Related
As I know, IPhone 3G runs on 400 MHz processor (based on: CNet), while HTC Hero runs on 528 MHz processor, but as far as I knows, IPhone games are much more better and run smoothly, while games in Android devices like Raging Thunder 2, Super KO Boxing runs very lag in them. Can someone explain to me why?
Thanks in advance...
Most probably the dedicated/better graphic chip inside the iPhone then htc hero has. Plus, I think iPhone has programming language (C?) which is a bit faster then android's Java.
yes.. maybe to better graphics chip...
but I think... it has to do with ... ability to program to 1 hardware!!!!! NO surprises!
iphone OS is on ... one phone!!!
android is on so many different phones with different features and hardware and limits and powers.
if you are a programmer... looking to develop a new game of yours...
On the iphone, you know exactly what to expect and how to make your game perform to the best it can.
Now, try to imagine developing the same game for android. You have to keep in mind all the different phones..size screens, screen techs, graphic chips, CPUs, memory size, keyboard or no keyboard, trackball, optical ball, Dpad, etc etc etc... this list can drive you crazy!!!! what do you do?? You have to make decision at each turn, what you can program for; what you have to not support.
Dan330 said:
yes.. maybe to better graphics chip...
but I think... it has to do with ... ability to program to 1 hardware!!!!! NO surprises!
iphone OS is on ... one phone!!!
android is on so many different phones with different features and hardware and limits and powers.
if you are a programmer... looking to develop a new game of yours...
On the iphone, you know exactly what to expect and how to make your game perform to the best it can.
Now, try to imagine developing the same game for android. You have to keep in mind all the different phones..size screens, screen techs, graphic chips, CPUs, memory size, keyboard or no keyboard, trackball, optical ball, Dpad, etc etc etc... this list can drive you crazy!!!! what do you do?? You have to make decision at each turn, what you can program for; what you have to not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ahhhhh I get it..... It make sense, Thanks for the answer.
There are three reasons:
1) The iPhone CPU has a built-in Floating Point Unit (FPU), whereas the hero CPU doesn't. This means that when doing mathematics involving real numbers with a decimal point (e.g. numbers like 1.23, 3.14159, rather than integer numbers like 1, 73 and 492363), the iPhone is considerably faster, probably by an order of magnitude. 3D games make a lot of use of that kind of mathematics.
2) iPhone programs are compiled to run directly on the iPhone's CPU, whereas Android programs compiled to run on a Java Virtual Machine, which in turn runs on the Hero's CPU. This extra level of indirection means that the programs run maybe 5 - 10 times as slowly as they could if they ran directly on the CPU.
3) The iPhone has a more powerful GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) - this means that it is capable of drawing more things to the screen in one frame than the Hero is.
all android phones dont have much internal storage so limates games
Sent from my aHero using the XDA mobile application powered by Tapatalk
Dan330 said:
yes.. maybe to better graphics chip...
but I think... it has to do with ... ability to program to 1 hardware!!!!! NO surprises!
iphone OS is on ... one phone!!!
android is on so many different phones with different features and hardware and limits and powers.
if you are a programmer... looking to develop a new game of yours...
On the iphone, you know exactly what to expect and how to make your game perform to the best it can.
Now, try to imagine developing the same game for android. You have to keep in mind all the different phones..size screens, screen techs, graphic chips, CPUs, memory size, keyboard or no keyboard, trackball, optical ball, Dpad, etc etc etc... this list can drive you crazy!!!! what do you do?? You have to make decision at each turn, what you can program for; what you have to not support.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Java was supposed to be platform independand(spelling) in the beginning... oh well... the wonders of theory vs reality..
Most laggy games are laggy because of bad programming.
This can be observed in things like... 2 games/apps with similar graphics where 1 is not laggy and the other is. I've experienced this quite lot. You can make decent games with Java, especially in 3d, since it just calls "native" OpenGLES functions and doesn't have to do the rendering. If you need an extra boost you can make native libraries and supply them with your app... Of course you lose a bit of platform independence, but it's not a big deal and a mere cross compilation of that library away from porting an app to a new device with different processors.
PlanetTimmy said:
2) iPhone programs are compiled to run directly on the iPhone's CPU, whereas Android programs compiled to run on a Java Virtual Machine, which in turn runs on the Hero's CPU. This extra level of indirection means that the programs run maybe 5 - 10 times as slowly as they could if they ran directly on the CPU.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think that's not the problem behind this. You can write critical code in NDK so you can achieve performance.. There's a lot of videos with motorola droid/milestone games. And they are working great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mn-XaaQXIxw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUlsfP38lSM
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=quake+3+motorola&aq=f
Motorola Milestone has a powerful GPU (PowerVR) and kicksoff the latest snapdron enabled devices.
qualcomm always delivered poor performance in their soc solutions..
+ qualcom msm7200A lacks FPU ... what a shame... screw you crapcomm and htc (for using cheap hardware, such as soc, display,etc). i'm keep wondering why htc doesn't lunch a true super smartphone with real GPU, high quality touchscreen, etc etc. And what's strange, even if they use cheap hardware their devices are more expensive than from other manufacturers ... hahaha
According to Microsoft QSD8250 is the chipset. Now how bad is it? I see people are saying it'd be better than HD2 since it'll have the perfect drivers from MS, but still wonder how this compare with the phone I am planning to get, Captivate, or an iPhone 4.
What prompted MS to choose this over so many newer (and possibly better) options?
rexian said:
What prompted MS to choose this over so many newer (and possibly better) options?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My guess: WP7 has been in development for quite some time, so at the start of development they choose the top processor that was available. But I think that this forum focuses to much on the processor and specifications, because in the end, the whole package must be convincing and that includes the operating system that has been optimized for this processor.
Furthermore, the current specifications will be the lowest common denominator for quiet some time (perhaps until WP8) and all apps will be optimized to run satisfactory on this specification (AFAIK the 20 second start-up rule for apps will be measured with the current specification). Newer processors may speed some things up, but the current hardware will be the target platform...
The development must have started before this chipset was launched, but you are right - this was most likely the target platform.
There are not many 3D games available though, the basic working will be fluid I know when I check at the store in few days. My worries are about the 3D games that will be launched later. If the experience with those is not as good as other platforms, MS will be in trouble. Better hardware will fix the issue in future but the reputation will be ruined and be stuck for a while.
Captivate is more powerful, mainly due to its GPU being about 4 times more powerful than the qsd8250s adreno200 gpu. Though, all WP7 devices will have better looking games since Captivate runs android... And everyone knows android games look crap, no matter how how powerful the hardware is (due to devs having to make their devices run on low end hardware to get more sales)
The IP4 is a better comparison because it's hardware and software have been fully engineered to run along each other, very much like WP7 devices. While it does have a more powerful GPU compared with the QSD, there wouldn't be much difference; the adreno 200 pushes about 22million triangles per sec, where as the sgx535 pushes about 28million triangles per sec. Whether developers even use all those polygons, I'm not sure I've seen.
Though epic citadel on iOS as well as this upcoming game called Aralon sure looks good.
Aralon link: http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2010/10/oh-man-aralon-for-ios-is-gonna-be-good/
Thanks Cruzer. Now it makes sense. 22 mil vs 28 mil is not a big difference. Were they running at the same clock-speed? I hear A4 processor in iPhone 4 runs at ~800MHz, so may be they both perform in a similar manner.
Not sure how much the GPU is affected by the CPU. I think it's more to do about the speed of the actual GPU, but don't take me on that quote lol.
I have a Captivate and an iPhone 4. Im getting rid of both of them to get a HD7 or Focus. The iphone works flawlessly and isnt buggy in the slightest bit, the captivate is very choppy and i couldnt take it after a while with the lagging even after i upgraded to froyo. I would go with wp7 to be different and because it looks fun even if it uses an older processor. The hummingbird and A4 are both top of the line and its going to be hard to compete especially with each having a different os.
Writing this from my iphone 4
Hey guys,
Just ordered a LCD adam last night, and Im really excited.
Quick concern though. It appears that most of the newer competitors have devices with higher screen resolutions. Is anyone concerned at all about how that will affect application compatibility with the ADAM? Meaning, running an app that is developed for 1280x800 probably wont work well on the 1024x600 screen.
Additionally, will honeycomb run well on a 1024x600 screen? Meaning, will it resize all the widgets and screen elements to maintain proper aspect ratio and icon size etc?
I dont have any experience with android devices, so I dont know the answers to these questions.
Either way, I am super excited about getting my Adam!
Minimum hardware requirements for Android 3.0 devices are:
1GHZ CPU, 512MB or RAM, displays from 3.5” and higher. (We all, of course, heard that Android handsets with 2GHz CPU’s are coming)
New 1280×760 resolution available for the devices with displays of 4” and higher. (Anyone thinking about Android tablets now? )
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source
It sounds as if 1024x600 will display apps fine - the way that Android apps scale to the resolution of the device has long-since been a feature. So it shouldn't be a problem!
a few people have noticed that the Honeycomb SDK switches to a more traditional look on lower resolutions. I don't think there's anything to worry about though, the nook color has the same resolution and seems to be working fine.
From experience reading this board, if i was in the tablet making business, I would make one with like 4GB RAM, an unlock[ed | able] bootloader and crap battery life, just to see how many people here at XDA would buy the darn thing and try to make a ROM with battery battery life and OC.
The most verbose people here about the "Eww, only 1GB" types have probably moved on to primes and are demanding TF700T's or whatever is next.
In most cases, we're likely just better off screwing with Dalvik and tuning our TF101's ROMs. It's still a VM and Java involved after all, not assembly code running natively to start with.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk; and my TF101 is half a foot away!
I've proposed many times that asus should come out with a TF model called Asus Transformer Whiner's Edition TFwhine. In it, there will be 4gig of ram, 100gig of sdcard space, 30hr of bat life, paper thin, water proof, fingerprint proof, sticky as hell (for the butter fingers), and foldable full size PC keyboard. But I'm sure the whiners will find some other thing to whine about.
To me, 1gig of ram is enough. I've never had any issue with running out of ram. I'm serious. This has never come up for me. I mean, what the hell are people running that requires more than a gig of ram?
More RAM would be nice, but I'm more excited about Windows 8 and the new 'ultrabooks' that we'll see in the near future.
letsgophillyingeneral said:
More RAM would be nice, but I'm more excited about Windows 8 and the new 'ultrabooks' that we'll see in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you give us a few examples of when you couldn't do something because it only has 1gig of ram?
goodintentions said:
To me, 1gig of ram is enough. I've never had any issue with running out of ram. I'm serious. This has never come up for me. I mean, what the hell are people running that requires more than a gig of ram?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have 2 other tablets and 2 phones with only 512mb of ram, even that seems to be enough for Android. IMO, anything over 1gb would be overkill.
goodintentions said:
Can you give us a few examples of when you couldn't do something because it only has 1gig of ram?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sorry, I thought I was still on the Charge forums. The Charge only has half a gig.
just lou said:
I have 2 other tablets and 2 phones with only 512mb of ram, even that seems to be enough for Android. IMO, anything over 1gb would be overkill.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
Seriously!! What the hell are people doing that 1GB isn't enough. We used to run (some people still do) Microsoft Windows computers with less than a gig of RAM. It's ridiculous to even sit there and think, that you need more RAM on a phone or tablet.
The browser kinda eats up lots of RAM (if I have around 3-4 pages open, as usual, it eats around 400MB!!), and basically, just the GPU eats off 120MB of all the thing.
FYI, a fast teardown:
- 1024MB RAM
- From that, 728MB is available mostly (some kernels push it to 768MB tops)
- Booting the system, with all the Asus crap loads approx 220-240MB into RAM, including all the things (Launcher, settings, applications autostarting, widgets). And that's a pretty good ratio.
- Basically you now got less than 500MB RAM. If you have tons of widgets, that can reduce free RAM to 400MB. And we're at the same point as smartphones - except that our devices have a lot bigger display, with a lot bigger resolution (2.666666 times more pixels), what means, we need bigger graphics too, what increases application RAM occupation.
Conclusion: With the current setup, we can run less applications on a 1GB RAM tablet than on a 512MB RAM phone (assuming it's a mid-end device with HDPI WVGA display, like, a Galaxy S). That's why we need more RAM, if you increase it to 2GB, you get approx 1.6GB free RAM, 1.3 after system start, and with many apps open, you'll get around 200MB free.
Guess what? That means you're running to much lol. I've got about 450MB if one trusts the settings app; Google and Exchange services are eating at least 20 megs combined! Never mind crap that I don't actually use burning some too. Devices have limits, and 1GB seems to hold plenty until content creation enters the mix, and doing that on Android has more pressing limits in software and users than RAM available. Besides, 2GB tablets will more likely result in fatter apps to fill it than more space to run most apps. Just take a look at Minecraft PC.
My old development system had 1GB of RAM running FreeBSD, if you try to combine GCC, pidgin x 6 logins, Firefox x 20+ tabs, and streaming music with Flash on that laptop, it would all but hit a HCF. I could either compile or have a smooth web, or buy a more powerful laptop. I didn't need one because I could still fit everythig well enough inti its constraints, I wasn't about to start re-encodig lord of the rings whileni waited either.
goodintentions said:
I've proposed many times that asus should come out with a TF model called Asus Transformer Whiner's Edition TFwhine. In it, there will be 4gig of ram, 100gig of sdcard space, 30hr of bat life, paper thin, water proof, fingerprint proof, sticky as hell (for the butter fingers), and foldable full size PC keyboard. But I'm sure the whiners will find some other thing to whine about.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nah, instead of a physical keyboard built in, it ought to hover on it's own and type by mental uplink, or project one in 3D if we can't do that one yet. That way ASUS can still make money off the dock .
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using Tapatalk
Actually, wasn't there supposed to be development from an MIT project, where it was a device that projected keyboards and "touch screens" on whatever surface you aim it at? It was like one of those projector things you always see in exhibitions and fancy places, where the projector interacts with the things blocking the projections, but more cellphone-like and computer-like.
Also, who could argue with more RAM? I think the thing that holds that idea is back is tablet space. Just wait for the next generation RAM/memory structures. STT-RAM, it will be a universal RAM-Memory! Non-volatile RAM ftw!
goodintentions said:
Can you give us a few examples of when you couldn't do something because it only has 1gig of ram?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ubuntu TF101 = Not enough RAM lol
Android = More than enough RAM for now atleast
Sent from my tf Enigmatic V2 beta 1.65Ghz Panda.test cust kernel settings
And ultrabooks are irrelevant to this discussion. You can take your ultrabook and Windows 8 but that's at the point where it's not even remotely comparable to a tablet, much less an Android tablet like the TF101 or TF201 due to the hardware costs. The licensing cost of Windows 8 alone is going to increase the price significantly.
1GB of RAM is more than enough, this is meant to be an enjoyable, lightweight consumer tablet. Not a supercomputing cluster on the go. If you want more RAM you're on the wrong device. Go get an ultrabook or a laptop because you're attempting to cram your needs into 1GB of memory, not designed for your needs.
My 2 cents it is that the memory requirement is a function of Apps. Right now most tablet's are running apps with limited functionality. But as the processors get better, more and more traditional desktop and notebook apps will migrate to tablets. This will be especially true for people that have tablets, like the Transformer, that blur the line between a tablet and a notebook. One can imagine something like Photoshop CS5 running on a tablet and easily requiring 4 GB or more of RAM.
jerrykur said:
My 2 cents it is that the memory requirement is a function of Apps. Right now most tablet's are running apps with limited functionality. But as the processors get better, more and more traditional desktop and notebook apps will migrate to tablets. This will be especially true for people that have tablets, like the Transformer, that blur the line between a tablet and a notebook. One can imagine something like Photoshop CS5 running on a tablet and easily requiring 4 GB or more of RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh, absolutely. I am sure that in due time we will have tablets with like 20GB of ram. But for now, with the software we have now and the foreseeable future, anything more than 1GB of ram is just stupid.
But that's a completely misguided notion of where apps and tablets are headed. Memory is not a function of apps, at least not linearly or continuously. I see memory hitting a ceiling in terms of heat, space and cost. I see apps not being developed with serious work in mind. You cited photoshop as an example and I think that's just bizarre. This is a tablet. There's this misguided notion that all mobile devices have to converge to the desktop in terms of performance and usage and I think it's bizarre and insane. When you cram a desktop into a tablet what is that? Why even bother when you can go for a laptop that would probably cost half in terms of price and multiples in terms of comfort? Why would any company bother doing this? Why would Google even push Android in this direction?
It's a tablet. You have fun, maybe do typing and word processing at the maximum and in special use cases. But it's meant to be lightweight, enjoyable and made for ENTERTAINMENT. User input at a minimum, simple touch movements, big on audio and visuals. Look at the screen to read a book, watch a video, listen to music. Pull your finger around or tilt the tablet. Not sit there and furiously work on a Photoshop project. That's what a mouse, a full sized keyboard and a desktop computer were made for.
When you talk about a future where RAM increases to meet the needs of apps, Photoshop is on the Android market and CPU power similarly increases to meet the needs. It's no longer a tablet, it's a laptop without a keyboard. It will be priced ugly and its design and specs will match that ugliness.
Maybe in the future we will have hardware so slim and so energy efficient and an input system so perfect all computers will be touch tablets, wafer thin, bendable and capable of running as fast as the U.S. govs fastest superclusters and everyone can download a genome sequencer app that lets you sequence the human genome on every tablet redundantly for ****s and giggles and within two seconds but I highly doubt this future will arrive within our lifetimes. Any attempt to head there by cramming a desktop ideal into a tablet form factor is misguided IMO.
Tubular said:
But that's a completely misguided notion of where apps and tablets are headed. Memory is not a function of apps, at least not linearly or continuously. I see memory hitting a ceiling in terms of heat, space and cost. I see apps not being developed with serious work in mind. You cited photoshop as an example and I think that's just bizarre. This is a tablet. There's this misguided notion that all mobile devices have to converge to the desktop in terms of performance and usage and I think it's bizarre and insane. When you cram a desktop into a tablet what is that? Why even bother when you can go for a laptop that would probably cost half in terms of price and multiples in terms of comfort? Why would any company bother doing this? Why would Google even push Android in this direction?
It's a tablet. You have fun, maybe do typing and word processing at the maximum and in special use cases. But it's meant to be lightweight, enjoyable and made for ENTERTAINMENT. User input at a minimum, simple touch movements, big on audio and visuals. Look at the screen to read a book, watch a video, listen to music. Pull your finger around or tilt the tablet. Not sit there and furiously work on a Photoshop project. That's what a mouse, a full sized keyboard and a desktop computer were made for.
When you talk about a future where RAM increases to meet the needs of apps, Photoshop is on the Android market and CPU power similarly increases to meet the needs. It's no longer a tablet, it's a laptop without a keyboard. It will be priced ugly and its design and specs will match that ugliness.
Maybe in the future we will have hardware so slim and so energy efficient and an input system so perfect all computers will be touch tablets, wafer thin, bendable and capable of running as fast as the U.S. govs fastest superclusters and everyone can download a genome sequencer app that lets you sequence the human genome on every tablet redundantly for ****s and giggles and within two seconds but I highly doubt this future will arrive within our lifetimes. Any attempt to head there by cramming a desktop ideal into a tablet form factor is misguided IMO.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should google graphene. That's where we're heading. Graphene is so strong and so conductive that electronic parts as thin as 1 atom thick could be made. We're talking ultra thin electronic devices in the near future.
I don't think 1GB RAM is enough for Honeycomb, I regularly find my free RAM dropping to double figures <70MB and the system requiring a reboot.
Even using a task killer over time will not free up the same amount of RAM as was available after the previous reboot.
Honeycomb memory management needs a massive amount of work before it can be left to control RAM on its own, I think 1.5-2GB RAM would be a much better solution
In my opinion, more RAM on Android devices is just to keep more applications in memory for multitasking.
I couldn't imagine that a 256mb game, or even a 2mb app, would benefit from a device having more ram than the size of the app.
Sent from my DROIDX using XDA App
goodintentions said:
You should google graphene. That's where we're heading. Graphene is so strong and so conductive that electronic parts as thin as 1 atom thick could be made. We're talking ultra thin electronic devices in the near future.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://arstechnica.com/science/news...hell-holds-the-secret-to-bendable-screens.ars
Here's another interesting one.
infazzdar said:
In my opinion, more RAM on Android devices is just to keep more applications in memory for multitasking.
I couldn't imagine that a 256mb game, or even a 2mb app, would benefit from a device having more ram than the size of the app.
Sent from my DROIDX using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The size of an app has nothing to do with how much RAM it consumes.
A prime example is firefox on a PC... around 17MB app, can use GB's of RAM due to memory leaks, and even without leaks, would still use a couple hundred MB
Viruses are another example, designed to use up as much system resources as possible while only being KB's in size
can you create powerpoint on lenovo yoga book just like you do in a normal laptop/pc
technically, yes you can. however, you should consider this two point. first, it has atom processor. if you want to create ppt including high resolution picture or high definition movie, it should be slow(but i think it's not a big deal). second, it's input device(halo keyboard and track pad) is naughty. you are going to mad if you don't have external keyboard and mouse. conclusion. it possible but for your mental fitness, you need bt keyboard and bt mouse or etc.
all office suite working great if you don't mind the performance of the processor. I've been using my YB for light office work, including editing ppt, and it has been nice to me.
The android version is also capable of producing powerpoint presentations. I chose the android version due to the processor and ram available. For android, the 4 gigs of ram plus the atom x5 processor is very snappy. For windows, the same specs are decidedly underpowered. Along with the 64gb storage, it makes for a low end windows 2in1, but a premium android device.
For the same price, amazon has an acer laptop with a 15.6 inch screen, 8 gigs of ram, discrete graphics, 256gb ssd and an i5. I don't see a major advantage of the windows yoga book in this price range.
uuang said:
The android version is also capable of producing powerpoint presentations. I chose the android version due to the processor and ram available. For android, the 4 gigs of ram plus the atom x5 processor is very snappy. For windows, the same specs are decidedly underpowered. Along with the 64gb storage, it makes for a low end windows 2in1, but a premium android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This was my reasoning also.
To be honest, I probably favor Windows over Android, but I really wanted this particular device, and for Windows I don't think the specs are up to speed. It'll do pretty much everything, but you'll be waiting a lot.
For ppt on android, which app did you guys use? I'm new to android tablet and I'm loving it, but I'm wondering how I can work on ppt, excel, and a few other windsows app on yogabook android.