Related
I felt like once phones hit the 1 ghz mark the cpu race kicked into over drive....the dual core phase was short lived and just about old news with quad core phones hitting shelves. Is there anything left after quad core phones? Will this be standard for awhile? I just hope its not a gimmick. Like the whole 4g deal....especially LTE....i still dont feel like the benefit of the slight boost in data transfer is worth the crappy battery life. Hspa+ seems to be a good sweet spot for data transfer.... and instead of improving networks and creating quality broadband services companies waste millions on trying to be the company with the latest inadequate tech. Most people dont even understand what they have or what they are using....if only i had a dollar for everytime i heard....."i love my iphone 4g"
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
I don't know, but as I can't see how there would enough multi-tasking to make more than four cores worth sacrificing features, I would love to see improvements in battery life instead.
Doesn't Moore's law apply to more than just processing speed? Like, we could see improvements in cost, speed, or energy efficiency, but we just keep going for speed? Because I'd really love to have double the battery life.
I doubt that they will be the standard for a while. Look at how amazing the HTC ONE S is performing compared to the ONE X and the transformer prime.
I think that the dual core still has a lot of life in it. Quad core phones may be in all the flagship phones pretty soon, but I don't think that they will be "standard" for quite some time.
Sent from my PG86100 using XDA
I hope so.....id rather have a high performance dual core than quad.....unless quad core phones will start flying planes
Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using xda premium
Don't worry about core counts. Just worry about overall performance.
Quad core is a meaningless number of cores.
Quad-Cores will remain flagship for at least another year. I predict the 2014 standard for lower-end phones will be quad-core. Dual-Core won't die out, however, because of low-power consumption and prices. Most changes we will likely see in the coming years:
1. Size (Probably a move to smaller 10nm chipsets, thinner screens and phones, Larger displays)
2. Optimization of Current Technologies (Software improvements, thinner AMOLEDS, power consumption)
3. BATTERY IMPROVEMENTS (It's needed the MOST)
Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core chips and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.
theherodrownd said:
Quad-Core phones will be short lived. Right now quad core chips are based on Cortex A9, Cortex A16 is around the corner. The A16 dual-core chips perform faster than current quad core batteries and will use much less power than Cortex A9 dual cores we have now. Due to the initial expensive production costs of the A16 it will be a while before we see A16 quads hit the market.
Edit: Of course cheap phones may use the old cheaper Quad Core Cortex A9 in their phones but by no means will it be the flagship thing to have in a phone, just standard like the 1 GHz processors have become.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
Smokeey said:
Tegra 3 has 2 A15's bro.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You sure? I looked a few places to check and saw it is still based on A9. Seems to be stamped on the same 40nm dye as the Tegra2. Its ghost core seems to have a different architecture however.
Edit: Valynor posted one of the links I was reading, thanks!
Valynor said:
Tegra 3 has 1.4 GHz Quad-Core ARM Cortex-A9s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_Cortex-A9_MPCore
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The next generation (Wayne) has 2 A9 and 2 A15 (est. Q4-Q1 13 release).
More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.
systemf said:
More efficient cores seems to be what people really want vs more cores. Along those lines, battery life is more a concern than just raw computing power.
I'm waiting to see what next gen processors bring rather than focusing on if it is quad core or not.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Absolutely, definitely too early. I mean it's cool and all but QUAD CORE on a phone right now really? If we keep going this fast we will have 16 cores by 2014. But in all seriousness google and oems should just focus on battery life improvements, software, skins like sense and touchwiz refinements and user experience. Once those things are perfected you can bring new crazy features that would require a quad core powerhouse but for now it really is not needed. Just upgrade the current dual core architecture to A15 based SoC.
Someday:thumbup:
Sent from my i9250 [GSM) Galaxy Nexus
i really wanna know:
i got 1,5 ghz processor + Graphic Card (4+1)
i got design
i got beats
i got sense
S3 got:
1,4 ghz processor
Amoled...
Touchwiz
Battery ( 2200 mAh) with low energy usage Cpu
İ see benchmark points pass the S3 when JB comes
5 min ago i installed geekbench 2
my phone get 1300 benchmark points (power saving off) but s3 got 1700 -.-
its one of most important thing for me: HAVE BETTER PROCESSOR THEN S3
can anyone explain to me HOX have better cpu or not?
and what about iphone 5? is it beat hox too? with dual core??
This thread will be closed.
The HOX and S3 are basically on a par with each other. However the S3 just edges out the HOX for a few different reasons. First, most software needs further optimising for Tegra devices and secondly because the S3 doesn't have the S-On/S-Off problem.
It's worth noting that the HOX is closer in terms of following Google's phone design guidelines (no menu button) and also that the screen is better.
The Tegra3 version of HOX has a slower CPU than it's dual core version.
It's like comparing a Q8200 with a E8600 and then run dual core optimized programs.
Hmmm thx for explain
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Bassicaly there isnt much of a big difference.. Exynos is a bit faster(effective)than tegra 3.. So s3 has worse screen while htc has better.. S3 has amoled display while htc has only lcd display.. But they r kinda same.. Used both phone sense is good but still wud go for touchwiz.. Lack of toggles in notification menu rly bugs me.. (There r no official htc toggles there r just play stores one)..It is just my opinion
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
I have the One X but I think the S3 is better overall
The S3 has a faster processor, smoother gaming and UI, better quality camera, touchwiz features (pop up play, multi-window, smart rotation) and most importantly a great XDA thread
However the HOX does have a much better (& sturdier) design, better screen, THD games support, Beats audio
Headless_monkeyhunta96 said:
I have the One X but I think the S3 is better overall
The S3 has a faster processor, smoother gaming and UI, better quality camera, touchwiz features (pop up play, multi-window, smart rotation) and most importantly a great XDA thread
However the HOX does have a much better (& sturdier) design, better screen, THD games support, Beats audio
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Regarding to beats.. Ok so when the driver is on the sound is just amazing it blows any other phone when it comes to that..But,but,but i think that they demolished sound when u play music without beats drivers just so u can say that the difference is sooo big.. And it is a good marketing trick gotta admit that.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
The amount of stupidity in this thread is unbelievable...
The S3 beats the Tegra 3 even though it has a slightly slower clock speed for a few reasons, mainly because the Exynos chip in the S3 is a 32nm chip as compared to the Tegra 3's 40nm process, so the Exynos is somewhat more efficient due to the smaller process. Also, blame Nvidia for crappy software optimisation. Furthermore, the Mali 400 chip in the S3 is far more powerful than the puny Tegra 3 ULP Geforce chip. Don't say more cores = more power, that is not true. Besides, the S4 in the HOXL is more powerful than the Tegra 3 because the S4 has the Cortex A15 architecture which gives about 40% more processing power per core against the Cortex A9. The comparison of a dual core CPU and a quad core CPU using a dual core optimised software I saw somewhere above in this thread means nothing in ARM terms. The Cortex A9 (for example Tegra 3) uses all 4 cores and loses against the Snapdragon S4, say the MSM8960 which the HOXL has.
All other discussions about S3 and HOX w.r.t. features (touchwiz is a feature?!) should be reserved for other threads.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
pandaball said:
The amount of stupidity in this thread is unbelievable...
The S3 beats the Tegra 3 even though it has a slightly slower clock speed for a few reasons, mainly because the Exynos chip in the S3 is a 32nm chip as compared to the Tegra 3's 40nm process, so the Exynos is somewhat more efficient due to the smaller process. Also, blame Nvidia for crappy software optimisation. Furthermore, the Mali 400 chip in the S3 is far more powerful than the puny Tegra 3 ULP Geforce chip. Don't say more cores = more power, that is not true. Besides, the S4 in the HOXL is more powerful than the Tegra 3 because the S4 has the Cortex A15 architecture which gives about 40% more processing power per core against the Cortex A9. The comparison of a dual core CPU and a quad core CPU using a dual core optimised software I saw somewhere above in this thread means nothing in ARM terms. The Cortex A9 (for example Tegra 3) uses all 4 cores and loses against the Snapdragon S4, say the MSM8960 which the HOXL has.
All other discussions about S3 and HOX w.r.t. features (touchwiz is a feature?!) should be reserved for other threads.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The amount of stupidity in this is ridiculous.
Snapdragon S4 doesn't use Cortex A15, it uses Krait cores.
Furthermore, the S4 beats Tegra 3 because at the time benchmark reviews came out, most of them were optimized for dual core, the T3 beats S4 in terms of raw power, of course software will do its part.
Mali-400 doesn't really beat the GeForce. Its running in 16 bit mode, and its vertex limited. Sure it has a good fillrate, but it cannot rim vertex heavy games.
GeForce ULP runs in 32 bit, and is pixel limited, which basically means its a draw, but when you factor in THD games, GeForce wins.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
XxVcVxX said:
The amount of stupidity in this is ridiculous.
Snapdragon S4 doesn't use Cortex A15, it uses Krait cores.
Furthermore, the S4 beats Tegra 3 because at the time benchmark reviews came out, most of them were optimized for dual core, the T3 beats S4 in terms of raw power, of course software will do its part.
Mali-400 doesn't really beat the GeForce. Its running in 16 bit mode, and its vertex limited. Sure it has a good fillrate, but it cannot rim vertex heavy games.
GeForce ULP runs in 32 bit, and is pixel limited, which basically means its a draw, but when you factor in THD games, GeForce wins.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I facepalmed. Especially at the very first statement. What architecture does Krait use, I wonder.
As for S4 not beating Tegra, S4 came out *after* Tegra 3. You'd think benchmarks would be optimised for quad cores before they became optimised for Cortex A15.
As for the last one, you forgot that ULP Geforce is not superscalar. The GPU cores have to wait for the first instruction to complete before the next one can process, making the process slow as hell. Mali is far more powerful than Tegra (just look at benchmarks), because the GPU cores are far beefier than the Tegra GPU cores, and also because ULP Geforce is based on Fermi cores which are a bit old and slow at this point.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
pandaball said:
I facepalmed. Especially at the very first statement.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Read on Wikipedia more. Krait isn't Cortex A15.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
XxVcVxX said:
Read on Wikipedia more. Krait isn't Cortex A15.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its A15 plus Qualcomm enhancements...
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Krait is a custom architecture made by Qualcomm. Its similar to A15, but its not A15, and performance sits between A9 and A15, bit its more power efficient than A15.
Its like Scorpion, where the performance was between A8 and A9.
As for GeForce ULP running with Fermi, you're wrong. Its definitely not Fermi since it still has seperate vertex and pixel cores, so its even before GT200.
Mali-400 is old, and its not beefier than GeForce. Samsung made it up to par by overclocking extensively and forcing 16 bit rendering on the thing. It ****s on GeForce on pixel fill rate, but GeForce ****s on it on vertex output, so its kinda a draw.
Most games run smoother on Mali because most applications on Play Store is optimized for the biggest phone company : Samsung. You can see how Gameloft downright ignored Tegra.
EDIT: The ULP is using NV47
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
XxVcVxX said:
Krait is a custom architecture made by Qualcomm. Its similar to A15, but its not A15, and performance sits between A9 and A15, bit its more power efficient than A15.
Its like Scorpion, where the performance was between A8 and A9.
As for GeForce ULP running with Fermi, you're wrong. Its definitely not Fermi since it still has seperate vertex and pixel cores, so its even before GT200.
Mali-400 is old, and its not beefier than GeForce. Samsung made it up to par by overclocking extensively and forcing 16 bit rendering on the thing. It ****s on GeForce on pixel fill rate, but GeForce ****s on it on vertex output, so its kinda a draw.
Most games run smoother on Mali because most applications on Play Store is optimized for the biggest phone company : Samsung. You can see how Gameloft downright ignored Tegra.
EDIT: The ULP is using NV47
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
To use slightly crude terms, Qualcomm licensed A15 from ARM, then beat it with sticks until it became more optimised. Qualcomm has a slightly different license from ARM which allows them to take the design by ARM, beat it into shape then sell it.
As for Fermi in Tegra, I was mistaken. I didn't refer to anything, and my offhand memory sucks.
For Mali vs Tegra, refer to this: http://m.gsmarena.com/snapdragon_s4_pro_benchmarked_crushes_older_chipsets-news-4563.php. Look at the benchmark list, particularly GLbenchmark offscreen since its the most relevant.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
pandaball said:
To use slightly crude terms, Qualcomm licensed A15 from ARM, then beat it with sticks until it became more optimised. Qualcomm has a slightly different license from ARM which allows them to take the design by ARM, beat it into shape then sell it.
As for Fermi in Tegra, I was mistaken. I didn't refer to anything, and my offhand memory sucks.
For Mali vs Tegra, refer to this: http://m.gsmarena.com/snapdragon_s4_pro_benchmarked_crushes_older_chipsets-news-4563.php. Look at the benchmark list, particularly GLbenchmark offscreen since its the most relevant.
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its offscreen test, as I have stated before, GeForce is pixel limited, at HD resolutions, it becomes less than Mali, however remember Mali is running at 16 bit.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
XxVcVxX is right.. we have discuss about this in hamdir thread for a long time and if s3 is running 32bit like us.. it just the same as ours..
BTW.. both phone have pros and cons.. so just choose any we,you,he or her like..
XxVcVxX said:
Its offscreen test, as I have stated before, GeForce is pixel limited, at HD resolutions, it becomes less than Mali, however remember Mali is running at 16 bit.
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In offscreen 720p, Mali still (overall) eats Tegra, although what you said is correct, which makes me wrong. Therefore, I accept defeat and bestow my RD status to you
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
pandaball said:
In offscreen 720p, Mali still (overall) eats Tegra, although what you said is correct, which makes me wrong. Therefore, I accept defeat and bestow my RD status to you
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol wut.
I accept this honor, and I thank my friends and family for supporting me, and most of all, I thank pandaball for arguing with me XDXD
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
XxVcVxX said:
Lol wut.
I accept this honor, and I thank my friends and family for supporting me, and most of all, I thank pandaball for arguing with me XDXD
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But seriously, thanks. I learnt something, although losing to a stranger in an argument online on my birthday is totally the best way to start my year
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
pandaball said:
But seriously, thanks. I learnt something, although losing to a stranger in an argument online on my birthday is totally the best way to start my year
Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Hell, if I knew you were RD I wouldn't be so aggressive xD
Damned mobile app.
Happy Birthday
Sent from my faster than SGS3 HOX.
The galaxy tab s products that are available to me have an octa-core processor, with the high speed cores being 1.9ghz. I can't really understand why Samsung chose to use that instead of a 2.3ghz quad-core like in the tab pro.
See Wikipedia for an explanation of the concept: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_...multi-processing_.28global_task_scheduling.29
Because the Exynos 5 Octa-core is the one processor that Samsung has to be able to compete with Snapdragon 800, and is cheaper to implement since it's their own processor. I don't buy the Octa-core hype, I'd be happier with the Snapdragon 800 honestly like on the Tab PRO 8.4.
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
ssuper2k said:
The question is:
Does TAB S use the 8 cores at the same time?
It seams it does NOT, little cores are only used when low power is required..
So performance wise, this CPU is slower than SD 800
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And yet I am getting 35,300 on Antutu using Shaheers t800 rom which is higher than any other current tablet or phone. (Shaheer's rom should go out of beta today - don't flash until final has been posted).
The Tab Pro 8.4 Antutu is 32,806.
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
I can see the argument that you don't always need full power, thus the four slow cores, but since all cores can't run at once, it seems a cheat to have 1.9ghz as the top speed for the faster four cores. Since, or at least I assume, cores step up and down as needed, it seems to me a snapdragon 800 or higher at 2.3ghz or higher would have been just fine. I mean, if you are going to put in 3gb of RAM, then you should put in a great cpu also and not pretend less (1.9ghz) is a better contribution to what is supposed to be a premium tablet.
And yet I don't think samsung is doing enough to utilizing this hardware capability. In theory it should run at least 4x faster and 6x more effecient then the snap dragon and apple current A8 chip. It has failed to outshine the competitors because samsung software department sucks. Samsung hardware is still great though.
sku|| said:
I CANT PLAY NOVA 3 with exynos !
AND GAMING IS NOT SO SMOOTH ! STILL A BIT LAGGY
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Blame the developer for not making it compatible. Tegra powered Htc one x is incompatible too so not sure that is exynos issue..
i wish my t805 had Full HD screen resolution :cyclops:
Funny. Was just browsing the web a bit on my i5 ultrabook and it occurred to me that the browser on my Tab S is actually faster. If gaming is your primary thing, I'd buy the Nvidia Shield, not the Tab S. This tablet is designed for eye candy media consumption (internet and video) not for gaming enthusiasts. Try running your PC video card at 2560 x 1600 on ultra and see what you get.
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
You cannot compare the clock speeds from two different processors. For instance, you can't compare the 1.9GHz quad-core of the Exynos to the 2.3GHz quad-core of the Snapdragon 800. This doesn't mean anything. If you compare the clock speed of two Snapdragon chips, that's ok, or if you compare the clock speed of two Exynos chips, then that's ok too. Comparing the clock speed of an Intel chip against the clock speed of an AMD chip, is the same as comparing the clock speed of an Exynos chip to the clock speed of a Snapdragon chip.
The Exynos chip in this tablet has been shown to compete very well/close with the Snapdragon on every level except GPU. The Mali GPU in this chip just doesn't match the Adreno GPU from the Snapdragon. However, the RAM is faster in the Exynos than the Snapdragon.
That said, I am a fan of the Snapdragon chip, of course. I was holding off to see if the LTE variant of this tablet would have the Snapdragon 800, but instead they shipped with an Intel LTE modem. Besides apps/games not being optimized for Exynos, I am fairly satisfied with my purchase. I'm just anxious to get CyanogenMod(or any other AOSP ROM installed on it).
fletch33 said:
i had heard from a Samsung rep i actually enjoy talking to that Sammy had just figured the all cores at once and we should see updates that turn that feature on. when this will happen who knows. i also did not ask him for a link and now cant find that info on the web so when i see him again soon i will get more info.
i would assume (insert you know what that means) that when/if this happens the full power of this setup would greatly improve?
anyway i have had my Tab S running snappy for me and no complaints at this time
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could also mean increased battery consumption,don't know. Overall I am satisfied with this Tab including battery life.
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
pibach said:
There are 3 different performace results:
a) what Exynos 520 does achieve in practice now, measured bei some benchmarks and real world performance (<= Snapdragon 800)
b) what it could do theoretically - but will never happen due to driver and scheduler etc issues (>> Snapdragon)
c) what it will do some day in near future on an optimized ROM (somewhere in between?)
Fortunately the Exynos 5420 does support all 8 cores in parallel, see here:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Exynos-5420-Octa-SoC.103633.0.html
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
UpInTheAir said:
Wish I knew how. Probably a linux thing. ...
If it is possible to implement in today's existing source, I'm sure @AndreiLux would know about it ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's impossible.
AndreiLux said:
It's impossible.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What and why?
pibach said:
What and why?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidauthority.com/sam...ta-can-use-eight-cores-simultaneously-267316/
I've found a few articles saying it should support it, then a couple Deva saying they had to goto the 5422 for a working implementation of HMP.
Here is a post from odroid
http://forum.odroid.com/viewtopic.php?f=97&t=5651
That's weird. The (newer) 5422 supports HMP but not 3gb RAM.
Can Exynos 5 OCTA 5420 use all 8 cores at same time?
How is Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T700 performance compared to Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T705( with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800)?
The Exynos cpu performs admirably against my htc one m8 snapdragon cpu and ranks highly with other top performing cpu's.
Even better with Skyhigh kernel.
Worth mentioning these Exynos units suck the battery dry much faster than the Qualcomm S800 without delivering more performance.
mrcet007 said:
Can Exynos 5 OCTA 5420 use all 8 cores at same time?
How is Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T700 performance compared to Samsung Galaxy Tab S SM-T705( with Qualcomm Snapdragon 800)?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
According to the wikipedia article, the Linux kernel does have a scheduler mode that allows to use all cores or switch between them as needed. I don't know if the Samsung stock kernel or others actually use that mode.
One important issue is that you should not be carried away with the idea that having more cores is always better for performance. It takes a lot of work to write software that can actually load four or eight cores. Moreover, a lot of algorithms are still bottle-necked by one core and there is no way to change that. As a result, a typical PC with a quad core Intel i5 CPU is usually faster than a PC with a six or eight core AMD CPU, thanks to intel's much better individual core performance. This truth is even more relevant on tablets, which are effectively single-user machines, usually running only one big application at a time. I wouldn't lose a minute of my sleep over having only two working cores instead of four or eight.
What about PowerVR 6200 GPU vs Adreno 430?
A good question!
What's actually inside these processors...
Can't post outside link... Its (8) a53 processors clocked at 2.0ghz w/ powervr 6200
The 810 being (4)a53/(4)a57 big.LITTLE combo.
Long story short geekbench says the mediatek wins in multicore barely, but is smashed in single core, because it's a true octacore, but just a midrange one severely overclocked, with last generations gpu running the blinky flashy show.
this is all based on mt6795 not sure what the (t) means...
atomikpunx said:
What's actually inside these processors...
Can't post outside link... Its (8) a53 processors clocked at 2.0ghz w/ powervr 6200
The 810 being (4)a53/(4)a57 big.LITTLE combo.
Long story short geekbench says the mediatek wins in multicore barely, but is smashed in single core, because it's a true octacore, but just a midrange one severely overclocked, with last generations gpu running the blinky flashy show.
this is all based on mt6795 not sure what the (t) means...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, what does this mean in real world use?
Sharpshooterrr said:
So, what does this mean in real world use?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Last mediatek proccesors trully provide smoothness, the MTK6795T is just a flashy overclocked MTK6795, yes, it beats the SD810, even the snapdragron 805 beats the 810 in some devices, maybe is because the 810 throttles himself to the oblivion.
MediaTek SOC's are known to have crap embedded security.
Additionally if you think about the ways in which the big.LITTLE architecture works it makes a lot more logical sense than a makeup of 8 cores in a true octa-core setup.
M9+ is out, so we'll see