Related
Which processow will be better, Exynos 5 Octa or A simple Snapdragon 600 quad?
In my POV, Octa will be useless since it will be a battery hog and no apps really use that much cores and power. The S600 will be more efficient for day-to-day use since it consumes less power and will actually be used.
-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-
Sent from a dark and unknown place
Galaxy Tab 2 7.0 P3100
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
AndreiLux said:
Misconception #1: Samsung didn't design this, ARM did. This is not some stupid marketing gimmick.
Misconception #2: You DON'T need to have all 8 cores online, actually, only maximum 4 cores will ever be online at the same time.
Misconception #3: If the workload is thread-light, just as we did hot-plugging on previous CPUs, big.LITTLE pairs will simply remain offline under such light loads. There is no wasted power with power-gating.
Misconception #4: As mentioned, each pair can switch independently of other pairs. It's not he whole cluster who switches between A15 and A7 cores. You can have only a single A15 online, together with two A7's, while the fourth pair is completely offline.
Misconception #5: The two clusters have their own frequency planes. This means A15 cores all run on one frequency while the A7 cores can be running on another. However, inside of the frequency planes, all cores run at the same frequency, meaning there is only one frequency for all cores of a type at a time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
I hope that the overclocking or higher clock rate doesn't produce Moment-esque results.
Alsybub said:
I thought the s4 had the same processor as the One, but it was clocked to 1.9? I could be wrong. I wasn't really paying attention.
Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
crawlgsx said:
In the US that is true, they are both S600's, with the S4 having a .2ghz higher clockspeed. Many of the other S4's will have the Octa Exynos chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah. I see. Different hardware for different regions. Like the One X.
Even though it's eight cores it is probably complete overkill. Yet another bigger number to put on marketing. How many apps will actually use that? How many apps use four cores at the moment?
There have been some articles about multiple cores being more for point of sale than for the end user. Even if you're signing up for a contract right now I doubt that much would be making use of it in two years time. So, the future proofing argument is moot.
It'll be interesting to see. Of course the galaxy builds of Android will use the cores. With things like the stay awake feature and pip it is useful. Outside of the OS I can't see it being necessary.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk HD
The "octa" core processor is complete bullsh*t. Imo, 2/4 cores are perfectly fine as long as they optimize it and perfect the hardware, why stack 8 cores when only 4 work at one time and no app will use all that power.
They should've focused on design to make it look less like a toy phone and use better finish, instead.
Oh the marketing..
Not HTC or whatever fanboy, just stating my opinion.
rotchcrocket04 said:
I'd imagine this thread will get closed.
In the meantime, read this thread and then make a judgement because the "it uses more power so it sucks" mentality is just simply incorrect.
[Info] Exynos Octa and why you need to stop the drama about the 8 cores
Addition: I am not a Samsung fanboy by any means, however, the amount of incorrect information floating around about both of these flagships is starting to get annoying.
2nd addition: Read this as well, the big.LITTLE technology being used in the Octa is pretty amazing: big.LITTLE Processing
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very good read, thanks for taking the time to post it. Surprised no-one has mentioned that we need this in our Ones. Would certainly help with the battery.
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Squirrel1620 said:
Benchmarks show adreno320 keeps up nicely. You won't see any real world differences besides a slightly lower benchmark score
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=2191834
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Nekromantik said:
Those are from the S600 version.
Higher clock speed and Android 4.2 will mean its slightly ahead.
No benchmarks from the Octa version yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll just stick with the one and wait for the 4.2 update. By then we should have custom kernels to overclock ourselves
Sent from my ADR6425LVW using xda app-developers app
Here you go
Nekromantik said:
Saying its a 8 core cpu is marketing simply put.
Like it has been said only 4 out of 8 cores will only ever be enabled at once max.
The GPU on the Octa might be better then the Adreno 320 but its have to wait for benchmarks.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How do you know all 8 can run at the same time? Has Samsung demonstrated that already? Any links?
Also what would be the speed if all 8 are running at the same time?
Also did you see that an Intel dual core @2GHz beat the Exynos Octa in benchmarks!!! So all 8 cores running at slower speed might not be very good actually. It might even slow down things even more...
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
joslicx said:
We recently demonstrated a dual core running at 3GHz at MWC in Barcelona. That chip was able to load games at crazy speeds. A game that took 15s to load on existing Exynos Quad core was loading in just 6s with our chip!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
backfromthestorm said:
. And used 3 times the energy to do it... Was that tested at all?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its all about bragging rights really. Same as Samsung is doing with regards to Octa.
The the chip that could run at 3GHz could also very well run at 1GHz at just 0.6V (so consuming far lesser power than anything else in the market). A dual core at 1GHz is still good enough for all mundane tasks like playing videos or internet browsing etc. So in practice it would have been a very efficient solution. It was a real innovation really. Sadly the company did not have money to pour more funds into the program and has shut it.
It was demonstrated at Mobile World Congress in Barcelona in february this year.
Anyway point is, we did not need extra set of power efficient cores like Samsung is doing. We ran the same cores that could do crazy high speeds and even crazier power efficient mode! Thats a very neat solution.
Heres a press link: http://www.itproportal.com/2013/02/25/mwc-2013-exclusive-dual-core-st-ericsson-novathor-l8580-soc-crushes-competition-benchmarks/
To quote the article:
A continuous running test monitored by an infra-red reader showed that the 3GHz prototype smartphone remained cooler as it uses less energy and in some scenarios, it could add up to five hours battery life in a normal usage scenario
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hung2900 said:
"Octa" is not gimmicky or for marketing.
Octa is the name of the SoC, and how it was named is nothing wrong
There are 3 implementations can be used, and one with maximum 8 cores running at the same time.
GS4 doesn't use that impletations, but it does not mean the SoC cannot be "Octa". You have a house with 8 rooms but you know to open or you wanna open 4 rooms only, the house is still an 8-room house.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, no. At least not in my opinion. Octacore means 8 cpu cores on one cpu-chip.
I would see it like this:
You have 2 houses on your lawn which are beside each other. Every house has 4 rooms. You have to switch houses to open up the rooms. Just like the Exynos "Octa" has to, since it cannot run both CPU's at the same time.
If you are in a house with 8 rooms, you cannot simply be in all 8 rooms at once. You can connect the open doors between all the rooms, and since your in that house, you can freely walk in every room. But not with that implementation.
I wouldn't call the Exynos "Octa" an Octacore, its a dual CPU system with a 2x4 cores, with the difference that regular desktop dual CPU systems can use both CPU units at once, but not like the Exynos "Octa". Still, dual quad system comes closer than a pure octacore system.
This is kind of a hybrid. Nice technology for a mobile device, but at the same time, kind of unneeded / inefficient, compared to regular quadcore systems. Even the Tegra 3 system with 4 active cores and 1 companion core for standby tasks seems more efficient (in terms of "used space" and ressources).
Ah well let's see how the supposed and so called "octacore" will score in the future...
processor differences
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
dawg00201 said:
okay I know both processor are snapdragon 600's but why is the galaxy S4's processor clocked at 1.9 ghz and the HTC One's processor is clocked at 1.7 ghz is it just an instance of samsung overclocking the s600 or are they different variations of the same processor, I have done some research and am able to find no clear answer to this question even on the snapdragon website????????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They should be identical. I think its just a manufacturer choice. But it could also be associated to termals or battery.
Cause Samsung took the higher frequency chips, there is the possibility that they also get the "better" chips: Lower Voltage for the same frequency. But thats just an assumption.
I've always wondered, how is the moto x faster than the quad core nexus 4? is there a way in making the nexus 4 faster? thankks
idonttakedrugs said:
I've always wondered, how is the moto x faster than the quad core nexus 4? is there a way in making the nexus 4 faster? thankks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
why are you comparing a diesel powered car ( n4) with hybrid car ( moto x) ? even if you did now both are fast, smooth and work great for everything asked to do so .... cores dont really matter
fahadsul3man said:
why are you comparing a diesel powered car ( n4) with hybrid car ( moto x) ? even if you did now both are fast, smooth and work great for everything asked to do so .... cores dont really matter
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
aint they the same processor though? the nexus 4 must have potential.......
idonttakedrugs said:
aint they the same processor though? the nexus 4 must have potential.......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.cnet.com/news/top-motorola-engineer-defends-moto-x-specs-q-a/
scream4cheese said:
http://www.cnet.com/news/top-motorola-engineer-defends-moto-x-specs-q-a/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hmm
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Good job on making Moto X only for US market......very smart decision -_-
Mashed_Potatoes said:
Good job on making Moto X only for US market......very smart decision -_-
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nooo! Its come to the UK earlier this year! Its not us exclusive anymore. Moto maker is though ?
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
They do not have the same processor. They do not have the same cores either.
Simply put the nexus 4 has krait 200 cores. The moto x has krait 300 cores.
The krait 300 cores are faster clock for clock than the 200. They also of course have a clockspeed advantage too.
All of Qualcomms crazy naming scheme aside. The moto x has basically a dual core S600 at 1.7ghz. Think HTC one m7 with two cores. And those two cores run at the their max frequency quite a bit often to boot....
User psx on nexus 4 and compare them
Sent from my LG-E975 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Quick summary:
N4: APQ8064 Krait 200 quad core @1.5ghz
MX: MSM8960DT Krait 300 dual core @1.7ghz
2013 N7: APQ8064AA Krait 300 quad core @1.5ghz
S4: APQ8064AC Krait 300 quad core @1.9ghz
S5: MSM8974ACv3 Krait 400 quad core @2.45ghz
(the fact some are S4Pros and some are S600's means very little, it's mostly K200 vs K300)
The moto x / 2013 N7 / S4 are pretty closely matched perf wise, which makes sense as they're all the same platform.
If you jump two steps between S4Pro -> S600 -> S800 -> S801 then there's a fair sized perf change, much less so with a single step jump.
At stock clocks I dont feel my S4 or 2013 N7 are dramatically faster then my N4.
It's merely that the N4 has the shortest battery life of the 3 (both relative and obviously absolute)
If you OC your N4, you could easily catch up in raw cpu power (if you ignore the fact that you could OC the other device too).
I wouldnt be too surprised if a K200 @~2.0-2.2+ ghz would equal a K300 @1.7-1.9ghz, though you'd shorten battery life even more on a already short life device.
If you could magically OC a N4 to ~3ghz, I wouldnt be surprised if it could keep up with the S5, I also wouldnt be surprised if it dies in 5 mins.
The N4 is very disadvantaged when it comes to thermal throttling, since once it hits the heat ceiling it drops like 20% in performance so it doesnt overheat.
You could also do the heatsink hardmod if it was really important, it's a rather easy mod (if you dont mind the fact you need to take it apart to do)
All devices have a thermal ceiling, but the N4 is usually disadvantaged when it comes to that. It's far easier to hit it on a N4 then any other device.
You could also do the qcom dalvik+bionic mod, it improved benchmark scores on my N7 by 15% (but much less on my N4, also I said benchmark and not "performance", it's very hard to quantify general performance/smoothness)
I think there was a F2FS mod for the n4, if there is and it works you could dramatically improve storage speed if you use that.
Finally you could always throw random build.prop mods, placebo effects are always the best as far as cost/performance goes.
----------------------------------------------------
scream4cheese said:
http://www.cnet.com/news/top-motorola-engineer-defends-moto-x-specs-q-a/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Moto has generally simply been spinning for marketing.
The fact of the matter is that the MSM8960DT is basically varient of the APQ8064AB/Ax that has 2 cores instead of 4.
Devices newer then the MX also have similar coprocessors now to offload idle sensor work, it's a general part of the S800/801 platform.
There's nothing stopping a manu from including them with any equivilent quad core soc,
which is essentially what qcom did with their own coprocessors in the S800/801 platforms.
Battery life on it is about equal to it's APQ8064Ax cousins since they're obviously the same cpu.
Depending on the rom/kernel, you can turn 2 cores off on the N7/S4/whatver,
but you cant turn 2 more cores on the MX.
The moto x has a slightly faster cores and clock speed but as there are too less cores it is slower. The reason it seems faster is the software optimizations Motorola have included on the moto x. Things such as optimized dalvik and bionic and using F2FS. If you install these on the nexus 4 i think it will be quicker.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
THEBANDIT420 said:
The moto x has a slightly faster cores and clock speed but as there are too less cores it is slower. The reason it seems faster is the software optimizations Motorola have included on the moto x. Things such as optimized dalvik and bionic and using F2FS. If you install these on the nexus 4 i think it will be quicker.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The nexus 4 is just not quicker no matter what you do.
Quad vs dual is irrelevant. There aren't hardly any workloads on mobile that even require four cores let alone max them out. And if you do its going to throttle very quick anyways.
Krait 300 cores are faster period. The moto x is faster period. The hardware is just faster.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/11
No software optimization or trickery. Krait 300 is just faster. It doesn't seem faster. It's faster.
Krait 200 was already a old core relatively speaking when the s4 pro came out. It is the same core as the last gen SoC in the s3 class devices. Just with a newer gpu basically.
Can't believe people are still having this silly discussion.
albundy2010 said:
The nexus 4 is just not quicker no matter what you do.
Quad vs dual is irrelevant. There aren't hardly any workloads on mobile that even require four cores let alone max them out. And if you do its going to throttle very quick anyways.
Krait 300 cores are faster period. The moto x is faster period. The hardware is just faster.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6747/htc-one-review/11
No software optimization or trickery. Krait 300 is just faster. It doesn't seem faster. It's faster.
Krait 200 was already a old core relatively speaking when the s4 pro came out. It is the same core as the last gen SoC in the s3 class devices. Just with a newer gpu basically.
Can't believe people are still having this silly discussion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes krait 300 is faster than 200, around 20-30%. The fact the nexus 4 does have 2 more cores does make it faster and just because "There aren't hardly any workloads on mobile that even require four cores let alone max them out" doesn't mean the moto x is faster ( at least by my definition of the word). The nexus 4 already beats in benchmarks but if the moto x does beat the nexus in things such as UI its because of all Motorola's software optimizations like i mentioned before.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
THEBANDIT420 said:
Yes krait 300 is faster than 200, around 20-30%. The fact the nexus 4 does have 2 more cores does make it faster and just because "There aren't hardly any workloads on mobile that even require four cores let alone max them out" doesn't mean the moto x is faster ( at least by my definition of the word). The nexus 4 already beats in benchmarks but if the moto x does beat the nexus in things such as UI its because of all Motorola's software optimizations like i mentioned before.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the majority of benchmarks that moto X wins. It even beats the quad core s600 devices in many of them as well. Even giving up 50mhz on the gpu to them.
Throttling is a big deal. Those chips throttle quicker and their clockspeeds go way down. The moto X spends more time at the highest clocks.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7235/moto-x-review/7
Overall no matter how you try and slice it. In the majority of use cases, real world and benchmarks. The moto X is faster
And it doesn't beat it in stuff like ui because of some optimization. It beats it because it is a significantly faster clock for clock and has a clockspeed advantage. And browsing around the ui doesn't use for cores on top of it all. You can easily show that on your nexus 4 with a custom kernel and setting it to dual core only.
It's faster because the platform is faster.
albundy2010 said:
In the majority of benchmarks that moto X wins. It even beats the quad core s600 devices in many of them as well. Even giving up 50mhz on the gpu to them.
Throttling is a big deal. Those chips throttle quicker and their clockspeeds go way down. The moto X spends more time at the highest clocks.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7235/moto-x-review/7
Overall no matter how you try and slice it. In the majority of use cases, real world and benchmarks. The moto X is faster
And it doesn't beat it in stuff like ui because of some optimization. It beats it because it is a significantly faster clock for clock and has a clockspeed advantage. And browsing around the ui doesn't use for cores on top of it all. You can easily show that on your nexus 4 with a custom kernel and setting it to dual core only.
It's faster because the platform is faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What benchmarks are these? I know the motox has great GPU performance (mostly as it's one of the few snap 600 with a 720p screen) but in CPU performance it usually is lower than quad core s600 devices. For example in geekbench. But yes the moto x is faster than many in real world performance but this is largely due to all Moto's software optimizations.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
THEBANDIT420 said:
What benchmarks are these? I know the motox has great GPU performance (mostly as it's one of the few snap 600 with a 720p screen) but in CPU performance it usually is lower than quad core s600 devices. For example in geekbench. But yes the moto x is faster than many in real world performance but this is largely due to all Moto's software optimizations.
Sent from my Nexus 4 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The article tells you what is used in it. Also for the gpu test many of them have offscreen testing as well which negates the resolution difference.
Again it's faster in many cases because the hardware is just faster period. Just as taking a HTC one m7 and a custom kernel with 2 cores disabled would be faster in real world performance as well compared to nexus 4.
Real world performance is not some micro level threaded benchmark test.
So out of curiosity I installed the CPU Z app on my new Moto G plus 4th gen (3GB) and found that according to it the processor is Snapdragon 615 instead of 617. Am I missing something? or something is wrong with the CPU Z app. Not that it makes a difference but I don't feel comfortable not knowing.
Update: I found some other people with similar case too.
Below is the link to screenshot of the app. I had to alter it.
imgur. com/9pkoQPn
Nope.. It's 617. CPU Z app is not updated and is falsely reading it as 615. Anyways 617 is basically just 615 with better optimization.
Sent from my Moto G4 Plus using Tapatalk.
same happened with me. just bought it, do you know any updates hit to solve its heating issues?
So yesterday, I picked up a used Alcatel Onetouch Idol 3 Octa-core phone. Has a snapdragon 615(4 1.5Ghz and 4 1.0Ghz processors) and we thought Amazon went to extremes, ha!! Turns out with the M 6.0.1 update, Alcatel not only locked everything down, they even stripped fastboot commands!!! Well anyhow as far as things weigh in, I swear the R1 still feels faster than the Idol 3. Now if I want to continue to play with the Idol 3 fortunately there is a way to downgrade and then flash over a different M rom, that may help. But for now the R1 will remain my daily.
I bought the BLU R1 without knowing what to expect and so far I'm impressed. It's my first ever BLU and Mediatek phone. I hate Snapdragon and avoid every phone that uses it. R1 HD is really fast and responsive. There is a video on youtube showing gaming footage on Moto G4 and it sucks really bad. Idol 3 and G4 are using the same slow, overheating Snapdragon 615 (617 same thing) and claim it's a high performance octa core processor.
ah_puch said:
I bought the BLU R1 without knowing what to expect and so far I'm impressed. It's my first ever BLU and Mediatek phone. I hate Snapdragon and avoid every phone that uses it. R1 HD is really fast and responsive. There is a video on youtube showing gaming footage on Moto G4 and it sucks really bad. Idol 3 and G4 are using the same slow, overheating Snapdragon 615 (617 same thing) and claim it's a high performance octa core processor.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, the performance of this phone does not feel as responsive as I thought for an 8 core(4x1.5,4x1.0), the 4 core 1.3 6735 honestly screamed. The Idol runs a 64bit Android 6.0.1 build where R1 is 32bit. Still I agree the R1 felt snappy. The area the Idol 3 shines in though is the Audio dept. Sound is awesome on this thing!! I won't be gone too long, I enjoyed the freedom of experimenting with the R1, practically indestructible until 6.6.... But never repeat NEVER install an OTA until you inspect what its doing!!!
I don't even get why phones apparently "need" an 8 core or even 10 core processor. You can't even do most of the things on a smartphone to max those cores out. I personally believe a quad-core is all that is needed and they need to work on the cpus so that they are better at doing more instructions per cycle so that single-thread and multi-thread will perform even better.
I love the Blu R1 HD and that screen is actually something to gawk at. You would never expect such a screen in a sub-100 phone as this screen can even best some of the high end phones of 2013! My only complaint about this phone is the battery, it has been 19 hours and I have used it for 2 hrs for SOT and it is dead, originally the battery was way better. I don't know what has happened because there is no report of it using massive amount of battery. The awake line is not there when it is draining rapidly and there are no wakelocks keeping it awake as shown in Wakelock Detector.
Christopher876 said:
I don't even get why phones apparently "need" an 8 core or even 10 core processor. You can't even do most of the things on a smartphone to max those cores out. I personally believe a quad-core is all that is needed and they need to work on the cpus so that they are better at doing more instructions per cycle so that single-thread and multi-thread will perform even better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So far as I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong), multiple cores allow for better power management.
So if you have 8 cores total, 4 powerful, 4 energy efficient, but are idling, then you can turn most of them off to save power. When more power is needed, the more powerful ones kick in and do their stuff.
Aside from that, I assume it is partly due to the difficulty in manufacturing CPUs. For example, Intel chips tend to have less cores (typically 2, hyperthreaded to 4) compared to AMD (often 4 or 8), because their CPUs have strong single core performance. AMD makes up for this by using more cores. I expect this is the same in the mobile computing world.
Zokoro said:
So far as I understand (please correct me if I'm wrong), multiple cores allow for better power management.
So if you have 8 cores total, 4 powerful, 4 energy efficient, but are idling, then you can turn most of them off to save power. When more power is needed, the more powerful ones kick in and do their stuff.
Aside from that, I assume it is partly due to the difficulty in manufacturing CPUs. For example, Intel chips tend to have less cores (typically 2, hyperthreaded to 4) compared to AMD (often 4 or 8), because their CPUs have strong single core performance. AMD makes up for this by using more cores. I expect this is the same in the mobile computing world.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That certainly makes sense, but in operation, it seems something was poorly implemented because, although this device specs out higher than the R1, in real world use it just seems to be on par with the speed of the R1, plus the R1 screen though smaller definitely appears more vivid and colors pop much more so than the Idol 3. As previously stated by me the Idol 3 has a much nicer audio experience, both in volume and in sound quality, but performance wise, I still think the R1 is superior.
Damnit I bought an Idol 3 and killed the R1 HD, lol
Hi all,
The Snapdragon 625 is one of the best mid range processors. It is powerful and very power efficient. I can get at least 5 hours of sot. In cpu z only all 8 cores can be used at the same time and they all have the same frequency (generally 652, 2016 or 1401 MHz). Does anyone know the clock speed of the two quad cores that make the Snapdragon 625
DarthMaul14 said:
Hi all,
The Snapdragon 625 is one of the best mid range processors. It is powerful and very power efficient. I can get at least 5 hours of sot. In cpu z only all 8 cores can be used at the same time and they all have the same frequency (generally 652, 2016 or 1401 MHz). Does anyone know the clock speed of the two quad cores that make the Snapdragon 625
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Snapdragon 625 is not a littleBIG architecture processor, all cores are the same, it is a true 8 core processor, not 2 quad core processors.
Ok thanks! So can each core can't go at their own frequency and all 8 cores must work at the same time.
DarthMaul14 said:
Ok thanks! So can each core can't go at their own frequency and all 8 cores must work at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, hey can throttle independent of each other, my guess is the default governor of the kernel does it that way because there is no real power savings.
True. I have a feeling that if the kernel allowed each core to run when it was needed and stopped when it isn't it would have been more power efficient.
DarthMaul14 said:
True. I have a feeling that if the kernel allowed each core to run when it was needed and stopped when it isn't it would have been more power efficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe... But the SD625 is pretty efficient as it is, plus there is a lot of issues with programs that report core usage on Nougat, it might actually be doing that but reporting incorrectly.
True. I tried 3 apps similar to cpu z and I got the same 3 frequencies and all the cores were being used. Do you think the Oreo update might fix that issue.
DarthMaul14 said:
True. I tried 3 apps similar to cpu z and I got the same 3 frequencies and all the cores were being used. Do you think the Oreo update might fix that issue.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No idea... My guess is no, most of this is due to changes in Android permissions, but honestly it works, it's quick and lag-free and great on battery, so I don't care about the details.
True