Related
Hi i like this website
i have a question for the CPU on htc shift
is possible to change my intel GMA 950 CPU to the new Intel Aton??
the intel atom is very good for the shift. this can make the battery life for 2 hour to 4 hour.
800mhz to 1.6 ghz
thx
Hi, I like the question
Actually it made me laught so much I'm going to answer.
No, you cannot change the graphic chip for a new processor. You would have no screen displaying nice lines and windows.
If you mean changing the processor by an Atom, this is not possible at all.
About getting twice the battery time, I think atom CPU don't get this anyway, so you should better look for an extended battery.
Becareful what we wish for
thaihugo said:
Hi, I like the question
Actually it made me laught so much I'm going to answer.
No, you cannot change the graphic chip for a new processor. You would have no screen displaying nice lines and windows.
If you mean changing the processor by an Atom, this is not possible at all.
About getting twice the battery time, I think atom CPU don't get this anyway, so you should better look for an extended battery.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Bro, Intel GMA is NOT totally a Graphic Card, it is North Bridge Chipset that Control CPU, Video (PCIe or AGP), and RAM, but in this case most of Value Chipset Intel has an onboard Graphic Card
Some Notebook Value are having Graphic Card embedded in the NorthBridge Chipset, but performance Notebook do not have that, most of it are used NVidia or ATI as their VGA Card separated from NorthBridge Chipsets to gain more speed on Vector/Poygon/OpenGL/DirectX/etc
To learn more about intel 945GM, follow this link
http://www.intel.com/products/notebook/chipsets/945gm/945gm-overview.htm
http://forum.xda-developers.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=114012&stc=1&d=1221760371
Processor Upgrade are depend to NorthBridge Chipset Compatibility
North Brodge Chipset of our SHIFT are very compatible to new processor, but perhaps the BIOS should have to be rewrite OR NOT, to understand the multiply factor and front side bus of the new CPU
this is Sony UX 280 being upgrade to Core2Duo
http://micropctalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4641
they said that the battery life got no change at all
but the process for upgrading the CPU is as complicated as HTC universal doing the RAM upgrade, except if the slot for the CPU is using ZIF (zero insertion force) like the one that we have in our desktop motherboard
hope somebody is DARE enough to do like those guys in MicroPCTalk
In my opinion, Chipset of SHIFT do have good compatibility because it was 945series, by theory it can achieve compatibility to CoreDuo, but depend on CPU formfactor
Speed for the Processor does not imply the battery life significantly, cause most of the mobile CPU is ULV (ultra low voltage), and have the Intel Speedstep technology, that can drop down the multiplier if not being used extensively
Atom 330
ok, the initial question was not very accurate, but let's try to stick back to the topic...
Does anybody knows if there is a chance to replace stock Shift CPU with new dual core Intel Atom 330?
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/09/20/dual-core-atom-chips-now-shipping-from-intel/
processors fit on sockets
BGA stands for the Ball Grid Array, cause this kind processor use soldered balls instead of pins to have a contact with the motherboard.
As i know the BGA CPU used on our shift is the Intel A110 Stealey 800Mhz with 663 BGA.
I'm searching for quite a while now, and i don't see something that fits 663...
http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/309219.pdf
Ctrl+f opens find.
Type a110, and you will get the answer you want...
945GU Express chipset, was designed for a100 and a110 processors.
You have to dig deeper on this, i guess.
regards.
zebra.belka said:
ok, the initial question was not very accurate, but let's try to stick back to the topic...
Does anybody knows if there is a chance to replace stock Shift CPU with new dual core Intel Atom 330?
http://www.crunchgear.com/2008/09/20/dual-core-atom-chips-now-shipping-from-intel/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Almost certainly not I'm afraid. The chipset and bios likely don't support the Atom and probably never will.
In addition, it I don't think you'd see that much of an improvement in battery life even if it were possible. Look at the MSI Wind - it barely makes 2 hours on 3 cell battery.
Regards,
Dave
foxmeister said:
Almost certainly not I'm afraid. The chipset and bios likely don't support the Atom and probably never will.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dave, am I right to say that our Shift got Atom A110 inside? So BIOS will probably get it, the only issue is to find something that would fit motherboard with 663 BGA.
zebra.belka said:
Dave, am I right to say that our Shift got Atom A110 inside? So BIOS will probably get it, the only issue is to find something that would fit motherboard with 663 BGA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No - the A110 Stealey processor is *not* an Atom
http://www.umpc.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=section&id=7&Itemid=31
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They are based on quite different architectures which leads me to believe they would not be drop in compatible in the Shift.
Regards,
Dave
nobody saw that i guess ...
vulcan_gr said:
BGA stands for the Ball Grid Array, cause this kind processor use soldered balls instead of pins to have a contact with the motherboard.
As i know the BGA CPU used on our shift is the Intel A110 Stealey 800Mhz with 663 BGA.
I'm searching for quite a while now, and i don't see something that fits 663...
http://www.intel.com/Assets/PDF/datasheet/309219.pdf
Ctrl+f opens find.
Type a110, and you will get the answer you want...
945GU Express chipset, was designed for a100 and a110 processors.
You have to dig deeper on this, i guess.
regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Talking about Atom install in the shift, is talking about fitting a 45nm processor, into a 90nm socket... it just wont fit...
Different structure. Different Philosophy.
The Stealy's are not even mentioned on intels web page...
They are called A100 and A110 and there was no more evolution on the 663 BGA.
The Atom processor has μFC-BGA 479 or 478 socket...
Smaller chip... newer technology.
{The good thing if you install an atom on your shift is that you will have a lot of spare balls
(and do not try to turn it on ... if you wana keep the rest of your remaining balls ... lol )
}
regards.
Why it has to be an Atom
Why ???
we have so much more option open here, IF you are dare enough to change the CPU
because this Intel 800MHz are very poor quality, perhaps we can look over to CoreDuo
batghost said:
Why ???
we have so much more option open here, IF you are dare enough to change the CPU
because this Intel 800MHz are very poor quality, perhaps we can look over to CoreDuo
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THERE IS NO OTHER PROCESSOR MADE IN 90nm TECHNOLOGY WITH 663 BGA (pins)
NOTHING ELSE FITS THE SHIFT ! ! !
The first thing to look when you want top change the processor is to see if it fits in ...
The intel A110 (Stealy) 800Mhz and A100 600Mhz are the ONLY ONES that fit in...
It's not the end of the world though ... there are still options... if you want more batery life ... go to 600Mhz.
Square peg, round hole comes to mind!
The guys here are good! But not THAT good...
It may be possible with a dedicated achitechture interface daughterboard but the speed loss using this method would negate any gains!
Anyone?
Sadly said that you are right
vulcan_gr said:
THERE IS NO OTHER PROCESSOR MADE IN 90nm TECHNOLOGY WITH 663 BGA (pins)
NOTHING ELSE FITS THE SHIFT ! ! !
The first thing to look when you want top change the processor is to see if it fits in ...
The intel A110 (Stealy) 800Mhz and A100 600Mhz are the ONLY ONES that fit in...
It's not the end of the world though ... there are still options... if you want more batery life ... go to 600Mhz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good research bro, cause i have ux280p, and i thought that good story may came up to our shift, after doing the research, it is only 100 n 110 that support our shift because of the cpu formfactor, and now Intel is leaving us ... hiks, so i think that the only possible way to improve performance is only upgrading the ram,
Maybe one day there will be another 100series come to life, but i doubt it
To use a daughterboard, maybe possible, but then we have to build another zif slot, hmmm dangerous .... hiks
...
if you can create room in the shift for that i''ll give you my car...
there is absolutelly no room in the device for such things...
it's not a desktop pc with an enormous tower...
vulcan_gr said:
if you can create room in the shift for that i''ll give you my car...
there is absolutelly no room in the device for such things...
it's not a desktop pc with an enormous tower...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was thinking on the lines of a pull-along kiddy-cart to carry the excess equipment in (THAT'S how serious I was thinking about it).
For the size, what it achieves and present tech vs cost, I am quite happy with what I have.
I know A free one is in development.but I cannot find any other information on it. Any idea when more info will be released?
Sent from my eris
Not psx4droid right?
Sent from my Eris using XDA App
I know one is out, but don't expect it to work on the eris. Its going to need a decent gpu.
Yeah, it doesn't work well on the Eris a little laggy-- but i just tried it with Chrono Cross maybe different games have better frame rates? Hope this helps!
They say they might be coming out with dual core snapdragons in the near future. I can't wait! DS games on my phone might be cool.
This will be a million times better with a dual core processor.
Processor doesn't make a phone though. GPU's in phones need to come a long way to really see the affects of 2gHz processors. Honestly I don't care if you have 4 gHz in your phone, if you have the ram of an Eris it won't be that much speedier then an Eris. All things need to be improved or else it is just a bottle-neck.
Well this is almost certainly like computer emulation where it's nearly 100% based on CPU and the GPU does virtually nothing. The threads just aren't sent through the GPU on an emulator because it's way too complication. So two cores will in fact have a very large thread on multithreaded emulation.
Yeah, I see where you're coming from there. I read online that if you had hardware 10x the original, you could emulate a device perfectly. Technically that makes the DS an ok candidate for a snapdragon phone. The DS has two processors that clock at 67 and 33 mHz. That makes it having 100mHz of processor. (I was surprised how little of a processor it actually has.) Do the math. If a snapdragon clocks at 1024mHz (1gHz) then 1000mHz would emulate it fine. That's all hypothetically speaking though. Games would probably still lag on a Droid X or Incredible. Could happen. I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
PSX, maybe that could be nice, but when my phone can emulate Gamecube and Xbox1, times will be good.
The issue is that dual core processors are exponentially faster than single core. A dual core 500 mhz processor does not equate a single core 1ghz processor in fact it's much closer to a 2ghz processor in benchmark scores if not higher.
I thought the complete opposite. Dual 1.5gHz vs. 3gHz, 3 gets the win for me. My lappy is a dual 2.13gHz and it doesn't seem like 4.26. Just my thoughts, I haven't actually run tests to verify this. Computing wise, a lot of applications only use one core. There in lies the problem with dual core. Plus, why do you call that an issue?
Well it's simply an issue at the moment because of the fact that phones only have one core is all.
And dual cores will always outpower single cores because of the increase in L3 cache size, which literally does not exist on a single core processor. The L3 Cache increases the speed of a dual or multi core processor by quite a lot.
edit: And a lot of emulators utilize multicores, if not all.
Just saying, this is a huge step forward though. It's just a matter of splitting the threads.
CPCookieMan said:
I just don't know about buttons. On the droid you could map them to letters but on the Eris... Where do buttons go?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The best solution for this would be using another controller with bluetooth. I know most of the iphone (and a few of the android) emulators can sync with a wiimote to avoid awful on-screen buttons.
Hi,
I was wondering if the 2 CPU's are working simultaneously together? or I'st just 1?., I'm using FLEXREAPER X10 ICS 4.0.3 . Sometimes I get screen glitches .... when My tab is trying to sleep and I touched the screen. Also...when I try the benchmark it only say's the CPU1 processing speed... & etc. Also when I'm browsing in the Playstore the screen animation is a bit lag... Can some1 enlighten me...or is there an app for this? than can force 2 cpu to work all the time together.?
Yes, both cores are enabled at all times. But no, you cannot make an application use both cores unless the application was designed to do so.
FLEXREAPER X10 ICS 4.0.3 base a leak rom ICS, not a stable rom, so it has some problems.
Your benchmark is correct.
There are NOT 2 CPU's. There is only one CPU, with 2 cores. It doesn't process two applications at once, it CAN process two threads of the same application at the same time. Think of it as this: two CPUs would be two people writing on different pieces of paper.A single CPU with two cores would be one person writing with both hands at the same time. He can only write on the same piece of paper, but it's faster then it would be if he was writing with only one hand.
Note: this is not related to multi-task. Multi-tasking works based on processing a little bit of each app at a time, so altough it may seen that both are running at the same time, it is not.
Most apps are not designed to work with threads though, so there's your (actually, our) problem. But this is not an A500 problem, it applies to any multi-core processor based devices ou there (including desktops).
danc135 said:
There are NOT 2 CPU's. There is only one CPU, with 2 cores
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Essentially true, but...
It doesn't process two applications at once
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
False. Two cores is just two CPUs on the same die.
Thanks for the response guys... I'm getting bit confused with this "multi-core processor".... I was expecting that it is fast to no lag, during browsing apps in my lib,switching application, even browsing in The PlAYSTORE". So It's correct to say that multi-core processor is a bit of a waste if an app can't use it's full/all cores potential? Also if the UI of an OS can't use all cores at the same time?
Dual Core, Dual CPU....
Not entirely, because if the kernel is capable of multi-threading, then it can use one core to run services while another is running the main application. The UI is only another application running on top of the kernel...
The only difference between a dual core Intel cpu and a dual core tegra 2 is the instruction set and basic capabilities, otherwise they can be thought of as essentially the same animal. The kernel, which is the core of the OS, handles the multi-tasking, but android has limited multi-tasking capabilities for Applications. Even so, services that run in the background are less of a hindrance on a dual core cpu than a single core one, and more and more applications are being written to take advantage of multiple cores.
Just have a bunch of widgets running on your UI, and you are looking at multi-tasking and multi-threading. Which are both better on multi-core processors.
A multiple core cpu are not more then one processor stacked on one die. They thread and load balance thru software.Applications MUST BE AWARE Of multi core cpus to take advantage of the dual cores.
A multiple Processor computer has a 3rd processor chip on the main board. this chip balances the load on hardware. this does not add over head on the processors. as on a Dual multi CORE CHIP. has a much higher load overhead.
SO Many people confuse the two. This is due to how the companies market the muticore cpu devices .
So a application that can not thread itself on a multi core chip will run in one of the cpu cores. a threaded app can well guess?
a dual Processor computer can run non multi thread aware app or program on two cores..
Its quite simply complicated..
You can throw all the hardware you want at a system. In the end, if the software sucks (not multi-threaded, poorly optimized, bad at resource management, etc...), it's still going to perform bad.
Dual core doesn't mean it can run one applicaton at twice speed, it means that it can run two applications at full speed, given that they're not threaded. Android's largely meant to run one application foregrounded, and since they can't magically make every application multi-threaded, you won't be seeing the benefits of multiple cores as much as you will on a more traditional platform.
Also, a dual-core tegra 2 is good, but only in comparison to other ARM processors (and even then, it's starting to show its age.) It's going to perform poorly compared to a full x86 computer, even one that's older.
netham45 said:
You can throw all the hardware you want at a system. In the end, if the software sucks (not multi-threaded, poorly optimized, bad at resource management, etc...), it's still going to perform bad.
Dual core doesn't mean it can run one applicaton at twice speed, it means that it can run two applications at full speed, given that they're not threaded. Android's largely meant to run one application foregrounded, and since they can't magically make every application multi-threaded, you won't be seeing the benefits of multiple cores as much as you will on a more traditional platform.
Also, a dual-core tegra 2 is good, but only in comparison to other ARM processors (and even then, it's starting to show its age.) It's going to perform poorly compared to a full x86 computer, even one that's older.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is so true . With the exception of a TRUE Server dual OR Quad processor computer.. There is a special on board chip that will thread application calls to balance the load for non threaded programs and games..My first dual processor computer was a amd MP3000 back when dual cpu computers started to be within user price ranges. Most applications/programs did not multi thread .
And yes as far as computer speed and performance you will not gain any from this. but only will feel less lag when running several programs at once.a 2.8 ghz dual processor computer still runs at 2.8 not double that.
erica_renee said:
With the exception of a TRUE Server dual OR Quad processor computer.. There is a special on board chip that will thread application calls to balance the load for non threaded programs and games..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually this is incorrect. All such decisions are left to the OS's own scheduler, for multiple reasons: the CPU cannot know what kind of tasks it is to run, what should be given priority under which conditions and so on, like e.g. on a desktop PC interactive, user-oriented and in-focus applications and tasks are usually given more priority than background-tasks, whereas on a server one either gives all tasks similar priority or handles tasks priorities based on task-grouping. Not to mention realtime operating system which have entirely different requirements altogether.
If it was left to the CPU the performance gains would be terribly limited and could not be adjusted for different kinds of tasks and even operating systems.
(Not that anyone cares, I just thought to pop in and rant a little...)
Self correction
I said a multi-core processor only runs threads from the same process. That is wrong (thanks to my Computer Architecture professor for misleading me). It can run multiple threads from different processes, which would constitute true parallel processing. It's just better to stick with same process threads because of shared memory within the processor. Every core has its own cache memory (level 1 caches), and shared, on-die level 2 caches.
It all depends on the OS scheduler, really.
With ICS (and future Android versions), I hope the scheduler will improve to get the best of multi-core.
In the end though, it won't matter if applications aren't multi-thread (much harder to code). What I mean is, performance will be better, but not as better as it could be if developers used a lot of multi-threading.
To answer hatyrei's question, yes, it is a waste, in the sense that it has too much untapped potential.
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.
Will it be possible to have 2 cpus on the Ara.. It will be a beast if it could .. ( p.s. sorry if i have mistakes! )
51r said:
Will it be possible to have 2 cpus on the Ara.. It will be a beast if it could .. ( p.s. sorry if i have mistakes! )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I highly doubt it, I reckon the device would heat up so much and consume so much battery. Plus I think it will take a much longer time for two mobile cpu's to play nice with each other
I doubt it. It'd be cool if you could though but I still see no point as to why.
Yes, you could. The problem is that Android is not written to really use those two processors (its only recently getting support to use dual cores, much less quad) so it would just be a waste of energy and space.
good post
riahc3 said:
Yes, you could. The problem is that Android is not written to really use those two processors (its only recently getting support to use dual cores, much less quad) so it would just be a waste of energy and space.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was going to suggest dual core. You beat me to it. Your post is good info; just like not jumping on a 64 bit bandwagon before devices have 8 or more GB of ram [not storage].
im sure it would be great to have two cpus but i feel like all that power would go to waste im sure it could bring more development but still what are you going to do with two cpu's at the current clock speeds we have now? the newest kindle fire is more powerful than my computer im sure quad cores are quite enough for phones cant believe they make octacores its a huge waste.
Dual processors in Project Ara devices.
Actually, from a functional standpoint, I see no reason to have dual CPUs. Android can't make use of a dual processor system, and if it could, what benefit would it provide in real time?
The system as it is, is too inefficient to handle the CPU commands, support the current demand of a dual CPU device.
With a dual CPU device, you also need to design additional power control regulation and filtering, additional battery support and ASIC devices to control the processor when demands are not being called upon, this adds a lot to the base architecture, and not really a financial benefit for a healthy profit margin. When you have finite board real estate for each individual module, you can't simply 'design-in' additional power control circuitry and maintain the same, or similar board dimensions, something has to give.
If we had everything we desired in a single device, I guarantess that device would be dimensionally unusable, the form factor would grow, costs would multiply, and with every feature added as 'standard', you would need to drag around a automotive-sized battery to operate all the options and features.
Personally, I prefer a robust Rf section, and then a modular antenna system that uses PIN diodes so I can select internal or external antennas if I desire. Next, I would like to have Bluetooth access to the entire phone system and file structure, so I can, in essence, 'clone' my phones parameters in a lab environment for testing applications and RF system compatibility.
The RF module should come standard with ALL known and used modulations, bands and coding, such as CDMA, GSM, WCDMA2000, TDMA, CQPSK and even 450 bands for Euro networks. Heck, I'd even like to see P25 thrown in for good measure, along with LTR and EDACS and OpenSky! ( I work with a LOT of RF radio networks, including trunked systems, so of course, I would love to have them all at my fingertips.
Off-Network communications is always a desire when you are in areas not served by cell sites, and point to point comms. is always useful.
Instead of sacrificing capabilities, how about increasing usefulness instead?
dual, quad, octa or more cpu cores are fit in one module i guess and yes android can't make use of dual cpu like servers.
2 cpus 1 phone
Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
Maybe utilize a 4.0 GHz overclocked x64 cpu?
Since Google just helped develop a new CPU for Ara this may be possible now
I could see 2 cpus as like an either or situation. Heavy load. Use the one for performance. Screen off or battery saving mode. Use a decent single core thats geared towards battery life.
The thing about Project Ara is the aim seems to be to bring smartphones to the level of customization that we see in PCs. We could very well see some manufacturers who get on board with Ara eventually make SoCs that support dual processors if they feel there is a demand for it. Another interesting thought is if there comes about a project where we could design our own SoCs. Technically it's already possible if you are a hardware developer. I looked into what it would take to do it once, and from what I found it looks like you have to be a hardware developer, own your own company, and form a partnership with a chipset maker(I.E. Intel).
Current apps don't even use all 4 cores properly let alone adding a second cpu
Sent from my GT-N7100 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Perhaps software in the system settings could detect the second cpu and allow you to allocate more/less power to separate processes and assign different apps to different cpus.
Sent from my GT-S7560M using XDA Free mobile app
I think that 2 cores is possible. 2 CPU depends on whether android can run it
------------------------------------------------
Projectaratalk.com - a forum for google project ara users and developers
Since the Ara use Tegra x1 ,there's a great chance it has 2 cores.
Imagine how powerfull this phone will get in 1-2 years .. :thumbup::thumbup:
Sent from my GT-I8730 using XDA Free mobile app