Help How is the HUMMINGBIRD so much faster than the SNAPDRAGON?

[mitchellvii]

I have been reading reviews of the Sprint Epic 4G with it's Hummingbird CPU and it is showing that CPU to be about 3 times as fast as the EVO Snapdragon even though both run at 1 Ghz. How is this possible? I thought 1 Ghz was 1Ghz?

P.S. Although I love my EVO, if I had known the Epic was coming to Sprint with the full Qwerty and such amazing specs I would have waited. Ah well, EVO still rocks but I'll never get used to virtual keyboards with my fat thumbs.

 

[EarlyMon]

Yes and no on that 1 GHz thing.

Think of it like horsepower on a car - there's more than just one factor that goes into performance and no one number tells the whole story.

The Hummingbird (and the Droid X's OMAP3) are made from a semiconductor manufacturing technique called a 45 nm process whereas the Snapdragons in our EVOs is made from a 65 nm process.

The smaller devices _can_ run more efficiently - where efficiency can be a bit a speed or less power consumption or a bit of both due to the physical layout of the devices within the processor.

The advantages or disadvantages of the Snapdragon, the OMAP3 and the Hummingbird are not as straightforward as most reviewers would have you believe. I make no exaggeration whatsoever when I tell you that the massively overwhelming group of reviewers discussing this subject are a bunch of moronic parrots spouting off pure fiction.

My favorite is their common attribution of one particular graphics metric that is in flat disagreement with Samsung's datasheet for the Hummingbird - and they will never retract or recant.

Reviewers' business is to create controversy and stir up fanboys - they make money by webhits and a simple review of what's really what tends to not have enough sizzle.

Here's a link to a benchmark graph showing the EVO setting a performance record using highly customized software. The colored graph (explanation on those a post or two later) pretty closes the case on the myth that the Snapdragon is a dog and that Brand Z is your must-have processor. (In fact, the whole thread might interest you.)

http://androidforums.com/all-things-root-evo-4g/141489-fast-evo-2-2-custom-kernel.html#post1374353

I've personally taken to calling any phone with the newer 1GHz processors running Android superphones rather than smartphones.

There's so much latent processing horsepower under the hood that present software is not exploiting it's not even close to funny.

It's for that reason alone that the reviewers' remarks are proven stoopid - how could they possibly make such claims when only the elite few have any idea whatsoever what these various processors are truly capable of?

Hope this helps.

PS - Waiting on Epic for WifelyMon, strictly for the keyboard she wants.

Keeping an eye on Samsung's response to the GPS complaint in the Galaxy-class phones - nothing's perfect, but hey, HTC and Samsung (and Sprint!!!) - could we update just a wee more often? Just 'cuz you guys think we're happy 'cuz we pay our bills doesn't mean we're always happy as clams with what's being served.

 

[mjbiren]

Yes and no on that 1 GHz thing.

Think of it like horsepower on a car - there's more than just one factor that goes into performance and no one number tells the whole story.

The Hummingbird (and the Droid X's OMAP3) are made from a semiconductor manufacturing technique called a 45 nm process whereas the Snapdragons in our EVOs is made from a 65 nm process.

The smaller devices _can_ run more efficiently - where efficiency can be a bit a speed or less power consumption or a bit of both due to the physical layout of the devices within the processor.

The advantages or disadvantages of the Snapdragon, the OMAP3 and the Hummingbird are not as straightforward as most reviewers would have you believe. I make no exaggeration whatsoever when I tell you that the massively overwhelming group of reviewers discussing this subject are a bunch of moronic parrots spouting off pure fiction.

My favorite is their common attribution of one particular graphics metric that is in flat disagreement with Samsung's datasheet for the Hummingbird - and they will never retract or recant.

Reviewers' business is to create controversy and stir up fanboys - they make money by webhits and a simple review of what's really what tends to not have enough sizzle.

Here's a link to a benchmark graph showing the EVO setting a performance record using highly customized software. The colored graph (explanation on those a post or two later) pretty closes the case on the myth that the Snapdragon is a dog and that Brand Z is your must-have processor. (In fact, the whole thread might interest you.)

http://androidforums.com/all-things-root-evo-4g/141489-fast-evo-2-2-custom-kernel.html#post1374353

I've personally taken to calling any phone with the newer 1GHz processors running Android superphones rather than smartphones.

There's so much latent processing horsepower under the hood that present software is not exploiting it's not even close to funny.

It's for that reason alone that the reviewers' remarks are proven stoopid - how could they possibly make such claims when only the elite few have any idea whatsoever what these various processors are truly capable of?

Hope this helps.

PS - Waiting on Epic for WifelyMon, strictly for the keyboard she wants.

Keeping an eye on Samsung's response to the GPS complaint in the Galaxy-class phones - nothing's perfect, but hey, HTC and Samsung (and Sprint!!!) - could we update just a wee more often? Just 'cuz you guys think we're happy 'cuz we pay our bills doesn't mean we're always happy as clams with what's being served.

Good summary, sounds like you're in the industry. I'd add that a lot of the benchmarks hit the GPU (graphics) rather than CPU. Also, as with all chips of this complexity, the memory bus speeds, which we don't know much about, make all the difference.

 

[EarlyMon]

Good summary, sounds like you're in the industry.

Ja wohl, we provide on-wafer and package part testing solutions.

I'd add that a lot of the benchmarks hit the GPU (graphics) rather than CPU. Also, as with all chips of this complexity, the memory bus speeds, which we don't know much about, make all the difference.

EggZactLee.

We carry phones - not benchmarks, and we pay the freight - not the reviewers.

 

[optikalillusi0n]

PS - Waiting on Epic for WifelyMon, strictly for the keyboard she wants.

Keeping an eye on Samsung's response to the GPS complaint in the Galaxy-class phones - nothing's perfect, but hey, HTC and Samsung (and Sprint!!!) - could we update just a wee more often? Just 'cuz you guys think we're happy 'cuz we pay our bills doesn't mean we're always happy as clams with what's being served.

EarlyMon, i'm sure you already saw this article, but if you haven't, check it out. Hopefully they will fix the entire problem. I'm thinking about getting the epic for my mom when it comes out.

Samsung commits to September updates for Galaxy S GPS woes -- Engadget

 

[EarlyMon]

Yeap, saw it - and defended the EVO in comments here -

Samsung Working on GPS Software Fix Due September for Galaxy S Phones | Android Phone Fans

Here's the thing - imagine what it's like at my house, especially with today being reservation day for the Epic:

"Hunny Bunny - now don't worry about how disappointed you are with your Moment and how much you've been looking forward to seeing the Epic. They're promising delivery by end of this month and a fix for the GPS in September."

"Wait. I'm signing up for another Samsung and you're telling me it's not 100% out of the box, while your EVO is just plain working?"

"Yeah babe, but they're fixing it in September."

<crickets chirping - many, many crickets chirping a long, long while>

"And you're sure you can root that for me?"

<the crickets go silent>

Yeah.

It was like that.

 

[optikalillusi0n]

Yeap, saw it - and defended the EVO in comments here -

Samsung Working on GPS Software Fix Due September for Galaxy S Phones | Android Phone Fans

Here's the thing - imagine what it's like at my house, especially with today being reservation day for the Epic:

"Hunny Bunny - now don't worry about how disappointed you are with your Moment and how much you've been looking forward to seeing the Epic. They're promising delivery by end of this month and a fix for the GPS in September."

"Wait. I'm signing up for another Samsung and you're telling me it's not 100% out of the box, while your EVO is just plain working?"

"Yeah babe, but they're fixing it in September."

<crickets chirping - many, many crickets chirping a long, long while>

"And you're sure you can root that for me?"

<the crickets go silent>

Yeah.

It was like that.

Haha, awesome. Just checked it out. Nice job.

 

[SporkLover]

I have been reading reviews of the Sprint Epic 4G with it's Hummingbird CPU and it is showing that CPU to be about 3 times as fast as the EVO Snapdragon even though both run at 1 Ghz. How is this possible? I thought 1 Ghz was 1Ghz?

P.S. Although I love my EVO, if I had known the Epic was coming to Sprint with the full Qwerty and such amazing specs I would have waited. Ah well, EVO still rocks but I'll never get used to virtual keyboards with my fat thumbs.

EarlyMon is spot on. This question reminds me of the early days of the explosion in Desk Top computer processing clock speed explosions.

Intel was firmly entrenched in perpetuating that the higher clock speed = faster and better processor. That's only half the truth, yes increasing clock speed is one way to increasing the processing power but there are soooo many more factors that make it a much more complicated equation. AMD proved it with the Athlon line of processors, lower clock speed CPU's were just slaying the Pentium 4 lineup. AMD was able to squeeze out more processing power per clock cycle than Intel.

It's the same thing when you start comparing mega pixels. More does not necessarily make it better, and two 8MP cameras are not necessarily created equal.