Related
Found the datasheet on MSM7200A, would be pleased if any of you guys check it and compare it to iPhone graphics chip
Xperia proccessor MSM7200A, with integrated graphics chip
iPhone graphics chip PowerVR MBX-Lite (Sorry no datasheet)
Since the most popular (because of its app store, games quantity) is iPhone,
And I must say iPhone games are really superb for a graphics aspect, imo best graphics in mobile phones/pda/smartphones field. (like Sims 3, NFS Undercover), I wonder if Xperia could do the same.
In GSM arena, I discovered that iPhone graphics chip is Powervr MBX-Lite (On iPhone & iPhone 3G), featuring OpenGL ES 1.1, OpenVG 1.0, Direct3D and of course full 2D/3D support, which, compared MSM7200A integrated ATi accelaration, well, really Im not a Pro out here, so I've just found a Datasheet on this.
Not to tell about the WM gaming industry, which is ermm "....", but the fact, hope, that we could have this...
Now we have almost everything - itje, who dedicated very much to xda (his roms, other deeds are priceless) ((ofcourse his Touch-IT testing team, who not only answer touch-it related questions but is active like everyhwere)) other Rom and active app's/ xda contributors like gtrab, smaberg, jackleung,Tnyynt, fingerkeyboard makers, HTC encoder makers, other guys, fixing our phone bugs, creating soft for us,moderators... I could go on and on
naming these great people, who raised up our xperia from stock to almost perfection.
So only issue is...(for me ) gaming.
Heard that EA, gameloft are porting iPhone games to newer WM devices, but, I dont think that these sources are...well...realistic.
Tautvydas said:
Been looking in forums, web, to be precise, everywhere, even Xperia X1 White Paper, but Still havent got clarified answer on what Graphics chip does Xperia use. So I made several assumptions, by checking the information a little bit.
As common answer is Xperia uses ATI Imageon 2700, in Wikipedia there's no such chip number as "2700", also, Products with Imageon well, there's no xperia!
Imo, variants Xperia graphics chip is "Imageon 2388/2380" or "Imageon 2300" (If its even Imageon) , just need you guys to clarify this.
Just why I am making this thread - since Xperia is very versatile, like music/internet/messaging/videos with qwerty and etc. the only problem (for me), well, not as a problem, but as a shortage - gaming.
We have ScuMMM, sNes, sega, even PSX emu's, and maybe one game, who shows what Xperia is capable of - Xtrakt.
Since the most popular (because of its app store, games quantity) is iPhone,
And I must say iPhone games are really superb for a graphics aspect, imo best graphics in mobile phones/pda/smartphones field. (like Sims 3, NFS Undercover), I wonder if Xperia could do the same.
In GSM arena, I discovered that iPhone graphics chip is Powervr MBX-Lite (On iPhone & iPhone 3G), featuring OpenGL ES 1.1, OpenVG 1.0, Direct3D and of course full 2D/3D support, which, compared to "Imageon 2388/2380", is "almost" equal (dunno about Direct3D, although I think its not supported by Imageon) , so if any of you would tell whats the Xperia graphics chip, we would clarify the fact that we "could" enjoy the iPhone graphics (^^)
Not to tell about the WM gaming industry, which is ermm "....", but the fact, hope, that we could have this...
Now we have almost everything - itje, who dedicated very much to xda (his roms, other deeds are priceless) ((ofcourse his Touch-IT testing team, who not only answer touch-it related questions but is active like everyhwere)) other Rom and active app's/ xda contributors like gtrab, smaberg, jackleung,Tnyynt, fingerkeyboard makers, HTC encoder makers, other guys, fixing our phone bugs, creating soft for us,moderators... I could go on and on
naming these great people, who raised up our xperia from stock to almost perfection.
So only issue is...(for me ) gaming.
Heard that EA, gameloft are porting iPhone games to newer WM devices, but, I dont think that these sources are...well...realistic.
My target is to clarify Xperia graphics potential, know full information about graphics chip
P.S. Yes I've searched xda/google for this like crazy. Sorry for this thread to go as a poem.
P.S.S. Yes Xperia is business class phone, but hey, why not to dream? It still has got one of the best HW on WM devices around.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could you maybe find out by taking the x1 apart and looking at all of the chips? I looked at some videos online but couldnt see the names on any chips - not sure if it would even say but it seems as if it could work - i looked around a bit too and i keep hearing about the Imageon 2300 but i cant confirm it sorry
the ati part is not a chip it's intergrated into the qualcomm cpu
http://www.google.dk/search?source=ig&hl=da&rlz=&q=MSM7200a+ati&btnG=Google-søgning&aq=f&oq=
more info
Well its not the 2300, here a quote from ati "Imageon 2300 integrates an advanced 2D and 3D graphics engine, MPEG-4 video decoder, JPEG encoding/decoding, and a 2 Mega pixel camera sub-system processing engine. With support for up to 2MB of ultra low-power SDRAM, it "
link:http://ati.amd.com/products/imageon2300/
since we have (being said) 128 mb shared ram and ive also read some where in some sheet that we have an tuned up gpu. (this is all speculative tho)
and why do the touch pro have 288 and we 256 ram? do we have a better gpu needing more ram ?
Updated the post, please check, now only we need guys to compare both phones graphics capability.
Chaosstorm said:
Well its not the 2300, here a quote from ati "Imageon 2300 integrates an advanced 2D and 3D graphics engine, MPEG-4 video decoder, JPEG encoding/decoding, and a 2 Mega pixel camera sub-system processing engine. With support for up to 2MB of ultra low-power SDRAM, it "
link:http://ati.amd.com/products/imageon2300/
since we have (being said) 128 mb shared ram and ive also read some where in some sheet that we have an tuned up gpu. (this is all speculative tho)
and why do the touch pro have 288 and we 256 ram? do we have a better gpu needing more ram ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Seems like SE/HTC made some kind of adjustment with these GPU on xperia's MSM7200A, wondering what, so your guessing might be right about better xperia's gpu, or its just that touch pro's all interface/oem/os modifications are more "hungry" for ram.
Just for curiosity, new released iPhone 3GS has PowerVR SGX535 graphics, also SE iDou has same chip from SGX family (530 one), so we can expect awesome graphics, chip's techinical capabilities are very big:
# next generation fully programmable universal scalable shader architecture
# exceeding requirements of OpenGL 2.0 and up to DirectX 10.1 Shader Model 4.1
Just that 3GS's chip will be better than iDou's (535 - 28MPolys/s , 530 - 14 MPolys/s)
soo..... where can we find an D3D drivers for X1i?
I've been reading a lot of discussion on this and would love to hear some opinions and see some benchmarks.
I currently own a Nexus One & where I live they are priced about $150 dollars more for a Nexus than a Galaxy S (It's my understanding Nexus are regarded as cheaper phones in America?) So basically I can sell my 4 month old Nexus One & buy a brand new 16GB Galaxy S for no extra cost. Here is what I am wondering...
I know the Galaxy S has an amazing GPU, it facerolls the Nexus One & even seems to stomp the Droid X with its improved GPU so that is great.
The CPU however seems to under perform in every benchmark I can find versus the Nexus/Droid2 & many more current high end Androids.
I realise these devices are running Android 2.2 with JIT. I've seen Linpacks of 2.2 running Galaxy S devices and JIT enabled ROMs that still don't compare with these other devices.
Question 1
What I'm wondering is the difference we can see in CPU benchmarks going to be surpassed with the addition of a proper 2.2 JIT rom on our devices or is simply that the Snapdragons & other Qualcomm CPU are actually better than our Hummingbird.
Question 2
My Nexus One is Linkpacking 30 MFlops atm, I think with OC etc I can get it higher too. Does anyone have any evidence of a Galaxy S phone (running 2.2, JIT, lagfix or anything) that competes (or even comes close to competing) with this? I have been unable to find anything.
Question 3
Is the current Quadrant scores that I'm seeing people reporting in the Lag Fix threads (2000+) actually representative of speed or are these (as Cyanogen & others seem to be claiming) distorted?
(I realise a lot of people are reporting lag fixed.. what I'm asking is the number represented there (x2 N1 Froyo's score) actually accurate. I don't understand the mechanics behind the I/O benchmark so I don't understand if the lagfix is distoring the reported results from it.)
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes. That's what lag fixes help. Cpu wise we eat snapdragons for breakfast, lunch and tea.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
andrewluecke said:
1. Hummingbird is apparently faster.
2. We don't have JIT yet.. Compare Nexus One 2.1/Eclair with Galaxy S 2.1, and I remember seeing we are faster.. JIT has a massive impact on mflops (because the benchmark uses bytecode, not compiled code).
3. No benchmark is really representative of speeds (no matter what people tell you). Because different apps have different workloads. You might get 50mflops in a CPU test, but for 3D games, the number of triangles matters more. It has recently been shown the I/O test for quadrant can be tricked too.
Benchmarks aren't really comprehensive enough for anything more than getting an idea of the performance.. But don't rely on them.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
what he said ^^^
regards
ickyboo said:
The reason why we get crappy benchmarks is due to having ****ty filesystem (rfs) which don't let us have multi writes.
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
andrewluecke said:
Source please.. I never have actually seen anyone prove this here, but I hear it being thrown around increasingly. How was this proven? I'm becoming increasingly concerned that this conclusion was made by playing chinese whispers
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Croak said:
Well, if you look at pre-Froyo benchmarks of Snapdragon devices, they generally get around 6.1 in Linpack, vs ~8.4 for a Galaxy S. That's a pretty big delta, and carriers through most other synthetic and real world benchmarks, roughly 20% faster at the same clock speed. Same thing can be seen with the TI processors in the Droid line, at 1Ghz, they score in the 8's with 2.1.
Froyo benchmarks are suspect for a number of reasons, mainly because most of the benchmarks were designed with 1.6-2.1 in mind, and partly because Google spent a lot of time optimizing the base Froyo build for a Snapdragon processor. HTC, Sony, Dell, etc can piggyback off this work with their version, whereas Samsung and Motorola have to start much closer to scratch. Which is also why the HTC devices got Froyo sooner.
Believe it or not (and despite the marketing hype) the Snapdragon chipset is a budget solution, with less complex/expensive memory subsystem, and a far less costly integrated graphics solution than what is found on the Galaxy S.
It's cheap to produce, it has almost everything in a nice tidy package that makes it cheaper to engineer handsets (when I say everything, I mean CPU/GPU/Radio/WiFi/GPS/USB).
It's a pretty good package for companies like HTC, who don't do any real hardware engineering, and try to keep costs low. They do software (very very well, I should add), industrial design, and mass manufacturing, but they've NEVER designed a chipset (or display), they always source those from a third party, in this case Qualcom for the chipset, Samsung/Sony for the displays, etc.
However, they were the first to market with 1Ghz speed and it's a solid and stable hardware setup. Just keep in mind that clock speeds don't tell the whole tale.
The Galaxy S, (and to a lesser extent the Droid series) use a better stand-alone CPU solution and a far superior non-integrated (has its own chip) GPU. Samsung does do their own in-house chipset engineering, and they didn't cut corners on the CPU design, and they learned a lot about how to squeeze a lot of performance out of the ARM instruction set from their own products and the work they did for the iPhone processors. In brute-force, they smack the Snapdragon chipset around like a *****, but they get slapped around in turn by HTC's superior software engineering.
HTC has a real advantage in lots and lots of PDA/Smartphone software experience. They know how to make the most of the hardware they purchase, and seem to spend a great deal of time optimizing the software, be it Windows Mobile or Android, and lessons learned from a decade of making PDAs, under their name and for others.
If HTC used a Hummingbird or TI OMAP chipset with PowerVR GPU, I have no doubt they'd be able to more quickly wring more performance and stability out of it than Samsung or Motorola can.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, that was a really insightful post.
So basically even though our processor should outperform or ATLEAST match the snapdragons. Due to the mass optimization of 2.2 JIT for Snapdragon devices it's likely we'll never see the same performance. Unless Samsung gets really keen to do some optimization themselves.
I searched all over the internet to see why the CPU scores in Quadrant and other benchmarks are waaaay lower then the Nexus ones, but still I can't find anything.
Does Samsung disable the JIT in their Froyo ROMs? Because both Snapdragon and Hummingbird are still based on the same Cortex A8 cores
"It's clear that FroYo's JIT compiler currently only delivers significant performance gains for Snapdragon CPUs with the Scorpion core. This in turn explains why, so far, only a beta version of Android 2.2 is available for the Cortex-A8-based Samsung Galaxy S — the JIT compiler is the outstanding feature of FroYo. For the widespread Cortex-A8 cores, used in many high-end Android smartphones, the JIT compiler needs to be optimised. A Cortex-A8 core will still be slower than a Scorpion core at the same clock speed, but the Scorpion's advantage may not be as much 260 percent."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://androidforums.com/samsung-ca...ant-scores-why-humming-bird-doing-so-bad.html
There are multiple reasons, not optimised jit, slow memory for caching and more. Most of them are solved in the CM roms (it performs on par with the N1), and i can tell you that when Gingerbread comes it will blow the snapdragons away.
Which custom ROM provides CPU performance close to Snapdragon?
[ignore this post please]
Still the 1Ghz humming bird out performs the 1Ghz snap in real world performance
Even the LG Optimus One ARM11 600MHz Core scores better than Galaxy S. I still believe it's a software problem.
http://lgoptimusonep500.blogspot.com/2011/01/custom-rom-for-lg-optimus-one-p500.html#more
Another benchmark:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-http://www.anandtech.com/show/4126/nokia-n8-review-/7
...where the Nexus S proves that the Hummingbird can do more than it currrently does in Galaxy S.
The Droid2/X use the same graphic processor as Droid 1, which is PowerVR SGX 530. According to the datasheet, this core is designed to run at 200Mhz with power of rendering 14M triangles/sec. But our Droid/Milestone runs underclocked at 110Mhz(7M tri/s) while D2/X at 200Mhz. That leads to major UI responsiveness&gaming difference between D2&D1.
I wonder if there's any possibility to overclock the GPU as well?
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
TeroZ said:
The Droid2/X use the same graphic processor as Droid 1, which is PowerVR SGX 530. According to the datasheet, this core is designed to run at 200Mhz with power of rendering 14M triangles/sec. But our Droid/Milestone runs underclocked at 110Mhz(7M tri/s) while D2/X at 200Mhz. That leads to major UI responsiveness&gaming difference between D2&D1.
I wonder if there's any possibility to overclock the GPU as well?
Thanks in advance.
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
As far as I know this has been tried (overclocking), but with no results (constant reboots)
Imagination Technologies (PowerVR) defines the GPU internals and sells the "plans" for the part, to be included in SOCs like TI's OMAP.
But PowerVR does not, however, define the exact clocks at which the parts should run, nor other things like number of memory channels, memory speed, etc.
Texas Instruments are the ones who defined the GPU clocks. The OMAP 34xx chips (Droid 1, Milestone, XT720, Flipout, etc) are made using 65nm process, and that determines a certain power consumption using certain clocks, hence why they defined a ~100MHz clock for the GPU and ~600-800MHz for the CPU.
The OMAP 36xx (Droid X, Droid 2, Defy, etc) are made using a newer, smaller 45nm process, which allows them to run at higher speeds while spending approx. the same power, which is why Texas Instruments decided to clock the GPU at ~200MHz and the CPU at ~1-1.2GHz.
So it's not like the Milestones and Droids have their GPUs underclocked, those are just their factory clocks.
Of course, overclocking the GPU would be nice and it could be possible. If someone found out how to change the GPU's voltage and clocks, I'm sure it could come in handy in future games.
However, right now, the 1st gen Milestones/Droids are running every high-end HD game from gameloft at full speed, and I bet it'll even do Infinity Blade and other UE3 games when they're out for Android.
Every "HD" Android game has to be compatible with the 1st-gen Snapdragon's GPU, the Adreno 200, which is a lot slower than the SGX530 @ 100MHz, so we're sitting confortably above the base spec for now. And with all the Windows Mobile 7 phones coming with a 1st-gen Snapdragon (mandatory requirement), it'll be like this for a while.
So there's really not a big need for overclocking the GPU right now, except for getting higher scores in mobile benchmarks (some of them terribly unoptimized, like GLBenchmark 1.1 and 2.0).
Furthermore, I it seems the first factor to limit the 1st-gen Droids in games will be the RAM amount.
The first UE3-based game for Android is already out, and it requires 512MB of RAM.
So the game runs on Nexus One and not on a Droid/Milestone, which has far superior graphics performance.
(I'm pretty sure this has something to do with the fact that Android doesn't allow graphics buffering in the main memory, though, which could be resolved in future firmware revisions).
Then again, overclocking the GPU would be cool, and I'm pretty sure getting our SGX530 to work @ ~200MHz would significantly increase the gaming longevity of our phones for quite a while.
Thanks for your useful and important reply.
"The Manhattan Project" on Galaxy S Series just made me curious about Droid's gpu oc, because SGS also use a PowerVR gpu. But things isn't easy due to a fact that one is made by TI while another is made by samsung, the structure inside both SoCs may be completely different.
But I still hope someone capable would try something on this.
That's really cool and significantly lengthen the lifetime of our Droid and Milestone.
Thx again for your reply!
PS: I also felt strange why the UI(not games) on N1 is faster than an OCed droid, could it be the optimization problem?
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
TeroZ said:
PS: I also felt strange why the UI(not games) on N1 is faster than an OCed droid, could it be the optimization problem?
Sent from my Milestone using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Definitely part of the optimization --a fast ROM with a good theme like the Droid X theme on the GOT 2.2.1 ROM has as fast a GUI as I've encountered on Android, even without overclock.
Also take in consideration that all the current 2.1 and 2.2 roms have a cap of 30fps in 2D, perhaps when the final 2.2 update arrives there will be some perfomance gain
Sent from my Milestone using Tapatalk
I currently have a HTC Desire which I have had since it first come out and am in line for a new handset... I always get mine sim free or pay as you go.
Been looking a lot a lately of the Optimus 2x or Galaxy S2 in regards to gaming. Now, I know there are threads about both GPU's but.... which one is more powerful and will be best "future proofed"?.
Heard a lot of things on both handset forums saying that Tegra 2 is a year old, has 8 cores and the Galazy S2 is newer and only 4 cores.
So, as a potential buyer of either handset... am looking at the best gaming platform based on games.
At the moment, its a hard choice because I want to purchase the best fone I can at the moment...
Any thoughts on which platform will be better?, or.... get the support from developers?. At the moment NVIDIA have got the marketing right imho, but could the Galazy S2 overtake that and make "it" the most optimized platform for games on a Android device?.
A lot of questions, which I am unsure of the answers?.
Any thoughts?.
While i can't tell you which is the future proof, i think its worth remembering that nvidia is very old school in gaming and i am sure they are doing what they can to promote tegra as the ultimate mobile gaming platform and i am sure they know a few in the business.
Can non tegra phone play tegra games ?
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
@iceman92
Yes.
But still i'd say tegra is more furute-proof cause the developers will focus on the more mainstream processor which will be tegra... only a suggestion.
With the future-proof part, I would say Tegra is the best to go with. Nvidia have alot of plans for releasing smartphone CPU's in the future, I mean, they are due to release a quad core CPU this summer. I've had my O2x for about 2 weeks now and I've had no problems gaming with it, smooth as silk. As long as you use Launcher Pro then you're fine
The Mali-400 in the SGS2 SoC is older than the Geforce ULP in the Tegra 2 I believe but the Mali should outperform Tegra 2 on paper. Currently, gaming on "superphones" is still murky. You have different approaches to how you make (e.g. Adreno and PowerVR parts are "tile-based") the chips work. Therefore some games will play better on some chips because they are optimized for a certain kind of graphics design which is good on certain kinds of GPU hardware.
So here's what you do. Focus on good "Families" of GPU. First we have Adreno found in Qualcomm Chips (Adreno 220 in the HTC Sensation slaps Geforce ULP hard). The Adreno 200 is in the Nexus One and several Android phones. It's a well known and widely used GPU in Android.
Next you have PowerVR by Imagination, a very proven family. The PowerVR SGX540 is found in the Nexus S and the Galaxy S i9000 class of phones (Very popular phone). So expect a lot of marketshare in that. PowerVR is also used in iPhones and iPads. So expect some advantages when an iPhone released game reaches an Android platform.
Next you have Geforce ULP in the Tegra 2 by NVidia. Geforce ULP has not had much time to shine HOWEVER Tegra Zone has demonstrated NVidia has been encouraging developers on the platform. NVidia has a good history with developer support on their desktop chips and it is quite evident that they are doing the same with their smartphones. However, Tegra 2 is only in two (three if you count g2x as separate from o2x) smartphones in the market so far.
From what I can see so far, the Adreno, PowerVR, and Geforce ULP are very relevant in the future of mobile gaming and will be for a long time. There's no chance in hell you can futureproof with any phone you buy now. On average, smartphone GPU performance appears to be breaking Moore's Law and is becoming well over 2x the performance year over year with no sign of slowing down. What you want is something that's on the market which you will be satisfied with now. That's all you can count on.
Thanks guys.. in the end i went for the 2X as i paid £278 for the handset with a trade in for my desire.
Am very happy with the fone at the moment but having a issue with the free Shrek Kart voucher as it seems the voucher may have been used with someone else, not too worry.
Haven't had chance with gaming on it but just hope that we get games that are optimised for tegra 2, rather than ports from another more powerful GPU?!.
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA Premium App
Since MWC is around the corner and Companies are already making announcements I ranted a bit about MultiCore phones. So like the Title says..
What do You think... Do Phones really need to have 2-4-6-8 cores?
My 2cents
To me the need for even two cores still seems over powered. My big complaint is that manufactures just want to ONE up the competition and add more and more even though it wouldn't be fully utilized by anyone in the foreseeable future.
For example. All these companies are slapping MultiCore phones and adding more ram and they aren't even really optimizing their software for the additional cores. It was android and it finally added MultiCore support with ICS, but companies were and still are releasing phones with 2cores running Froyo, Gingerbread that won't see ICS ever if not for devoted developers to Port it.
To me you can have the most fancy OS with all the Eye Candy you can think off and have it run off a Single(One) Core Processor just fine with no lag and 768MB of RAM and still have enough left for background apps if you focus on making your software efficient and optimized for that ONE core.
Look at WP7 sure its UI was over simplified, but it runs just fine with ONE core and 512MB of ram. And I've seen some very impressive Games run just fine on those phones. Unrelated to phones but look at how Windows (Desktop) handles RAM. Right now with just Chrome open with two tabs its using up 2GB of ram and this is a clean install. I just formatted my HDD and installed Chrome and updated to SP1 so there is no program prefetched. Ubuntu on this computer with just Chrome open only uses up 256-300MB of RAM because it was optimized for low ram machines. OSX86 SL on this computer only uses about about 300-500MB of ram.
So in the end all these multicore phones are doing is using up battery life to feed all these cores when the software hasn't been optimized for it. Now some processors shut off the additional cores when they aren't needed but even then only Games/apps that are aware of those cores will ever really use them.
Companies as they add more RAM and more cores add along with it bugged down crappy software and that just kills the purpose of all that power.
---
I just needed to spit this somewhere
There needs to be another high end mobile OS entering the market along with developers building more CPU demanding apps. That's the problem with android, its not universal like ios. And I don't want a apple vs android argument
Sent from the Nokia Galaxy Nexus S2 XL XE S X 3G LTE T-mo Plus with Beats Audio
I think they needs to focus on the CPU speed rather then cores. I'd rather have a dual core phone running at 3.5ghz then a quad core running at 1.2
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA Premium App
What I think a company should do is focus on
Software > Battery > CPU/RAM
Because if you make you software RIGHT and perfect it then right from the get go you will notice huge performance with a single dual core processor.
Just imagine HTC sense with the speed of stock ICS on the Gnex or any other phone with Dual Core 1GB ram!
If companies like HTC focused on improving their UI with performance in mind, CPU makers at the same time will evolve and develop better smaller processors and will be cheaper then making a monster out of a phone only to cage it with half as UI's that suck.... Cuz we all know that a Single Core 1Ghz processor from today beats the crap out of a similar spec one from early 2000's
I dislike Apple but i gotta give them credit for focusing on iOS more then the actual iPhone.. If Android makers did the same and improved their crapware we wouldn't call it that.
I heard the multiple cores end up saving battery, especially in regards to the Tegra 3 because it has the companion core to take care of easy tasks like email syncing while the screen is off or whatever. The extra cores kick in when they're needed too, they're not constantly running when there's nothing going on. Most of the time, the extra ones are offline (see screenshots below).
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA Premium.
Do we really need hexacore computers? Even though most software doesn't really benefit from them? The majority of computer games rarely put more than 2 cores to any worthy use, the OS runs quite the same with 2 or 4 cores in general and for the most part only intensive applications even benefit from it at all (photo, video, CAD, 3D and so on). We still get them though, and often enough they don't use excessively more power than the previous generation with smaller, more efficient technology. Also, try running your ubuntu setup with an 800x480 res and a comparatively weak single 1ghz, 512mb shared ram setup. It'll struggle for air.
It is good to move into this realm with phones. Play around with a Galaxy S, then with a Galaxy S 2 - both in their pure touchwiz form. The S 2 simply blows away the original. Virtually no performance hitches throughout any usage you can imagine, and this is just an upgrade from single to dual core. New designs don't use any more power than predecessors, and often save power as described above. 4 active cores when needed (completely shut off when inactive), and a seperate low-power single core when there is something basic? Genius.
I'm all for phones with as many cores as they fit, as long as the designs of tomorrow are like the designs of today. I don't see any reason why they won't be, so what's the harm?
i dont think we need 2+ cores
my nexus s out performs most dual core phone when i had it on stock 4.0.3 @ 1ghz
not im on a custom rom @ 1.4ghz... its even better
qaz2453 said:
i dont think we need 2+ cores
my nexus s out performs most dual core phone when i had it on stock 4.0.3 @ 1ghz
not im on a custom rom @ 1.4ghz... its even better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No offence but I really don't think it will, maybe at benchmarking because that's not really a full test of speed.
Dual cores and 1.5ghz seems like all we need...
I am running 1ghz on my epic4g with a nice rom and i never really have complaints about the single core and the 1ghz it always works.
Dual core would satisfy my needs
sensation lover said:
No offence but I really don't think it will, maybe at benchmarking because that's not really a full test of speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Nexus S routinely beats SOME dual core phones with the right kernel and ROM. I should know, I have one. That phone with Trinity kernel is a beast.
Wasn't me!! I didn't do it!
The more the merrier!
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium
For a long time i agreed with you completely, thinking more than two cores was fairly unnecessary, but after having recently looked into Ubuntu for Android and the Webtop application in the motorola atrix, i thought if our phones our powerful enough (4 or so cores), rather than have that power needlessly sitting there have our phones be able to run full desktop OS's. Ubuntu seems like the key candidate here, as i did enjoy my brief stint on there.
So too many cores does seem unnecessary just to one up the competition, but if we use that power to have a phone and desktop computer in one, then i am all for it!
qaz2453 said:
i dont think we need 2+ cores
my nexus s out performs most dual core phone when i had it on stock 4.0.3 @ 1ghz
not im on a custom rom @ 1.4ghz... its even better
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, it gets a higher score in a benchmark that literally measures the frequency. I have a Nexus S and no matter how much i OC it doesn't compare to something like an SGS2.
Zorigo said:
For a long time i agreed with you completely, thinking more than two cores was fairly unnecessary, but after having recently looked into Ubuntu for Android and the Webtop application in the motorola atrix, i thought if our phones our powerful enough (4 or so cores), rather than have that power needlessly sitting there have our phones be able to run full desktop OS's. Ubuntu seems like the key candidate here, as i did enjoy my brief stint on there.
So too many cores does seem unnecessary just to one up the competition, but if we use that power to have a phone and desktop computer in one, then i am all for it!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with this entirely. Android, in its current state, is a Phone OS. In time I hope to see it gain many Desktop OS attributes, and right now we can already see Desktop OSes run on the phones. There is no reason to turn Android into one, but more processor power means we can turn our phones into a mini-computer worth using at a whim.
Unlike what seems to have happened with the iPhone 4S, the android dual cores don't guzzle through the battery like no tomorrow. Battery technology in it's current state is also limited. You want more mAh? Buy a bigger battery. Anything else is more often than not just a scam.
I think not nessesary in more cores.Simply stupid marketing to get your money.
Give me more ram, give me more cores, give me a decent screen, USB host and native Ubuntu... That way
Sent from my HTC Sensation XE with Beats Audio using Tapatalk
Give me more batary life.
animal-on said:
Give me more batary life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Indeed, instead of making the specifications better, they should focus on improving the battery live. Really, 1 day is horse**** compared to the Nokia phones in the early 2000's..
My two cents:
I recently upgraded from a MyTouch 3G Slide to a MyTouch 4G Slide... going from a 600MHz MSM7227 Qualcomm proc to a 1.2GHz MSM8260 Dual-core SnapDragon.
Now aside from the obvious bump in speed, what impressed me the most was improved battery efficiency - partly from the proc, partly from Android improvements. From what I have seen of the new Tegra 3 SoC, it basically has four system cores and one battery saver core, that runs with minimal draw when the phone is idling.
As with PC procs, I think we'll see near future software and operating systems that are able to make greater use of multi-core setups, while saving battery life.
---------- Post added at 01:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:43 PM ----------
Here's a better question:
Why are hardware manufacturers so stingy with RAM and ROM!?
I can't believe that HTC or Samsung or Nokia would pay all that much more for 512MB of RAM as they would 2GB of RAM, right?
It just annoys me that we still have current onboard memory restrictions with so many devices in 2012
It's simple.If manufecturers will equip devices so fast of big memory,2 Gb for example,not so many people will buy new phone or tab.They will be waiting,because it's devices will works very fine with any apps.
I don't think people need all these extra cores, the only reason people think they do, is because stupid interfaces slowing the sh!+ out of their phones, if companies start concentrating on simpler UI, the need for all this RAM and CPU power will be gone, it's all part of the marketing plan, make things slower, tell people they need more cores, sell expensive phones and profit like a boss