They've unveiled it today
http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/06/nvidia-tegra-4-official/
and apparently it's much powerful and faster than the eqynox on the nexus 10, but I don't know that much about this kind of tech, I'm probably finally going to buy the Nexus 10 this week if Samsung doesn't unveil a more powerful tablet, so I was wondering if this Tegra 4 processor is worth waiting for until it's implemented on a tablet.
May TEGRA 3 Rest in Peace ...
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
Yes that thing is packing heat. Best case, the next device with a tegra 4 will come out next Christmas. Unless they've been hiding something.
cuguy said:
Yes that thing is packing heat. Best case, the next device with a tegra 4 will come out next Christmas. Unless they've been hiding something.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will be out somewhere b/w June and August maybe..
It will not take that long ...
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk 2
i think march....mark my words
Their browser test is having the Nexus 10 run Chrome while the Tegra runs AOSP. In my eyes that makes it a 100% unfair comparison.
Between bad experiences with Tegra 2 and 3 (Atrix/TF700) and their requirement that Tegra optimized games not run on other SoC vendors without any real reason other than because they can, I cant even consider a mobile Nvidia device. All they're good for is keeping the more reputable chip makers on their toes.
yes it's nice
Would be interesting to see this with both devices running the AOSP browser! From my experience it is much faster than the current chrome version (which still is version 18 on android, compared to 23 on desktop). Maybe the Tegra4 would be faster aswell, but not that much.
Everything on my N10 is extremely fast and fluid, so I wouldn't wait for whenever the first Tegra4 devices will be available. Plus its Nexus so you know what you are buying!
Jotokun said:
Their browser test is having the Nexus 10 run Chrome while the Tegra runs AOSP. In my eyes that makes it a 100% unfair comparison.
Between bad experiences with Tegra 2 and 3 (Atrix/TF700) and their requirement that Tegra optimized games not run on other SoC vendors without any real reason other than because they can, I cant even consider a mobile Nvidia device. All they're good for is keeping the more reputable chip makers on their toes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed, they're making an Apples and Pears comparison that was undoubtedly set to show the new processor in a good light. It's only to be expected, it is a sales pitch after all. It will no doubt be a faster chip though.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using XDA Premium HD app
I would much rather see a couple benchmark runs myself. A time comparison of a web browser is no way to test the power of a new chipset.
Still, I would expect Tegra 4 to be WAY WAY WAY more powerful than the Exynos 5250. Both devices use the A15 architecture, and Tegra 4 has twice as many CPU cores as we have. This alone is already a big boost in multithreaded apps. Then look at the GPU where you cant even compare the two at all except by end result numbers. They are just far too different. We have 4 GPU cores, Tegra 4 has 72 GPU cores. But those cores are designed far differently and not nearly as powerful per core. It is all about the companies definition of what a GPU "core" is. And then you have a smaller process node as well, which by itself already promises to use less power than the larger process node the Exynos 5250 uses.
I would honestly expect the Tegra 4 chipset to completely destroy our tablet in terms of performance, but a much more fair comparison would be to compare the Tegra 4 to the Exynos 5 quad. Those two are actually designed to compete with each other.
If you want to compare exynos and tegra 4 then wait for exynos 5450 (quad a15) which should come with galaxy s4 no of cores makes a difference here t4 is quad but early gl benchmarks show that A6X and exynos 5250 have a better GPU
First Tegra 4 Tablet running stock android 4.2:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/7/3845608/vizio-10-inch-tablet-combines-tegra-4-android-thin-body
Lets hope and pray Vizio managed to add microSD capability to it. Free of Nexus restraints, it should be doable, but since it is running stock JB, the storage would have to be mounted as USB (?) . So far this Vizio 10" was the most exciting Android development out of CES. We have few more our of Press events scheduled in Vegas and then it will be all over
rashid11 said:
Lets hope and pray Vizio managed to add microSD capability to it. Free of Nexus restraints, it should be doable, but since it is running stock JB, the storage would have to be mounted as USB (?) . So far this Vizio 10" was the most exciting Android development out of CES. We have few more our of Press events scheduled in Vegas and then it will be all over
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Dont expect the Nexus advantage of up-to-date software or timely updates.
EniGmA1987 said:
I would much rather see a couple benchmark runs myself. A time comparison of a web browser is no way to test the power of a new chipset.
Still, I would expect Tegra 4 to be WAY WAY WAY more powerful than the Exynos 5250. Both devices use the A15 architecture, and Tegra 4 has twice as many CPU cores as we have. This alone is already a big boost in multithreaded apps. Then look at the GPU where you cant even compare the two at all except by end result numbers. They are just far too different. We have 4 GPU cores, Tegra 4 has 72 GPU cores. But those cores are designed far differently and not nearly as powerful per core. It is all about the companies definition of what a GPU "core" is. And then you have a smaller process node as well, which by itself already promises to use less power than the larger process node the Exynos 5250 uses.
I would honestly expect the Tegra 4 chipset to completely destroy our tablet in terms of performance, but a much more fair comparison would be to compare the Tegra 4 to the Exynos 5 quad. Those two are actually designed to compete with each other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
look at the new iphone only 2 cores (different architecure) beating the higher clock double cored galaxy s3 in some disciplines..
this presentation is scientifically SO SO irrelevant especially becasue they use different software.. I LOL SO HARD at ppl thinking this is anywhere near to be comparable
schnip said:
look at the new iphone only 2 cores (different architecure) beating the higher clock double cored galaxy s3 in some disciplines..
this presentation is scientifically SO SO irrelevant especially becasue they use different software.. I LOL SO HARD at ppl thinking this is anywhere near to be comparable
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The new iPhone 5 doesnt use the same ARM architecture are the S3 though, it is a custom design. So those can be compared against each other fine to see which architecture is better. And if a slower clock speed CPU gets better scores then we know it is a superior design. This is the basis of all benchmarking. If we were only allowed to compare the exact same architectures together then we wouldnt learn anything.
Tegra4 uses a (probably slightly modified) A15 core, and the Exynos 5xxx uses a fairly stock A15 core. So a higher clocked A15 should beat out a lower clocked A15 in a direct comparison no matter what. Then when you throw 2 additional cores on top it should always win in multithreaded benchmarks too. Seems pretty common sense to me.
The main difference will be in the graphics side of things, where Nvidia has their own designed GPU compared to Samsung's use of the Mali GPU's.
You can still compare them together just fine, it just need to be both of them on the same browser if there is a browser comparison being done. In this PR release, Nvidia skewed the results like all companies do. So we cant really see the difference between the two from those pictures and we need to wait for 3rd party review sites to do proper testing to see actual results. Yet we can still estimate performance plenty fine since we have a baseline of the architecture already with this tablet.
"Tegra 4 more powerful than Nexus 10"... well duh! It's a new chip just unveiled by nvidia that won't show up in any on sale devices for at least a couple of months. Tablet and smartphone tech is moving very quickly at the moment, nvidia will hold the android performance crown for a couple of months and then someone (probably samsung or qualcomm) will come along with something even more powerful. Such is the nature of the tablet/smartphone market. People that hold off on buying because there is something better on the horizon will be waiting forever because there will always be a better device just a few months down the line!
EniGmA1987 said:
The new iPhone 5 doesnt use the same ARM architecture are the S3 though, it is a custom design. So those can be compared against each other fine to see which architecture is better. And if a slower clock speed CPU gets better scores then we know it is a superior design. This is the basis of all benchmarking. If we were only allowed to compare the exact same architectures together then we wouldnt learn anything.
Tegra4 uses a (probably slightly modified) A15 core, and the Exynos 5xxx uses a fairly stock A15 core. So a higher clocked A15 should beat out a lower clocked A15 in a direct comparison no matter what. Then when you throw 2 additional cores on top it should always win in multithreaded benchmarks too. Seems pretty common sense to me.
The main difference will be in the graphics side of things, where Nvidia has their own designed GPU compared to Samsung's use of the Mali GPU's.
You can still compare them together just fine, it just need to be both of them on the same browser if there is a browser comparison being done. In this PR release, Nvidia skewed the results like all companies do. So we cant really see the difference between the two from those pictures and we need to wait for 3rd party review sites to do proper testing to see actual results. Yet we can still estimate performance plenty fine since we have a baseline of the architecture already with this tablet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That was kind of his point.
I don't think anyone is denying that the tegra will be faster. What's being disputed here is just how much faster it is. Personally, I don't think it'll be enough to notice in everyday use. Twice the cores does not automatically a faster CPU make, you need software that can properly take advantage and even then is not a huge plus in everyday tasks. Also, in the past Nvidia has made pretty crappy chips due to compromise. Good example being how the tegra 2 lacked neon support. The only concrete advantages I see are more cores and a higher clock rate.
Based on the hype : performance ratio of both Tegra 2 & 3 I wouldn't have high hopes until I see legit benchmark results.
What does seem promising though, is the fact that they are making more significant changes than from T2 to T3, such as dual channel memory (finally after 1-2 years of all other SoCs having it -.-) and the GPU cores are different too.
Still, the GPU has always been the weakest point of Tegra, so I still don't think it can beat an overclocked T-604 by much, even though this time around they will not be the first ones to debut a next-gen SoC. Given the A15 architecture they can't really screw up the CPU even if they wanted to, so that should be significantly faster than the Exynos 5 Dual.
I've also just read this article on Anandtech about power consumption and the SoC in the Nexus 10 consumes multiple times as much power as other tablet chipsets, making me wonder how nVidia plans to solve the battery life issue with 2 times as many cores and a (seemingly) beefier GPU, not even mentioning implementation in phones..
freshlysqueezed said:
First Tegra 4 Tablet running stock android 4.2:
http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/7/3845608/vizio-10-inch-tablet-combines-tegra-4-android-thin-body
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apparently this is the tablet that comes to take Nexus 10 spot, Vizio 10 inch tablet with Tegra 4, 2560 x 1600 resolution, 32gb storage, Android 4.2. And it should be coming out Q1 2013, I think this one makes me wait to hear some more about it until I buy the Nexus 10, although to be honest the brand is a bit of a let down for me.
Edit: the 10-inch model, key specs (aside from Tegra 4) include a 2,560 x 1,600 display, 32GB of on-board memory, NFC and dual 5MP / 1.3MP cameras.
http://www.engadget.com/2013/01/07/vizio-10-inch-tegra-4-tablet-hands-on/
Related
Even though I have followed dev/porting for 8 months starting with HTC Touch, I have little knowledge of how it is actually done. So here's my question to the developers.
We all know that Nexus S (2?) will have Gingerbread 2.3. Looking at the rumored specs and model number, it seems that Nexus S is a slight upgrade from Galaxy S.
Assuming most of the hardware is identical to Galaxy S, how easy is it to port 2.3 to Epic 4G, once Galaxy S becomes available?
Specifically, what is needed to bake a new 2.3 rom? Do you need to reverse engineer like what devs did on HTC WM devices? Or is it a straight port? I suspect it's somewhere in between but want to hear from you.
(If necessary, please move this to android development forum.)
The simple answer to this (which has been answered in other threads already if you looked) is no its won't be easy.
Also, the Nexus S is rumored and pretty much guaranteed to launch with a dual core processor. The rumor is that they delayed the device and gingerbread to implement this, since it will be google's new flagship device and has to be cutting edge. Everyone knows that dual core processors are set to hit the market within the first couple months of 2011 anyway, so releasing an old generation processor in a flagship google phone just makes no sense.
So no, it will not be easy to port from the Nexus S. It will not only have a completely different processor, but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
muyoso said:
but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree and think this is the bigger problem (for the Epic at least).
Sure would be nice if the folks at Google would release at one clean Google device for each carrier. I'd be on it in a heart beat.
vansmack said:
I agree and think this is the bigger problem (for the Epic at least).
Sure would be nice if the folks at Google would release at one clean Google device for each carrier. I'd be on it in a heart beat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes that would be nice if they did that.I am surprised they are even doing another google phone by the way it sounded when they stopped marketing the nexus 1 that had no interest in doing another google branded phone.
muyoso said:
Also, the Nexus S is rumored and pretty much guaranteed to launch with a dual core processor. The rumor is that they delayed the device and gingerbread to implement this, since it will be google's new flagship device and has to be cutting edge. Everyone knows that dual core processors are set to hit the market within the first couple months of 2011 anyway, so releasing an old generation processor in a flagship google phone just makes no sense.
So no, it will not be easy to port from the Nexus S. It will not only have a completely different processor, but will also probably only be a GSM phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are just rumors, all of the official specs that have come out say it will be a 1.2ghz hummingbird. The dual core 1ghz orion chip is definitely on the horizon but I highly doubt they will be able to get it in at the last minute, and there's a good chance we won't see it in phones until late next year. All rumors of a dual core Nexus S have had no credibility with their sources.
That said, if this turns out to be a dual core phone and gingerbread turns out to be optimized for dual cores, a port will probably be very difficult. But if it's just a 1.2ghz hummingbird then it would just be a matter of getting the CDMA radio working.
LucJoe said:
Those are just rumors, all of the official specs that have come out say it will be a 1.2ghz hummingbird. The dual core 1ghz orion chip is definitely on the horizon but I highly doubt they will be able to get it in at the last minute, and there's a good chance we won't see it in phones until late next year. All rumors of a dual core Nexus S have had no credibility with their sources.
That said, if this turns out to be a dual core phone and gingerbread turns out to be optimized for dual cores, a port will probably be very difficult. But if it's just a 1.2ghz hummingbird then it would just be a matter of getting the CDMA radio working.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The reason that I think he has to have a dual core in it is as follows:
If it has a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, BFD. It immediately launches and is mediocre. Nothing exciting at all about it.
If it launches as the first dual core phone, it is the top of the line phone worthy of being branded as a Google flagship device.
Also, if it just had a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, what is the holdup? It is no different from phones released months ago. Also, if its a 1.2 Ghz processor, it will be eclipsed within a matter of a month or two performance wise by Tegra 2 and dual core snapdragon processors. Basically, it would be an embarassing flagship device. The original Nexus is still to this day a damn good phone that is near the top of the pack of android phones performance wise, and it is a year old.
muyoso said:
The reason that I think he has to have a dual core in it is as follows:
If it has a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, BFD. It immediately launches and is mediocre. Nothing exciting at all about it.
If it launches as the first dual core phone, it is the top of the line phone worthy of being branded as a Google flagship device.
Also, if it just had a 1.2 ghz hummingbird processor, what is the holdup? It is no different from phones released months ago. Also, if its a 1.2 Ghz processor, it will be eclipsed within a matter of a month or two performance wise by Tegra 2 and dual core snapdragon processors. Basically, it would be an embarassing flagship device. The original Nexus is still to this day a damn good phone that is near the top of the pack of android phones performance wise, and it is a year old.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are fully aware the the Tegra 2 do not even exceed the hummingbird in gpu or cpu performance right? Im just saying cause it would suck if you didn't know what you're talking about.
Plus gingerbread will have HW acceleration, putting gpu performance on a step for the overall fluidity of the gui. So again... what's faster?
Really? I assumed it would greatly ourperform. Where did u get your facts.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
InfDaMarvel said:
Really? I assumed it would greatly ourperform. Where did u get your facts.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm trying to find the article again, but i know they were close but Tegra 2 did not outperform the hummingbird. Apparently now they optimized the platform more.
Don't get me wrong i love nvidia, that's all i've purchased and stayed with them even thou they still dont have a decent dx11 card that doesnt need 2 power supplies. But they really need to step up and their CEO needs to wattch what he says and deliver more.
Here's a quote "On the 3D side, Nvidia says it has doubled the performance of the initial Tegra, resulting in a peak speed of 90 million triangles per second. This level is well beyond the performance of any mobile processor shipping or even sampling today." Hummingbird has the same exact performance. And CPU performance is a very interesting area. Anyway the GPU performance is almost par with the Hummingbird leading maybe by 3-5%
apatcas said:
I'm trying to find the article again, but i know they were close but Tegra 2 did not outperform the hummingbird. Apparently now they optimized the platform more.
Don't get me wrong i love nvidia, that's all i've purchased and stayed with them even thou they still dont have a decent dx11 card that doesnt need 2 power supplies. But they really need to step up and their CEO needs to wattch what he says and deliver more.
Here's a quote "On the 3D side, Nvidia says it has doubled the performance of the initial Tegra, resulting in a peak speed of 90 million triangles per second. This level is well beyond the performance of any mobile processor shipping or even sampling today." Hummingbird has the same exact performance. And CPU performance is a very interesting area. Anyway the GPU performance is almost par with the Hummingbird leading maybe by 3-5%
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since Tegra 2 is dual core and android does not have 2 core support till Gingerbread (Actually I don't think it even supports cortex A9 till gingerbread)..so if they ran 1 core vs 1 core I'd see a hummingbird win against a Tegra 2..but if Tegra 2 is running dual core (and optimized for it) it should win...but by that analogy Orion would then be superior.
gTen said:
Since Tegra 2 is dual core and android does not have 2 core support till Gingerbread (Actually I don't think it even supports cortex A9 till gingerbread)..so if they ran 1 core vs 1 core I'd see a hummingbird win against a Tegra 2..but if Tegra 2 is running dual core (and optimized for it) it should win...but by that analogy Orion would then be superior.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not to mention that Tegra 2 does 1080P video recording. So yes, releasing a google flagship phone that within one month is eclipsed by LG with the first Tegra 2 phone, would be embarrassing. The Nexus 1 set the standard for almost a year, before the Galaxy S line came out. If the Nexus 2 can only set the standard for under a month, that would be stupid. Therefore, it is easy to conclude that the rumors of the Nexus S having a dual core are most likely true. Doesn't mean it has to be the Orion, but it would be awesome if it was.
Tegra 2 is a Cortex A9 CPU... as is the Samsung Orion and the TI OMAP4xxx chips. They accomplish 2.5 instructions per MHz as opposed to the 2 instructions per MHz in the Cortex A8 Hummingbird, and that's not counting improvements to instruction efficiency (getting more done with less instructions.) Add to that improvements such as out of order instruction handling and dual-channel memory support and Cortex A9 chips are head and shoulders above Cortex A8.
The only reason Tegra 2 wouldn't outperform Hummingbird significantly is, as mentioned, lack of dual-core support in current builds of Android, and the nVidia GPU which is, surprisingly, only just about on par with Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Electrofreak said:
Tegra 2 is a Cortex A9 CPU... as is the Samsung Orion and the TI OMAP4xxx chips. They accomplish 2.5 instructions per MHz as opposed to the 2 instructions per MHz in the Cortex A8 Hummingbird, and that's not counting improvements to instruction efficiency (getting more done with less instructions.) Add to that improvements such as out of order instruction handling and dual-channel memory support and Cortex A9 chips are head and shoulders above Cortex A8.
The only reason Tegra 2 wouldn't outperform Hummingbird significantly is, as mentioned, lack of dual-core support in current builds of Android, and the nVidia GPU which is, surprisingly, only just about on par with Hummingbird's PowerVR SGX540.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
apatcas said:
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
I'm not sure that triangles per second is accurate to describe performance.
Still, if you want an article:
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
The Hummingbird has memory bandwidth limitations that I don't think the Tegra 250 will. Lets wait and see.
apatcas said:
OK here's facts dudes. Tegra sucks... really please get it.
Tegra250 based Toshiba AC100 Running Neocore Benchmark
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uJav9ns6b4o
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here's the facts dude, and try to get this; Tegra2 does not, in fact, suck. You just posted a video of it being benchmarked on a netbook running Android 2.1 which cannot make full use of Tegra2's dual-core CPU. Secondly, neocore is a GPU test, not a CPU test. We already discussed the fact that the Tegra2 GPU is only just about on par with the SGX540. Thirdly, that test is being run at a signifcantly higher resolution than a mobile device would run, and frankly, considering this, the score isn't bad.
Fail, man, fail.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
sauron0101 said:
I'm not sure that triangles per second is accurate to describe performance.
Still, if you want an article:
http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=17125
The Hummingbird has memory bandwidth limitations that I don't think the Tegra 250 will. Lets wait and see.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would also like to point out that I wrote the article that sauron0101 just linked. It's also posted on my blog (linked in my signature) posted back in March. Tegra2 does feature dual-channel memory support as part of the Cortex A9 architecture, which is a significant advantage.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Electrofreak said:
I would also like to point out that I wrote the article that sauron0101 just linked. It's also posted on my blog (linked in my signature) posted back in March. Tegra2 does feature dual-channel memory support as part of the Cortex A9 architecture, which is a significant advantage.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any idea how fast the other Arm Cortex A9s are compared to the 250?
- We know that the SGX540 will be in the TI OMAP 4 series; probably not bandwidth limited - I am surprised that they did not opt for the SGX545
- The Samsung Orion series has Mail 400 (unknown performance)
- The Snapdragon (A8 unless Qualcomm opts to keep the name "Snapdragon for its A9 CPUs) will have a new generation of Adreno 300 graphics
Unknown if we will see this on mobile
- Marvell also has a new SOC
Also interesting is Samsung's Netbook roadmap, which uses the same SOCs on a phone:
Sorry if all of this is a bit off topic, but it is worth looking at what everyone has.
Edit: Qualcomm is keeping the Snapdragon name for the A9 processors.
Does no one see i was talking about Gpu perfomance? That's what's gonna matter in Gingerbread. And that's running 1024x600 on that res Galaxy tab is around 53 fps. It's the same thing that Vista started doing with HW accel so u understand.
This post is not to start a flaming war against any of the devices using any of these chips.
I just wanted to start this post for information.
Im a bit concerned with the geforce ULP which shows only around 20-30% increase over the previous PowerVR 540 chip.
The PowerVR 543 is supposed to be a multicore version that is much faster than the PowerVR 540 (Also, the PowerVR543 dual core is rumored to be in the ipad 2)
Additionally, the new adreno 220 has been showing off its tech and is rumored to be in the new dual core qualcomm chips.
The problem i see is, that while the dual core CPUs seem to be equally matched in terms of A5 vs tegra 2 vs dual core qualcomm, the geforce ULP seems to be heavily outclassed by the powerVR 543 (perhaps even the single core) and the adreno 220.
Does this worry anyone?
I know that the games coming out for the tegra 2 are looking quite amazing, but at the same time people are saying no low framerates, and when I looked at dungeon defenders HD in the store, the framerates, while playable, where not that high..
If the ipad 2 is going to have a dual core PowerVR SGx543 then it is going to crush the geforce ULP. And the adreno 220 looks to be a high performer as well.
I feel apprehensive jumping into a technology (the tegra 2 with geforce ULP) that is already heavily outclassed by its competition (ipad 2's A5 with power VR 543)
I dont want to get into a competition between iOS and honeycomb - and I agree that it depends fully on how the developers utilize the chip - but with such a huge performance difference, I can see developers making more amazing games with the faster chips.
The Tegra 2 is fine for gaming. It can handle its own. Media playback is an entirely other issue and the Tegra 2 is a failure in that regard.
We haven't seen either the Adreno or the SGX543 benchmarked yet at all, so its too early to say they are better than the Tegra 2. Also, I feel as though Nvidia is going to be pushing for a lot of games to be made specifically for the Tegra 2. If that is the case its going to fragment the Android market even further.
Its not fair to look at the Xoom's benchmark due to the much higher resolution skewing results downwards, so lets look at current generation phones:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
You can see the best performer right now is the old SGX540 clocked at 300mhz. I would bet that the SGX543 is a monster.
muyoso said:
The Tegra 2 is fine for gaming. It can handle its own. Media playback is an entirely other issue and the Tegra 2 is a failure in that regard.
We haven't seen either the Adreno or the SGX543 benchmarked yet at all, so its too early to say they are better than the Tegra 2. Also, I feel as though Nvidia is going to be pushing for a lot of games to be made specifically for the Tegra 2. If that is the case its going to fragment the Android market even further.
Its not fair to look at the Xoom's benchmark due to the much higher resolution skewing results downwards, so lets look at current generation phones:
You can see the best performer right now is the old SGX540 clocked at 300mhz. I would bet that the SGX543 is a monster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra 2 was rebenched after that using the viewsonic G-tablet and it did better than the SGX 540.
Refer to:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/8
and
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview/2
(on the last link - look to the bottom of the page with the "updated" benchmarks
Those are the exact same numbers. 25.2 for the Optimus 2x. 18.9 for the G-Tablet.
Flaunt77 said:
The tegra 2 was rebenched after that using the viewsonic G-tablet and it did better than the SGX 540.
Refer to:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/8
and
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4054/first-look-viewsonic-gtablet-and-tegra-2-performance-preview/2
(on the last link - look to the bottom of the page with the "updated" benchmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Judging by these articles - Tegra 2 is doing great.
Besides, nVidia is excellent when it comes to updating drivers on their GPUs and working with game devs to help them use the GPU's potential.
So, if they do the same for their ULPs, we should expect frequent Tegra 2 updates and great games coming.
Actually, even now, a mere week from release - check Tegra zone and see the amazing games that will be released this/next month. Mindblowing.
DarkDvr said:
Judging by these articles - Tegra 2 is doing great.
Besides, nVidia is excellent when it comes to updating drivers on their GPUs and working with game devs to help them use the GPU's potential.
So, if they do the same for their ULPs, we should expect frequent Tegra 2 updates and great games coming.
Actually, even now, a mere week from release - check Tegra zone and see the amazing games that will be released this/next month. Mindblowing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree NOW that it may be the fastest - but in one week when the ipad 2 comes out - it will supposedly do LESS THAN HALF of the ipad 2 graphics capability - thats a huge hit in performance.
THis means that the ipad 2 can handle a class of games far above what the tegra can. Its just unsettling is all.
Flaunt77 said:
I agree NOW that it may be the fastest - but in one week when the ipad 2 comes out - it will supposedly do LESS THAN HALF of the ipad 2 graphics capability - thats a huge hit in performance.
THis means that the ipad 2 can handle a class of games far above what the tegra can. Its just unsettling is all.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
muyoso said:
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't forget the Tegra 2 has EIGHT cores in the GPU. Can't wait to see the anandtech review on the iPad2. Gonna be interesting.
well ipad 2 was released and although an apple hater i do have to admit..we gentlemen have been obliterated..its a dual 543..everything android devices had to offer so far has been surpassed by double the ammount..was considering the atrix,but certainly not gonna buy a device incinerated already, as it is...xoom is still a great tablet and honeycomb an amazing os...but i think its time price is lowered..we have been outclassed twofold.
chris2busy said:
well ipad 2 was released and although an apple hater i do have to admit..we gentlemen have been obliterated..its a dual 543..everything android devices had to offer so far has been surpassed by double the ammount..was considering the atrix,but certainly not gonna buy a device incinerated already, as it is...xoom is still a great tablet and honeycomb an amazing os...but i think its time price is lowered..we have been outclassed twofold.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its not released yet. We will see the benchmarks when anandtech releases their review. Anandtech released their Xoom review the day before launch. If they do something similar for the iPad2, we will know in 2 days.
muyoso said:
Its not released yet. We will see the benchmarks when anandtech releases their review. Anandtech released their Xoom review the day before launch. If they do something similar for the iPad2, we will know in 2 days.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well you kinda know the ooutcome without waiting...each sgx543 core outperforms a tegra2 by roughly 50% ..with 75% more fillrate,huge shaders e.t.c ..and since they went dual core on gpu, well..they should be around double in performance terms against xoom,maybe more,given xoom is running on higher res..what IS surprising is that samsung made the chips for them but still on their own products chose the lesser exynos/t2..
Wasn't it pa semi and intrinsity that made the chips for apple? Samsung also works with intrinsity to design their soc.
I've read a rumor on I want to say anandtech, that the CPU cores of the ipad 2 may only be 1Ghz cortex A8 vs our dual A9s. That gives us a heafty lead in the computing department. Also just because a mobile gpu has the potential to be rediculously fast, doesn't meant it actually will be when used in the soc. It it depends on frequencies and bandwidths as well. For instance the TI omap4 uses the same gpu as galaxy s, vr540, but handily wins benchmarking due to its dual A9s and dual memory channels. And if you guys are worried about cores, we basically have 4 split into eight, so eat your heart out, dual core gpus!
The fight definitely ain't over yet fellas! Have some faith in nVidia!
I'm not very sure about the architecture of mobile GPUs, but if it is in any way similar to those of desktop GPUs then the number of cores and the core speeds matter only upto to a certain extent. If you look at AMD GPUs, they are filled with a lot of cores (~ 800 is common) running at pretty good speeds, while the equivalent NVidia GPUs have about quarter or even less cores (~200 is common with the newer fermi cards having more cores) at usually lower speeds . But NVidia makes up the performance with its memory bandwidth. The end result -- both GPUs have a similar performance. My guess is it would be the same with these mobile GPUs. Just my 2c.
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually they have and it blew XOOM out the water I mean earth. PowerVR 543 is much better and that is why I am suprised that Nvidia didn't do enough for their GPU. I was also suprised that Samsung went with them instead of their accomplishment with the PowerVr
i sstill dont ththink those benchmarks are right because I don't thing the software was optimized for tergra2
Flaunt77 said:
This post is not to start a flaming war against any of the devices using any of these chips.
I just wanted to start this post for information.
Im a bit concerned with the geforce ULP which shows only around 20-30% increase over the previous PowerVR 540 chip.
The PowerVR 543 is supposed to be a multicore version that is much faster than the PowerVR 540 (Also, the PowerVR543 dual core is rumored to be in the ipad 2)
Additionally, the new adreno 220 has been showing off its tech and is rumored to be in the new dual core qualcomm chips.
The problem i see is, that while the dual core CPUs seem to be equally matched in terms of A5 vs tegra 2 vs dual core qualcomm, the geforce ULP seems to be heavily outclassed by the powerVR 543 (perhaps even the single core) and the adreno 220.
Does this worry anyone?
I know that the games coming out for the tegra 2 are looking quite amazing, but at the same time people are saying no low framerates, and when I looked at dungeon defenders HD in the store, the framerates, while playable, where not that high..
If the ipad 2 is going to have a dual core PowerVR SGx543 then it is going to crush the geforce ULP. And the adreno 220 looks to be a high performer as well.
I feel apprehensive jumping into a technology (the tegra 2 with geforce ULP) that is already heavily outclassed by its competition (ipad 2's A5 with power VR 543)
I dont want to get into a competition between iOS and honeycomb - and I agree that it depends fully on how the developers utilize the chip - but with such a huge performance difference, I can see developers making more amazing games with the faster chips.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
muyoso said:
The iPad 2 is not going to be 2x faster than the Tegra 2. The graphics processor it uses will handily beat the Tegra 2, but not by 100%. It really depends on how many cores the SGX543 has. Wikipedia says it can be anywhere from 2-16 cores.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Flaunt77 said:
i guess we will find out on march 11th
but if the SGX543 has 2 cores and each single core is faster than the tegra 2 geforce ULP, then combined it will likely be 75-85% faster than the tegra 2 (i agree no more than double)
Having said that, that is still a huge upgrade.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
muyoso said:
Don't forget the Tegra 2 has EIGHT cores in the GPU. Can't wait to see the anandtech review on the iPad2. Gonna be interesting.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know this thread is ancient, but I just have to call all of you morons, especially you muyoso.
Not only is all of that wrong, but the benchmark used has glitches with the SGX 540, putting it at a disadvantage, also the galaxy s phones are framecapped.
Since the launch of SGS3 is around the corner and the next note will probably come within next few months, I thought of starting this thread to know how many users prefer having Quad Exynos 4 ( similar to SGS3 which is based on A9 arcitecture with Mali 400 GPU built using 32nm manufacturing process) or dual Exynos 5 (A15 architecture with Mali T604 GPU which is based on probably 28nm manufacturing process)in our next Note...
Cast your votes in the poll
You should put a POLL, it would get more people interested. But for me, I'd rather get the A15 with the Mali 604T since A15 is supposedly to be 40% faster than A9 and the Mali 604T will blow the Mali 400 away.
Definitely the dual A15 with Mali 604. No doubt.
Sent from my superior GT-N7000 using Tapatalk
I dont see any benifit by haveing a quad core cpu. Most apps dont even use the duel core.
Cant fault my note at all. So just the new duel will do with less battery drain
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Quad! I don't care if I don't use it, and I don't care if I don't need it.
It just feels good to have that much power in the palm of your hand.
I'll benefit from that much power since I play games and I look forward to more capable emulators in the future.
I don't give a CRAP about the amount of cores!
I want the most speed that's possible, if that would be with dthe dual i take that, if it's with de quad, then thats my way to go...
Can't vote in the poll because i want speed, and since it's not sure wich one is faster i can't vote!
PS
I think the Exynos 5 will be released @ the end of this year, and the Exynos 4 tomorow
If that's correct i go with the Exynos 4, i hate waiting
what the note lacks is a decent GPU. the current GPU can't efficiently handle the 1280x800 pixels. however what i want more than anything is 1. non-pentile screen that is FLAWLESS and 2. a bigger battery still ~3000 mAh like the RAZR max. I would gladly sacrifice a few mm for a larger battery. I find it stupid how HTC decided to go with a slim and NON-REMOVABLE battery and storage to save a few mm. Seriously? This is why HTC is falling in a deep pit.
Exynos 5 dual, it has more power and is more efficient
Sent from my GT-N7000 using XDA
EASILY the A15 with the T-604! Come to papa!
The fastest clock speed and the best GPU is all that matters. 2.2 ghz 2 core with a fab GPU will blow away a 10 core 1.0 ghz with a bad gpu everyday every way.
How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
With a single core my galaxy s with ics is snappier than my note. Finally its the software I guess.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA
Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. Android multitasking would need to be vastly different than what it is today, and on top of this the RAM specs need a major bump to even begin to show advantages in multi-core processing.
Also like you said, it has not mattered for deskptops and laptops what the real-world benefits are, just what the consumer feels about the value in their purchase. Nowadays it seems people are more concerned with the number of cores as opposed to the clock speed.
I do like the approach that Ti has taken with the OMAP in dedicating low-power cores to low-power functions, and feel that it really has potential in mobile devices, but they seem to be a step behind when it comes to the bigger tasks of mobile processing. Intel being on the cusp of Haswell has me excited to see what they can do in this territory.
Dual Exynos 5 for me at the moment.
It'll be interesting to see how they market this dual core a15 processor because joe public, will always think more cores is better. I do feel though that the note 2 might not have the same internals as the s3, like our notes had the same as the s2. For the note they seemed to put in all the best tech they had on offer at the tine, so if the a15 is ready to go by November time then I think they'll defo use it unless something better is available.
Dual core with speed.
Quad cores mean squat if they slow the primary usage down.
I'd rather get a dual than a quad even if its on the same generation and process so long as it is clocked higher. Give me a smaller process, newer gen chip and better gpu? There is no choice.
Id go for the i7 3960x and gtx 690 if they can squeeze that in the next note but I think I wont get a choice and will just end up with whatever Samsung puts into the note 2.
Mystic38 said:
I am sorry.. but this amounts to techie circle jerking..
Quad core processors came out for the PC when not a single application could even use two cores, much less four.. Even today, several years later, for the very very vast majority of applications, it is hard to get a PC to run more that one and a bit processors.. My i7 snoozes, and even cranking up real time low latency audio(a stressful activity)it runs 2 processors at 30% and one at 5%
Therefore I frankly do not care if they put a hamster and a wheel inside the device...as long as the results in operation of the device meets my needs.
So, given my customer needs are for smoother, faster and more reliable operation with better battery life and an enhanced user experience, Samsung can put whatever they want into the device...
In saying that, decisions by the majority of folks are driven by what they think the specifications mean, rather than the impact or result of those specifications in real life usage, so while i am sure its not necessary, a next Note will for sure have a quad core.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with you....the main reason I created this thread, because I wanted to know how many members actually know the effect of system architecture and the manufacturing process will affect the day to day performance of the device, battery consumption etc.,it was never about the software but I know it everything comes to the OS how deeply it is integrated with the hardware and how effectively it co-ordinates with them...this is why Apple's devices are snappier than the android...the problem here is Samsung is more concerned about bringing more devices out than focusing on the system's deep integration...so it only comes to the fact that the thread is only about the hardware... but the discussion about the embedded systems is also welcomed....
adelmundo said:
How about the beast Quad Core A15 Exynos 5450 with Mali T-658? Ok, ok, I know technically it hasn't been built yet and will probably be for tablets, but wouldn't mind seeing it in the Note since it is a tab/phone hybrid.
But as for the current SoC's available now, I would take the A15 dual Exynos 5250 with Mali T-604.
More likely, I think Samsung's road map would be to release the flagship Galaxy S lines (in this case the GS 3) with the latest SoC's, then the next Note (Note 2 in this case) would get a slight spec bump based on the Galaxy S 3 with a faster clocked CPU/GPU combo of the Galaxy S 3 line 6 months later, then the GS4 would get next Gen SoCs with the Note 3 getting a spec bump of the GS 4 SoCs, etc.....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I heard that Note 10.1 tablet is being delayed because Samsung wanted the device with quad than dual...so there is a little chance that the next Hybrid Note will come with some other spec....
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/12
Most cpu tests favor the nexus 10 over the HTC.
Gpu tests appear evenly matched slightly favoring the htc. (easily overclocking the gpu with custom kernels should fix that.)
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
freshlysqueezed said:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/12
Most cpu tests favor the nexus 10 over the HTC.
Gpu tests appear evenly matched slightly favoring the htc. (easily overclocking the gpu with custom kernels should fix that.)
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
These are mostly browser tests unless there is something I don't understand. But I know benchmarks aren't everything. But quadrant HTC one stock 12000. Nexus 10 4300. Antutu nexus 10 14000. HTC one 24000. Am I missing something? Same with geekbench. HTC score Is quite a but more.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
treIII said:
These are mostly browser tests unless there is something I don't understand. But I know benchmarks aren't everything. But quadrant HTC one stock 12000. Nexus 10 4300. Antutu nexus 10 14000. HTC one 24000. Am I missing something? Same with geekbench. HTC score Is quite a but more.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/compare/1837522/1834810
It depends on how the benchmarks are weighted for single core vs multi-core processes.I believe Antutu heavily tests multi-core processes.
Other benchmarks take a balanced approach such as geekbench. If you look at the link above, the Geekbench total scores of the nexus 10 and htc one are actually really close with a slight favor for the snapdragon 600.
If you look at the single core process subscores, the nexus 10 wins.
If you look at the multi-core process subscores, the snapdragon wins. (makes sense: 2 core processor vs 4 core processor).
Because in the real world, a majority of apps are still designed as single core processes, Geekbench will test and weight single and multicore processes fairly equally in calculating total scores.
treIII said:
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Exynos 5 Dual in your Nexus 10 is a Cortex A15, the most powerful type of ARM chip, which is in only a handful of mobile devices so far. The HTC One, by comparison, has a Krait, a souped-up version of the Cortex A9, the older ARM chip that is in most mobile devices. For raw power, they're probably comparable, even though one is dual-core and the other is quad-core, with the Exynos edging out the Snapdragon in those web browsing benchmarks that freshlysqueezed linked to, while the Adreno in the Snapdragon edges out the Mali in many of the GPU tests.
The big difference is probably battery life, as the Nexus 10 can suck 5-10 W max (though 3-4 W of that is probably the huge display), while the HTC One pulls 4 W max. That's why everybody is going with Snapdragon for the current lineup of phones, the combination of high speed and minimal power can't be beat. Even Samsung, who wanted to put its Exynos 5 Octa, with a quad-core Cortex A15, in the Galaxy S4, has admitted to putting Snapdragon in most of the S4s, though that might be related to fabrication problems they're having with the Octa.
One reason the HTC One might seem "blazing fast" when compared to the Nexus 10 is that the Nexus 10 screen has twice as many pixels as the HTC One's display, though I doubt you'd notice any lag. I don't think the Nexus 10 will have any problems getting updates, as it's the first Android device with Cortex A15 and all high-end Android devices will be getting Cortex A15 over the next couple years. So the Nexus 10 is already ahead of the game.
The one big miss with the Exynos 5 Dual in the Nexus 10 is that it doesn't have a low-power core for light usage, what ARM calls big.LITTLE. That's what the Exynos 5 Octa uses, a quad-core Cortex A15 is the big component and a quad-core Cortex A7 is the little. That way, you can switch back and forth depending on how heavily you are using the device, saving power when you're not using it much. ARM is pushing this in a big way and even though not many chips have it yet, if it becomes common, the Exynos 5 Dual will be behind. Of course, Android will still always support non-big.LITTLE chips, you just won't get the benefits of big.LITTLE. A little chip would have been particularly useful given the high power draw of the big chips in the Nexus 10.
treIII said:
Is this dual core really comparable to the quad core processors available? I just got my N10 and I also have an HTC one phone and the phone is blazing fast in my comparison to the nexus. Also I'm concerned with will this processor move forward along with the updates a nexus device gets in it's life time? I think 4 or so android updates is common with a nexus device? Thanks to those who may give an honest opinion rather than new biased to a certain product.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Rirere said:
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is there a better tablet or there than the N7? Right now. The screen resolution should be superior to all other tablets but next to an iPad with the same game playing this isn't as good. My girlfriend proved that. She likes i anything. I'm an android guy. Is the gpu not so good in this device? I like it don't get me wrong. But I just bought it and if there's ifs something better I would rather have the latest and greatest. I really do not understand why this isn't powered by a quad-core. I feel like my son's nexus 7 had better graphics. At least when I look at his screen it just looks better to my eye.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
treIII said:
Is there a better tablet or there than the N7? Right now. The screen resolution should be superior to all other tablets but next to an iPad with the same game playing this isn't as good. My girlfriend proved that. She likes i anything. I'm an android guy. Is the gpu not so good in this device? I like it don't get me wrong. But I just bought it and if there's ifs something better I would rather have the latest and greatest. I really do not understand why this isn't powered by a quad-core. I feel like my son's nexus 7 had better graphics. At least when I look at his screen it just looks better to my eye.
Sent from my HTCONE using Xparent Blue Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This dual core/quad core thing is a red herring, sorry. The Nexus 10 went with a dual core A15 because the performance boost provided by an A15 was such that Samsung could afford to use a dual core chipset (meaning reduced power consumption, both due to reduced core count and improved architecture) while still blowing out all comparable chipsets at time of launch. The Tegra 4s (if they're not hobbled by memory bandwith issues like the Tegra 3s) will be a half/full generation ahead of the Exynus 5250 when they launch, so you could sit and wait for those (they also have pretty good GPUs).
The Nexus 10 has a powerful GPU, but some of it gets sapped by driving the enormous screen resolution. As far as the screen goes, it's an amazing 10" IPS panel without too much else to say. The Nexus 7 has a WVGA 1280x800 IPS panel with significantly lower PPI, and you generally hold a 7" tablet a bit closer, which can compound the density drop. However, on a 7" device, it's hardly bad.
The Nexus 10 is going to beat the crap out of the Nexus 7, but if you want to switch, I'd wait for the next Nexus 7 (which is rumored to have an upgraded screen and proc in a similar price envelope as the original), or for the first Tegra 4s. There's not really much else on the market that'll beat a Nexus 10 right now in tablet-land.
joakim_one said:
The Exynos 5 Dual in your Nexus 10 is a Cortex A15, the most powerful type of ARM chip, which is in only a handful of mobile devices so far. The HTC One, by comparison, has a Krait, a souped-up version of the Cortex A9, the older ARM chip that is in most mobile devices. For raw power, they're probably comparable, even though one is dual-core and the other is quad-core, with the Exynos edging out the Snapdragon in those web browsing benchmarks that freshlysqueezed linked to, while the Adreno in the Snapdragon edges out the Mali in many of the GPU tests.
The big difference is probably battery life, as the Nexus 10 can suck 5-10 W max (though 3-4 W of that is probably the huge display), while the HTC One pulls 4 W max. That's why everybody is going with Snapdragon for the current lineup of phones, the combination of high speed and minimal power can't be beat. Even Samsung, who wanted to put its Exynos 5 Octa, with a quad-core Cortex A15, in the Galaxy S4, has admitted to putting Snapdragon in most of the S4s, though that might be related to fabrication problems they're having with the Octa.
One reason the HTC One might seem "blazing fast" when compared to the Nexus 10 is that the Nexus 10 screen has twice as many pixels as the HTC One's display, though I doubt you'd notice any lag. I don't think the Nexus 10 will have any problems getting updates, as it's the first Android device with Cortex A15 and all high-end Android devices will be getting Cortex A15 over the next couple years. So the Nexus 10 is already ahead of the game.
The one big miss with the Exynos 5 Dual in the Nexus 10 is that it doesn't have a low-power core for light usage, what ARM calls big.LITTLE. That's what the Exynos 5 Octa uses, a quad-core Cortex A15 is the big component and a quad-core Cortex A7 is the little. That way, you can switch back and forth depending on how heavily you are using the device, saving power when you're not using it much. ARM is pushing this in a big way and even though not many chips have it yet, if it becomes common, the Exynos 5 Dual will be behind. Of course, Android will still always support non-big.LITTLE chips, you just won't get the benefits of big.LITTLE. A little chip would have been particularly useful given the high power draw of the big chips in the Nexus 10.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just a quick reply to point some things out. The Snapdragon 600 in the One is a quad-core A15 with Krait 300 architecture. The 600 is about as powerful as the 5250 with better multi-threading. Also most chipsets currently use A15. It is the current standard, not something that will "happen over time". The CPU has nothing to do with the screen res, the image processing is done through the GPU. And finally, I expect the 5250 to be eclipsed relatively soon, as chipsets supporting higher clock frequencies(like the 800, or even the rumored Tegra5/6 with a possible 3.0Ghz clock) start to enter manufacturing. Sorry for the brevity, I'll edit this a bit later when I get more time.
Koopa777 said:
Just a quick reply to point some things out. The Snapdragon 600 in the One is a quad-core A15 with Krait 300 architecture. The 600 is about as powerful as the 5250 with better multi-threading. Also most chipsets currently use A15. It is the current standard, not something that will "happen over time". The CPU has nothing to do with the screen res, the image processing is done through the GPU. And finally, I expect the 5250 to be eclipsed relatively soon, as chipsets supporting higher clock frequencies(like the 800, or even the rumored Tegra5/6 with a possible 3.0Ghz clock) start to enter manufacturing. Sorry for the brevity, I'll edit this a bit later when I get more time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 5/6 is purely theoretical at this point. It's also best for clarity to note that most new chipsets are switching to A15 (or customized variants thereof). Most chipsets in the market right now are A9 or lower, and there are still phones being released running high-end A9 kit. The CPU also does have some role to play in screen drawing, especially for handling elements that are not using GPU rendering for one reason or another. This interaction isn't as significant as some would believe, but it cannot be discounted entirely either.
The Snapdragon 600 is probably on par with the Exynos 5250, that much is definitely true. They're pretty neck and neck and will outclass one another on different aspects of CPU performance, but both are quite good.
Rirere said:
Four or so updates is a lot for Android; I don't think you'll really find a phone other than a certain HTC phone (hint, it started with Windows Mobile) that'll get more than that. Keep in mind that even the lowly single-core Nexus S got its update to Jelly Bean-- I also have the Nexus 10 and HTC One, and both have the horsepower to stay in the game for quite some time. As a Galaxy Nexus user as well, I can also say that even relatively underpowered devices can stay kicking for some time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plus the rumor is that Android 5.0 is being heavily optimized so it can run even on older phones, even with 512 MBs of RAM. If true, they may keep current devices updated for a while, as it may take a while for Android to bloat up again. :highfive:
joakim_one said:
Plus the rumor is that Android 5.0 is being heavily optimized so it can run even on older phones, even with 512 MBs of RAM. If true, they may keep current devices updated for a while, as it may take a while for Android to bloat up again. :highfive:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol @ the "up again." Hopefully they keep moving in this direction, towards leaner, sleeker software. And one of the nice kicks about modern, flat, industrial design is that it doesn't hit system resources quite as hard.
Rirere said:
Tegra 5/6 is purely theoretical at this point. It's also best for clarity to note that most new chipsets are switching to A15 (or customized variants thereof). Most chipsets in the market right now are A9 or lower, and there are still phones being released running high-end A9 kit. The CPU also does have some role to play in screen drawing, especially for handling elements that are not using GPU rendering for one reason or another. This interaction isn't as significant as some would believe, but it cannot be discounted entirely either.
The Snapdragon 600 is probably on par with the Exynos 5250, that much is definitely true. They're pretty neck and neck and will outclass one another on different aspects of CPU performance, but both are quite good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As Rirere says, Koopa777's post is pretty much all wrong. Krait is not Cortex A15, it is a unique design from Qualcomm that is somewhere between Cortex A9 and A15, which are off-the-shelf designs from ARM. Most current chipsets are Cortex A9, not A15. The Exynos 5250 Dual will of course be eclipsed with time, for example, the Tegra 4 will be coming out later this year with a quad-core Cortex A15, but right now the 5250 is basically the only Cortex A15 chip, other than the aforementioned Octa, which just came out.
As for Tegra 5/6, those won't come out till next year, I don't think anyone is planning on waiting till then.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Snapdragon 800
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
freshlysqueezed said:
Snapdragon 800
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah. I agree. Even the older quad cores once a device has root.
Sent from my Nexus 10 using XDA Premium HD app
More snapdragon 800 benchmarks
Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk HD
Got to say, I'm looking forward to the next generation. I upgraded from a Galaxy Nexus (TI OMAP 4430) to the Snapdragon 600, and it was like night and day (the Nexus was my first smartphone, although I'd played around with many Android devices before). Amazing what processor tech is like these days.
freshlysqueezed said:
More snapdragon 800 benchmarks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
joakim_one said:
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hot can be a sign of bad heat flow though, more than power consumption. A15s are better than A9s in some efficiency regards, but pumping them up to a higher clock speed will eat through that saving.
joakim_one said:
Eh, if it's using twice as much power to get these results, who cares? Let's see how the battery life is.
I picked up a HTC One X+ with the fastest Tegra 3 and it gets very hot when playing 1080p video, burning battery like crazy. Even the Exynos 5 Dual in my Nexus 10 runs pretty hot when playing 1080p video. All these processors are powerful enough these days, whether they'll kill your battery or not is the real test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's why I underclock/undervolt when I play my mkv movies.
Thanks to the awesome DEVS here at xda for the great flexibility in our kernels. Great battery life when you need it and speed at other times.
Agreed, thermal regulation and throttling is an issue, but Qualcomm seems to be doing pretty well with these issues as well as battery life in my HTC evo 4g lte and my sisters galaxy s4.
We will have to see for the new 800 and tegra 4.
Sent from my EVO using xda app-developers app
I know, this is one of those silly little topics that gets thrown around every time a newer faster arm chip comes out, but this is the first time that I personally have ever seen an Arm chip as a threat to intel. When I saw the Galaxy s6 scoring around a 4800 multi-core I stopped and thought to myself, "hey, that looks pretty darn close to my fancy i5." Sure enough, the I5 5200u only scores around a 5280 in the Geekbench 64 bit multi-core benchmark. I understand that this is only possible because the Galaxy S6 has 8 cores, but it's still very impressive what Arm and Samsung were able to achieve using a fraction of the power intel has on hand. Of course I don't think that this chip will take over the market, but if Arm's performance continues increase at the same rate while maintaining the same low power draw, then intel might have some real competition in the laptop space within the near future. Heck, maybe Microsoft will bring back RT but with full app support.
I also know that I didn't account for how much power the GPU was drawing, but I feel as if that wouldn't be the only factor after seeing the issues with Core M.
I doubt they're worried. intel CPUs are wicked fast. i have a 3 year old i7 and it's faster than most of AMDs current gen CPUs.
if Intel is able to apply the same method/engineering they use on CPUs to the mobile platform, i bet it will smoke anything out there. kind of like how intel CPUs kill basically anything AMDs can put out.
tcb4 said:
I know, this is one of those silly little topics that gets thrown around every time a newer faster arm chip comes out, but this is the first time that I personally have ever seen an Arm chip as a threat to intel. When I saw the Galaxy s6 scoring around a 4800 multi-core I stopped and thought to myself, "hey, that looks pretty darn close to my fancy i5." Sure enough, the I5 5200u only scores around a 5280 in the Geekbench 64 bit multi-core benchmark. I understand that this is only possible because the Galaxy S6 has 8 cores, but it's still very impressive what Arm and Samsung were able to achieve using a fraction of the power intel has on hand. Of course I don't think that this chip will take over the market, but if Arm's performance continues increase at the same rate while maintaining the same low power draw, then intel might have some real competition in the laptop space within the near future. Heck, maybe Microsoft will bring back RT but with full app support.
I also know that I didn't account for how much power the GPU was drawing, but I feel as if that wouldn't be the only factor after seeing the issues with Core M.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is important to remember that ultimately the same constraints and limitations will apply to both Intel and ARM CPUs. After all ARM and x86 are just instruction set architectures. There is no evidence to suggest that somehow ARM is at a significant advantage vs Intel in terms of increasing performance while keeping power low. It has been generally accepted now that ISA's have a negligible impact on IPC and performance per watt. Many of these newer ARM socs like the 810 are having overheating issues themselves. The higher performance Nvidia SOCs that have impressive performance are using 10+ watts TDPs too.
Also it is always a bit tricky to make cross platform and cross ISA CPUs comparisons in benchmarks like GeekBench and for whatever reason Intel cpus tend to do relatively poorly in GeekBench compared to other benchmarks. You can try to compare other real world uses between the i5-5200U and the Exynos 7420 and I can assure you that the tiny Exynos will be absolutely no match to the much larger, wider and more complex Broadwell cores. Don't get me wrong, the Exynos 7420 is very impressive for its size and power consumption, but I don't think we can take that GeekBench comparison seriously.
The fastest low power core right now is without a doubt the Broadwell Core M which is a 4.5 watt part. This is built on Intel's 14nm process which is more advanced than Samsungs.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/9061/lenovo-yoga-3-pro-review/4
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
"Once again, in web use, the Core M processor is very similar to the outgoing Haswell U based Yoga 2 Pro. Just to put the numbers in a bit more context, I also ran the benchmarks on my Core i7-860 based Desktop (running Chrome, as were the Yogas) and it is pretty clear just how far we have come. The i7-860 is a four core, eight thread 45 nm processor with a 2.8 GHz base clock and 3.46 GHz boost, all in a 95 watt TDP. It was launched in late 2009. Five years later, we have higher performance in a 4.5 watt TDP for many tasks. It really is staggering."
"As a tablet, the Core M powered Yoga 3 Pro will run circles around other tablets when performing CPU tasks. The GPU is a bit behind, but it is ahead of the iPad Air already, so it is not a slouch. The CPU is miles ahead though, even when compared to the Apple A8X which is consistently the best ARM based tablet CPU.
"
---------- Post added at 04:46 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:33 AM ----------
tft said:
I doubt they're worried. intel CPUs are wicked fast. i have a 3 year old i7 and it's faster than most of AMDs current gen CPUs.
if Intel is able to apply the same method/engineering they use on CPUs to the mobile platform, i bet it will smoke anything out there. kind of like how intel CPUs kill basically anything AMDs can put out.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This.
All of the little atom CPUs we see in mobile right now are much smaller, narrower and simpler cores than Intel Core chips. Once you see Intel big cores trickle down into mobile, it will get much more interesting.
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Sent from my SM-G920T using XDA Free mobile app
rjayflo said:
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Sent from my SM-G920T using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically Intel and AMD have had 64 bit for well over a decade now with AMD64/EM64T and many Intel mobile processors have had it for years, so the HW has supported it for a while but 64 bit enabled tablets/phones haven't started shipping until very recently.
Indeed Intel has been shipping 14nm products since last year and their 14nm process is more advanced than Samsung's. Note that there is no real science behind naming a process node so terms like "14nm" and "20nm" have turned into purely marketing material. For example, TSMC 16nm isn't actually any smaller than their 20nm process. Presumably Intel 14nm also yields higher and allows for higher performance transistors than the Samsung 14nm.
It is likely that Samsung has the most advanced process outside of Intel however. I do agree that Qualcomm is in a bit of trouble at the moment with players like Intel really growing in the tablet space and Samsung coming out with the very formidable Exynos 7420 SOC in the smartphone space. The SD810 just isn't cutting it and has too many problems. Qualcomm should also be considered that both Samsung and Intel have managed to come out with high end LTE radios, this was something that Qualcomm pretty much had a monopoly on for years. Intel now has the 7360 LTE radio and Samsung has the Shannon 333 LTE.
rjayflo said:
Intel will catch up...quick too just watch. They've been working on 64-bit for over a year now...and they're already onto 14nm. Qualcomm should be worried, I don't think their ready for this competition. They talked trash about octa cores and 64-bits...now their doing both and seems their product is still in beta status, not ready for the real world. Intel and Samsung are gonna give them problems
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree about Qualcomm, i actually mentioned that some time ago.
i think Qualcomm will happen what happened to nokia/blackberry, they got huge and stopped innovating and ended up being left in the dust. perhaps Qualcomm thought they had a monopoly and that samsung and other device makers would continue to buy their chips..
in the end, i think the only thing Qualcomm will have left is a bunch of patents..
I understand that Core M is a powerful part, but I'm not sure I believer their TDP figures. I am, however, more inclined to believe Samsung as they achieving this performance with an soc that is within a phone; in other words, they don't have the surface area to displace large quantities of heat. Nvidia has always skewed performance per watt numbers, and, as a result, they haven't been able to put an soc in a phone for years. Now, the reason I doubt intel's claims is because of battery life tests performed by reviewers and because of the low battery life claims made by manufacturers. For instance, the New Macbook and Yoga Pro 3 aren't showing large improvements in battery life when compared to their 15w counterparts.
I'm not sure how I feel about the iPad comparison though; I feel as if you just compounded the issue by showing us a benchmark that was not only cross platform, but also within different browsers.
Also, I think I understand what you mean about how an ISA will not directly impact performance per watt, but is it not possible that Samsung and Arm could just have a better design? I mean intel and AMD both utilize the same instruction set, but Intel will run circles around AMD in terms of efficiency. I may be way off base here, so feel free to correct me.
I think that Qualcomm is busy working on a new Krait of their own, but right now they're in hot water. They got a little lazy milking 32 bit chips, but once Apple announced their 64 bit chip they panicked and went with an ARM design. We'll have to see if they can bring a 64 bit Krait chip to the table, but right now Samsung's 7420 appears to be the best thing on the market.
tcb4 said:
I understand that Core M is a powerful part, but I'm not sure I believer their TDP figures. I am, however, more inclined to believe Samsung as they achieving this performance with an soc that is within a phone; in other words, they don't have the surface area to displace large quantities of heat. Nvidia has always skewed performance per watt numbers, and, as a result, they haven't been able to put an soc in a phone for years. Now, the reason I doubt intel's claims is because of battery life tests performed by reviewers and because of the low battery life claims made by manufacturers. For instance, the New Macbook and Yoga Pro 3 aren't showing large improvements in battery life when compared to their 15w counterparts.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Technically the Core M will dissipate more than 4.5w for "bursty" workloads but under longer steady workloads it will average to 4.5w. The ARM tablet and phone SOCs more or less do the same thing. In terms of actual battery life test results, yes the battery life of most of these devices hasn't really changed since the last generation Intel U series chips but that isn't a real apples to apples comparison. As SOC power consumption continues to drop, it is becoming a smaller and smaller chunk of total system power consumption. Lenovo did a poor job IMO in originally implementing the first Core M device but Apple will almost certainly do a much better job. The SOC is only one part of the system, it is the responsibility of the OEM to properly package up the device and do proper power management, provide an adequate battery etc. Yes the new Macbook doesn't get significantly longer battery life but it also weighs only 2.0 lbs and has a ridiculously small battery. It also has a much higher resolution and more power hungry screen and yet manages to keep battery life equal with the last generation. Benchmarks have also indicated that the newer 14nm Intel CPUs are much better at sustained performance compared to the older 22nm Haswells. This is something that phone and tablets typically are very poor at.
tcb4 said:
I'm not sure how I feel about the iPad comparison though; I feel as if you just compounded the issue by showing us a benchmark that was not only cross platform, but also within different browsers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
A very fair point, browser benchmarks are especially notorious in being very misleading. I think in this case Chrome was used in all cases which helps a little. My point in showing this is that we need to take those GeekBench results with a little grain of salt. Outside of that benchmark, I don't think you'll find the A8X or Exynos 7420 getting anywhere near a higher speced Core M let alone a i5-5200U at any real world use or any other benchmark, browser based or not. Even other synthetic benchmarks like 3dmark Physics, etc don't show the Intel CPUs nearly as low as GeekBench does.
tcb4 said:
Also, I think I understand what you mean about how an ISA will not directly impact performance per watt, but is it not possible that Samsung and Arm could just have a better design? I mean intel and AMD both utilize the same instruction set, but Intel will run circles around AMD in terms of efficiency. I may be way off base here, so feel free to correct me.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is correct.
It is certainly possible for Samsung to have a design that is more power efficient than Intel when it comes to making a 2W phone SOC, but that won't be because Samsung uses ARM ISA while Intel uses x86. At this point, ISA is mostly just coincidental and isn't going to greatly impact the characteristics of your CPU. The CPU design and the ISA that the CPU uses are different things. The notion of "better design" is also a little tricky because a design that may be best for a low power SOC may not necessarily be the best for a higher wattage CPU. Intel absolutely rules the CPU landscape from 15w and up. Despite all of the hype around ARM based servers, Intel has continued to dominate servers and has actually continued to increase its lead in that space since Intel's performance per watt is completely unmatched in higher performance applications. Intel's big core design is just better for that application than any ARM based CPU's. It is important to remember that just because you have the best performance per watt 2 watt SOC, doesn't mean you can just scale that design into a beastly 90 watt CPU. If it were that easy, Intel would have probably easily downscaled their big core chips to dominate mobile SOCs.
You frequently find some people trying to reason that at 1.2 Ghz Apple's A8 SOC is very efficient and fast and then they claim that if they could clock that SOC at 3+ Ghz then it should be able to match an Intel Haswell core, but there is no guarantee that the design will allow such high clocks. You have to consider that maybe Apple made design choices to provide great IPC but that IPC came at the cost of limiting clock frequencies.