Related
The snapdragon version isn't available in my country, so I will have to buy the exynos (Pretty cheap right now $500 equivalent). The thing is reviews say the snapdragon doesn't lag a bit while exynos is made for a large device.
Is the performance really this bad? I'm not into eons right now by the way.
No its not worth buying the snapdragon version. My s4 is faster than my note...
Sent from my GT-I9505 using xda app-developers app
With HMP enabled there is no comparison between the two, exynos is up to 50% faster and potentially more efficient. With HMP disabled (as things currently are) then qualcomm is the slightly better chip, but I'm not convinced that the difference is enough to prefer one soc over the other...
In short Exynos 5420 is artificially neutered to seem worse than qualcomm, yet -even so- going either way won't make much of a difference...
Do you have any benchmarks to prove your claim of a speed bump of 50 %?
to OP
There are a lot of threads about Exynos vs snapdragon, long story short
Exynos , tad better cpu
Snapdragon tad better gpu
I've had both, ended with exynos , because I didn't need 4g, but needed 32 GB ( in scandinavia 4 G seems to be 16 gb only)
Lag was more or less the same
I felt the battery time on the exynos was a tad better
They felt equally as snappy when they needed to
BUT!!!
App support was a tad better on Snapdragon, ie more apps in the plastore worked with the snapdragon version, a few more games etc... no big deal for me, but still get me ticked of when I noticed a few apps I bought weren't compatible ( yet?!) with the new exynos chip ( but worked with my sammy S3 also exynos chip, older )
Exynos is fine. I've played with both and from a UI and app use perspective you can't tell the difference. Adreno's a bit faster than Mali but no so much as to drastically alter performance. Some games are better optimized for Adreno so depending on your choice of games it could make a difference. As for app compatibility it's more likely the 2,560x1,600 display that's causing the issue not the specific SoC. If there were huge differences between Exynos and S-800 or drastic app performance differences and app compatibility issues it would be all over the N3 forum and it's not.
DeBoX said:
Do you have any benchmarks to prove your claim of a speed bump of 50 %?
to
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
HMP for 8 cores have not yet released but look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note, so by adding two more large cores you can expect the score to be about 50% more. As I said that is only true were all 8 cores would be used at the same time and they are not throttled (that is why I said "up to").
Stevethegreat said:
Look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not really. It also has a 267 PPI display which is benefitting its graphics scores in AnTuTu compared to the SGS4 at 441 PPI and N3 at 386 PPI.
http://www.nairaland.com/1597298/samsung-budget-galaxy-note-neo
S-800 vs. Exynos on the N3...
BarryH_GEG said:
Not really. It also has a 267 PPI display which is benefitting its graphics scores in AnTuTu compared to the SGS4
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was more properly referring to CPU scores which are the only ones benefitted from HMP.
I ran a quick AnTuTu (cpu) test to my Exynos 5420 equipped note and here are the results: http://i.imgur.com/zD32DZQ.png
Notice how remarkably similar they are to note neo's cpu score:
http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=newsimg/14/01/sgn3n-leak/gsmarena_006.jpg&idNews=7538
Note that note neo has only two large cores which are clocked lower by 10% compared to exynos 5420 and it still posts almost the same score merely by employing the help of the small cores. Now add two large cores more and you'd get 50% more performance, it's simple math really...
Now I'm not saying that it would be a performance that we would actually see in most occasions , it would either be throttled or -even- not supported by most apps but still it's potentially there (which was my point by saying "up to").
What will *definitely* be there if HMP is to be enabled is better battery -though- as it would make more efficient use of the small cores. Since exynos 5422 is also on 28nm yet has HMP enabled leads me to believe that we lack HMP for strategic reasons (so that samsung will sell more exynos 5422 / qualcomm equipped machines)
Stevethegreat said:
I was more properly referring to CPU scores which are the only ones benefitted from HMP.
I ran a quick AnTuTu (cpu) test to my Exynos 5420 equipped note and here are the results: http://i.imgur.com/zD32DZQ.png
Notice how remarkably similar they are to note neo's cpu score:
http://www.gsmarena.com/showpic.php3?sImg=newsimg/14/01/sgn3n-leak/gsmarena_006.jpg&idNews=7538
Note that note neo has only two large cores which are clocked lower by 10% compared to exynos 5420 and it still posts almost the same score merely by employing the help of the small cores. Now add two large cores more and you'd get 50% more performance, it's simple math really...
Now I'm not saying that it would be a performance that we would actually see in most occasions , it would either be throttled or -even- not supported by most apps but still it's potentially there (which was my point by saying "up to").
What will *definitely* be there if HMP is to be enabled is better battery -though- as it would make more efficient use of the small cores. Since exynos 5422 is also on 28nm yet has HMP enabled leads me to believe that we lack HMP for strategic reasons (so that samsung will sell more exynos 5422 / qualcomm equipped machines)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You can't divorce the impact of display area size and PPI from CPU performance. The GPU doesn't absolve the CPU's role in graphics output. An i3 PC with a killer graphics card will perform worse graphically than an i7 PC with a lesser card because most computational (not rendering, texture mapping, vectoring, and decoding) work is still done on the CPU. So I have no idea what AnTuTu's testing to come up with a CPU rating in isolation but if it's a real-time performance test the CPU's role in graphics output is impacting it. So comparing the Neo with a 5.5" display and 267 PPI against the N10.1-14 with a 10.1" display and 299 PPI isn't going to get you a relevant CPU comparison. That's why I used the N3 and SGS4 as comparisons because only the PPI is off. And the Neo would be well behind the SGS4 in the cumulative AnTuTu test if it had the same PPI because the lower workload of the lower PPI is artificially enhancing its score. At the end of the day an isolated CPU number is pretty meaningless. It's like bench horsepower in a car vs. horsepower to the wheels. A higher bench rating means nothing because none of us drive an engine, we drive a car. The total AnTuTu number (AKA: drive train loss) is more relevant even though it doesn't support the point you're trying to make about HMP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit#Computational_functions
BarryH_GEG said:
You can't divorce the impact of display area size and PPI from CPU performance. The GPU doesn't absolve the CPU's role in graphics output. An i3 PC with a killer graphics card will perform worse graphically than an i7 PC with a lesser card because most computational (not rendering, texture mapping, vectoring, and decoding) work is still done on the CPU. So I have no idea what AnTuTu's testing to come up with a CPU rating in isolation but if it's a real-time performance test the CPU's role in graphics output is impacting it. So comparing the Neo with a 5.5" display and 267 PPI against the N10.1-14 with a 10.1" display and 299 PPI isn't going to get you a relevant CPU comparison. That's why I used the N3 and SGS4 as comparisons because only the PPI is off. And the Neo would be well behind the SGS4 in the cumulative AnTuTu test if it had the same PPI because the lower workload of the lower PPI is artificially enhancing its score. At the end of the day an isolated CPU number is pretty meaningless. It's like bench horsepower in a car vs. horsepower to the wheels. A higher bench rating means nothing because none of us drive an engine, we drive a car. The total AnTuTu number (AKA: drive train loss) is more relevant even though it doesn't support the point you're trying to make about HMP.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_processing_unit#Computational_functions
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe so, but the benchmark in question runs off screen. So while in real life resolution matter in Antutu Cpu score, or super pi , or, or, it doesn't. HMP will make the Cpu 50% faster in multi threaded operations, I never claimed it makes the total machine faster by the same amount. For example an HMP equipped note 2014 will score around 40000 in Antutu , NOT 49500. I don't see where we disagree, I merely think you misunderstood my initial claim
If you live for real world use, the Exynos Note is a wonderful tablet. If you live in the world of needing the highest quadrant and antutu scores you should pass.
Sent via Tapatalk and my thumbs.
Stevethegreat said:
With HMP enabled there is no comparison between the two, exynos is up to 50% faster and potentially more efficient. With HMP disabled (as things currently are) then qualcomm is the slightly better chip, but I'm not convinced that the difference is enough to prefer one soc over the other...
In short Exynos 5420 is artificially neutered to seem worse than qualcomm, yet -even so- going either way won't make much of a difference...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How did you enable HMP? My note 3 snap dragon is so much faster than my note.
Sent from my SM-N900T using XDA Premium 4 mobile app
Stevethegreat said:
HMP for 8 cores have not yet released but look at Note 3 Neo, it uses 2 less large cores and it posts the same antutu score as our note, so by adding two more large cores you can expect the score to be about 50% more. As I said that is only true were all 8 cores would be used at the same time and they are not throttled (that is why I said "up to").
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It will never be released for Exynos 5420 either, unless Samsung want alot of complains about fried Exynos 5420 chipsets. Also they already said it wont release HMP for Exynos 5420 cause of the heat.
dt33 said:
It will never be released for Exynos 5420 either, unless Samsung want alot of complains about fried Exynos 5420 chipsets. Also they already said it wont release HMP for Exynos 5420 cause of the heat.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Once again, that's not the reason that they won't release it, if anything the chip would be cooler because more use of A7 cores would be possible and if all 8 cores are needed Samsung could choose to throttle the thing. The reason that they don't release it is the Exynos 5422 which is the same chip but with all 8 cores enabled (also 28nm)...
So no fried socs, lesser profits more like
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.
What about PowerVR 6200 GPU vs Adreno 430?
A good question!
What's actually inside these processors...
Can't post outside link... Its (8) a53 processors clocked at 2.0ghz w/ powervr 6200
The 810 being (4)a53/(4)a57 big.LITTLE combo.
Long story short geekbench says the mediatek wins in multicore barely, but is smashed in single core, because it's a true octacore, but just a midrange one severely overclocked, with last generations gpu running the blinky flashy show.
this is all based on mt6795 not sure what the (t) means...
atomikpunx said:
What's actually inside these processors...
Can't post outside link... Its (8) a53 processors clocked at 2.0ghz w/ powervr 6200
The 810 being (4)a53/(4)a57 big.LITTLE combo.
Long story short geekbench says the mediatek wins in multicore barely, but is smashed in single core, because it's a true octacore, but just a midrange one severely overclocked, with last generations gpu running the blinky flashy show.
this is all based on mt6795 not sure what the (t) means...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, what does this mean in real world use?
Sharpshooterrr said:
So, what does this mean in real world use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Last mediatek proccesors trully provide smoothness, the MTK6795T is just a flashy overclocked MTK6795, yes, it beats the SD810, even the snapdragron 805 beats the 810 in some devices, maybe is because the 810 throttles himself to the oblivion.
MediaTek SOC's are known to have crap embedded security.
Additionally if you think about the ways in which the big.LITTLE architecture works it makes a lot more logical sense than a makeup of 8 cores in a true octa-core setup.
M9+ is out, so we'll see
Well, the new mid-range CPU Snapdragon 650 found on the Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 Pro is a beast, check this video minute 4:38, the results on Antutu are around 75000, my Nexus 5X gets around 56000, that is Snapdragon 810 performance from the 650, damn...
Just some food for thought for you guys, 2015 was not the year for Qualcomm, this year though...
The 650 is a lower end version of the 808 (28nm vs 20nm). Your own personal Antutu score does not represent what the 808 is capable of.
The 650 would be a downgrade from the 808 specifically in terms of power usage and heat generation.
lol... check yourself dude. 808 is so much better than anything mid range like SD 6XX. it even beats some SD810 devices. check my score.
AnTuTu means nothing! When you run AnTuTu on a Snapdragon 820 device, few times, it will drop on under 100k (from about 130k).
The new 650 runs like 808...
http://www.gizmochina.com/2016/01/1...x10-vs-snapdragon-808-antutu-scores-compared/
Here you get some realistic benchmarks, not that sience fiction screenshot from the user in #3
The pixel XI and the pixel are packed with snadragon 821 chipset wich supposed to be clocked at 2*2.35 kryo & 2*2.0 kryo but both pixel phones are clocked at 2*2.15 kryo & 2*1.6 Kryo which is exactly the same as SD820 on Lg G5 and the s7 so if someone knows what is the difference between the cpu in the pixel phones and the regular snapdragon 820 please write it down
From what I have read the 821 is a 820. The 821 is just higher binned 820. When they make chips they are not all the same. Some just are a little more efficient than others do to very minor differences in the chips. So a high binned 820 can handle a higher clock speed while using less power are turned into 821.
So Google decided they wanted to go with the 821 because it is more power efficient than a 820. But it seems Google thinks the speed of the 820 is fast enough to provide a good snappy user experience. So they are doubling down on efficiency by clocking these high binned chips down to the same as the 820. So say the 821 is 5% more efficient at stock speed over the 820. The 821 might be 10% more efficient at the same clock speed at the 820 while delivering the same speed as the 820. So they are sort of doubling down on efficiency over performance.
From the hands on I have seen everyone has described the phone as very fast. This is likely due to Google optimizing Android to run on the pixels hardware. Much like Apple does with the iPhone. Also the Pixel has some hardware features that might not show up on a regular spec sheet. It has some improved touch screen latency and faster storage. Because of these factors Google decided they don't need the extra performance of the 821 but instead want to utilize it's efficiency.
TLDR Google is going all in on the Pixel proving a very fast user experience while being power efficient!
So in theory once kernel source has been released we can just OC it back to "stock" frequency and get even faster performance with a hit to battery life.
I have the OP3 and the phone is clocking to max. frequency very rarely anyway. So there is no reason to clock it down for better efficiency.
So basically the pixel xl nd the pixel have snadragon 820 with a different name and better efficiency, as a result the gaming performance is the same as on the lg g5 or the s7 for example, these pixel devices arent worth the extra 200$
ramqashou said:
So basically the pixel xl nd the pixel have snadragon 820 with a different name and better efficiency, as a result the gaming performance is the same as on the lg g5 or the s7 for example, these pixel devices arent worth the extra 200$
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The smaller Pixel has the potential to out do both of those phones and the Pixel XL in gaming since it has a native resolution of 1080p. The lower the resolution, the higher frames per second possible in games when using the same SoC, assuming the game is made to run at your phones native resolution.
ramqashou said:
So basically the pixel xl nd the pixel have snadragon 820 with a different name and better efficiency, as a result the gaming performance is the same as on the lg g5 or the s7 for example, these pixel devices arent worth the extra 200$
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In the current climate and with the 810 fiasco overshadowing can you really blame them for dialing it down? Perhaps the GPU is still clocked higher in the 821 and I'll take the efficiency as a perk. It's up to you what's worth $200 more but there are a few more bits less talked about included in the price.
---------- Post added at 07:11 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:09 AM ----------
mixedguy said:
The smaller Pixel has the potential to out do both of those phones and the Pixel XL in gaming since it has a native resolution of 1080p. The lower the resolution, the higher frames per second possible in games when using the same SoC, assuming the game is made to run at your phones native resolution.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd rather have 1080p at 60FPS than 2k at 30FPS on a screen that size, however I think most games, at least the big titles, have adjustable resolution so I think the only difference will be battery draw.
Hoodeddeathman said:
I'd rather have 1080p at 60FPS than 2k at 30FPS on a screen that size, however I think most games, at least the big titles, have adjustable resolution so I think the only difference will be battery draw.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree, I wasn't aware you could choose your resolution in mobile phone games as I don't really play demanding games on my phone, I assumed it was like mainstream game consoles where the developer predetermines the resolution or just sets it to use the native res by default.
I play games on PC, so it's pretty cool that you can change the resolution on mobile phone games like you can on PC games.
mixedguy said:
I agree, I wasn't aware you could choose your resolution in mobile phone games as I don't really play demanding games on my phone, I assumed it was like mainstream game consoles where the developer predetermines the resolution or just sets it to use the native res by default.
I play games on PC, so it's pretty cool that you can change the resolution on mobile phone games like you can on PC games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As I understand it android has the capability and it's up to the devs to implement. The game can be rendered at whatever resolution and will then be upscaled. for example Warhammer Freeblade allows you to select which resolution to use and texture qualities just as you would in most PC games at the risk of losing frames however Need For Speed No Limits selects a pre-defined profile depending on device.
As I said, underclocking doesn't automatically mean better effiency... If you would have a 820 phone you would know that. I experimented a lot with different CPU settings on my One Plus 3 and underclocking is not worth it because it only cuts of performance but does NOT increase effiency because your CPU is using max frequency like 1% of the runtime anyway... In more than two days 2,15 GHz on the big cluster was used only 49s on my OP3.
And that the 821 reaches a higher frequency doesn't automatically mean that the CPU has a higher quality. I know it would be possible that the 820s are only bad 821s that don't surpass quality tests but I don't think so because the 820 was released much earlier. Usually it goes the other way around, like on GPUs. Nvidia first releases the very high end models and then sells the crappy GPUs in the lower end models. I don't think that Qualcomm is like, hey we are picking out all really good 820s and pile them up to sell them as 821s... A 821 could be better and more efficient but it's not necessarily true. A good 820 could still be as good or even better than a 821, regarding effiency. Also think about AMD Processors a few years ago, whole cores where unlock able and there was still room for OC if you were lucky.
Gerrit507 said:
As I said, underclocking doesn't automatically mean better effiency... If you would have a 820 phone you would know that. I experimented a lot with different CPU settings on my One Plus 3 and underclocking is not worth it because it only cuts of performance but does NOT increase effiency because your CPU is using max frequency like 1% of the runtime anyway... In more than two days 2,15 GHz on the big cluster was used only 49s on my OP3.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
When talking about efficiency I'm referring more to undervolting as appose to underclocking, it may be the case that they have chosen those frequencies because the 821 steps up in voltage beyond that point thus increasing power consumption and heat. We'll have to wait and see how the Pixel performs, but if that underclock means the thermal load is capped lower we will also see less throttling, ideal for daydream.
As an example I would refer to overclocking desktop CPUs, the architecture is different but how it responds to heat and power is not. beyond a certain frequency the CPU requires exponentially more power and generates exponentially more heat the higher you go.
http://m.gsmarena.com/google_pixel_xl_benchmark_doesnt_show_performance_improvement-news-20927.php
This benchmark proves to all those who insist that the chipset in the pixel phones is better than the original snadragon 820
It might be only to reduce the heat. The battery efficiency is, IMO, very marginal.
But I will surely put back the 2.4GHz on mine.
firewave said:
It might be only to reduce the heat. The battery efficiency is, IMO, very marginal.
But I will surely put back the 2.4GHz on mine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
For some reason idont believe in overclocking, cuz it's beyond the device capabilities and it might cause some problems.
This seems a very big piece of marketing by Google. It isn't really an SD 821, its an SD820.
The 821 only has a 10% performance increase when clocked at its max frequency, so even if Google did leave it at its max frequency, a 10% increase would be barely noticeable, if noticeable at all in real world use.
The 821 does have some features that aren't available on the 820, which is why Google probably chose the 821 over the 820. I found this info about two important features for the 821, that's not found in the 820 and quoted it below.
"One of the main reason why Google used the Snapdragon 821 in the Pixel phones is the Snapdragon VR SDK (Software Development Kit). This is entirely unavailable with the Snapdragon 820. The new SDK comes with advanced VR toolset to give the developers broad access to the internal architecture of the Snapdragon 821 chipset. This is extremely useful and fully compatible with Google Daydream platform. The VR SDK helps in the rendering of cutting-edge visual and audio which helps in state of the art Virtual Reality experience."
"Another important thing which is unknown for most people is about the camera improvements brought by the MSM8996 Pro. The SoC can simultaneously use two phase detectors for significant improvement in focussing quality and time. On the contrary, the Snapdragon 820 or MSM8996 only supports single PDAF (Phase Detecting Auto Focus) systems. The newer chipset extends the range of laser autofocus technology. This will substantially boost the laser-assisted autofocus systems of upcoming smartphones."
ramqashou said:
For some reason idont believe in overclocking, cuz it's beyond the device capabilities and it might cause some problems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's a very incorrect statement. The kernel determines the clock speed. Google could choose something like 0.5GHz if they were so inclined. The phone would run like ****, but in your eyes, the device is not "capable" of anything faster. It sounds like Google purposely underclocked these. If nothing else, you are absolutely 100% fine to clock it back to the speed that Qualcomm, the OEM of the chipset, intended it to run at. True overclocking can present problems, but I have overclocked my CPUs, RAM, and GPUs for YEARS with no issues and reaped plenty of extra benefits in terms of performance. I used to do it on my smartphones too, but it is pointless and wastes battery for almost every use scenario.
Google specifically chose 2.15GHz instead of 2.4GHz as specified by Qualcomm, either due to heat issues or battery life benefit. I am going to guess they realized that their incredibly light and optimized software does not need a 2.4GHz CPU speed - hell, my 6P is faster with a SD 810 than my Note7 with an 820 in day to day use for a reason, that reason being stock Android is incredibly quick and efficient.
That is true from the chip standpoint. What you don't know, though, is if google/htc designed the heat removal system to handle the additional heat produced at full clock speeds without throttling...
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
JasonJoel said:
That is true from the chip standpoint. What you don't know, though, is if google/htc designed the heat removal system to handle the additional heat produced at full click speeds without throttling...
Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The phone being a uni-body aluminium shell should help with that. My 5X gets mega hot when I run games or for extended screen on times, but the back is plastic. I think using the whole surface of the phone as an additional heat-sink so to speak could help with heat dissipation.
Either way - I hope someone tries to OC it back to "stock" qualcomm speeds. I will certainly try to see the results, that is, if custom kernels can be a thing with the Pixel.
Nitemare3219 said:
That's a very incorrect statement. The kernel determines the clock speed. Google could choose something like 0.5GHz if they were so inclined. The phone would run like ****, but in your eyes, the device is not "capable" of anything faster. It sounds like Google purposely underclocked these. If nothing else, you are absolutely 100% fine to clock it back to the speed that Qualcomm, the OEM of the chipset, intended it to run at. True overclocking can present problems, but I have overclocked my CPUs, RAM, and GPUs for YEARS with no issues and reaped plenty of extra benefits in terms of performance. I used to do it on my smartphones too, but it is pointless and wastes battery for almost every use scenario.
Google specifically chose 2.15GHz instead of 2.4GHz as specified by Qualcomm, either due to heat issues or battery life benefit. I am going to guess they realized that their incredibly light and optimized software does not need a 2.4GHz CPU speed - hell, my 6P is faster with a SD 810 than my Note7 with an 820 in day to day use for a reason, that reason being stock Android is incredibly quick and efficient.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's true i can't
Deny the power of stock android, but there are many other OEM custom skins that are well optimized and are plenty fast such as sense and Lg ux 5.0 and even the oxygen OS