Develop Bugs

WP7 minimum requirements

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.

Will future versions feature multi-core processors??

Hi,
Not to long ago samsung released their new dual core processor "Orion" with has some amazing specs. They says it will be up for mass production in frist half of 2011.
Both qualcomm and lg has also new smartphone processors coming next year.
Will future windows phone 7 devices feature this? The snapdragon in the current devices is kinda outdated...
My ultimate windows phone 7 phone would feature:
512 meg ram or more
at least 1GHz Orion or similar dual core processor
800 x 480 or greater super-amoled multitouch screen
4" screen
Sleak design in aluminium

Yeah.
WP7 will get put onto all the new software as its needs to compete with Android and the iPhone.

Although the 1GHz snapdragon is a little outdated now i think some people don't realise that it is still a beast of a processor, and WP7 has been specifically designed to run perfectly on it as it was the minimum requirement for Hardware Manufacturers don't forget.
Having Qualcomms "Still in Development" 1.5 Dual Core inside a device would be fantastic, but it's not going to happen anytime soon (2012 at the earliest) and for the time being that doesn't bother me the slightest as my HD7 runs smooth as anything with what it's got. I doubt a dual-core processor would increase the usuability of any of the WP7 Phones, the only thing it would do is reduce loading times of App's/Games/etc, which is currently only seconds anyway.

Agreed, I believe in Q2 2011, the processors will finally be available for manufactures
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Audio said:
Although the 1GHz snapdragon is a little outdated now i think some people don't realise that it is still a beast of a processor, and WP7 has been specifically designed to run perfectly on it as it was the minimum requirement for Hardware Manufacturers don't forget.
Having Qualcomms "Still in Development" 1.5 Dual Core inside a device would be fantastic, but it's not going to happen anytime soon (2012 at the earliest) and for the time being that doesn't bother me the slightest as my HD7 runs smooth as anything with what it's got. I doubt a dual-core processor would increase the usuability of any of the WP7 Phones, the only thing it would do is reduce loading times of App's/Games/etc, which is currently only seconds anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
True but what about Samsungs Orion then?
The other reason why im waiting for a New wp7 device is the lack of exchangeable storage on all devices...

my only concern is about the compatibility of the Phones with LTE technology as Verizon's LTE network will be up in my area by the end of the year.

i'm waiting 1G ram with using nvidia Tegra 2 cpu + 5-7 point mutil touch

CE7 supports multi-core ARM CPUs. There are plans to move WP7 to CE7 (it's currently on a CE6/7 variant) later on. That should happen before dual core chips are a reality so there's no reason Microsoft won't move to it. I would guess that would come with a major software and hardware spec update, maybe WP8. There's no point in tossing the current WP7 on much more powerful hardware because the software won't take advantage of it. Games and apps will still be targeted at the 1ghz SnapDragon so basically things will just load faster.
People really need to get out of this hardware spec mentality. It doesn't matter if the phone had a 100mhz CPU if it performs well. I know that's hard if you're a techy but you have to focus on the end result, not the pieces that make it happen.
hkcyber said:
i'm waiting 1G ram with using nvidia Tegra 2 cpu + 5-7 point mutil touch
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Is this for real? Why would you need 5-7 touch points? Can you even fit 7 fingers on a 4in screen?

I sure as hell hope that Microsoft won't allow this on Pad devices.
Sure the idea with Pad devices might be good, but not with an OS built for a 4" display.

Sir. Haxalot said:
I sure as hell hope that Microsoft won't allow this on Pad devices.
Sure the idea with Pad devices might be good, but not with an OS built for a 4" display.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah, if MS comes out with a pad, I hope they alter the OS or make a new one optimized for a pad sized screen.

[INFO] Intel's pushing for Android ...

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

Why octa-core?

The galaxy tab s products that are available to me have an octa-core processor, with the high speed cores being 1.9ghz. I can't really understand why Samsung chose to use that instead of a 2.3ghz quad-core like in the tab pro.

See Wikipedia for an explanation of the concept: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_...multi-processing_.28global_task_scheduling.29

Because the Exynos 5 Octa-core is the one processor that Samsung has to be able to compete with Snapdragon 800, and is cheaper to implement since it's their own processor. I don't buy the Octa-core hype, I'd be happier with the Snapdragon 800 honestly like on the Tab PRO 8.4.

The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800

ssuper2k said:
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yet I am getting 35,300 on Antutu using Shaheers t800 rom which is higher than any other current tablet or phone. (Shaheer's rom should go out of beta today - don't flash until final has been posted).
The Tab Pro 8.4 Antutu is 32,806.

I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY

I can see the argument that you don't always need full power, thus the four slow cores, but since all cores can't run at once, it seems a cheat to have 1.9ghz as the top speed for the faster four cores. Since, or at least I assume, cores step up and down as needed, it seems to me a snapdragon 800 or higher at 2.3ghz or higher would have been just fine. I mean, if you are going to put in 3gb of RAM, then you should put in a great cpu also and not pretend less (1.9ghz) is a better contribution to what is supposed to be a premium tablet.

And yet I don't think samsung is doing enough to utilizing this hardware capability. In theory it should run at least 4x faster and 6x more effecient then the snap dragon and apple current A8 chip. It has failed to outshine the competitors because samsung software department sucks. Samsung hardware is still great though.

sku|| said:
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blame the developer for not making it compatible. Tegra powered Htc one x is incompatible too so not sure that is exynos issue..

i wish my t805 had Full HD screen resolution :cyclops:

Funny. Was just browsing the web a bit on my i5 ultrabook and it occurred to me that the browser on my Tab S is actually faster. If gaming is your primary thing, I'd buy the Nvidia Shield, not the Tab S. This tablet is designed for eye candy media consumption (internet and video) not for gaming enthusiasts. Try running your PC video card at 2560 x 1600 on ultra and see what you get.

i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time

You cannot compare the clock speeds from two different processors. For instance, you can't compare the 1.9GHz quad-core of the Exynos to the 2.3GHz quad-core of the Snapdragon 800. This doesn't mean anything. If you compare the clock speed of two Snapdragon chips, that's ok, or if you compare the clock speed of two Exynos chips, then that's ok too. Comparing the clock speed of an Intel chip against the clock speed of an AMD chip, is the same as comparing the clock speed of an Exynos chip to the clock speed of a Snapdragon chip.
The Exynos chip in this tablet has been shown to compete very well/close with the Snapdragon on every level except GPU. The Mali GPU in this chip just doesn't match the Adreno GPU from the Snapdragon. However, the RAM is faster in the Exynos than the Snapdragon.
That said, I am a fan of the Snapdragon chip, of course. I was holding off to see if the LTE variant of this tablet would have the Snapdragon 800, but instead they shipped with an Intel LTE modem. Besides apps/games not being optimized for Exynos, I am fairly satisfied with my purchase. I'm just anxious to get CyanogenMod(or any other AOSP ROM installed on it).

fletch33 said:
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could also mean increased battery consumption,don't know. Overall I am satisfied with this Tab including battery life.

There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html

pibach said:
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?

UpInTheAir said:
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's impossible.

AndreiLux said:
It's impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What and why?

pibach said:
What and why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...ta-can-use-eight-cores-simultaneously-267316/
I've found a few articles saying it should support it, then a couple Deva saying they had to goto the 5422 for a working implementation of HMP.
Here is a post from odroid
http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=5651

That's weird. The (newer) 5422 supports HMP but not 3gb RAM.

How is powervr g6430 rogue when campared to top class gpu's like adreno 405 etc?

Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?

http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_5s_vs_lg_g2_vs_nokia_lumia_1020-review-997p5.php
The same GPU used on iPhone 5s. Based on this benchmark, it's better than Adreno 330 I think.
Adreno 405 isn't top class GPU. According to GFLOPS numbers, 405 is better than 1st gen Adreno 320 (S4 Pro, S4 Prime) and weaker 2nd gen.
But all about benchmarks, the most important is user experience and last but not least is optimization

GrandpaaOvekill said:
Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Adreno 405 is only half as power of powervgr g6430
Adreno 405 is middle range gpu
While powervgr g6430, adreno 320, 330, 420 are last year and current flagship gpu
Gpu mostly rated by gflops
http://kyokojap.myweb.hinet.net/gpu_gflops/
And adreno each generation have basic, mid, high power gpu..
Adreno 405 is 4th generation (05 means basic) and can match 3rd Gen mid
Adreno 420 is 4th generation (20 is mid) and can match 3rd Gen high gpu
See gflops of each in that above link
And yes optimization is the most for gaming

The PowerVR G6430 in Zenfone 2 is clocked higher than iphone 5s but lower than ipads and Atom 3570. Its performance is between the Adreno 330 and 430 which is excellent given that it was designed in 2012 and released in 2013. Reclocking it at 640Mhz like its 3570 brother should give a nice run for its price, still technically, it won't be as fast as Adreno 430. However, in real world usage and coupled with a more powerful Intel cpu, it should match it as the CPU is able to extract more GPU power.
If you are really looking at the most powerful mobile GPU, the Nvidia Tegra X1 is at the top, close to twice the performance of the top Qualcomm 810 GPU, Adreno 430. In Antutu, it only scores 75K because the CPU is slower than others like Intel. 75K is still unbreakeable for the moment. Surely, Nvidia and ATI have much more experience in the GPU domain so its not surprising that they are the fastest.
Now, only if ATI partner with Intel to provide us with 14nm goodies :angel:
p.s: To have a broader picture, the Tegra X1 chip is close to twice the performance of a PS3 which is astonishing considering its small size and 2W max power consumption.

Nvidia Shield TV based on Tegra X1 has active cooling system.
So, how it can be compared to phone SoCs?

My bad, I though it was found in the Nvidia Shield tablet. Its its brother the Kepler K1 that is currently used but still at 365 GFlops on nvidia website, it competes with the adreno 430. Note that the PS3 was 192 GFlops.
Interesting fact is that the Tegra X1 actually draws much Less power at idle and slightly less power (1w less than Kepler) at load. Kepler would peak at 11w. Thanks to the new 20nm tech in Maxwell cores efficiency. The Nvidia TV Shield has much more and larger components to power, its also for sure clocked higher.
''According to Nvidia, the power consumption in a tablet powered by Tegra X1 will be on par with Tegra K1. In fact, idle power consumption will be even lower thanks to the various architecture improvements. Tegra K1 was designed to operate at around 5-8 watts, with infrequent peaks up to 11 watts when running stressful benchmarks, so the X1 will be well within the realm of tablet power requirements.'' Source: greenbot.com
Heres this too: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/NVIDIA-Announces-Tegra-X1-Maxwell-Hits-Ultra-Low-Power
I really like the fact that PC manifacturers enter the mobile market, after all, they were building computer components for ages. This will open the door to more powerfull and cheaper SoCs especially because they have the ability to mass produce and develop the latest tech with many factory plants worldwide.

aziz07 said:
My bad, I though it was found in the Nvidia Shield tablet. Its its brother the Kepler K1 that is currently used but still at 365 GFlops on nvidia website, it competes with the adreno 430. Note that the PS3 was 192 GFlops.
Interesting fact is that the Tegra X1 actually draws much Less power at idle and slightly less power (1w less than Kepler) at load. Kepler would peak at 11w. Thanks to the new 20nm tech in Maxwell cores efficiency. The Nvidia TV Shield has much more and larger components to power, its also for sure clocked higher.
''According to Nvidia, the power consumption in a tablet powered by Tegra X1 will be on par with Tegra K1. In fact, idle power consumption will be even lower thanks to the various architecture improvements. Tegra K1 was designed to operate at around 5-8 watts, with infrequent peaks up to 11 watts when running stressful benchmarks, so the X1 will be well within the realm of tablet power requirements.'' Source: greenbot.com
Heres this too: http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/NVIDIA-Announces-Tegra-X1-Maxwell-Hits-Ultra-Low-Power
I really like the fact that PC manifacturers enter the mobile market, after all, they were building computer components for ages. This will open the door to more powerfull and cheaper SoCs especially because they have the ability to mass produce and develop the latest tech with many factory plants worldwide.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maxwell can very power hungry when you clock it all the way up, and X1 has more CUDA cores than K1. X1 has 2 SMM with 256 total while K1 only has 1 SMX with 192.
also, pc manufacturers have always been in the mobile market, or you could even say they started the mobile market. for instance, Apple was a pc manufacturer, steve jobs dedicated 70% of his life to PC rather than phones. samsung makes everything and they have a lot of experience too in making notebooks. so the two most powerful (or most successful) players in the mobile sector are also pc manufacturers, what do you mean by pc manufacturers entering the mobile market?

Its getting off topic but Intel or Apple weren't the first one to build a cell phone. Intel was the first company to build a CPU though. Motorola built the 1st cellphone.
On a sidenote, Apple never really built anything except for aesthetics, it started with IBM building for them after non-success with Synertek for a couple of months. Btw, Samsung does not manifacture PC CPUs or GPUs. Only CPU they build is the Exynos for mobile. I think you misinterpreted the fact the they sell laptops, yes they do, but they are not the one building its major components, its Intel and AMD. They may build its memory components but not CPU or GPU.
You are seeing technology the other way around. If we take, let say, a 2 years old gpu and a new one. The new one can have double the transitor and components count yet still consume less power. Its about architechture efficiency and transistor nm. e.g. the Intel in our Zenfone 2 is built with 3D 22nm transistor which is more power efficient. That's how tech flow.
Anyway, apple is slowly declining, Intel is building their PC segment, replacing IBM, and Samsung is building their next iphone and taking care of the mobile segment. We can already see whats next.
I have been building PCs for over 15 years, its my hobby.
@ mods There should be a ''resolved'' button just like other forums so threads don't get cluttered lol

GrandpaaOvekill said:
Is power vr g6430 any good when campared to adreno gpu's?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know benchmarks aren't everything, but GFX gives a good idea of the performance difference between the two. Basically, the PowerVR G6430 is much more powerful than the Adreno 405.
PowerVR G6430:
https://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?ben...VR Rogue G6430&base=device&ff-check-desktop=0
Adreno 405:
https://gfxbench.com/result.jsp?ben...ter=Adreno 405&base=device&ff-check-desktop=0
Here's some videos of a Zenfone 2 with a phone that utilizes the SD 615/Adreno 405 combo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3DcRHXrTHg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYZr53U2Tfk
Hope this helps.