks when it comes to graphics. No hardware acceleration. Perfect example of why a first gen iPhone can run circles around a evo with half the hardware power when it comes to rendering effects and graphics. These hardware specs are just SPECS anyways. That dual core Tegra LG android phone thats coming out still lags despite how powerful it is.
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Perhaps this is a case of build it and they (new uses) will come? Good points on both side.
No, 3D is a gimmick. Dualcore CPU's, until fully optimized - and even then - is not a gimmick.
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
eh, i wouldnt necessarily call it a gimmick, imagine a dual core android phone that did have hardware acceleration. The possibilities would be crazy!!
But yes I totally agree with you also, until the fix the inherent flaw in every android device, more powerful harware is just going to drain the battery faster, instead of just optimizing the OS. Which sounds easy in practice but when there are hundreds of android devices, its probably not an easy task. ( i could very well be wrong though)
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tell that to my quad core PC!
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
If you build it, they will come.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
starplaya93 said:
I was totally buying into the dual core processing for all these new phones until I stopped looking at the "cool factor" and started actually thinking...
In all reality, why in the world do we need a dual core processor on a cell phone?
Don't even say 3d gaming, because that's just ridiculous. The percentage of people that want to play call of duty on their cell phones is probably less than the amount of people who know what rooting is.
What's wrong with optimizing our current 1 and 1.2 ghz processors to give us optimized performance and throwing in decent GPU's?
Anything more than that is COMPLETELY unnecessary for a cell phone.
Where do you guys think the cellular industry is heading?
Its moving waaay too fast imo.
Why don't we focus on things that people are having issues with like Battery Life, build quality of the phones, quality of cameras, crappy software, etc?
I don't know.... Sometimes I feel like the only person with sense nowadays.
Feel Me?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it makes perfect sense , a lot is being asked out of a phone ,console like 3d graphics for gaming and yeah i do like some games on my evo like angry birds once in awhile but overall my main priority of my evo is just communicating and and apps for productivity like wifi tether etc. and the rest is for customizing which im pretty happy that my over clocked processor handles that great with occasional lags buts thats just the software though , if wanted gaming i would go with home consoles or portable gaming , i agree that people are just giving dual core too much hype , Right?
novanosis85 said:
If you build it, they will come.
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahahahahahahaha!!!!!
Good one. lol
I don't think I said exactly what I meant in the OP...
My main point is that android does not need dual core processors at this point. We are still a new OS and there are tons of bugs and things that should be ironed out in the software, etc.
I have no problem with dual core processors if some people feel they will offer better performance and battery life than a 3rd or 4th generation fully optimized 1.2 ghz processor with a beast gpu.
My concern is that android is moving too fast for its own good. The OS has a lot of potential, but if we're just trying to blaze past the competition we're missing out ON A LOT of things.
3d is hands down a gimmick. There is absolutely no justification for that. lol
novanosis85 said:
Tell that to my quad core PC!
Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aight, take your quad for example, lets say its 3ghz, now make a 12ghz single core and only run 2~3 apps at a time, I think it will run them better and use less power to do so
NewZJ said:
I agree with OP. if our phones had a faster single core, say 1.6~2.0gjz and a decent gpu I believe it would perform better and have better battery life vs a dual core 800~1000mhz with the same gpu, dual core is a gimmick, nothing more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A single core 2GHz CPU would probably be slower and suck up more juice than a dual core 1 GHz CPU.
I personally agree with the mentality of energy efficiency over power. I'm just not certain whether dual cores are better or worse in that regard. Two cores doing a few simple tasks would be more energy efficient than a similarly designed single core doing the same tasks, but firing both cores up at max performance would obviously not be. Right now, aside from gaming, I don't see any apps that would strain a dual core; so if provided with great software support from the kernel/OS, maybe multiple cores are the better option. I don't know, maybe someone more technical could shed some light.
Regardless though, software will evolve and become more complex and resource hungry. Maybe HD video editing (not complex just simple social network / personal stuff) and some other stuff I can't think of but will likely pop up. I definitely see much more value in having a powerful GPU, a big reason why I think the EVO ultimately falls short, but like I said, maybe big phones + big batteries (1900+ mAh) + small CPUs and components + multiple cores + and optimized software is the answer to the battery problems.
NewZJ said:
aight, take your quad for example, lets say its 3ghz, now make a 12ghz single core and only run 2~3 apps at a time, I think it will run them better and use less power to do so
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No. No, it wont.
I still can't understand why everyone wants to upgrade processors so quickly. I am not talking about any device or processor in particular but in general. Like our pc's. How many pc's come with a decent amount of memory out of the box. That is usually one of the first things we must do to really enjoy it unless u spent the money on a high end gaming pc. Why don't they beef up the memory on these while they work on dual core stuff.
In no way am I saying I don't think I need a dual core. More is always better with that kind of stuff. I would definitely take a dual over a single core. Just wandering why memory always seems like it could use more. Phones and pc's
Sent from my rooted HTC EVO using the xda app!
I just got a Galaxy S II and now Samsung is gearing up for the Galaxy III powered by Exynos 4412 @ 1.5Ghz.
Sources:
http://pinoydroid.net/samsung-galaxy-iii-quadcore-smartphone-samsung-exynox-4412
http://androidandme.com/2011/11/new...-exynos-4412-could-power-samsung-galaxy-s-iii
http://www.devicemag.com/2011/11/22...e-powered-by-quad-core-exynos-4412-processor/
Come at me bro
That would be very nice. A little sad I couldn't upgrade to the GS II but I think I can shell out for a new phone next year and a quad core Galaxy S would fit the bill.
I kinda want a galaxy Nexus, I missed out on the N1 so I do want a pure google device but samsung just gets it so right. Can't wait to see what they do with ICS.
Sent from my GT - I9000M running Tornado JVR Gold with Tornado kernel.
wtf do we need a quad core phone for when very little use dual core. Now quad core on a tablet i can somewhat understand
Gonna stick with the SGS2, unless of course the SGS3 has improved everything in which case I'll get it on launch day..
Seems pointless to me.... quad core will b battery hungry and bare use both cores on gs2 lol. Meeeeh
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Overkill...
I this going to be the future of Android, constant hardware updates that totally outdo the previous model in a matter of months, its already a fragmented nightmare, coders cant cope with dual core, let along quad, to be honest I am getting fed up with the constant changing and new models all the time, getting ridiculous
na its for tablets. a dual A15 with A7 more likely.
THUDUK said:
I this going to be the future of Android, constant hardware updates that totally outdo the previous model in a matter of months, its already a fragmented nightmare, coders cant cope with dual core, let along quad, to be honest I am getting fed up with the constant changing and new models all the time, getting ridiculous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then don't upgrade! you forget the other millions who didnt update this year and will be looking at 2012 for the latest and greatest. Where is the sense in wanting an Apple like crawl in progression. Android gives companies like Samsung the freedom to concentrate on the hardware. It can only be a good thing for the consumer. What I take from your post is "WWAaaAaa my fones not the bestest anymore!!11!!"
androidkid311 said:
Seems pointless to me.... quad core will b battery hungry and bare use both cores on gs2 lol. Meeeeh
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I do agree that it is somewhat pointless at this point in time, it's a common misconception that newer CPUs = more power usage. By that logic, a Core i7 will consume more power than the Core 2 Quad, which it does not.
CPU manufacturers control power consumption in a number of ways. The most common is a die shrink, manufacturing the CPU at a smaller level. The Exynos is a 45nm chip, and the next generation is supposed to be 28nm. Thus, we can expect power consumption to stay the same, or even decrease.
The other way is through the use of core gating. The OS simply shuts off the cores that are not in use, and wakes them up when they are needed.
Hopefully this helps to clear up some of the misunderstandings regarding CPUs and power consumption.
quad core has already been stated to be more battery friendly and the tegra3 chips is very clever only using more cores when needed and even having a stealth 5th core for mega low idle speeds
obvously the exynos is not a tegra3 but i am sure samsung will do some clever stuff too
quad core will be awesome , i am happy with my dual core sgs2 so wont upgrade for a while ive also bought extras etc so its not worth upgrading for me , however that doesnt stop quad core from being gooooooooooood
have you seen the gfx power it will bring , the extra camera capabillities it allows the manufactuers to use , the speed that the browser will work , how smooth the ui transisitions and scrolling will be even when multi tasking , it also brings support for up to 2gb of ram which alone is great stuff everyone knows the only thing better then ram is more ram
i think if we want our mobile to be proper mobile computers connected to bluetooth keyboards and usb hardrives then linked up to hdmi or dlna while doing back ground tasks , followed by some high end intensive 3d gaming with a bluetooth pad over hdmi while still doing background tasks , encoding high quality media on the fly and editing it without having to wait an age for it to finalise then qua core is a great thing as is the way that tech is moving so fast
the only problem i can see is fragmentation as things move so quick
its got to make it hard for devs etc which in the long turn could damage the platform a bit , however i am sure it will come to the point it will smooth out and tech wont accelerate so fast , maybe? lol
nvidia have a road map and it shows that they will be releasing a new cpu/gpu combo each year for at least the next 3-4 years before they think we will be at mobile maximum potenial , so get ready for this tradition to carry on for a while yet
Sadly I think this fragmentation might become a very big problem in the future, and is one area where Apple is unfortunately right.
Look at PC Gaming. A lot of people buy PCs not knowing exactly what the PC they bought at capable of. When it fails to run Battlefield 3 at an acceptable framerate they are not going to be happy.
For us techies, it's easy to know that you need at least a GTX 560Ti or something, but for Joe Sixpack out there they obviously don't know these things.
I think perhaps Google should enforce some sort of system requirement rating system. Give it a number scale to make it simple. So maybe the SGS2 scores 9/10, and Contract Killer requires a phone with at least 7 to run smoothly. So Joe Sixpack who bought a Galaxy 3 GT-i5800 that scores a 3 doesn't get all pissed off.
Hope I'm making sense here.
Nah fragmentation will be fine. Pc is still the choice for gamers over Apple mac, not including consoles. Transfer that to mobile phones, and as long as the android mobiles become popular enough, games will be great for them. Everyone will just know they have to have a good mobile just like their pc.
I read somewhere it would feature the AMD's new 8 core bulldozer CPU with nVidias GTX 590 in SLI.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App
i dont really understand people complaining about fragmentation. Android isnt a phone, it isnt a manufacturer, its an operating system. Do people complain the laptop market is fragmented because some computers are on xp, vista or 7? Some are on faster processors than others? Did people ever complain that symbian updated on some phones but not others?
I just dont get it, Id rather new phones/tech come out than only one release every 18 months.
Who cares? My upgrade isn't due until 2013... When I will get the top of the line handset again. I'm sure that model will be usurped within 4-6 months too.
Maybe we should all keep our phones in their original packaging like toy collectors, so they can't contribute to the disastrous fragmentation issue.
The actual effect of this media-inspired phenomena on consumers is negligible.
LOL sorry - had to point out the galaxy s III still has an 8mp camera. =p
Almost sounded like the Samsung Nexus with the 5mp camera... ahaha.
Just kidding. The phone should be solid. =)
Samsung g3 will be have 1.8 ghz processor not 1.5 ghz and will be dual core
Sent from my GT-I9100
biffsmash said:
Pc is still the choice for gamers over Apple mac, not including consoles
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android phones vs iPhone is basically like PC vs console since PC has a billion different hardware and software configs where as a console as 1 (There are a few iPhones but you generally only support the latest 2-3 versions).
so the pattern is doubling the number of cores every generations then the next generation should have 8core processor?
I highly doubt it...
Probably a hex core.
Swyped from my OG Droid running CM7
I just noticed this in Tapatalk new posts, and just HAD to answer.
What's the point?
Name one situation where you would even need that.
Samsung needs to work on improving other practical features.
They've always upgraded what makes people fall for their phones, but never anything actually useful.
Years ago, their phone cameras went up in megapixels, but sucked no matter how much megapixels they had. Because megapixels aren't as important as is other more technical camera features. But megapixels are easiest to advertise so they went with those.
Personally I think a single core was enough. Now, phone companies need to work on RAM. They could stuff a lot more RAM in before they need to upgrade the processor.
/myopinion
Sent from my HTC Dream using Tapatalk
No, we will get more quad graphics
Sent from my HTC Explorer using XDA
Doubt it. these apps doesnt even require 8 cores. if any of these phone users require 8 core just to play games, either get a console or a decent pc.
8 core to play Angry birds or Shadowgun...pffftt...
will 8 core make me type faster?
Just Faster Speeds
tbh, I think faster speeds are really the only shift we'll be seeing at least next year for sure, but probably the year after that as well. Although with Windows 8 on ARM on the horizon, perhaps devs may find a way to do some serious mobile computing.
i don't think that 8 core will be useful for a device of 5" or 6"
They will stay at quad core but use the faster A15 architecture.
It's possible they might add some low powered A7 cores in a big.little configuration to improve battery life.
It will also have a next gen Mali gpu. Either Mali 604 or t658.
I'm also expecting it to have 2gb of ram.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA
Why would you even care...
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
vnvman said:
Why would you even care...
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol coming from a WP user
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2
I'm not entirely convinced multi-cored phones of any variety are even really getting fully utilized yet :/
I honestly believe cores are more of a marketing gimmick at the moment. I could be wrong, I'm no expert and I don't have the ability to see how well android handles the fine details.. But, there are a lot of factors most people don't even think about when buying phones.. Manufacturers know you're not going to ask "Well what about this 1.5ghz single core processor preforming 4 instructions per clock compared to this dual core phone performing 1.5 instructions per clock?"
Maybe when I go to upgrade my captivate I'll worry about cores more but, at the moment I wouldn't be surprised if dual cores were preforming better than quad cores since they have been out longer and had more time to get optimized in the code.
Dual core phones are already fast enough but seems like phones will start competing with pc in the next few years.
Imo RAM n battery life need to be increased greatly then manufactures should start thinking about future multiple core cpu.
Imagine a hex core cpu n the juice it needs
Yes, RAM!
ya, I definitely think RAM has a place because that's one of the best things about smartphones is the ability to multi-task! So if manufacturers can further cater to that, then I think more cores may follow, especially if we get more TRUE multi-tasking where you have live apps running. Because then, you can delegate individual cores to individual apps that are running. ATM I'm not entirely sure why I would need multiple live apps running simultaneously on a phone, however I think for business workers/students it could be helpful to be watching a live stream or doing a conference call while taking notes in an office suite app.
FinancialWar said:
lol coming from a WP user
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
LOL coming from somebody using even lesser hardware than mine. Pull out the wallet and get sum 6 core goodness you cheapo. You even fail at trolling, come on you can do better than this.
On a more serious note, even Win7 has issues handling more than 6 cores efficiently, so why would anyone even bother having 8 effing cores on a phone. A full desktop experience would be useless anyway on something like a phone, only no life nerds should get all excited about something like that. I wonder why people can't just enjoy the current technology, looking so far just means that one hasn't really got **** to do all day IMHO.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Snow_fox said:
I'm not entirely convinced multi-cored phones of any variety are even really getting fully utilized yet :/
I honestly believe cores are more of a marketing gimmick at the moment. I could be wrong, I'm no expert and I don't have the ability to see how well android handles the fine details.. But, there are a lot of factors most people don't even think about when buying phones.. Manufacturers know you're not going to ask "Well what about this 1.5ghz single core processor preforming 4 instructions per clock compared to this dual core phone performing 1.5 instructions per clock?"
Maybe when I go to upgrade my captivate I'll worry about cores more but, at the moment I wouldn't be surprised if dual cores were preforming better than quad cores since they have been out longer and had more time to get optimized in the code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. One needs to wonder why would a decent mobile OS need this much power anyway?
vnvman said:
LOL coming from somebody using even lesser hardware than mine. Pull out the wallet and get sum 6 core goodness you cheapo. You even fail at trolling, come on you can do better than this.
On a more serious note, even Win7 has issues handling more than 6 cores efficiently, so why would anyone even bother having 8 effing cores on a phone. A full desktop experience would be useless anyway on something like a phone, only no life nerds should get all excited about something like that. I wonder why people can't just enjoy the current technology, looking so far just means that one hasn't really got **** to do all day IMHO.
Sent from my Lumia 800 using XDA Windows Phone 7 App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I use even lesser lesser lesser, and lesser hardware
Instead of wasting money (which I don't have) on a newer phone, I work on optimizing Android to run at its best on my phone. Look at the Sony PSP. The XMB is amazing for a 333mhz processor. (And its actually clocked at 222mhz at the XMB). Now, were not talking about the browser here, that sucks. Sony spent time on the OS itself. They won't get thanked for it by the people who look at the features list on the box, but they engineered a wonderful OS for such a weak device.
Sent from my HTC Dream using Tapatalk
the s4 will be dualcore 2.3ghz the s5 will probably be some insane cpu and graphics chip capable of running mw3 im 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000% sure they will be more powerful than a xbox 360
Battery and ram def need to be upped. I also think phone manuf should provide a extended battery option with every high powered phone. I would also like to see a slow down on e amount of phones coming out. Perfect your flagship mid and lower powered phones then move on
Sent from my VS920 4G using xda premium
I hope they will stop messing with cores and screen sizes and let's focus on batteries and RAM.
Most apps and software don't even use two cores, let alone four, forbid more than that.
frankdrey said:
I use even lesser lesser lesser, and lesser hardware
Instead of wasting money (which I don't have) on a newer phone, I work on optimizing Android to run at its best on my phone. Look at the Sony PSP. The XMB is amazing for a 333mhz processor. (And its actually clocked at 222mhz at the XMB). Now, were not talking about the browser here, that sucks. Sony spent time on the OS itself. They won't get thanked for it by the people who look at the features list on the box, but they engineered a wonderful OS for such a weak device.
Sent from my HTC Dream using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hehe, I know what you mean...a year ago I had a Desire, and it was amazing to see how greatly the software could work after some tweaking, compared to stock. Sure it was kinda challenging, but it really felt like it was worth it: that phone was a living thing to me, I could hear it breathing. I swear I almost cried when I sold it, and I actually immediately regretted doing it, but it was too late. It was like leaving a dog on the side of the road or something like that, but at that time I was all excited about the fresh dual core thing, so I couldn't think rationally. There are days when I still feel very guilty about what I did. I'll never do that again. Guys seriously, if you have an old Android device with you don't sell it, you will regret it. Maybe not now, and not even in a few months, but you definitely will, trust me, especially if you've been living with it for a while (I had that phone for over a year).
Selling the GS2 didn't actually make me feel that way, probably because I've only kept it for a few months and didn't really tweak it that much...
8 cores is long way to go.
no way 8 core phone in next 3 years!
---------- Post added at 04:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:47 PM ----------
I Am Marino said:
I hope they will stop messing with cores and screen sizes and let's focus on batteries and RAM.
Most apps and software don't even use two cores, let alone four, forbid more than that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats ri8 More RAM and Longer Battery life is way to go.
They already have superb camera and beautiful display