can you post the perf/power graphs comparing Kryo with the other cores ?A57 on 14LPE on the 7420 was both faster and more efficient than Kryo on 14LPP.
can you post the perf/power graphs comparing Kryo with the other cores ?A57 on 14LPE on the 7420 was both faster and more efficient than Kryo on 14LPP.
I wonder if the MT score doesn't point to either of these two improvements: it's low for 4 big cores.
can you post the perf/power graphs comparing Kryo with the other cores ?
Thanks, I hope you can keep giving us this graphs/info in your new job <3
This was data still from AT, I can still talk about stuff but don't think I'll post graphs like that.Thanks, I hope you can keep giving us this graphs/info in your new job <3
Compared to the Qualcomm A57 looks decent.Wow, Kryo really does suck.
You were 100% wrong and were corrected. Simple as that.Compared to the Qualcomm A57 looks decent.
Also is missing 28 nm A72 (Qualcomm) and 20 nm A72 (Mediatek). Both might put A57 on shame. And 20nm Mediatek would put Qualcomm Kryo on shame too.
BTW, Kryo 280 is different than stock A73... That's because the stock one will come on the Snapdragon 660.
Still thinking like that? We will get the stock A73 and we will compare against the Kryo 280 of is the same or not. If there are differences... What you will say about that?You were 100% wrong and were corrected. Simple as that.
Are you hard of comprehension? We already have the comparison. There is no difference.Still thinking like that? We will get the stock A73 and we will compare against the Kryo 280 of is the same or not. If there are differences... What you will say about that?
The problem is that the way Android goes is that it cause a lot of performance issues that eventually will backfire them hard.. even more if Andromeda goes on that path it will end as Windows RT. The only way Android can survive is to start to implement very high standards to avoid more fragmentation.Apple isn't faster because they are solely chip wizards. They have some nice ARM customization to be sure. Especially in the power consumption area. Most of their gains are because they have tight integration with the OS. Android has always been at a speed disadvantage because they've used virtual machines and runtime environments in order to be compatible with the widest array of hardware possible. That is the fundamental trade off between the two.
Snapdragon 660
- 4X Kryo 260 at 2.2 Ghz and 4X Kryo 260 at 1.8 Ghz
- GPU Adreno 512
- Process Manufacturing: 14 nm
Snapdragon 660
- 4X ARM A53 at 2.3 Ghz and 4X ARM A53 at 1.8 Ghz
- GPU Adreno 508
- Process Manufacturing: 14 nm
BTW.... If ARM A73 and Kryo 280 Performance are equal, the Kirin 960 could easily emulate Windows since it uses the ARM A73.
So... Is possible to emulate, I mean run Windows on ARM with any ARM chip only if it is powerful enough?First Kryo 280 is for all intents and purposes a Cortex A73 supported by the new licensing model allowing Qualcomm to slap its own label on the cores. Qualcomm has moved its core engineering resources away from mobile into servers and putting their bets on standard ARM cores.
Second there is no Windows emulation at all, Windows on ARM is supported by dynamic translation x86->AArch64 in SW at the application layer. All Windows OS including all Win32 libraries are natively compiled for AArch64.
Most likely yes.So... Is possible to emulate, I mean run Windows on ARM with any ARM chip only if it is powerful enough?
Let's wait... maybe is compatible with Power VR GPU and Adreno one, but maybe not on Mali...Most likely yes.
CPU:
- 8x Cortex-A53 @ ?.? Ghz
GPU: Power VR GT7400 Plus ??? Mhz
- Supports LPPDR4X RAM at 1600 Mhz
- Process Manufacturing: 16 nm TSMC
Possible release date: Q4 2017
It will support Cat. 7 LTE, up to 2K displays, and dual cameras.
CPU:
- 4x Cortex-A53 @ 2.6 Ghz
- 4x Cortex-A53 @ 1.7 Ghz
GPU: Power VR GT7400 Plus @ 500 Mhz (scenario 1)
Power VR GT7200 Plus @ 900 Mhz (scenario 2)
CPU:
- 2x Cortex-A73 @2.0GHz
- 4x Cortex-A53 @1.8GHz
- 4x Cortex-A35 @1.4GHz
GPU: PowerVR 7XTP-MT4 @600MHz (aka GT 7400 Plus)
CPU:
- 2x Cortex-A73 @ ?.? Ghz
- 4x Cortex-A53 @ ?.? Ghz
GPU: Mali T830 - MP2 @ ??? Mhz
- Process Manufacturing: 14 nm Samsung
This might turn into a dissaster if Samsung does not do nothing to avoid it.. heck, even Mediatek seems to release a Power VR based Helio P30... and now the information is confusing regarding to that.The Snapdragon 660 is alredy being shipped to customers and is significantly better than this chip, there is no competition. It was a shame releasing the 2017 A series with the Exynos 7880.
But... A72 is more scalable than A73... You can even use A72 on 28 nm design while A73 only from 16nm onwards.Final scores can improve. The CPU ID is the same as the SD835 which uses Cortex 73 cores. Aslo different implementations can target different approaches. They might have focused on reducing size at the cost of performance ( less cache etc ) for the SD660. It makes no sense for anyone to use A72 over A73 because the latter is smaller/cheaper and has better characteristics.
That's not true,you can use any architecture you want at any given process node.But... A72 is more scalable than A73... You can even use A72 on 28 nm design while A73 only from 16nm onwards.
But the effectiveness will go according to the uarch?That's not true,you can use any architecture you want at any given process node.