Database Develop

Why my cpuinfo is wrong?

Hi, I would want to ask a developer, why my cpuinfo show me that i have only one processor?
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App

Marsou77 said:
Hi, I would want to ask a developer, why my cpuinfo show me that i have only one processor?
Sent from my LG-P990 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It shows both your processors just fine...
See, there is proccesor 0, and processor 1. The naming might seem a tad strange, but that's because of how data formats work

My Atrix show me that it have 2 and my mini x10 pro show me that it have 1...
So, WTF ?

Marsou77 said:
My Atrix show me that it have 2 and my mini x10 pro show me that it have 1...
So, WTF ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't get what you mean... They are both obviously showed in you cpuinfo.

Well... first, sorry for my English and I try to do my best... second, I want to know why, my Atrix show me that it have 2 processors in CPUinfo (which is powered by NVidia too) so that my 2X show me 1... because 0 mean nothing, not existing, ok ? I find it very strange...
Btw, I change the value to 2, i'm wrong ?

You fool
It is enumeration which starts at 0 and continues to 1... and 2.. and so on
If you'll have 4 processors (or cores) you'll have here CPU 0, CPU 1, CPU 2, CPU 3...

Thanks for your answers... but another one for the way
How do you make any difference between devices which show in the CPUinfo 0 for 1 core and 1 for 2 cores (like ours 2x) and devices which show in the CPUinfo 1 for 1 core and 2 for 2 cores (like my Atrix)
I think it's a little confused but it's understandable

Marsou77 said:
Thanks for your answers... but another one for the way
How do you make any difference between devices which show in the CPUinfo 0 for 1 core and 1 for 2 cores (like ours 2x) and devices which show in the CPUinfo 1 for 1 core and 2 for 2 cores (like my Atrix)
I think it's a little confused but it's understandable
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's implemented somewhere in the kernel code, and could be changed by adding "+1" to a line or something like that

This came from Linux kernel. You get from kernel structure CPU enumeration which starts at 0 and it is on your own how to interpret it. This seems Motorola kernel interpret it in "human readable" form, in other kernel it is interpreted in "machine readable" form. Both are correct indeed

Thank you for your answer Keltek. So, if I understand good, no developers can use this information for their games to detect the number of core and optimize the game ?
My father works on many support such as iOS, (3)DS.... and only begin Android now.
And he wants to do a game with the same code between devices : A same game in full 3D works, in all devices you can imagine, smoothly
http://s3.noelshack.com/uploads/images/144829675584_raj.jpg
(the picture is too big)

I think (and blindly hope) if developers uses Android system API for CPU enumeration function, there is no problem to support more cores.

Marsou77 said:
Thank you for your answer Keltek. So, if I understand good, no developers can use this information for their games to detect the number of core and optimize the game ?
My father works on many support such as iOS, (3)DS.... and only begin Android now.
And he wants to do a game with the same code between devices : A same game in full 3D works, in all devices you can imagine, smoothly
http://s3.noelshack.com/uploads/images/144829675584_raj.jpg
(the picture is too big)
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sure he can He'll just have to count lines containg those numbers, instead of using the numbers themselves

Thank you very much guys

If you know anything about computer CPUs, please help!

So,
My friend (Simon), recently acquired a Dell Precision Series computer/micro server tower.
Inside, it has 2 Intel® Xeon® X5472 quad-core processors running at 3.00ghz
My other friend (Josh) said to Simon, in his apparent jealousy, that even though Simon essentially has 8 cores, they are %&$# because they are VIRTUAL cores and not physical cores.
I scouted the Intel website and found this model processor and clearly states that within each processor, "Number of cores: 4. Number of threads: 4"
I am not familiar with threads but I am aware that hyper-threading is essentially creating virtual cores.
So the question is:
Is he using 8 virtual cores or merely 8 physical cores
If you can answer this, could you please tell me your reasoning if you have one?
Thanks =)
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App

[CORRECTION]
8 physical cores or merely 8 virtual cores*****

This is a thread

assuming he is running windows 7....
click start, right there above where you clicked... there is a search box... type "dxdiag" and hit enter.
this will bring up a window listing all your hardware in detail.
i have an i5, dual core (which is actually a quad core with 4 logical processors) so under my "processor" description, it reads "M540 @ 2.53 Ghz (4 CPUs) ~2.5 Ghz."
running this program will tell you exactly what hardware he has. sounds like a dual quad core to me, though.
hope that helps.
you can also, type "msconfig" in that same window... then click the "boot" tab, then "advanced options" and on the top right you will see a window listing how many processor you have available to you.
hope that helps

His says:
Intel(R ) Xeon( R)
CPU X5472 @ 3. 00GHz (8 CPU's), ~3GHz
8 physical cores or only virtual?
Sorry =\
And thanks for the responses...
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App

jimbo.levy said:
His says:
Intel(R ) Xeon( R)
CPU X5472 @ 3. 00GHz (8 CPU's), ~3GHz
8 physical cores or only virtual?
Sorry =\
And thanks for the responses...
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm pretty sure that's a 4 physical core processor.

sure is. that is a dual processor, quad core processor set up, my friend.

http://ark.intel.com/products/34447/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5472-(12M-Cache-3_00-GHz-1600-MHz-FSB)
Says here its a quad core

Each Xeon has 4 physical cores inside. A dual processor setup in this case means 8 actual cores. A better question will be whether your friend has applications that can make use of said number of cores.

The most number of cores is 6 , which is the Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition Q----- (something) , in which it has 6 cores 12 threads (as said by the Intel site)
Forever living in my Galaxy Ace using XDA App

http://ark.intel.com/products/34447/Intel-Xeon-Processor-X5472-(12M-Cache-3_00-GHz-1600-MHz-FSB)
Four physical cores per processor. No Hyperthreading.
Two processors..
4x2=8

Thanks everyone =D
Sent from my GT-S5830 using XDA App

changing the chipset????????

is there possibility of changing qualcomm chipset to MSM7227A or MSM7227 800Mhz for our x8???????

mayurcools said:
is there possibility of changing qualcomm chipset to MSM7227A or MSM7227 800Mhz for our x8???????
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Try And give us feedback
Send from E15i
nAa 13
FireDroid 2.3

Do you really think it is possible ??
I mean seriously..

lol...
sent from my phone using hands and brain...

ROFL......LMAO
Sent from my E16i using Tapatalk 2

No, you can't
Sent from my X8 using xda app-developers app

try, but i'm not sure............tell us the results if you did it

i think we can
because in the 800MHz chipset the only difference is cpu frequency thats it

woowwww
"Incredible"

Totally impossible for the MSM7227A.. the MSM7227 at 800MHz should work though, the only difference from ours is that it is stable at 800MHz.
The hard part is to get one and replace it without damaging the phone
I'm sure it's also possible to increase the RAM with a identical chip but with more space and reprogram the phone to address it properly.

Nikkopt said:
Totally impossible for the MSM7227A.. the MSM7227 at 800MHz should work though, the only difference from ours is that it is stable at 800MHz.
The hard part is to get one and replace it without damaging the phone
I'm sure it's also possible to increase the RAM with a identical chip but with more space and reprogram the phone to address it properly.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The MSM7227 at 800mhz is actually MSM7227T. The recommended frequency for our chipset is 600Mhz. Lol it's not possible to change the chipset for to either of them, the skill needed to do that would kill you.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium

NIMBAH said:
Lol it's not possible to change the chipset for to either of them, the skill needed to do that would kill you.
Sent from my MB860 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know what? You are right, i have been seeing in the news that thousands of people die every week because they learned how to rework BGA chips.. The knowledge needed is so insane that the brain explodes.
What the hell are you talking about dude? Reworking/ flowing / balling is simple when you have the right equipment.. The hard part is its price. Or were you thinking of doing it with a soldering iron?
About the chipsets, they are the same thing.. the turbo version is stable at 800MHz, the normal is not.. It's the same as changing your computer cpu from a 2.5GHz to a 2.7Ghz.. the pins are the same, everything is the same, the 2.7 just draws more power.
I am not 100% sure it would work because there are lots of variables (software and power wise), but at least 90%
I'm not screaming IMPOSSIBLE or mocking the dude like everyone else because it can actually work.. it's just very impractical, it would be cheaper buying a new phone.

I already have hot air soldering station and other tools but how can I get a chipset moreover where can I get the datasheet of the chipset I searched alot but havnt found any
Sent from my E15i using xda app-developers app

Too much cores?

I'm talking about CPU cores people, not corn or the earth's core,
IS THERE SUCH THING AS TOO MUCH CORE FOR A SMARTPHONE?
this is how experts view this:
Greg Sullivan said:
If you're going to use the number of cores on your phone as the single metric for performance, you're doing it wrong. --
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nick DiCarlo said:
In theory, if you divide among cores, each one has an easy job rather than a hard job. --
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Raj Talluri said:
"We're able to get more performance with two processors than our competition can get with four,"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Greg Sullivan said:
that writing code to take advantage of multiple processor cores makes writing apps much harder. Likewise, there's a lot more complexity in debugging apps when something goes wrong, a challenge that many app developers are reluctant to face.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Greg Sullivan said:
Multicore won't help you in a world where the apps aren't threaded
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Francis Sideco said:
It's just like punching the accelerator on the sports car. The faster you do that, the faster you burn through gas
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Greg Sullivan said:
people listen to music while surfing the Web, and that's something you can do very efficiently with one core, performance rests on how efficiently the operating system can manage tasks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nick DiCarlo said:
Chip guys...will absolutely show you benchmarks where their chip will dominate everybody else's
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So these are the experts,
but what do you think?

I see no difference between single core and dual core services except in gaming.I'm quite content with my single core device compared to a dual core
Sent from my inter galactic super fantastic communication device.

Honestly, I'm a little torn on this one. The spec snob in me says "Moar cores, moar better, moar faster! Gimme nao!!"
However, I own both the HTC One X (international Quad core Tegra 3 variant) and the Samsung Galaxy S III (TMOUS S4 dual core variant)
They are both fast, powerful phones....
(disclaimer: yes, I know the S4 is based on a newer architecture (28nm vs the 40nm Tegra 3)
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

I don't know. It still takes about 3 full minutes for a picture to show up in the folder I moved it to. Maybe that's not the phone messing up, but I wonder if it would happen faster with a quad core phone.
BUT, I am inclined to agree with Greg Sullivan as a gut instinct.
Sent from your mom.

guys thats a simple a thing.
the performance isnt based on the number of cores,you can have a phone with dualcore cpu and it can be better(in performance) than a quadcore one,but you can have a quadcore which is better than a dualcore phone, its based on the software and the other hardware,its not only about cores.....

Eventually more cores will make a difference, but it's still too early right now
Once the majority of software is threaded, then more cores will mean faster processing and better battery life, especially in a multi-tasking environment like Android
But for right now, I wish there was as much attention paid to ram speed and r/w speed to internal/external sd storage
That would be a bigger boost to performance right now than cramming a 20 core cpu into a phone

Of course there can be too many cores. Every core more, than needed to complete a given task in an appropriate amount of time is one core to much. The question is, what will the average user (not people like us) do with their phones, and how much processor power does that need. The average users I know use their phones for Facebook and Angry Birds. Not very demanding things. To be honest, I don't do very much more CPU-intensive things, too.
Also, don't forget that software has to be optimised to run on multicore-machines. And those software that can be highly optimised, takes more advantage of GPUs than of CPUs. And highly parallelizable tasks are usually there to calculate things that you don't want to bother with on your way.
It's a matter of how people use their phones, but as a guideline we can take Intel's and AMD's x86-processors, for most tasks dual-core is enough, and more than quad-core is rarely used at all for private purposes.

deathnotice01 said:
I'm talking about CPU cores people, not corn or the earth's core,
IS THERE SUCH THING AS TOO MUCH CORE FOR A SMARTPHONE?
this is how experts view this:
So these are the experts,
but what do you think?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The amount of cores is not the only factor for performance.
However, assuming all other factors are the same, more cores will yield better performance in multi threaded code.
Sent from my HTC Rezound

I'm surprised no one has brought up the PS3 yet. It's processor is the epitome of this discussion.
More cores can make a huge difference, but the process is difficult and sometimes not with it, especially if they're unused.

Zacmanman said:
I'm surprised no one has brought up the PS3 yet. It's processor is the epitome of this discussion.
More cores can make a huge difference, but the process is difficult and sometimes not with it, especially if they're unused.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well the Cell Processor isn't like traditional multi core processors.
Each of the helper cores can only do single floats, but they are good for assisting the Gpu.
(I think it has been super fast bus between the cpu and gpu)
A very unique architecture, which is why it took several years to fully take advantage of it.
Sent from my HTC Rezound

The PS3 doesn't have to last off of a limited power supply. They can throw as many cores as they want in something with a wired power supply, when you switch over to something like a cellphone that has an expected battery life all that crap flies out the window. If the cores aren't being properly utilized that's just wasted power (at least to me). I am going to hold onto my Nexus S until it either dies out or stops being developed for. Hopefully multi core processors are better utilized by then.

wouldn't it be possible to break 1 chip into like 10 smaller cores, so it's almost like an army tackling the date transfer rather then 1 big chip tackling the data transfer? I know that that they're integrating GPU's with CPU's now, but what if they were to make 5 small GPU cores and 5 small CPU cores inside of one blazing fast chip. could it work?

MRsf27 said:
wouldn't it be possible to break 1 chip into like 10 smaller cores, so it's almost like an army tackling the date transfer rather then 1 big chip tackling the data transfer? I know that that they're integrating GPU's with CPU's now, but what if they were to make 5 small GPU cores and 5 small CPU cores inside of one blazing fast chip. could it work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually, that's sort of what Tegra 3 is like. Look up the specs of the Nexus 7.

Zacmanman said:
Actually, that's sort of what Tegra 3 is like. Look up the specs of the Nexus 7.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
oh... sowwies im a nuubeee :laugh: knowledge is power. you learn something new everyday thank you sir

Just give it more time batteries will get smaller with higher power rating and mobile phone CPUs will get more power efficient.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app

MRsf27 said:
wouldn't it be possible to break 1 chip into like 10 smaller cores, so it's almost like an army tackling the date transfer rather then 1 big chip tackling the data transfer? I know that that they're integrating GPU's with CPU's now, but what if they were to make 5 small GPU cores and 5 small CPU cores inside of one blazing fast chip. could it work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Intel and AMD chips are also like that, that's the new thing coming. I just find tech funy, the more powerful the smaller...smh..
Sent from my HTC Desire Z using xda premium

strip419 said:
Intel and AMD chips are also like that, that's the new thing coming. I just find tech funy, the more powerful the smaller...smh..
Sent from my HTC Desire Z using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well they have to make them smaller.
If they kept the build process at the same size and made them more powerful, they would be giant, use a ton of power, and generate a ton of heat.
Sent from my HTC Rezound

I don't think more cores will be added to phones for a long while yet anyway.
This is because we had single cores and dual cores for years and they still work perfectly well.
Proof of that is the S2. It's an old phone in comparison to the newest phones on the market, yet it's still more powerful than the majority of phones around. Now, I know that it isn't purely based on the cores, but they are a deciding factor.
The dual cores of it can still more than easily do everything that is required of them, without even struggling.
So based on that, quad cores aren't even essential as of yet, so it's going to be a long time before more are needed.
I'm a product of the system I was born to destroy!

From a developer’s point of view, to get any advantage out of multiple core processors can involve a complete rewrite of the application. Is it worth the pain of doing this? The job has to be able to be split into threads that can be run completely independently of each other. In some cases this is impossible, or hardly worth the effort for any advantage returned.
On a PC, I have written a few number crunching programs that can farm out parcels of work across all four cores, using the _beginthreadex() Windows API. It still has to wait for the longest running thread to finish before it can carry on, meanwhile the other cores that have finished, sit there idle.
While multicore devices can run different applications at once, can you keep up with them all? There is only one human interface to the device.
There is very little software that really knows how to make full use of multiple cores.

[Q] CPU usage detail from CPU Z

I don't know if anyone have installed CPU Z in you Xperia Z
but any of you have the same problem as me.
in CPU Z, 4 core of CPU is displayed, but 3 of them is showing status of stopped. (some time the stopped core will show the clock speed)
Is this normal? if no, then what can i do.

I think that the four cores dont work all the time, it starts using them only when neede, my cpuz app shows the same as urs. Thats normal.
Sent from my C6603 using xda app-developers app

This is fully normal, because while you are at CPUZ, there is no CPU usage, so your cores are off for power saving
Sent from my GT-N7100 using xda app-developers app

FelixWan said:
I don't know if anyone have installed CPU Z in you Xperia Z
but any of you have the same problem as me.
in CPU Z, 4 core of CPU is displayed, but 3 of them is showing status of stopped. (some time the stopped core will show the clock speed)
Is this normal? if no, then what can i do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You should be happy, because this saves a lot of battery life. All new devices act like this to preserve energy.
P. S. No questions in the general section.
Sent from my C6603 using xda app-developers app

Dsteppa said:
You should be happy, because this saves a lot of battery life. All new devices act like this to preserve energy.
P. S. No questions in the general section.
Sent from my C6603 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
of course i am happy with this...
just want to make sure that the clock speed not appear is normal...
since what i remember is clock speed is not related to loading... even CPU not in use, the clock speed should still able to be extracted

FelixWan said:
of course i am happy with this...
just want to make sure that the clock speed not appear is normal...
since what i remember is clock speed is not related to loading... even CPU not in use, the clock speed should still able to be extracted
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Qualcoms cores are asynchronous. Each core kick-in when needed and most important they work asynchronously.

You can see this sort of behaviour on any device. Qualcomm CPUs run asynchronously, that is, the different CPU cores can turn on and off independently of each other, but more importantly can clock themselves independently of each other as well, which other manufacturers don't do. Seeing 1 core on and 3 cores off can be on any quad core device, but seeing one core running at 1.5GHz, another at 384MHz, another at 1GHz and the last one off is a Qualcomm only feature. Supposedly helps save battery life since clocking asynchronously gives the CPU only the power it needs, rather than clocking all 4 cores to 1.5GHz when 2 cores are at full load and 2 cores at half load (for example).

My Samsung Exynos Note 2 also runs 3 cores and stops the fourth. Seen in CPU-Z. I came here because i found it weird it stops the 3rd core and not the 4th. It's not a big deal I was just curious why it chooses to stop that core. My cores also clock independantly.