hello
Xperia X1 has a Qualcomm MSM7200 528MHz processor and Omnia i900 has a 624MHz Marvell PXA312 processor , now the question is :
Xperia cpu has the top speed or Omnia Cpu ???
please answer with full detail and full info !!!
thanks
ofcource omnia has a faster cpu
xperia in my opinion is suffering from not optimal firmware..
however i have seen a video online about xperia vs touch pro when switching landscape to port. , xperia wins..
what do u intend to use the phone for most impt.
CPU speed has nothing to do with actual performance, there are many variables there like RAM, video processor and many other things.
so if you want to know which is better between the two by comparing the CPU, then i think you are heading the wrong way.
samy.3660 said:
ofcource omnia has a faster cpu
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks but i need full details !!!
May i know why my Quake 3 only running 1fps on my xperia?
mcbyte_it said:
CPU speed has nothing to do with actual performance, there are many variables there like RAM, video processor and many other things.
so if you want to know which is better between the two by comparing the CPU, then i think you are heading the wrong way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you right !!!
i want to now xperia x1 has top speed and top performance or Omnia i900 !!!
xperia have 256mb ram and omnia have 128mb ram !!!
I also got an Fujitsu Siemens n560 with xscale 624MHz (pxa 27* i think) and its twice as fast as xperia playing vga avi.
If i compare the time they need to open /windows for example, the xperia is faster.
The qualcomm is made to run with extra graphics chip i think and is slow if it has to draw something itself.
Der_Immitanz_konverter said:
I also got an Fujitsu Siemens n560 with xscale 624MHz (pxa 27* i think) and its twice as fast as xperia playing vga avi.
If i compare the time they need to open /windows for example, the xperia is faster.
The qualcomm is made to run with extra graphics chip i think and is slow if it has to draw something itself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
thanks ! nice !!
command , more info , you can do it !!!
CPU Topic only...
No brainer! 624MHz > 528MHz.. Omnia Wins!
Thread close...
frankly, you can't compare CPU with MHZ. depends on the internal structure.. for example, u take a pentium 3 CPU 3GHZ vs intel core 2 3GHZ, intel core 2 will be WAY faster
leobox1 said:
frankly, you can't compare CPU with MHZ. depends on the internal structure.. for example, u take a pentium 3 CPU 3GHZ vs intel core 2 3GHZ, intel core 2 will be WAY faster
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yes , you right !!! we can't compare CPU with MHZ !!!!
xxl2005 said:
yes , you right !!! we can't compare CPU with MHZ !!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to disagree on this one.
Of course there are hundreds of important facts, how the CPU is processing the data, which structure it is using, what processes can be outsourced, how they are transferred and so on.
But these are concerns of the processor type and its environment.
The MHz say, how many operations the CPU can do per second. That is the only indication of its real speed.
Just think about the car industry. If you want to compare the power of an engine to another, everything that counts is the power. There are thousands of reasons why the car with the weaker engine could be faster than the other (maybe the stronger engine is built in a truck or what else).
But you wanted to compare the engines, so the most powerful wins.
I'm sure, the opener of the thread rather wanted to hear about the overall phone speed, but then he asked the wrong question.
i remember he powerpc cpu used to be lower than p4 but used to run a lot faster. i think the ram is the bigger factor between these 2 handsets. i know the x1 has a due core cpu, not sure on the other handset.
correct me if im wrong but these are both based on the same arm cpu right?
damskie said:
CPU Topic only...
No brainer! 624MHz > 528MHz.. Omnia Wins!
Thread close...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just like the old AMD 64 series CPU's beat Intel Pentium 4 chips which ran at a way higher clockspeed?
Get the facts straight before posting ignorant posts like that. Pure clockspeed has nothing to do with overall performance of a CPU.
Non scientific answer here, but ive got both phones.
The omnia on the stock Vodafone UK rom was slow as ya like to the point where the phone was almost useless.
Both phones with cooked roms on them perform about the same.
Personal winner... cant choose, omnia better as a phone, x1 better as a pda, not amazed by either.
lol not amazed by either
Simple test. One is Divx certified and the other isn't. That's a true performance test.
Hi,
i used to have both phone and i have used them and test them a lot.
for processors mhz doesn't mean anything sine a long time now.That why industry has creatd mips instead of frequency . Why ? for instance take a pentium 1 266mhz and a pentium 1 mmx 266mhz. same frequency but p1 mmx was way faster because of optimise instructions inside the cpu itself. Don't forgot we speak for frenquency about cpu cycles. before it was 1 cpu cycle = one simple operation since mmx 1cpu cycle severals operations. So you can have a very high frequency processor which can do worst than a lesser frenquency one. Compare Pentium 2 400mhz with a G3 266 mhz. G3 had the same performance. Why? not the same technology inside. A core 2 duo 1.8gz will outperform an p4 4 ghz even with more than 2ghz frenquency difference!!!
So to come back to the thread. omnia 1 arm cpu. xperia qualcomm 2700a.
2700a = dual core processor with integrated gpu. 1 core for the pda 1 core for the phone and 1 core for the 3d graphic cards( omnia doesn't have an accelerated graphic card.) So with the actual firmware we can say that omnia has reached the maximum of its capabilities. Which is not true with the xperia.
in cpu benchmark the two are about equals. But xperia is faster in all the other domain like memory access ...better multitasking on xperia.
for example on omnia when using their touchscroll music player if you got a lot of music the music will stop during the scrolling because scrolling" iphone like" takes a lot of ram....
the truth is that it's better to have more ram and a less powerfull processor than having a powerfull processor and no ram.
after a lot of testing i have sold my omnia and kept my xperia.
it's only my opinion with the test i made.
cheers.
NuShrike said:
Simple test. One is Divx certified and the other isn't. That's a true performance test.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
divx playback with the integrated player was shocking. Packets of pixels everywhere...thx coreplayer to play divx so well!! and the resolution is a bit too small 240*400.
only samsung phone are divx certified... maybe because the other construtor didn't ask for the certification.
Related
I'm pretty sure I saw that on the side of the box at an AT&T store (it was far from me behind the counter though), but I've have never heard this about this phone before. Is the performance increase over the Tytn very noticeable to this effect?
stpete111 said:
I'm pretty sure I saw that on the side of the box at an AT&T store (it was far from me behind the counter though), but I've have never heard this about this phone before. Is the performance increase over the Tytn very noticeable to this effect?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's nothing on the device, the HTC box or the Internets that leads me to believe that that's true.
I just saw a news.com story a couple of days ago (cant find the link though) about dual-core devices.
There's no noticible speed increas on the Kaiser.
Also, see this:http://www.pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=4554
s
Nope, but there are seperate CPU's the 2nd one runs the radio. Doesn't help WM6 speed, mabe it unloads it a little.
The side of the box DOES say dual core
I would scan the side of the box "Att White label reads ...400 mhz dual core processor..."but i dont need to prove it, do the research...even though it is prob. a marketing scheme!
shaharprish said:
There's nothing on the device, the HTC box or the Internets that leads me to believe that that's true.
I just saw a news.com story a couple of days ago (cant find the link though) about dual-core devices.
There's no noticible speed increas on the Kaiser.
Also, see this:http://www.pocketnow.com/index.php?a=portal_detail&t=news&id=4554
s
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding speed, you say there's no noticable speed increase on the Kaiser. I'd disagree there, the first and most enduring thing I have noticed is a speed increase (untweaked) compared with a heavily tweaked (for max speed) Hermes. That said though, that increase is not across the board in all applications.
Regarding whether it's dual core or not - well it just depends what you mean. Not perhaps dual core as we might normally think of it but rather a double processor function with seperate handling of some functions. That has advantages and dedicates processing to specific functions. In any case of course dual core is a much over hyped concept and for example a quad core can still be slower than a double or single processor. Much of this whole idea about cores is misleading and panders to those unenlihghtened folk who assume that the more cores you have the faster things will be. Very crudely put would you rather a dual 100 mhz core processor or a single 400mhz processor?
Mike
Its got one processor for PDA function and another for 3g... which actually means worse battery consumption... I heard HTC etc are working on a combined processor
And to answer the poster above, it actually depends what jobs I was asking the device to do...
unwired4 said:
And to answer the poster above, it actually depends what jobs I was asking the device to do...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly, a wise answer.
Mike
There's a lot of talk about this subject, and from an architecture standpoint it depends on how you define "dual core". In modern terms, it means two processors with identical functions packaged together. However, that's only true of the last couple of years.
Back in the days of the 386, a separate processor was required to do floating point math. This co-processor (the FPU) was built into the die of the 486 chip. In the days of the Pentium Pro, the cache chip and its supporting logic was on-die, then removed in the Pentium II, then re-integrated in the Pentium III. The Athlon64 chip took the memory controller, formerly in a separate chip, and put it on-die to increase performance. The next generation Intel mobile processors will have an integrated GPU chip in the CPU (and AMD/Cyrix did the same several years ago). In the strictest definition, all of these are "systems on a chip" (SoCs) and are "multi-core" processors, as they take the functionality of two chips ("cores"), and integrate them into one.
The question is, when does a processor that can accelerate multiple functions simultanesously stop being "multi-core" and start being a processor that has a function built in?
The Quallcomm 7200 and 7500 SoCs have several "co-processors" built in. There's one for graphics, one for GPS, one for the radio, etc. Saying it's "multi-core" by modern standards is a stretch, but it does indeed have dedicated processor acceleration for various processor tasks. It's more in line with how some of the above examples work than "true" multi-processing like a Core Duo or Athlon X2 work, but it's there.
He's right, the side of the Tilt box says "QUALCOMM(r) Dual Core 400 Mhz Processor"
Pretty misleading. 2nd core doesn't operate at 400 Mhz, either (290-something, I think)
DLD
well I can say that coming from a wizard (200 mhz) ran everything to my kaiser (260 or 290 for the phone and 400 for everything else) its an incredible diference. on the wizard hit the hang up button 20-30 times LITERALLY and then it wil finally disconnect hit the hang up botton on the kaiser no mater what ur running it disconnects instantly. and I know its definitely capable of running games much quicker than my my wizard. also keep in mind the wizard was overclocked 252 with every tweak and the kaiser is stock.
A good discusion, if you look at Intel's roadmap they are heading in the direction of having 'core acceleration'. Theye are designing seperate cores for different tasks, so if you want a sql server you would have a core that's dedicated to windows, one dedicated to storage, and one that's dedicated to sql... or something like that...
But hey when you have 80cores in a processor you can specialise them I suppose.
Yeah, finally picked up the Tilt yesterday and what I thought I saw is what I definitely saw, as confirmed by exzist and RacerX earlier in the thread. Definitely an interesting discussion as to what that really does mean.
It's been bugging me, how the Kaiser has a 400 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM, yet still isn't quite that snappy. As a point of comparison, I have a Thinkpad 770Z, which has a 233 MHz Pentium II processor and 128 MB of RAM. This is capable of running Windows XP SP2 without excessive lag. The Kaiser runs a stripped down version of Windows, yet isn't quite up to par with an inferior machine, based on specs. Is this due to processor instruction sets or source code efficiency? Why is there such a disparity in performance?
PointZero said:
It's been bugging me, how the Kaiser has a 400 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM, yet still isn't quite that snappy. As a point of comparison, I have a Thinkpad 770Z, which has a 233 MHz Pentium II processor and 128 MB of RAM. This is capable of running Windows XP SP2 without excessive lag. The Kaiser runs a stripped down version of Windows, yet isn't quite up to par with an inferior machine, based on specs. Is this due to processor instruction sets or source code efficiency? Why is there such a disparity in performance?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Maybe u should ask HTC.
The two systems are completely different - perhaps it's a bit like expecting a mouse to outrun a rabbit as it has a 500bpm heart rate compared to 130bpm.
Also, are you sure you can run XP well on a 233Mhz P11 with 128mb ram? I have excessive slowness on a 2Ghz Athlon XP with 1gb of Ram (depending on what I'm doing of course)!
PointZero said:
I have a Thinkpad 770Z, which has a 233 MHz Pentium II processor and 128 MB of RAM. This is capable of running Windows XP SP2 without excessive lag.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I call BS on that one... the smallest hardware I've tried XP on was a PII 400MHz with 256MB, and it was horribly slow and unusable. Next to that the Kaiser is heaven. I can run 10 programs simultaneously without problem and actually would have no reason to complain about it as a mobile device.
As DavidMc0 said, the architectures have nothing in common. Why does a 2GHz core 2 duo beat a 3.5GHz P4 hands down? There's not the same inside. Frequency can only consistently be compared in the same processor type.
I have been repairing and building various computers for about 10 years and i'll tell you that running windows xp with a 233mhz is nonsense. I actually installed windows xp on a customer of mine with a pentium 1 233mhz processor with 128mb of ram. That thing was insanely slow, everyway you look at it. The slowest processor you could run windows xp has to be at least a pentium 3 at above 500mhz. And yes, i even did benchmark, a 2ghz core 2 duo will beat my old 3ghz pentium D all day long.
Yes..that is not a fair comparision...compare apples with apples..by the way this test has already been done....( i.e Kaiser versus other smartphones) in the market...and Kaiser passed the test ( number 1) in all tests.
It could jusst be your phone...i have no problem with my Kaiser..
Cheers.
tytn64 said:
Yes..that is not a fair comparision...compare apples with apples..by the way this test has already been done....( i.e Kaiser versus other smartphones) in the market...and Kaiser passed the test ( number 1) in all tests.
It could jusst be your phone...i have no problem with my Kaiser..
Cheers.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The test results you write about sound interesting with kaiser coming first in all tests - can you post a link to them?
PointZero said:
It's been bugging me, how the Kaiser has a 400 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM, yet still isn't quite that snappy. As a point of comparison, I have a Thinkpad 770Z, which has a 233 MHz Pentium II processor and 128 MB of RAM. This is capable of running Windows XP SP2 without excessive lag. The Kaiser runs a stripped down version of Windows, yet isn't quite up to par with an inferior machine, based on specs. Is this due to processor instruction sets or source code efficiency? Why is there such a disparity in performance?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is probably the greatest ideia i've ever seen (not!)
So.. you got you PentiumII. I'll not dwell into cache diferences... busses... etc... i'll just point this:
Given that the Pentium 1 needed a heatsink and a fan (normaly)... do you think you would be able to just HOLD your kaiser if it was running a intel cpu like that?
Think before you post...
He would, because the battery would already be empty before it had a chance to heat up that much
Not to forget the slot-mounted PII is bigger than a Kaiser on its own, and still needs a chipset, graphics controller, sound chip to actually serve a purpose
Wonderful! I have the ROM Lucapicci 1.8.1 and it works very well!
http://rapidshare.com/files/224152407/Performance.exe
I think that software can be dangerous to our HD´s, have you used it during a long time? any crash?
I'm using it from 2 days without problems!
Can you at least post some more info or some screenshots.
Never know, this may just be a virus
However I have no responsibilities. Is your risk!
Good work!
How about battery usage and warming?
overclocking about 20% for such a small device, i think is not very good.
2 days no problem i think is because u havn't used maximal of the clock, if you do that constantly, i think your touch HD might start crashing (more often, it crashs quiet often already ))
Hmm I´m a big fan of every overclocking (my home pc processor is a core 2 quad that normaly has 2.4GHz and it´s working on 4.1GHz without any problems).
Now my question is where can I see that the cpu of the touch hd really runs on 624MHz? And can someone post some benchmark tests comparing to the normal speed of 520MHz please???
I did not benchmark but it is obvious when you open applications or windows folder of HD simply.
it's a fake ... isn't the first post a the subject
Im sure that its fake! it doesnt work on qualcomms cpu.. make some benchs (coreplayer, sktools) then u ll see that there´s no difference btw 528 and 624mhz...
bye
Fake
Just instaled, Bench and the results
CPU Performance: Float : 713
CPU Performance: Integer : 8216
versus std
CPU Performance: Float : 785
CPU Performance: Integer : 8220
These are pure CPU. No bottle necks. Should see approx 20% improvement
eg
900 and 9850
Its a fake
i wouldnt overclock my 900 dollar hd anyways. i used to overclock my palm tungsten devices and a couple of my treos that used pxa procs and it shortend their life considerably. i would take them from the stock 200 and 312 to 312 and 400 respectively. it did improver performance for certain things like viewing pics and watching video but i have no performance issues with the HD
Its definately not working.
I made some benchmarks!
Nothing changes, shame! Perhaps it is definitely a fake! But he's nice!
I'm sorry!
This is the standard HTC Performance application that hasn't worked for years, from before the Vogue. Doesn't support the new Qualcomm processors.
How about this?
I don't think this is fake but who is willing to fry their HD?
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=507301&highlight=clockspeed
I don't understand one thing. First of all, whether if the poster is posting something real or not, I will for sure not trying to OC my device. I luv my device in anyway, and I've no complaint with the speed, even if I do, I would blame on the operating system and the software, not the hardware.
I wouldn't putting stress to my HD if I were you guys. OC nature is like this, "if you take something, you must give away something too"! What is wrong with the HD that needed to be oc??????
precsmo said:
I wouldn't putting stress to my HD if I were you guys. OC nature is like this, "if you take something, you must give away something too"! What is wrong with the HD that needed to be oc??????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you don't understand the overclockers . Some guys are keen on getting the maximum out of their devices, its not really rational at all, but its good to know whether something like this is possible, or not.
its a choose I would not risk it , its not a PC only a mobile phone, the speed on HD currently we have is far better than shorten it life by putting overload clock speed, Kill your HD if you like
Hi all,
Since the X1 hardware is so similar to Blackstone, is it possible to use what the Blackstone guys are doing to improve performance on the X1?
What I am most interested in is this: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=442712
BETA graphics drivers for improving OpenGL speed. There is also a benchmark thread in the Blackstone forums, do the same benchies work with X1? Could be useful to have a reference for which ROMs are actually fastest.
Just some thoughts, hope for a response from a guru!
-Oobly
So I was reading that thread...
Theres a faq there:
"..
Q: Are these solely for MSM720X devices?
A: Yes, since the files used only work with the MSM720X chipset. And not even ALL MSM720X chipsets.
Q: So, which devices are supported?
A: Currently only newer devices: the Kaiser, Polaris, Nike, Diamond and up. There MAY be more in the future though.
.."
here is my take on all this:
-the neo2007 work on xperia but i cant see any performance increase
-the xperia is running @400mhz not 528mhz like the HD or td2. so dont ever expect it to reach the same level of performance. i have tested many cooked roms on xperia and they all trail the HD or TD2 stock roms in application and multitasking performance
THE GRIZZ said:
here is my take on all this:
-the neo2007 work on xperia but i cant see any performance increase
-the xperia is running @400mhz not 528mhz like the HD or td2. so dont ever expect it to reach the same level of performance. i have tested many cooked roms on xperia and they all trail the HD or TD2 stock roms in application and multitasking performance
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
on the other hand, i (which are currently running Touch X 6.1 with various performance tweaks) find that the custom ROM that i'm currently using are faster and have better responce compared to a TD2 running on stock ROM that i've tested for 30 minutes in a store.
if that extra Mhz really matters, then it could always be unlocked using neurom. i did also tried neurom only to find that it decreases my battery life.
so i'm sticking with 400 mhz that lasts me 3-4 days than a 2 days 528mhz.
and no, i'm not biased just because i'm using an x1.
ejat said:
if that extra Mhz really matters, then it could always be unlocked using neurom. i did also tried neurom only to find that it decreases my battery life.
so i'm sticking with 400 mhz that lasts me 3-4 days than a 2 days 528mhz..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i tried using neurom but i could not overclock it to 528. if you can please let us now how. to test if it worked test with something like the core player or tcmp (both have benchmarking tools) and the game xtract.
both apps will give you real world performance and both perform clearly worse on my xperia then on td2
ohh and %20 less cpu speed will not double the battery life. the x1 has a nice big 1500mah battery
Thanks for the replies guys!
I always thought the xperia runs a 7200A processor at 528MHz...?? That's what all the spec sheets say at least.
About speed and battery life, increasing the CPU speed by 20% can certainly double power usage especially if it is an overclock. Both power usage and heat generated increase dramatically when overclocking CPU's in PC's and I don't expect it is any different with mobile CPU's.
I am disappointed by the benchmark results I see for xperia, but I really love the hardware layout and size. According to the specifications it should run faster than it seems to....
Any definitive answers about CPU clock speed? Anyone? From what I have read, the 7200 CPU runs at 400 and the 7200A at 528. The X1 has a 7200A and all the spec sheets I have seen and "official" specs say 528MHz.
Have we been screwed again by HTC? <--- referring to the 3D driver issue....
Hi all,
I notice that all the marketing data and spec sheets say the X1 has a 528MHz processor, but some people are saying it has a 400MHz. Does anyone here know what speed their device is actually running at?
-Oobly
well, 528mhz is correct.
the plugin homescreen++ showes 400mhz, but i think that this information in wrong.
The phone has a 528mhz processor, but it only runs at 400mhz - meaning that it does not run at full speed unless you tweak the settings.
Okay, so how do you tweak the settings? Does neuClockControl work to set it to 528MHz?
A processor specified to work at 528MHz running at 400MHz is still just a 400MHz processor if there is no way to make it run at 528. If this is the case then we have been royally screwed by SE/HTC.
I would like to be able to push it to 528MHz for gaming, etc (I don't mind the extra power usage if it means better performance), and change it back to 400 manually again for normal use (so it uses less battery power).
-Oobly
Oobly said:
Okay, so how do you tweak the settings? Does neuClockControl work to set it to 528MHz?
-Oobly
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yep i use Nuecpl-ClockSpeed and the cpu work at max speed without problems....
PredatorX11 said:
yep i use Nuecpl-ClockSpeed and the cpu work at max speed without problems....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cool! So does it actually show 528MHz and can you see a difference in performance?
I'm pretty sure it runs on 528mhz, not at 400. It is not slower than touch pro/hd expect graphical apps, where the video drivers count. Plus I saw the clock rate on some WinMo software as 528.something mhz, or was it 529mhz. Can't remember the software, but I couldn't care less if some old software with old DB misjudges the 7200A with 7200 processor and says that the cpu runs at 400mhz sharp. That's not reliable at all. Plus it's almost imposible to keep the cpu at 400.00mhz, just like 528.00mhz, it's usually a little bit more or less. So if it is a real measurement, you would probably see something like 401.25 or 528.84 or something Mhz. Have you done some benchmarks on SKTools for example. The cpu is somethimes on par with Samsung Omnia, which should be a Marvell PXA312 624 MHz processor. A 400mhz cpu just can not do that, even though mhz to mhz is not a proper way to compare CPU speed.
Here's a little info on what I mean: SKTools shows that the cpu speed is 400 000 000 hz, which is obviously not the real value but something predefined. Also the Integer Test on SkTools gave a value of 329.8084 units, which is on par with Touch Pro/HD and much faster than Omnia 1 with value of 253.10 on this test. The floating point is 7.552 MWIPS, again on par with the other 528mhz devices, and here it is slower than the top in list 8.63 MWIPS Omnia 624Mhz. The conclusion should be clear - either all devices are underclocked (together with X1) or X1 is running on 528Mhz cpu.
installed the software and started it up, it says my cpu is at 528mhz. where are people getting the 400mhz from?
Official R3 uk rom
TCPMP sometimes shows me 530Mhz XD
Ganondolf said:
installed the software and started it up, it says my cpu is at 528mhz. where are people getting the 400mhz from?
Official R3 uk rom
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=4264970&postcount=3
And a few other places. Could just be reported incorrectly to some software, especially when they display exactly 400MHz. On the other hand it could be that CorePlayer or the OS somehow ups the speed to 528 when it is needed. I have heard reports of devices running faster when leaving a video open in the background. Maybe there is already some dynamic clock adjustment going on even without using neuDynamicClock?
this is what i think. the x1 is running at 538mhz but sometimes (with some app/ tasks) its been told to stay at 400mhz for some reason unknown to us (maybe to save battery or so it does not overheat).
if u look at the iphone we know for a fact that it was underclocked but the x1 nowhere has it even been said that its been underclocked apart from a few people on this forum, and i reckon that the app / software is not giving a proper / accurate reading or the app been told to run at 400mhz and people have just assumed that the cpu is underclocked. as i said this software is saying its running a 528mhz, which is the official spec for the cpu, so i cant see how people have handsets that are underclocked.
Oobly said:
Cool! So does it actually show 528MHz and can you see a difference in performance?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry no, i have not tested the x1 at default speed.
but with this software you can change the speed from same state... and a little or medium improvement is possible.
i use the 528 mhz and level 0 for the voltage. to put the chipset to 528 mhz at 1.1 volt instead of 1.325 volt
and in stand-by i put the chipset at 122 mhz and 1.1 volt
Ganondolf said:
this is what i think. the x1 is running at 538mhz but sometimes (with some app/ tasks) its been told to stay at 400mhz for some reason unknown to us (maybe to save battery or so it does not overheat).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with that. Even the modern CPUs run at lower speeds if not utilized enough, not to mention that this should be a must for the handheld/pocket devices.
funny thing is, that I've installed nue dynamic clock and without changing anything in the past it shows that my device clock is running 528 mhz @ 1.1V. it is all soo damn confusing...
bronx said:
funny thing is, that I've installed nue dynamic clock and without changing anything in the past it shows that my device clock is running 528 mhz @ 1.1V. it is all soo damn confusing...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did this as well, with nue dynamic clock showing 528mHz.
Homescreen++ still shows 400 mHz though. Only thing I can think is that Homescreen++ looks up the processor and mistakes it with a predecessor.
In other news, xperia is darn side quicker than my Kaiser, with a much more beautiful screen bonus, but maybe the speed is related to that 'drivers' story
Anyone know what registry settings Nue alters?
I want to try to overclock.
ring-bearer said:
Anyone know what registry settings Nue alters?
I want to try to overclock.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You cannot do that.
Calvin H said:
I did this as well, with nue dynamic clock showing 528mHz.
Homescreen++ still shows 400 mHz though. Only thing I can think is that Homescreen++ looks up the processor and mistakes it with a predecessor.
In other news, xperia is darn side quicker than my Kaiser, with a much more beautiful screen bonus, but maybe the speed is related to that 'drivers' story
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hey! I was a kaiser user as well and x1 is much faster indeed. what more, You musn't forget that it's resolution is more than four times higher.
orelsi said:
You cannot do that.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I actually did overclock my fuze, to 628MHz. There is a program in the raphael section; performance something something...
I tried it right before i received my x1, and i didn't notice any improvements or problems.
I belive the same app should work for the x1, since it has same chip.
Stalix said:
I actually did overclock my fuze, to 628MHz. There is a program in the raphael section; performance something something...
I tried it right before i received my x1, and i didn't notice any improvements or problems.
I belive the same app should work for the x1, since it has same chip.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'd be all over that. I searched the forum but came up empty. If you happen to remember the name, let me know. I'll run a bunch of benchmarks and post them here.