Related
Hi,
I just download CPU-Z from Google Play here:
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cpuid.cpu_z
But I'm amazed because it identifies Nexus10 CPU manufacturer as ARM instead of Samsung. In fact CPU manufacturer detected is 0x41, that is ARM not Samsung...
Please, can any owner of another Nexus10 run CPU-Z in order to know if there is the same issue or is just related to my processor.
Thanks and best regards.
Well it is an ARM core design, and the GPU is a straight ARM design as well.
EniGmA1987 said:
Well it is an ARM core design, and the GPU is a straight ARM design as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, but I have a serious overheating problem with my nexus 10. Maybe it can be avoided if there are different processors used in nexus 10 build. That's why I ask if someone can check it in his/her machine, to know if it's possible.
Thanks and best regards.
No one has a different processor, and the overheating affects everyone. Pretty much anything you do will always hit thermal throttling which is why everyone should run a custom kernel since that tweaks the way throttling works.
EniGmA1987 said:
No one has a different processor
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's exactly what I want to confirm. Sometimes internal parts were changed/replaced due to lack of stock (and it was a common situation for the nexus 10).
Did you run CPU-Z to check the processor?
Thanks and best regards.
VivaErBetis said:
That's exactly what I want to confirm. Sometimes internal parts were changed/replaced due to lack of stock (and it was a common situation for the nexus 10).
Did you run CPU-Z to check the processor?
Thanks and best regards.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It is ARM, mostly. Mali, the GPU portion of the chip, is from ARM.
BTW, there were too few Nexus 10 devices sold to have a part shortage. Even the Surface RT outsold the Nexus 10.
VivaErBetis said:
That's exactly what I want to confirm. Sometimes internal parts were changed/replaced due to lack of stock (and it was a common situation for the nexus 10).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why do you think some Nexus 10's have a different processor? I highly doubt they put in anything other than an Exynos 5 Dual and yet only list that CPU on their official specs page. More likely is that CPU-Z simply doesn't have a complete database of all the ARM processors out there, particularly since the Nexus 10 is the first Android device with a Cortex A15 CPU and there still aren't that many A15 CPUs out there.
joakim_one said:
Why do you think some Nexus 10's have a different processor? I highly doubt they put in anything other than an Exynos 5 Dual and yet only list that CPU on their official specs page. More likely is that CPU-Z simply doesn't have a complete database of all the ARM processors out there, particularly since the Nexus 10 is the first Android device with a Cortex A15 CPU and there still aren't that many A15 CPUs out there.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Note the "Field Name" is CPU Architecture, not CPU. This is an important distinction, because CPU-Z is identifying the CPU "type" not the exact make/model from that manufacturer.
Samsung's Exynos CPU used in the N10 was advertised as using the latest "licensed Cortex ARM" design of A15. For more detail see http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/index.php for a list of the various ARM-A designs.
ARM doesn't necessarily produce the processors themselves, but develops and then licenses the IP to the various CPU manufacturers that want to create ARM "type" CPU's. Even though it's modified, Qualcomm still pays for the IP so that their instruction sets for Krait are compatible with the competition.
So with CPU-Z, you'll see "ARM Cortex-A15" for our N10's and "Krait" on my Samsung GS3.
SeaFractor said:
Note the "Field Name" is CPU Architecture, not CPU. This is an important distinction, because CPU-Z is identifying the CPU "type" not the exact make/model from that manufacturer.
Samsung's Exynos CPU used in the N10 was advertised as using the latest "licensed Cortex ARM" design of A15. For more detail see http://www.arm.com/products/processors/cortex-a/index.php for a list of the various ARM-A designs.
ARM doesn't necessarily produce the processors themselves, but develops and then licenses the IP to the various CPU manufacturers that want to create ARM "type" CPU's. Even though it's modified, Qualcomm still pays for the IP so that their instruction sets for Krait are compatible with the competition.
So with CPU-Z, you'll see "ARM Cortex-A15" for our N10's and "Krait" on my Samsung GS3.
View attachment 2071624
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm well aware of how ARM licensing works. If you look at his screenshot, it doesn't identify his processor as a Samsung Exynos 5, but your screenshot shows a Qualcomm Snapdragon S4. That is probably because they don't have the Exynos 5 in their database yet.
Thanks for all the answers. I contacted CPU-Z devs to ask about this issue and they change the soc recognition in the new version published today.
According to the information displayed in the RAM tab of my phone's Task Manager, my GN3 has 2.38GB of RAM installed. Naturally I was expecting to see 3GB since that's what the specs advertise.
Is anyone else seeing the same thing on their GN3? I'm wondering if this is normal or not.
That is natural since some ram will be used to run the Android system and whatever else is currently running in your phone. One thing that holds true across all ram whether it is hard drives or what not is they always advertise a rounded up number. Just an fyi.
Tap'n & Talk'n on my Note 3
cmcaulay71 said:
According to the information displayed in the RAM tab of my phone's Task Manager, my GN3 has 2.38GB of RAM installed. Naturally I was expecting to see 3GB since that's what the specs advertise.
Is anyone else seeing the same thing on their GN3? I'm wondering if this is normal or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
GPU is assigned a certain block of this. This is standard across all devices. You have 3 GB ram, doesn't mean apps have access to all of it.
Does the lack of 64bit make much of a difference for between now and 2016 spring where I'll most probably get my next phone after this note? Will it take some time for 64bit to really be widespread in terms of apps and games and software etc which would make it ok to get this note provided I upgrade again in 2016?
According to anandtech, the Exynos version might have a 64bit capable architecture (Cortex A57), but the chip's drivers and firmware run in a CAL mode (32-bit compatibility mode). This means that while it benefits from some of the performance and power saving features of A57, it won't be running 64bit code.
pcman2000 said:
According to anandtech, the Exynos version might have a 64bit capable architecture (Cortex A57), but the chip's drivers and firmware run in a CAL mode (32-bit compatibility mode). This means that while it benefits from some of the performance and power saving features of A57, it won't be running 64bit code.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Same as Snapdragon 410 devices launched. No 64bit code because Android 4.4.4 can't run 64bit but Android L will.
Sent from my SM-G900H using XDA Free mobile app
hiepgia said:
Same as Snapdragon 410 devices launched. No 64bit code because Android 4.4.4 can't run 64bit but Android L will.
Sent from my SM-G900H using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The anandtech article: http://www.anandtech.com/show/8537/samsungs-exynos-5433-is-an-a57a53-arm-soc
It seems to imply that this was never meant to be a 64bit SoC, and may not ever run in 64bit mode (at least without some hacking), even with Android L.
They share their opinion. I checked HTC Desire 510 have snapdragon 410 too. In source code doesn't have AArch64 implement too. But it doesn't mean an update with android L won't bring implement AArch64.
Anandtech think Exynos 5433 is 32 bit and they are total wrong. Now they can wrong too.
Exynos 5433 with AArch64 at first is line up Exynos 6 but they don't want Snapdragon chipset can't sell-out when people want Exynos chipset. The very same story with Snapdragon and Exynos in Galaxy S4/S5 and Note 4.
markboi13 said:
Does the lack of 64bit make much of a difference for between now and 2016 spring where I'll most probably get my next phone after this note? Will it take some time for 64bit to really be widespread in terms of apps and games and software etc which would make it ok to get this note provided I upgrade again in 2016?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think some people answered your question but not fully lol. Simply put this whole argument over 64-bit and 32-bit is kind of pointless. As others have stated the exynos version isn't even running in 64 bit mode. Android L has yet to be released and there is no way of telling if it can be put into 64 bit mode. Even if it could, if you decide to get a snapdragon note now, you will be good. Most apps will not be 64 bit compatible out of the gate, and will take some time for them to be so. You will not experience any major loss in performance, and maybe someslight difference in battery life. Hell my nexus 5 on Android L developer preview which isn't even finalized runs AMAZING in comparison to kit kat, and in no way shape or form is the nexus 5 64 bit compatible. Don't let 64-bit fanboys sway your decision on an exynos vs snapdragon note 4. They both will be powerhouses with android L. By 2016 for your next upgrade there will be plenty of 64 bit phones, especially the S6 at that time, and the Note 5 in the fall.
It will be years until 64bit is widely accepted and used so you'll be okay. I'm basing this off of the windows transition which is still occurring after all these years.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Itchiee said:
It will be years until 64bit is widely accepted and used so you'll be okay. I'm basing this off of the windows transition which is still occurring after all these years.
Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People get new phone every 18 months on average, I would imagine people hold on to computers for much longer, so analogy to windows regarding transition is probably wrong. Another example for disparity would be OS updates, Google has 2-3 updates of Android a year, where MS would be every 2-3 years?
Also the newest ARM architecture is probably 20-40% faster (per clock) and Google has a chance to write more efficient OS (like replacing JIT with ART for example). So I'm willing to predict that transition to 64 bit will be much faster for the phones than it is with computers. Of course all this depends on translating theoretical gains into real life advantages , if they don't show up due to poor execution, then all bets are off.
So this past few hours, I've been doing some research about our device ZE550KL (The 3GB, Octa-core one) and I've noticed that our processor runs at 1.7GHz which is a false info obviously, if you look at the CPU-Z's report. Our device in real world, runs at 1.5GHz. Take a look at this. It clearly states here that our device runs at 8x1.7GHz. And then there comes the Snapdragon 617 which runs at 8x1.5GHz. It makes sense if our device has the 617 instead of the 615 considering the frequency, obviously. It really bugs me out, and I don't know if I'm making any sense right now, but that's just my theory. We already have our device giving us false specs, it won't be any surprise if the processor is false too.
Correct me if I'm wrong. :fingers-crossed:
Edit: And also, if you look at 617's Antutu v6 score, it sits around 40k-50k. I re-ran my phone just a while ago and I got 49K. Another reason to consider that our processor is 617 on disguise.
It seems ever since 64bit roms were possible for Athene, all maintainers are only building 64bit Oreo roms, rather than 32bit. But what is the real benefit of this? From what I've noticed, 64bit roms have more issues than 32bit roms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the info I've gathered:
32bit rom bugs:
Camera
Torch
64bit ROM bugs:
Camera
Torch
GPS
System UI lags
Video recording
Not to mention 64bit roms have more ram consumption, which isn't good for those who have the 2GB version of Athene.
I think maintainers should continue building 32bit versions of their roms along with 64bit to give users more options. Just a thought.
There is absolutely no reason why a 64 bit Android should be on our devices. Will not add any performance, the memory is max 4GB (3.6GB available with 32 bit), 64 bit native apps take more space in memory, CPU is not fully equipped for 64 bit OS (32 bit memory bus)...
Skeptico said:
It seems ever since 64bit roms were possible for Athene, all maintainers are only building 64bit Oreo roms, rather than 32bit. But what is the real benefit of this? From what I've noticed, 64bit roms have more issues than 32bit roms. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is the info I've gathered:
32bit rom bugs:
Camera
Torch
64bit ROM bugs:
Camera
Torch
GPS
System UI lags
Video recording
Not to mention 64bit roms have more ram consumption, which isn't good for those who have the 2GB version of Athene.
I think maintainers should continue building 32bit versions of their roms along with 64bit to give users more options. Just a thought.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The point is: most maintains uses one device tree for 64bit which will be developed.(correct me if I'm wrong).
So if the 32bit source won't be developed, you must switch to the other one.
ok, but 64bits mainteners are on the same stage: no progress.
lot of 64bits roms are compiled without any debugging.
murigny64 said:
ok, but 64bits mainteners are on the same stage: no progress.
lot of 64bits roms are compiled without any debugging.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's what I wrote: they use the same device tree/source hence the bugs are present on nearly all 8.1 builds and. You need to fix the camera issues in the device source not the rom source as its a problem of not available drivers and you need to shim it.
---------- Post added at 07:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:23 PM ----------
SoNic67 said:
There is absolutely no reason why a 64 bit Android should be on our devices. Will not add any performance, the memory is max 4GB (3.6GB available with 32 bit), 64 bit native apps take more space in memory, CPU is not fully equipped for 64 bit OS (32 bit memory bus)...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People demand it permanently, that's the real reason for it.
strongst said:
People demand it permanently, that's the real reason for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is the most vital reason. If perfected you get portrait mode which most people will be crazy about
64 (bit) is double the value of 32 (bit), so it must be far better, faster, sexier, whatever... :silly:
thorin0815 said:
64 (bit) is double the value of 32 (bit), so it must be far better, faster, sexier, whatever... :silly:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah another reason.... Like Megapixel in case of quality....
You can use marshmallow. Bug free, 32 bit, torch works.
32bit was rather good since the only plus i see is Google camera which i don't really care. Bugs could be fixed on 64bit which isn't a issue. But the thing is 32BIT is dying, all oems are going through the trend of 64bit and the support for 32bit is slowly dead.
64bit is the way to go.
Orelse you guys should be on Nougat.
Just because marketing wise it's successful, it doesn't mean it will be better.
Especially when Moto doesn't develop 64 bit drivers.
But yes, stupidity always wins in the end because it's unrelenting.
That's because the ROM "builders" are not technically aware imho or maybe they just want to ignore the facts.
Fact is, this device houses a 32 bit bus. Busses are responsible for transferring data signals. When you are using a 32 bit system, the data is transported in one go but in the case of 64 bit roms, the data has to be transported in 2 turns ie the latency gets doubled. More the latency, lesser responsive your system. Yes you can reduce the latency by overclocking the bus, but doing that can only get you max to max 10% efficiency, overall the system is still lagging by 40%. This might not be noticeable on 3gb+ variants because of the obvious reasons but it gets pretty evident in the versions having 2gb ram.
We cannot get over this hardware limitation no matter what. It would be utterly stupid to shift to 64 bit roms for this device. A 32bit ROM should outperform any 64bit ROM easily. That's just my 2 cents tho, I would any day prefer a 32 bit ROM over any other.
hell_lock said:
That's because the ROM "builders" are not technically aware imho or maybe they just want to ignore the facts.
Fact is, this device houses a 32 bit bus. Busses are responsible for transferring data signals. When you are using a 32 bit system, the data is transported in one go but in the case of 64 bit roms, the data has to be transported in 2 turns ie the latency gets doubled. More the latency, lesser responsive your system. Yes you can reduce the latency by overclocking the bus, but doing that can only get you max to max 10% efficiency, overall the system is still lagging by 40%. This might not be noticeable on 3gb+ variants because of the obvious reasons but it gets pretty evident in the versions having 2gb ram.
We cannot get over this hardware limitation no matter what. It would be utterly stupid to shift to 64 bit roms for this device. A 32bit ROM should outperform any 64bit ROM easily. That's just my 2 cents tho, I would any day prefer a 32 bit ROM over any other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well hopefully most of the maintainers for our device read this, and then stop building 64bit ROMs. You've confirmed my suspicion that it's basically pointless.
Frostbite said:
You can use marshmallow. Bug free, 32 bit, torch works.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If there were security patches for it, I would love to do for sure!
You guys remember that discussion https://forum.xda-developers.com/moto-g4-plus/help/64bit-roms-t3634876 now it's known that there's no real benefit and more problems with 64bit :silly:
hell_lock said:
That's because the ROM "builders" are not technically aware imho or maybe they just want to ignore the facts.
Fact is, this device houses a 32 bit bus. Busses are responsible for transferring data signals. When you are using a 32 bit system, the data is transported in one go but in the case of 64 bit roms, the data has to be transported in 2 turns ie the latency gets doubled. More the latency, lesser responsive your system. Yes you can reduce the latency by overclocking the bus, but doing that can only get you max to max 10% efficiency, overall the system is still lagging by 40%. This might not be noticeable on 3gb+ variants because of the obvious reasons but it gets pretty evident in the versions having 2gb ram.
We cannot get over this hardware limitation no matter what. It would be utterly stupid to shift to 64 bit roms for this device. A 32bit ROM should outperform any 64bit ROM easily. That's just my 2 cents tho, I would any day prefer a 32 bit ROM over any other.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you have the data greater than the 32bit system instruction set, you have to run the cycle twice.
64Bit doesn't mean you everytime have to run the cycle twice Imo.
When it's needed, it's done.
krypticallusion said:
If you have the data greater than the 32bit system instruction set, you have to run the cycle twice.
64Bit doesn't mean you everytime have to run the cycle twice Imo.
When it's needed, it's done.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not about the data. A 64bit system uses 64 bits for referencing the memory. So when you're running any app or anything, the cpu has to wait twice the normal time to get the next instruction.
hell_lock said:
It's not about the data. A 64bit system uses 64 bits for referencing the memory. So when you're running any app or anything, the cpu has to wait twice the normal time to get the next instruction.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Stay on N 32-bit and enjoy :')
Dreamstar said:
Stay on 32-bit and enjoy :')
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But look at the title of the thread: that's exactly the problem.
All those 32 bit ROMs are stalled, no security updates or development anymore ..
(Of course everybody is free to compile himself, I know).
Dreamstar said:
Stay on 32-bit and enjoy :')
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you and other maintainers would continue building 32bit Oreo ROMs, then sure. But no one is anymore...