Android Forums - View Single Post

DroidAV8R · March 11th, 2010, 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woodraskam

I was wrong. I'm sorry. I didn't originate that information, I was just trying to pass it on, but it seems to be false.

But it's not as illogical as you think. When processor manufacturers such as intel rate processors, they do stability tests and then usually rate them below where they are perfectly stable to create a safe zone buffer. say Intel does tests and finds a processor stable at 3.2 GHz, then they will rate it as a 2.8 GHz processor. This is a very common practice with processors, and they aren't considered "failed" processors, but are just lower rated. I thought this would be plausible for the Snapdragon chips, but like you I was unable to find any corroborating evidence.

Once again, I should have done more research instead of relying on that post being accurate, so that's my bad, but it's not like that was a totally rediculous explanation for why it was rated lower.

Understood, and no worries. I think you are in essence saying the same thing I am. In your example of Intel, I think you are right on. The difference is that Intel has a large large number of processors that share the same architecture, but are meant to be rated at different speeds. In that case, a chip can possibly be sold as a lower-speed processor, although intended to be higher-rated, along with others intended to be that way as long as it meets the lower qualifications

I think the difference here is that Qualcomm intends to rate all the 8650 chips at 1GHz, and the suggestion that HTC and Verizon would choose to put these chips that failed to meet that spec, and were subsequently given a rating of 768MHz (an un-listed, "B-stock-type" product) in their new, "Incredible," flagship phone is highly unlikely, especially since HTC is not doing the same with its other high-end devices.