Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-20-2012, 06:04 PM   #1
-Slacker-
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,562
Default Smartphones going overboard with # of cores?

So, with Samsung's announcement on their 8 core exynos, and intel's 48 core mobile processor set for the middle of the decade, I have to wonder if RISC software scales better with more cores than what we usually get on windows...

http://www.engadget.com/2012/11/20/s...r-in-february/

http://www.engadget.com/2012/10/30/i...hones-tablets/


Can smartphones really take advantage of that many cores using real world applications, and not just the same couple of synthetic benchmarks we see in reviews?

What are some popular apps that run on more than 2 threads on android or ios?
__________________
Phenom II x4 B35 2.9Ghz 1.3625v unlocked from AIIx3 435/ cooler master hyper 212 plus/ Palit geforce 460 768mb green "SE"/ 4 gb ddr3 / chieftec aps a135 550 s 550w, 1280x1024 and 1920x1080 TV
-Slacker- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 06:36 PM   #2
wlee15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 295
Default

In the Samsung Exynos example only 1 group of quad core can be active at a time so when the device is heavily taxed the more powerful A15s are on while the A7s are put to sleep. Conversely when the device is being lightly used the A7s are turned on while the A15 are put to sleep.
wlee15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 06:37 PM   #3
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 738
Default

The 8 core exynos counts as a quad core due to the big.LITTLE approach.

One half fast quad/One half slow quad

Intel... I'm not sure how they plan to use that.
Haserath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-20-2012, 07:00 PM   #4
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,074
Default

The 48 Intel chip is only PR. Just like the old 80 core chip. Its for research and showoff.

And as others said, the exynos is really only a quadcore.
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 07:42 AM   #5
Cerb
Elite Member
 
Cerb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,645
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -Slacker- View Post
Can smartphones really take advantage of that many cores using real world applications, and not just the same couple of synthetic benchmarks we see in reviews?
They will be able to (not 48-core, but 4-8-core--and nobody has yet announced more than 4 for any commercial chip). The real concern is not having enough when the time comes. If everybody has quads by the time quads (and more RAM bandwidth, please) can be made really useful, it be a complete non-issue. Whoever is stuck with a dual-core of similar performance/core will be slow. And, it's not like they can just whip out a SoC in a few months.

FI, popular game X is made available for many mobile devices, and can use 3-4 threads. Do you want to be selling dual-cores for the months following that? Even people that don't need the extra cores, and don't even understand what the words mean, will be wary.

Also, there's the keeping up with the Joneses thing, for the time being. Tegra's got 4, so we all need 4, just because.

Quote:
What are some popular apps that run on more than 2 threads on android or ios?
Any application that can use 2 threads can make you want to have 3 cores, because there are background applications to worry about. This is especially the case on Android. One more let's the OS and lighter background applications do their work without getting in the way, even when they might take a fair amount of CPU time.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crono View Post
I'm 90% certain the hipster movement was started by aliens from another galaxy who have an exaggerated interpretation of earth culture(s).
Cerb is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:00 AM   #6
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,713
Default

I'd wish they improve per core performance instead of trying to cram in more small/large cores on a single die. At least Apple got the right formula akin to Intel. Others deserve a face palm.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:10 AM   #7
Tuna-Fish
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 538
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
I'd wish they improve per core performance instead of trying to cram in more small/large cores on a single die.
The cost in power of making a core 2x as fast is ~4x, while if you just double the core count you only increase power use by 2x.

It makes very, very much sense to stuff as many cores as you can possibly use in a smartphone. Especially since with modern clock gating, a core that is off uses no power.

Quote:
At least Apple got the right formula akin to Intel. Others deserve a face palm.
The PA Semi team that Apple acquired to build their new chips is full of superstars. Among other key people, I believe it holds the highest concentration of the designers of the original AMD K8 anywhere. Their chips are not awesomely good because of their high-level design decisions (eg, 2 vs 4 cores), they are awesomely good because their low-level design was done by some of the very best people in the industry.
Tuna-Fish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:18 AM   #8
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna-Fish View Post
The cost in power of making a core 2x as fast is ~4x, while if you just double the core count you only increase power use by 2x.

It makes very, very much sense to stuff as many cores as you can possibly use in a smartphone. Especially since with modern clock gating, a core that is off uses no power.
Until you sit with a task that only runs on 1-2 cores and you wait...wait and wait.

Funny how 4 also seems to be the magic number in smartphones.
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:23 AM   #9
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna-Fish View Post
The cost in power of making a core 2x as fast is ~4x, while if you just double the core count you only increase power use by 2x.

It makes very, very much sense to stuff as many cores as you can possibly use in a smartphone. Especially since with modern clock gating, a core that is off uses no power.
It doesn't have to be improved by a factor of 2. The A6 has put to shame most of other manufacturer's implementation, that's good enough proof that more cores isn't the way to go just yet. The problem with increasing core count is that the resources aren't being used to its fullest potential. Tegra has a single auxiliary core that works together with 4 more powerful cores but it didn't improve battery life significantly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuna-Fish View Post
The PA Semi team that Apple acquired to build their new chips is full of superstars. Among other key people, I believe it holds the highest concentration of the designers of the original AMD K8 anywhere. Their chips are not awesomely good because of their high-level design decisions (eg, 2 vs 4 cores), they are awesomely good because their low-level design was done by some of the very best people in the industry.
I don't think it would've been as good if Apple went ahead with the core race. They know that their OS isn't up to task for more cores yet. Other manufacturers on the other hand uses them as a marketing gimmick.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:44 AM   #10
MarkLuvsCS
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 658
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
Until you sit with a task that only runs on 1-2 cores and you wait...wait and wait.

Funny how 4 also seems to be the magic number in smartphones.
Blame lazy programmers not revolutionizing programming models. I mean how hard can it be?
__________________
My Heatware
MarkLuvsCS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 09:41 AM   #11
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkLuvsCS View Post
Blame lazy programmers not revolutionizing programming models. I mean how hard can it be?
Haha.

Ye exactly. Same with unemployed people. Just start a business and live on it. How hard could it be! I mean really, here in my post I instantly fixed unemployment!
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 11:18 AM   #12
Skurge
Diamond Member
 
Skurge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Namibia
Posts: 4,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
It doesn't have to be improved by a factor of 2. The A6 has put to shame most of other manufacturer's implementation, that's good enough proof that more cores isn't the way to go just yet. The problem with increasing core count is that the resources aren't being used to its fullest potential. Tegra has a single auxiliary core that works together with 4 more powerful cores but it didn't improve battery life significantly.


I don't think it would've been as good if Apple went ahead with the core race. They know that their OS isn't up to task for more cores yet. Other manufacturers on the other hand uses them as a marketing gimmick.
Krait is about as fast as the A6 and Exynos 5/A15 is quite a bit faster. So I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that it put other chips to shame.
__________________
Intel Core i5-4670K |MSI Z97-Gaming 5|32GB DDR3-1600|Gigabyte R9 290 Windforce CF [stock]|Samsung SSD 840 Evo 500GB|Corsair AX860 PSU|Corsair 750D|Windows 8.1 Pro|Samsung U28D590D|Logitech G27 Racing Wheel|Nexus 5 32GB
Skurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 11:56 AM   #13
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skurge View Post
Krait is about as fast as the A6 and Exynos 5/A15 is quite a bit faster. So I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that it put other chips to shame.
Reviews that I could find about it doesn't suggest that Krait is faster than than the A6. (iP5, Krait) (Sunspider : iP5, Krait) (Browsermark : iP5, Krait). Even a Krait powered HTC One X doesn't seem to show that it is better. Exynos 5 seems to be the only contender to the A6 but its only on the Chromebook for now, which suggests that it would take up more juice than a smartphone based Exynos 5 would for that extra performance.

The numbers suggests that the A6 is designed much closer to the Cortex A9 than the A15. If Apple were to design a part where it is closer to the A15 in the future, it'll be an interesting comparison against the future Exynos chips.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 12:56 PM   #14
beginner99
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,196
Default

I would rather have 2 faster cores than those 4 anemic ones.
beginner99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 01:19 PM   #15
joshhedge
Senior Member
 
joshhedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 597
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skurge View Post
Krait is about as fast as the A6 and Exynos 5/A15 is quite a bit faster. So I'm not sure where you are getting the idea that it put other chips to shame.
Bare in mind that Exynos 5/A15 is clocked higher than Apples A6.
__________________
Intel Core i7 2600k o/c 4.8GHz at 1.35v Corsair H80
Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3
Kingston HyperX 2x4GB 1600MHz
Sapphire 6970 2GB @ 965/1400/1250
120GB OCZ Agility 3
2TB WD Caviar Black

Retina Macbook Pro, 2.6GHz, 16GB, 256GB.
joshhedge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 02:37 PM   #16
Haserath
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 738
Default

Nvm

Last edited by Haserath; 11-21-2012 at 02:42 PM.
Haserath is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:33 PM   #17
Skurge
Diamond Member
 
Skurge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Namibia
Posts: 4,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
Reviews that I could find about it doesn't suggest that Krait is faster than than the A6. (iP5, Krait) (Sunspider : iP5, Krait) (Browsermark : iP5, Krait). Even a Krait powered HTC One X doesn't seem to show that it is better. Exynos 5 seems to be the only contender to the A6 but its only on the Chromebook for now, which suggests that it would take up more juice than a smartphone based Exynos 5 would for that extra performance.

The numbers suggests that the A6 is designed much closer to the Cortex A9 than the A15. If Apple were to design a part where it is closer to the A15 in the future, it'll be an interesting comparison against the future Exynos chips.
Those benches are heavily browser influenced. The Note 2 is very close to the iPhone 5 and beats it in some benches. And it is using Quad core A9. It makes minced meat of the optimus g that is quad core krait and all of that is down to software.

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express
__________________
Intel Core i5-4670K |MSI Z97-Gaming 5|32GB DDR3-1600|Gigabyte R9 290 Windforce CF [stock]|Samsung SSD 840 Evo 500GB|Corsair AX860 PSU|Corsair 750D|Windows 8.1 Pro|Samsung U28D590D|Logitech G27 Racing Wheel|Nexus 5 32GB
Skurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 08:56 PM   #18
grkM3
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
Reviews that I could find about it doesn't suggest that Krait is faster than than the A6. (iP5, Krait) (Sunspider : iP5, Krait) (Browsermark : iP5, Krait). Even a Krait powered HTC One X doesn't seem to show that it is better. Exynos 5 seems to be the only contender to the A6 but its only on the Chromebook for now, which suggests that it would take up more juice than a smartphone based Exynos 5 would for that extra performance.

The numbers suggests that the A6 is designed much closer to the Cortex A9 than the A15. If Apple were to design a part where it is closer to the A15 in the future, it'll be an interesting comparison against the future Exynos chips.
Why are you using a java web browser to show cpu performance?The old samsung galaxy nexus with very out dated hardware blows the doors off the gs3 in sunspider because it uses a better web broswer from vanila android.

the nexus chromebook scores 600 in sunspider with a dual core exynos 5 cpu so we cant use a java web browser to show cpu perfomance.
__________________
Main rig
2600k@4.8 24/7 1.415 WC
ASUS P67 MIVE
8GB Gskill 2200 7-10-7-1t
Corsair Force GT 120GB SSD
2 GTX 560TI in SLI
grkM3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-21-2012, 11:17 PM   #19
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skurge View Post
Those benches are heavily browser influenced. The Note 2 is very close to the iPhone 5 and beats it in some benches. And it is using Quad core A9. It makes minced meat of the optimus g that is quad core krait and all of that is down to software.

Sent from my Lumia 800 using Board Express
Regardless of its browser dependence, it still is a benchmark. You can have the most powerful hardware but without a decent software to compliment it and use its fullest potential, its gone to waste. Beats it in some but with Sunspider at 1015 and Browsermark at 174584, it isn't the mince meat that I was expecting.

Unless of course we're talking about raw compute performance, Android could do better in that. No one has a comprehensive collection of data for raw compute performance of smartphones so I can't use it as a comparison. Then again, referring to my statement above, raw compute performance isn't doing much good if the software isn't good enough to use it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grkM3 View Post
Why are you using a java web browser to show cpu performance?The old samsung galaxy nexus with very out dated hardware blows the doors off the gs3 in sunspider because it uses a better web broswer from vanila android.

the nexus chromebook scores 600 in sunspider with a dual core exynos 5 cpu so we cant use a java web browser to show cpu perfomance.
Why blame me? Blame on the fact that is the only data you could get from the reviewers. Sure, the score is dependent on the browser but as I said above, performance isn't everything if you can't use it properly. From this review, the Galaxy S3 is ahead of the Galaxy Nexus in Sunspider.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 02:51 PM   #20
grkM3
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,398
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
Regardless of its browser dependence, it still is a benchmark. You can have the most powerful hardware but without a decent software to compliment it and use its fullest potential, its gone to waste. Beats it in some but with Sunspider at 1015 and Browsermark at 174584, it isn't the mince meat that I was expecting.

Unless of course we're talking about raw compute performance, Android could do better in that. No one has a comprehensive collection of data for raw compute performance of smartphones so I can't use it as a comparison. Then again, referring to my statement above, raw compute performance isn't doing much good if the software isn't good enough to use it.


Why blame me? Blame on the fact that is the only data you could get from the reviewers. Sure, the score is dependent on the browser but as I said above, performance isn't everything if you can't use it properly. From this review, the Galaxy S3 is ahead of the Galaxy Nexus in Sunspider.
Why even bother posting a browser bench when u can find benches on CPU numbers instead of how well a browser uses java?

There are other tests that show the power os the CPUs and I have both a nexus and a gs3 and my nexus scores 1100 bone stock and my gs3 scores 1500 on sun spider and I would never try to tell anyone the nexus has better hardware than the gs3
__________________
Main rig
2600k@4.8 24/7 1.415 WC
ASUS P67 MIVE
8GB Gskill 2200 7-10-7-1t
Corsair Force GT 120GB SSD
2 GTX 560TI in SLI
grkM3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 02:56 PM   #21
soccerballtux
Lifer
 
soccerballtux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 10,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
Regardless of its browser dependence, it still is a benchmark. You can have the most powerful hardware but without a decent software to compliment it and use its fullest potential, its gone to waste. Beats it in some but with Sunspider at 1015 and Browsermark at 174584, it isn't the mince meat that I was expecting.

Unless of course we're talking about raw compute performance, Android could do better in that. No one has a comprehensive collection of data for raw compute performance of smartphones so I can't use it as a comparison. Then again, referring to my statement above, raw compute performance isn't doing much good if the software isn't good enough to use it.


Why blame me? Blame on the fact that is the only data you could get from the reviewers. Sure, the score is dependent on the browser but as I said above, performance isn't everything if you can't use it properly. From this review, the Galaxy S3 is ahead of the Galaxy Nexus in Sunspider.
no, browser benchmarks are completely worthless unless it's ~same browser version
calling Iphone browser vs Android browser a benchmark comparison is hilarious
__________________
HOW TO nested quote
Install this into Firefox then click this, then click "quote" as usual, then click "Nested Quote" to the right of the title bar.
4.0Ghz&2.6Ghz-CPU-NB Ph2-965BE || GA790X-UD4P 8GB DDR800 || Gigabyte GTX670 || Soyo 24" PMVA Heatware
soccerballtux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 03:05 PM   #22
mikeymikec
Diamond Member
 
mikeymikec's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 4,333
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShintaiDK View Post
The 48 Intel chip is only PR. Just like the old 80 core chip. Its for research and showoff.
Yeah, I remember a good few years ago they said something like that. Even reputable manufacturers engage in a bit of vapourware announcements.
mikeymikec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 03:22 PM   #23
Skurge
Diamond Member
 
Skurge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Namibia
Posts: 4,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dma0991 View Post
Regardless of its browser dependence, it still is a benchmark. You can have the most powerful hardware but without a decent software to compliment it and use its fullest potential, its gone to waste. Beats it in some but with Sunspider at 1015 and Browsermark at 174584, it isn't the mince meat that I was expecting.

Unless of course we're talking about raw compute performance, Android could do better in that. No one has a comprehensive collection of data for raw compute performance of smartphones so I can't use it as a comparison. Then again, referring to my statement above, raw compute performance isn't doing much good if the software isn't good enough to use it.


Why blame me? Blame on the fact that is the only data you could get from the reviewers. Sure, the score is dependent on the browser but as I said above, performance isn't everything if you can't use it properly. From this review, the Galaxy S3 is ahead of the Galaxy Nexus in Sunspider.
There is geekbench and linpack to name a few that show pure CPU performance. Android does fine. I point to the Note 2 again, when a quad core A9 hadily beats quad core Krait, it should show you that test is nothing more than a browser bench and a showcase for how manufacturer can optimise for their own chipsets.
__________________
Intel Core i5-4670K |MSI Z97-Gaming 5|32GB DDR3-1600|Gigabyte R9 290 Windforce CF [stock]|Samsung SSD 840 Evo 500GB|Corsair AX860 PSU|Corsair 750D|Windows 8.1 Pro|Samsung U28D590D|Logitech G27 Racing Wheel|Nexus 5 32GB
Skurge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 04:22 PM   #24
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,074
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeymikec View Post
Yeah, I remember a good few years ago they said something like that. Even reputable manufacturers engage in a bit of vapourware announcements.
Well its not vapourware, they actually have it there. Specially IBM is a number 1 in these PR announcements.

The problem is they dont always tell the entire story.

For example with IBM:
We have 250Ghz transistors! But we can only make a handful of them run at it at a time. And it will never be in a commercial product.


Or another IBM one:
We have 14nm ARM cores! But its a Cortex M0 test chip with less than 12000 transistors.

Last edited by ShintaiDK; 11-22-2012 at 04:24 PM.
ShintaiDK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-22-2012, 09:31 PM   #25
dma0991
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,713
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by grkM3 View Post
Why even bother posting a browser bench when u can find benches on CPU numbers instead of how well a browser uses java?

There are other tests that show the power os the CPUs and I have both a nexus and a gs3 and my nexus scores 1100 bone stock and my gs3 scores 1500 on sun spider and I would never try to tell anyone the nexus has better hardware than the gs3
So you're saying that the reviewer is wrong? I'd like to see your numbers instead of a word of mouth.

Quote:
Originally Posted by soccerballtux View Post
no, browser benchmarks are completely worthless unless it's ~same browser version
calling Iphone browser vs Android browser a benchmark comparison is hilarious
It isn't completely worthless as that is what you do with the phone most of the time. Were you expecting to run Folding on the phone instead?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skurge View Post
There is geekbench and linpack to name a few that show pure CPU performance. Android does fine. I point to the Note 2 again, when a quad core A9 hadily beats quad core Krait, it should show you that test is nothing more than a browser bench and a showcase for how manufacturer can optimise for their own chipsets.
Optimizing to meet the potential of the software is what you should do. Hardware and software goes hand in hand.
__________________
Intel Core i5 3570K [4.5GHz @ 1.28V]|MSI Z77A-GD65|Samsung MV-3V4G3D 16GB 1866MHz@9-9-9-24/1.35V|Powercolor HD4650|Corsair Force GT 120GB|Samsung F3 1TB|Corsair CX500|Corsair 400R|XSPC Raystorm + XSPC EX240 + EK DCP 4.0
Intel Core i7 2600|ASRock H61M/U3S3|Kingston HyperX 8GB|Intel HD2000|WD Blue 320GB|Samsung F4EG 2TB|WD Green 2TB|WD Green 3TB|WD Green 3TB|FSP SAGA II 500W|CM Elite 343
| |
dma0991 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.