Related
WP7 calls for a minimum of 1ghz processor.
That does make me think - how come the competition is able to provide smooth UI with 600mhz phones? ie. android / iphone / palm pre?
Is the WP7 so much processor hungry? that is calling for trouble...
your thoughts please.
The demo shown was using non-final build of the OS.
Something like BETA version, not yet final version.
There you would expect: bugs, glitch, errors, etc.
But still, it is quite impressive.
We can only judge the "perfectness" of the OS later when it has been "OFFICIALLY" released.
chiks19018 said:
WP7 calls for a minimum of 1ghz processor.
That does make me think - how come the competition is able to provide smooth UI with 600mhz phones? ie. android / iphone / palm pre?
Is the WP7 so much processor hungry? that is calling for trouble...
your thoughts please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's about more than just the basic UI. Lots of background stuff going on. All those live tiles need CPU power to populate. The Zune HD with a similar UI is only 600mhz. Microsoft is just setting the bar high so that the entire device is snappy. Compare the experience of an Android phone on a Snapdragon to that of a lesser CPU and there's a big speed difference. Microsoft is just demanding the best and it gives them more room to grow. If they set the bar low, the devices will be obsolete much sooner. Besides, faster stuff will likely be out by the end of the year and 1ghz will be somewhat commonplace. Apple's iPad is 1ghz and if they release an updated iPhone later this year I'd bet it will be 1ghz as well.
who's to say it needs all 1GHz? i think they're doing a great thing by setting that as minimum. our devices would be up to date much longer or at least it will feel that way. It's a good sign for those who don't like upgrading every year, no?
Besides, the Nexus One is 1ghz.... Supersonic will probably be 1ghz..... Everything will be 1ghz by the time wp7 comes out, if not more.
RustyGrom said:
Microsoft is just setting the bar high so that the entire device is snappy. Compare the experience of an Android phone on a Snapdragon to that of a lesser CPU and there's a big speed difference. Microsoft is just demanding the best and it gives them more room to grow. If they set the bar low, the devices will be obsolete much sooner. Besides, faster stuff will likely be out by the end of the year and 1ghz will be somewhat commonplace. Apple's iPad is 1ghz and if they release an updated iPhone later this year I'd bet it will be 1ghz as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What he said. It's set because it's very doable.. at the end of this year, which manufacturer would expect a new device to be competitive using an old processor? Setting a bare minimum as the minimum would mean that you have 7 Series phones which perform much crappier than others.. a situation they want to avoid.
Plus it's mobile XBox.
My prediction:
Touch HD3
Qualcomm Dual Core 1.5 GHz Snapdragon processor
4.3" OLED Capacitive screen WVGA 800x480
No hardware keyboard
5 MP Camera with auto-focus and flash
aGPS
FM Radio
Windows Phone 7 Series
...
gogol said:
My prediction:
Touch HD3
Qualcomm Dual Core 1.5 GHz Snapdragon processor
4.3" OLED Capacitive screen WVGA 800x480
No hardware keyboard
5 MP Camera with auto-focus and flash
aGPS
FM Radio
Windows Phone 7 Series
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
the new qualcomm 1.5 ghz chip is not meant for mobile devices till now it is used for mini notebooks the one which will be avaliable for devices is the 1.3 ghz version same specifications as the 1ghz processor but with 45 nm technology( uses less power ) same graphics performance but with 300 mhz over clock speed nearly same performance but less power consumption
Where does it say 1GHz is required? Right: Nowhere.
An ARMv7 processor is required. iPhone/Pre/Droid all have ARMv7 processors.
freyberry said:
Where does it say 1GHz is required? Right: Nowhere.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i think 1ghz is enough for a mobile os (the win xp runs on 500mhz processor and on 128 of ram )
It's not all about the clock rate. An ARMv7 processor at 500MHz is about twice as fast as an ARMv6 processor at the same clock speed.
(that's why the iPhone 3GS is so much faster than the iPhone 3G, despite only having 200Mhz more)
Windows XP doesn't run on ARM processors at all.
freyberry said:
Where does it say 1GHz is required? Right: Nowhere.
An ARMv7 processor is required. iPhone/Pre/Droid all have ARMv7 processors.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft said that Qualcomm was the only silicon provider right now.
Qualcomm said they are pleased that their Snapdragon CPU has been chosen for WP7.
Snapdragon runs at 1ghz+.
Therefore, in effect, the minimum CPU is 1ghz.
chiks19018 said:
WP7 calls for a minimum of 1ghz processor.
That does make me think - how come the competition is able to provide smooth UI with 600mhz phones? ie. android / iphone / palm pre?
Is the WP7 so much processor hungry? that is calling for trouble...
your thoughts please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well I'm sure they could, but Microsoft wants there to be very high minimum specs that developers can expect so that all apps can take advantage of the hardware to its full extent. An example would be the way WinMo apps are now. Most 3D apps aren't very good because the minimum of what developers can expect in a device isn't very high; thus, they have have to make it use as little resources as possible.
Based on what I'm hearing most current 6.X phones will be unsupported unless they pack a Dragoon. I hope the scorpion CPU is used in a win7 phone.
RustyGrom said:
It's about more than just the basic UI. Lots of background stuff going on. All those live tiles need CPU power to populate. The Zune HD with a similar UI is only 600mhz. Microsoft is just setting the bar high so that the entire device is snappy. Compare the experience of an Android phone on a Snapdragon to that of a lesser CPU and there's a big speed difference. Microsoft is just demanding the best and it gives them more room to grow. If they set the bar low, the devices will be obsolete much sooner. Besides, faster stuff will likely be out by the end of the year and 1ghz will be somewhat commonplace. Apple's iPad is 1ghz and if they release an updated iPhone later this year I'd bet it will be 1ghz as well.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yep, I would agree this is their plan as well. Personally, I would like to have phone stay pretty current within the 2 year contract I have to sign to get one at a fair price....
Insurance is mandatory on this one...
Ignore this post
RustyGrom said:
Microsoft said that Qualcomm was the only silicon provider right now.
Qualcomm said they are pleased that their Snapdragon CPU has been chosen for WP7.
Snapdragon runs at 1ghz+.
Therefore, in effect, the minimum CPU is 1ghz.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon can run at lower clock rates as well (e.g. 768Mhz in the Acer Liquid).
They also have slower processors besides Snapdragon (though I don't know whether the 7227 is ARMv7, I don't care about low end devices ).
freyberry said:
Snapdragon can run at lower clock rates as well (e.g. 768Mhz in the Acer Liquid).
They also have slower processors besides Snapdragon (though I don't know whether the 7227 is ARMv7, I don't care about low end devices ).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Any CPU can be underclocked. The "normal" speed for Snapdragons is 1ghz.
Qualcomm specifically mentioned that the Snapdragon had been chosen for WP7.
How about the famous HTC graphic acceleration driver?
I hope this time there will be no more missing graphics driver for WP7!
gogol said:
How about the famous HTC graphic acceleration driver?
I hope this time there will be no more missing graphics driver for WP7!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Microsoft said they're providing the drivers for these phones, I think
EDIT: Never mind.
Hi
Noob here. Was just wondering what the general consensus was on the 'old' GPU that the Galaxy Nexus will be supplied with. It isn't as powerful as say, the Galaxy S2 or the iPhone4s, but will this have an overall effect on how the phone performs in day to day use? Will it only effect the high end games that are currently available? I'm seriously tempted by this phone - mainly due to the lovely looking ICS but I'm concerned I may regret purchasing if there are serious issues with the GPU.
Cheers.
I am presuming the GPU is clocked all the way up to 384Mhz like the chip's specification says, if not then curses to Google.
TBH I believe it'll be fine, although it is an old GPU it is still quite a powerful one and can handle almost every game fine. Tegra 2 is generally a weaker GPU than SGX540 @ 200 and can still manage games just fine at 1280 x 800, I don't see why the SGX540 @ 384 can't do that. Although we'll never know for sure until we get the phone.
I'll quote myself from the other thread here:
Here's a lovely anecdote: I use an Eyefinity (three-monitor) setup on my gaming rig. It's a general rule of thumb that (compared to a single 1080p monitor) adding an additional 1080p monitor will reduce your performance by about 30%. A third 1080p monitor will reduce your performance to about 50% that of a single-screen setup.
Now consider, the Nexus Prime has about 2.4 times the number of pixels as the Nexus S. If the same formula as a desktop GPU holds true for mobiles, we could expect about a 40% loss in 3D performance. Now the GPU has been clocked up about 92%. It's throughput is now approaching double that of the Galaxy S, when it needed only make up a 40% defecit. Of course if you consider diminishing returns from clockspeed scaling, the [email protected] should perform at 720p about as well as it did at 200MHz and 480p. /shrug
The usual disclaimer: this was all conjecture on my part.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Like I said, that's just my theory, and it's got no real grounding (since I haven't used the new Nexus yet.)
Hope you guys are right, of course I'm not going to hold you to it, I just would like to have seen fresh architecture.
If we get a kernel, or I should say when we get a kernel that allows overclocking, does that only OC the CPU cores or will it OC the GPU even more?
Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
And while you guys are skeptical of a gpu more powerful than the Geforce on the Tegra 2, which has its own games zone dedicated to it's well-known-to-be-awesome-or-atleast-marketed-well performance, I'm rocking an Adreno 200 powering a thoroughly shattered-yet-still-working-perfectly 4.3" WVGA standard LCD display. That powervr is probably more powerful than my Geforce3 ti 200 on my desktop.
I need a refresh.
Andreno200 < Adreno205 < [email protected] < [email protected] < or = Adreno 220
The Andreno 205 is 2X the 200, but the SGX is around 1.5X Adreno205, 220 is 2X Andreno205...So [email protected] is similar to Andreno 220 at same res, but slower at 720P?
I think it's stupid that people think it's weak because:
* It isn't brand new
* They've never seen it clocked like it is and/or matched with the OMAP processor it's matched with.
* Have never played a game optimized for it
* Can't name a game/movie/program that will run on something else but not the combination mentioned above
* Assume that superficial benchmark results mean much in real world applications
The entire conversation is like talking about a way to make your race car's top speed go from 210mph to 230mph on a track that is designed to make it impossible to go faster than 175mph.
For the last time, this is NOT the same GPU that is in the SGS.
Dragooon123 said:
I am presuming the GPU is clocked all the way up to 384Mhz like the chip's specification says, if not then curses to Google.
TBH I believe it'll be fine, although it is an old GPU it is still quite a powerful one and can handle almost every game fine. Tegra 2 is generally a weaker GPU than SGX540 @ 200 and can still manage games just fine at 1280 x 800, I don't see why the SGX540 @ 384 can't do that. Although we'll never know for sure until we get the phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You got it wrong there dude, SGX 540 @304 Mhz is equal or +1 to 2 % faster then the Geforce ULP GPU @800x480( Note that this can be because of the Dual channel memory the 4430 soc uses (optimus 3d)). Also the ULP Geforce does not work the same way as the SGX. Geforce ULP has the tendency to not get major performance hits when resolution gets bigger hence why all tablets use Tegra 2(Got a source for this however cant find it right now), it was Nvidias plan all along to grab the Tablet market.
I hope the extra Mhz helps the sgx 540 to perform well on the galaxy nexus when it comes to Games and so on. If it doesn't there are tricks to bypass things and get good performance in gaming however it up to google/samsung to implement them
I'm looking forward to try the phone myself when it hits the stores, and hope it'll be ok...
taxas said:
You got it wrong there dude, SGX 540 @304 Mhz is equal or +1 to 2 % faster then the Geforce ULP GPU @800x480( Note that this can be because of the Dual channel memory the 4430 soc uses (optimus 3d)). Also the ULP Geforce does not work the same way as the SGX. Geforce ULP has the tendency to not get major performance hits when resolution gets bigger hence why all tablets use Tegra 2(Got a source for this however cant find it right now), it was Nvidias plan all along to grab the Tablet market.
I hope the extra Mhz helps the sgx 540 to perform well on the galaxy nexus when it comes to Games and so on. If it doesn't there are tricks to bypass things and get good performance in gaming however it up to google/samsung to implement them
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That might be the case but I saw SGX540 outperforming tegra at 720p, so even then at a tablet resolution the SGX540 doesn't fail to perform. Regardless, the gpu in galaxy nexus is nothing short of high end and should perform fine.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
...and Tegra isn't that great either!
Regardless of whether the phone is fast or not, there is the overwhelming feeling that it could have been better. I think most people wanted a 543MP2 or if it were possible, the 543MP4+ (it isn't) on th Vita.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
There is no soc out yet apart from the A5 with the 543mp2, the lead time on a soc is huge, i mean they were designing the OMAP 4460 back in 2009 or earlier (first mentions in white papers of the 4460 where in Feb 2009) but i am sure they where working on it before then.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
veyka said:
There is no soc out yet apart from the A5 with the 543mp2, the lead time on a soc is huge, i mean they were designing the OMAP 4460 back in 2009 or earlier (first mentions in white papers of the 4460 where in Feb 2009) but i am sure they where working on it before then.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True. We know that the new A15s have been in development since at least 2009.
The Omap 5430 has a 544MPx; we don't know how many cores.
I suppose there was no alternative except the Exynos?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
sauron0101 said:
True. We know that the new A15s have been in development since at least 2009.
The Omap 5430 has a 544MPx; we don't know how many cores.
I suppose there as no alternative except the Exynos?
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well there is Exynos, OMAP or snapdragon for current generation soc's.
OMAP and exynos are S9 cores. Snapdragon is kinda A8 with extra SIMD performance.
That's generally why snapdragon gets out performed clock for clock by A9+neon designs (that's why a 1.5ghz snapdragon eg sensation xl gets or tmob USA sgs2 is out performed by a 1.2ghz exynos.
I am more happy with OMAP than snapdragon that's for sure.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
A lot of people seem to bemoaning the fact that this phone doesn't have a 1.5Ghz Exynos 4212 or even the 4210. The big worry is that the chip may not run well at 1280x720, hence the "lag" we saw in the leak videos.
There is disagreement on if the Mali 400 or the SGX 540 is better (at this clock anyways), but there seems to be a consensus that the Exynos is a faster CPU than the OMAP 4. I suppose that a few were hoping for a ARM Cortex A15 with a 2-core SGX 554. No such a SOC currently exists sadly.
I am also hopeful that there have been some software optimizations in Ice Cream that could improve performance.
Part of me wonders if Google should do what Apple did - get its own semiconductor design department and outsource the actual fab. It seems to be offering Apple a competitive advantage of sorts.
my thoughts are that i don't care.
eric b
veyka said:
Well there is Exynos, OMAP or snapdragon for current generation soc's.
OMAP and exynos are S9 cores. Snapdragon is kinda A8 with extra SIMD performance.
That's generally why snapdragon gets out performed clock for clock by A9+neon designs (that's why a 1.5ghz snapdragon eg sensation xl gets or tmob USA sgs2 is out performed by a 1.2ghz exynos.
I am more happy with OMAP than snapdragon that's for sure.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Agreed. Better Omap 4 than Scorpion.
Apparently there are also a few people who were hoping for a Tegra 3. It might have been doable (and I stress the might), as the new Asus Transformer Prime is rumoured to carry Kal El.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
TBH the GPU and CPU are more than capable off handling the gui, its not like they are pulling out a fully 3D gui, even if the resolution is bumped the hardware should still be able handle it without breaking a sweat. It's only the games where the doubt arises.
sauron0101 said:
Agreed. Better Omap 4 than Scorpion.
Apparently there are also a few people who were hoping for a Tegra 3. It might have been doable (and I stress the might), as the new Asus Transformer Prime is rumoured to carry Kal El.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am not sure if kal el is ready yet, i dont think the transformer prime is due till q1 2012, and I'm sure if the smartphone Tegra 3 is ready as well.
And Tegra 2 doesn't even have neon!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
I posted this in the XDA general section not too long ago and didn't get too many replies, I was hoping I could get some more info here.
"I've been doing quite a bit of research on GPU's and CPU's in phone's/tablets lately. And I have a few unanswered questions that I can't seem to find an answer for.
1: What's the best chipset available for mobile phones and tablets right now? This link cleared quite a bit up for me, it does a fairly indepth comparison for both GPU and CPU performance between the Qualcomm S4, Tegra 3, OMAP 4470, and the Exynos 4212. And I dont want the 'Well this is better because it has more jiggahertz". Shut up, that's not what I need. I need something more indepth. If studies on individual GPU comparison can be provided, please drop a link. I'd like to know these things very well in depth.
2: What individual GPU is currently the best? I realize the Ipad3 came out with with a graphics chip that's supposedly superior to the Xbox/PS3's (which is bogus). However I take anything Apple says with a grain of salt, they're notorious for shooting flaming BS out of their rear. However based on the little bit of searching I've done, the Adreno GPU's seem to be ahead of their time, as well as the PowerVR series seen in apple products. I previously thought the Mali 400 GPU in the Exynos chipset was one of the best, but apparently it's outdated. Again, links to tests/studies/comparisons would be appreciated.
3: What's the deal with the Tegra 3 GPU? It's a 12 core set, but it's constantly outperformed by quad core GPU's, even dual core Adreno GPU's perform better than whatever is inside the the Tegra 3, the Kal-El or whatever it's called. The Power VR's M4 gpu in the Ipad (as said as it is to say) destroys pretty much everything else out there. What's the deal.
If you're able to answer any one of these, even exclusively, that would be appreciated. I just like knowledge "
The Mali mp400 won't be used next exynos .... the nvidia is inferior due to number of instructions per core per cycle didn't change they just brought more cores...... adreno has proven middle of the road but better then tegra and powervr in the latest is the best to see the market the Mali mt series isn't in any products yet.... but I'm hopeful
Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk
The following article is not even remotely related to E4GT (or Samsung for that matter) but I found it very interesting... There's a strong possibility of Intel dominating all mobile processors starting 2014 - 2015 ...
http://liliputing.com/2012/04/intel-pushes-atom-chip-for-android-devices.html
EDIT: I just noticed that the website (or maybe the user) removed the second post that I copied below.
You can skip the actual article, but read the comments (from user CyberGusa) :
While as for what advantages Intel can start to offer, it's what Chippy from UMPCPortal would call High Dynamic Range Computing (HDRC). Unlike ARM, Intel is fully capable of scaling from the mobile range to the full desktop range.
This will be especially true if Windows 8 is successful, as x86 can offer legacy support where ARM can't, and can provide the higher range performance that ARM is still many years away from being able to provide as their high end next gen offerings will only rival the present gen Intel ATOMs.
MS in particular is patenting a way to easily switch between CPU's when docking. So could make a Windows system literally scale from mobile to laptop and even desktop by just docking it.
The closest ARM based devices will get to this scaling is switching from a ARM to higher end Intel or AMD chip when docked but this will also involve switching from a mobile OS to a desktop one to fully take advantage of the switch.
Though Google is making progress towards making Android a more desktop friendly OS, like with Webtop and similar UI optimizations that take over when docked that would allow Android to take advantage of such scaling but would still be more limited than switching to a true desktop OS that isn't designed with the limits that a mobile OS will have to deal with no matter how the UI is altered and optimized,
Failure of Windows 8 though could well give ARM the advantage.
Intel though is hedging its bets with support for Android and of course the Tizen project. They already bought a company last year that provides them the option to easily switch between two OS instantly, without rebooting.
While they are compensating for what advantages ARM has over them by keeping ahead of the manufacturing shrink curve by at least a year.
So while ARM is heading towards 32 and 28nm productions, Intel is heading toward 22nm and that combined with the architectural updates could potentially start giving Intel the edge.
Mind also that there have been problems with the 28nm production and Intel has strategically not helped ARM with this issue. So time table for many gives them limited time for market penetration before Intel will be able to come out with their own 22nm chips and 14nm is scheduled for 2014.
Also consider that it's not the general consumer market at stake here but also the embedded and server markets, which could give Intel more of a advantage considering that x86 hardware can run pretty much any OS but ARM is still limited to OS already optimized for it.
While ARM is also depending on Windows 8 being a success to provide it a mainstream desktop OS to provide the ability to start competing in the traditional PC markets, and thus would also be negatively effected if Windows 8 fails.
So while ARM is looking good for the rest of this year, it remains to be seen if that will remain true next year and Intel should never be underestimated.
More comments from the same user (CyberGusa):
Right now Intel only has dual core in their higher end ATOM lineup and up to 8 cores for the server market, neither of which are competing with ARM yet.
The upcoming dual core Medfield is mainly just planned for the Tablet market and shouldn't effect the Smart Phone market.
So the main advantage of ARM solutions right now is that they're much more mainstream for the mobile market, with Intel only beginning to compete for the first time. Much like how Nvidia when they first introduced the Tegra and shows slow beginnings are not indicative of how they will do in a year or two.
While as already mentioned the Intel ATOM's are still using pretty much the same architecture as when it was first introduced to the market in 2008. This is like comparing the Cortex A15 to the older Cortex A8 based ARM chips and having the Cortex A8 solution still holds its own.
So having it even come in the same ball park is actually a testament to how much ARM still has to catch up for the higher performance range they're only now entering.
Mind beating the ATOM isn't really hard, as that's the bottom of Intel's chip offerings, with the Core i-Series offering multiples times better performance that ARM is still years away from even getting close to.
While the next gen ATOM's coming out next year are Intel's equivalent of a A15 update to the ATOM. Introducing many of the technology they developed for Ivy Bridge to the ATOM.
Like Intel's Tri-Gate Transistors, a HD 4000 based GMA, putting the entire lineup under SoC, offering a wider range of processor configurations, finally adding Out Of Order Processing to the ATOM, among many other improvements.
While ARM manufacturers are having problems, the delay in moving to 28nm being the most outstanding right now, which is why many are still opting for 32nm. Especially those who have yet to deal with the increased problem of power leakage as they continue to shrink the FAB.
Even Apple is still on 45nm with their latest iPad and had to increase the battery size by 70% to compensate for the increased power consumption of the retina display and the quad core GPU's requires.
So they may up their game but it's going to get harder for them here on out as ARM was designed for low power and low performance and need time to evolve to be able to apply itself to higher end applications.
While Intel already dominates the higher end and just wants to start penetrating into the lower end and that's going to be arguably easier for them to do than for ARM to keep on increasing its performance.
Mind, ARM is still a 32bit architecture and only recently introduced designs for 64bit. This means they're still years away from going fully 64bit and for now we're only going to see enhancements like 64bit memory management.
While it's not easy to continue providing increasing performance and still keep costs and power consumption low. Also ARM customizations has the down side of increased hardware fragmentation.
So it's not like Intel doesn't stand a chance, it's just going to take awhile to see if they can really start competing in the mobile market or have to stay in the higher end PC market.
Comment as you see fit, and keep in mind these are just opinions, not facts !!!
First...
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Even if Intel is not on top by then they will make sure the bar is set high. Good read.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
Good read. If Intel is truly interested in advancing the mobile field, I can see them doing big things in the future. At the very least, the competition they bring to the market will keep everyone else on their toes.
Transmission sent from a Galaxy S II, CODENAME style.
intel will show other processor companies how its done. their technology is quality when compared to AMD. but AMD tries to be more innovative. in the end i went with expensive intel to build my computer
Competition premotes innovation. I have read that the next few generations of processors are already developed but they only release one at a time to guarantee profits and to not outrun what they have. So, with more chips in competition this will help us see better processors faster. It will also lower cost. So, a phone might cost the same 4 years from now instead of more. I personally think it is a great idea. Even if there chips weren't much better they still will help. It is a win win for the consumer. Great article!
Sent from Team KC's founding member HTC Evo 4G LTE.
Oh and Intel is known for making low battery consumption processors. Can't wait for that by them making small chips only nanometers big
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
kc_exactly said:
Competition premotes innovation. I have read that the next few generations of processors are already developed but they only release one at a time to guarantee profits and to not outrun what they have. So, with more chips in competition this will help us see better processors faster. It will also lower cost. So, a phone might cost the same 4 years from now instead of more. I personally think it is a great idea. Even if there chips weren't much better they still will help. It is a win win for the consumer. Great article!
Sent from Team KC's founding member HTC Evo 4G LTE.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my personal opinion, I think Intel does make outstanding processors, but their marketing skills are not customer friendly. Take for example the numerous options for the speed of a processor they sell...
let's say the new processor X came out with speeds of 1.6 GHz, and then 3 months later, they come out with the same processor X but with improved speeds of 2.2 GHz at 40% increased cost... and after another 3 months they release the Black Edition processor X with the ultimate speed of 2.4 GHz at double and even triple the price of the original !!!
Do you honestly think they will redesign the production line just to make the new and improved Black Edition processor X ??? I don't think so... In my opinion, they're probably selling the exact same processor X from the beginning to the end, but they slow down the speed in the early versions and they gradually release to full potential ... In this way, they sell the same processor (which cuts down the design/engineering and production costs) yet they stay very profitable and ahead of the market curve by announcing an improved product every 3 months !!!
In other words, the same processor X will sell as follows:
1st release) Speed minus 40% (no overclock) ... "Regular" price
2nd release) Speed minus 30% (no overclock) ... "Regular" price + 15%
...................................................................................
...................................................................................
Black Edition) Speed and overclock unlocked ... "Regular" price + 300%
The worst thing they ever did (starting with Core processors, such as i3, i5...) was to incorporate the video card into the processor, and to lock out other video card vendors from the system ... In this way, they sell the processor AND the video card at the same time, and there's no more competition at the same time !!! They call this bull **** integration something like "system on a chip" for better power consumption ... WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME ANYONE LOOKED FORWARD TO INSTALLING AND BENCHMARKING INTEL VIDEO CARDS IN THEIR COMPUTERS ??? Why do you think AMD bought ATI video card manufacturer ?
And you think it wouldn't get any worst ? Recently Intel started to sell their TOP OF THE LINE PROCESSORS without their video integrated cards ... That means that us, the consumers, have to PAY EXTRA FOR LESS PRODUCT just to get away from their marketing schemes !!!
In the end, we probably pay "regular" price when processor X is introduced, then it's all profits from there on for Intel.
Now back to cell phones ... think of the same scenario applied to your phone with Intel Inside ...
The above are just my personal opinions on Intel ... tell me if I'm wrong ! Say thanks if you believe I helped you open your eyes !
peryp9 said:
In my personal opinion, I think Intel does make outstanding processors, but their marketing skills are not customer friendly. Take for example the numerous options for the speed of a processor they sell...
let's say the new processor X came out with speeds of 1.6 GHz, and then 3 months later, they come out with the same processor X but with improved speeds of 2.2 GHz at 40% increased cost... and after another 3 months they release the Black Edition processor X with the ultimate speed of 2.4 GHz at double and even triple the price of the original !!!
Do you honestly think they will redesign the production line just to make the new and improved Black Edition processor X ??? I don't think so... In my opinion, they're probably selling the exact same processor X from the beginning to the end, but they slow down the speed in the early versions and they gradually release to full potential ... In this way, they sell the same processor (which cuts down the design/engineering and production costs) yet they stay very profitable and ahead of the market curve by announcing an improved product every 3 months !!!
In other words, the same processor X will sell as follows:
1st release) Speed minus 40% (no overclock) ... "Regular" price
2nd release) Speed minus 30% (no overclock) ... "Regular" price + 15%
...................................................................................
...................................................................................
Black Edition) Speed and overclock unlocked ... "Regular" price + 300%
The worst thing they ever did (starting with Core processors, such as i3, i5...) was to incorporate the video card into the processor, and to lock out other video card vendors from the system ... In this way, they sell the processor AND the video card at the same time, and there's no more competition at the same time !!! They call this bull **** integration something like "system on a chip" for better power consumption ... WHEN WAS THE FIRST TIME ANYONE LOOKED FORWARD TO INSTALLING AND BENCHMARKING INTEL VIDEO CARDS IN THEIR COMPUTERS ??? Why do you think AMD bought ATI video card manufacturer ?
And you think it wouldn't get any worst ? Recently Intel started to sell their TOP OF THE LINE PROCESSORS without their video integrated cards ... That means that us, the consumers, have to PAY EXTRA FOR LESS PRODUCT just to get away from their marketing schemes !!!
In the end, we probably pay "regular" price when processor X is introduced, then it's all profits from there on for Intel.
Now back to cell phones ... think of the same scenario applied to your phone with Intel Inside ...
The above are just my personal opinions on Intel ... tell me if I'm wrong ! Say thanks if you believe I helped you open your eyes !
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Since when Intel has Black Edition CPU?
And about locking out other video card vendors from the system, are you sure you know what you talking about?
locoboi187 said:
intel will show other processor companies how its done. their technology is quality when compared to AMD. but AMD tries to be more innovative. in the end i went with expensive intel to build my computer
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Intel can school everyone else on microprocessor development, manufacturing, budget, evolution...but...x86 is known power hungry. I'm sure if they keep reducing their process (which they will) they can get x86 to match arm, energy consumption wise. But, on the same token, ARM will (WILL) get developed to a point where they will match x86 performance wise.
It's anybodies race. It's early (yes, very early) in the mobile computing game. Intel could very well pull through with it's very refined architecture....that's also regarded as crufty as fnck. The ARM architecture could very well also be refined to the point where they get as many operations per clock...both neck-and-neck on power efficiency.
All said, I'm both excited and doubtful in intel's ability. Microsoft is becoming irrelevant at an amazing speed...perhaps it's intel's turn as well. Wintel? Armdroid? A mix of the two?
Exciting times. Bring on the competition.
Intel never had something called "black editions". They have processors known as "Extreme editions" which are the highest quality bin CPU's which did not get chosen for the Xeon server cpus. These costs $999.
The next batch would be the second highest binned ones which would costs ~$500. Then the next are the average ones which passed all the tests but wasn't as high quality as the higher end models. These are the $200-300 ones.
The rest probably get thrown out.
Now the their integrated solution is a step foward in providing all in one solutions. They did not locking out video card makers who make discrete chipsets which absolutely crushes the integrated HD 2000/3000's. What makes these integrated solutions so attractive is the fact the their intel sync (?) encoding and other stuff is literally mind blowing.
You probably don't even know what you're talking about... like seriously? BE's are AMD's.... video makers are mainly dedicated with PCI-e interfaces....
*Edit*
Intel innovates crazily when pushed heavily. AMD punished Intel for its pentium 4 and forced them either step up or be irrelevant and stepped up they did... conroe... nehalam... clarksfield...sandy bridge.. ivy bridge...
I have no reason to believe if Arm shoved into intel into a corner like AMD did, they wouldn't pounce like they did on amd... let's just say.. if history has taught us anything... I' would feel really bad for ARM due to intels insane budgets, R&D, and advanced chipmaking facilities..
lilotimz said:
Intel never had something called "black editions". They have processors known as "Extreme editions" which are the highest quality bin CPU's which did not get chosen for the Xenon's server cpus. These costs $999.
The next batch would be the second highest binned ones , which would costs ~$500. Then the next are the average ones which did passed all the tests but wasn't as high quality as the higher end models. These are the $200-300 ones.
The rest probably get thrown out.
Now the their integrated solution is a step foward in providing all in one solutions. Not locking out video card makers who make discrete chipsets which absolutely crushes the integrated HD 2000/3000's. What makes these integrated solutions so attractive is the fact the their intel sync (?) encoding and other stuff is literally mind blowing.
You probably don't even know what you're talking about... like seriously? BE's are AMD's.... video makers are mainly dedicated with PCI-e interfaces....
*Edit*
Intel innovates crazily when pushed heavily. AMD punished Intel for its pentium 4 and forced them either step up or be irrelevant and stepped up they did... conroe... nehalam... clarksfield...sandy bridge.. ivy bridge...
I have no reason to believe if Arm shoved into intel into a corner like AMD did... let's just say.. if history has taught us anything... I' would feel really bad for ARM due to intels insane budgets, R&D, and advanced chipmaking facilities..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Intel Black Edition ... Intel Extreme Edition ... the idea was "top of the line". Look at the point I'm trying to make, not the wrong words I used.
Intel may claim that their integrated graphics are great for many thing, but look at the larger picture... pay premium dollar for the ability to use the video card of your choice !!
EDIT: The cheapest processor comes with integrated graphics, while the most expensive one comes without it. I remember when I bought my laptop a few years back (1st generation Intel i5). I was reading about Intel not allowing manufacturers to put other cards in order to bypass the integrated one. In the end, I bought this Intel i5 laptop with NVidia GeForce 325M with Optimus. Check to see how Optimus works with Intel's integrated card and you'll understand what I meant in my previous post.
In the end, the main point I'm trying to get across, is that Intel's products are great (except their video cards) but their marketing scheme will hurt the consumers if they take control of the mobile processor.
All the info by the commenter not withstanding, I have a hard time taking anyone who uses "effect" instead of "affect" seriously.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium
I'm loving my yoga 11, however at times I just feel that Windows 8 RT slows down especially when multi-tasking. Since our Tegra's are clocked at 1.3Ghz and the same Chip in android devices runs at 1.5, with overclocked kernels available to run at 1.8-2.0Ghz, what are the chances we see this type of hack/development come to windows 8 RT? Im not sure the security obstacles that would present, but haven't seen much on this to even know if someone has looked into this or actively working on method to do so.
Thanks!
I have been thinking about this as well. Im sure it can be done, but by who? thats the question. Im sure we can easily squeeze some more power out of our device. Good luck to whoever spearheads this
ej_424 said:
I'm loving my yoga 11, however at times I just feel that Windows 8 RT slows down especially when multi-tasking. Since our Tegra's are clocked at 1.3Ghz and the same Chip in android devices runs at 1.5, with overclocked kernels available to run at 1.8-2.0Ghz, what are the chances we see this type of hack/development come to windows 8 RT? Im not sure the security obstacles that would present, but haven't seen much on this to even know if someone has looked into this or actively working on method to do so.
Thanks!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The tegra isnt overclocked to 1.5 in android devices. There are actually 3 models of the Tegra 3 at different clock speeds. The one used in the RT is the lowest model (1.2GHz) overclocked to 1.3GHz already. I believe the other models are 1.4 and 1.6 with a few ROMs adding about 100MHz overclock as needed. 2ghz seems extreme though.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
The tegra isnt overclocked to 1.5 in android devices. There are actually 3 models of the Tegra 3 at different clock speeds. The one used in the RT is the lowest model (1.2GHz) overclocked to 1.3GHz already. I believe the other models are 1.4 and 1.6 with a few ROMs adding about 100MHz overclock as needed. 2ghz seems extreme though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've thought about this as well but have always been too scared to ask. Windows is obviously not foreign to processor scaling and power management, perhaps there's a way to make a custom power plan or something. Maybe the way to approach overlooking is not 'like' Android, but 'like' regular old windows. I have no idea and am a noob, but I thought I'd just toss that out there.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
The tegra isnt overclocked to 1.5 in android devices. There are actually 3 models of the Tegra 3 at different clock speeds. The one used in the RT is the lowest model (1.2GHz) overclocked to 1.3GHz already. I believe the other models are 1.4 and 1.6 with a few ROMs adding about 100MHz overclock as needed. 2ghz seems extreme though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html
Its support for Windows RT is still under development. It isn't overclocked on the Surface RT/Vivo Tab but underclocked to compensate for the missing support for the fifth battery saver core.
We should expect the performance and battery to get better as they iron this out :laugh:
Actually, for those who have gotten Surface RT since launch... I bet most of you have already experience better performance after each monthly firmware update
LastBattle said:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html
Its support for Windows RT is still under development. It isn't overclocked on the Surface RT/Vivo Tab but underclocked to compensate for the missing support for the fifth battery saver core.
We should expect the performance and battery to get better as they iron this out :laugh:
Actually, for those who have gotten Surface RT since launch... I bet most of you have already experience better performance after each monthly firmware update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a very good news indeed and we should then probably be able to run the Tablet at 1.6Ghz Quad core instead of the actual 1.3Ghz quad core :good:
LastBattle said:
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html
Its support for Windows RT is still under development. It isn't overclocked on the Surface RT/Vivo Tab but underclocked to compensate for the missing support for the fifth battery saver core.
We should expect the performance and battery to get better as they iron this out :laugh:
Actually, for those who have gotten Surface RT since launch... I bet most of you have already experience better performance after each monthly firmware update
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No where in that link does it mention it being underclocked. The 1.4ghz single core/1.3 quad core is a feature of the entire tegra product line, not jsut the surface RT.
It does mention that the 5th battery saver core doesnt work on windows RT though, that will help.
Interesting: There is a "~MHz" key in regedit under local machine -> Hardware -> Description -> System -> Central processor -> 0, 1, 2, or 3. It is set to 1300, but changing it doesn't do anything and it reverts upon reboot.
Even if we can't overclock this thing, is there a way to resurrect the "High Performance" power plan that disappeared in RT? One that would set the CPU to 100% by default, all the time?
Any update or more info on this?
bigsnack said:
Any update or more info on this?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1
hope to see a 'high performance' feature on the pwr mgnment as well, especially when we are hooking up RT onto the power line and battery life is not so much of an issue in this case.
Rogerngks said:
hope to see a 'high performance' feature on the pwr mgnment as well, especially when we are hooking up RT onto the power line and battery life is not so much of an issue in this case.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iirc, you can still set your cpu states through powercfg in the command line. I might be wrong though.
Is the 5th power saving core just disabled or not present on our hardware?
bigsnack said:
Is the 5th power saving core just disabled or not present on our hardware?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to NVidia's website, Tegra 3 for RT is "still under development." (http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html) It also lists it as only being quad-core on Windows 8 devices.
I had personally reeealy hoped that one of the highlights for RT 8.1 was going to be reworked support for the 5th core, bringing performance and battery life improvements. Alas, it was not to be.
jtg007 said:
According to NVidia's website, Tegra 3 for RT is "still under development." (http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html) It also lists it as only being quad-core on Windows 8 devices.
I had personally reeealy hoped that one of the highlights for RT 8.1 was going to be reworked support for the 5th core, bringing performance and battery life improvements. Alas, it was not to be.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I cant see how the 5th core would bring a performance improvement. The system cannot use the 5th core as an actual 5th core, it shuts most of the other cores down to sleep when it needs the 5th which is also an incredibly low performance core, its just for power saving really, or simply hopping around the UI and checking your email, NVidia claim that android can also play video while running purely on the 5th core although this never happened on my Nexus 7 without any other apps running, it carried on running using 1 of the main cores for that.
Would definitely boost the battery life though and thats not something to be ignored. But there are few times where that 5th core really comes into its own, perhaps it just wasn't worth the time for MS to add companion core support to windows RT 8.1 when not all RT tablets use the tegra.
SixSixSevenSeven said:
I cant see how the 5th core would bring a performance improvement. The system cannot use the 5th core as an actual 5th core, it shuts most of the other cores down to sleep when it needs the 5th which is also an incredibly low performance core, its just for power saving really, or simply hopping around the UI and checking your email, NVidia claim that android can also play video while running purely on the 5th core although this never happened on my Nexus 7 without any other apps running, it carried on running using 1 of the main cores for that.
Would definitely boost the battery life though and thats not something to be ignored. But there are few times where that 5th core really comes into its own, perhaps it just wasn't worth the time for MS to add companion core support to windows RT 8.1 when not all RT tablets use the tegra.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I always thought that the 5th core could run simultaneously with the other 4 to manage background tasks, etc, thus leaving less side work for the others. I could be wrong though. Also, I know of only one RT tab to NOT use Tegra (Dell), and it was the first to drop price and flop.
Anyways, the exciting thing about kexec/Linux prospects is that if we were to get in, there are a lot of Android and Linux versions that run on Tegra 3, which hopefully means we wouldn't have too tough of a time getting at that 5th core working then.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
Well the Samsung Ativ Tab RT is also using the S4 cpu, but that device had a limited release from what it seems like in North America. I too was under the assumption that th3 5th core could be used at the same time with the other cores, which could free up power for other things. Like the 5th core would be used for the low power task, while at the same the the other 4 cores are being used for a more process heavy task.
It would be interesting to have Android or Linux running in a dual boot situation on our RT devices, or if even possible do what Samsung is doing, and have it emulated in Windows so you can run apps side by side.
No, the 5th core is not an actual 5th core. The idea is you have 4 full blown cores at 1.2, 1.4 or 1.6ghz depending on the tegra model (and then the tegra can overclock automatically to 1.3, 1.5 or 1.7), thats quite power hungry really. But as CPU usage falls the tegra shuts a few cores off, if the system cant benefit from all 4 cores being active it will drop to 3, then 2 and then 1. Sometimes even that 1 core running at 1.2ghz is compartively power hungry, so the tegra shuts the final core down and fires up the companion core which I think runs around the 700MHz range, its slow at any rate, its also built optimised purely for power consumption over performance. Idea is you can go from a full quad core chip when you need the performance but then when the device is idling you can switch over to the companion core and shut the main 4 all off and save alot of power.
NVidia claim that the companion core combined with the hardware video acceleration of the tegra should be able to play HD videos on its own. That doesnt really seem to happen outside of the lab. But when you lock the screen on your android device it often jumps into companion core mode, you can browse around the android home screen and use a few lightweight apps on the companion core no problem, and when it does begin to struggle the tegra just has to skip over to its main core and gradually bring the other 3 main cores online as it needs them.
It never has the companion and main cores on in a state able to be used by the operating system simultaneously though.
Samsungs so called octa-core chips also do the same. They arent really octa core chips, in reality they are a quad core cortex A15 chip and a quad core lower clock speed cortex A9 chip (possibly even A7) on the same piece of silicon, when CPU load is high it runs as a quad core A15, when it doesnt need so much performance it shuts down the A15 and swaps for the A9, the 2 CPU's are near separate and at any one time the chip is only running as a single quad core processor not an octacore. Similar to the companion core design this can lead to a massive boost in battery life. In both A15 and A9 modes the processor is capable of shutting down individual cores as need be.
Tegra may well be the chip in all main tablets, but when microsoft first started working on windows RT there were meant to be qualcomm snapdragon, NVidia tegra and texas instruments OMAP devices all coming to market so of course microsoft at the time needed RT to run on all 3. The original plan was that there would be56 3rd party manufacturers manufacturing RT tablets, 2 per chip vendor except TI. Originally qualcomm partnered with HP and Samsung, NVidia with Lenovo and Asus and Toshiba with TI In the end TI dropped out and shortly after downscaled OMAP production (I think it has completely stopped with the exception of existing contracts now, or at least chips intended for tablet usage have been, they had a few industrial chips under the OMAP branding that might still be available, their ARM based microcontroller and DSP lines are still going fine), TI took Toshiba with them. Of course by the time TI dropped out there were already running builds of RT. HP dropped out and were replaced by dell. Acer were slated to be joining the program but didn't, when MS unveiled the surface that killed it for acer.
Another limitation is that Windows RT is essentially just an ARM port of windows 8, windows 8 and the NT kernel in general didnt already have support for the companion core or similar tech, it would be pointless adding it to the base NT kernel as hardly any devices use it and it would probably lead to issues introducing it only for tegra.
Surely Microsoft can see that getting the maximum out of the CPUs in their own devices is a good thing? I get that they have to support a few ARM architectures, but there's no reason why Windows RT can't be optimised with a specific update for the Surface?
bydandie said:
Surely Microsoft can see that getting the maximum out of the CPUs in their own devices is a good thing? I get that they have to support a few ARM architectures, but there's no reason why Windows RT can't be optimised with a specific update for the Surface?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It would be a maintenance nightmare. You know the way everyone *****es and moans about the non existent android fragmentation (or at the very least hugely over exaggerated)? Now apply that to windows RT, its already a struggling platform. You don't want more ammo for the opposition, the extra effort probably isn't worth it. Under sleep mode or single core mode (non companion, RT will scale back to single core non companion happily) the battery life is good enough, companion would be nice, but non essential. Companion core would need to be supported at a kernel level. It would be a nightmare to keep one version of the kernel (if you don't know what a kernel is, consider it the chassis of a car or the foundations of a house, its the very core of the operating system) for each tablet.