Underlying tech in the Evo 3D - qHD, 3D, dual-core SMPGeneral


Last Updated: 2011-06-26 04:38:45
  1. RichboyJhae

    RichboyJhae Well-Known Member

    I've been thinking the same thing, and that'd be pretty awesome. I'd speculate maybe permanent clocking at 1.5 gHz since that benchmark came out and that was the speed, and also since Samsung recently gave the GS2 a bump to 1.2, I could see hTC wanting to keep a leg up over the competition. I'd also maybe speculate increased internal storage since 4GB is a pretty random number(Phones usually have 1-8-16-32). An increase to 8 would be awesome and an increase to 16-32 would be godly(Although I want hold my breathe on that one). Finally what'd have me most excited is the addition of a kickstand to the battery cover since now they see how much people are mad that they took it away. This is all speculation of course, but who says I guy can't hope?

    Advertisement
  2. you2

    you2 Well-Known Member

    Well higher clock speed usually require higher voltage which shorten battery life and increase heat. I actually know nothing about the architecture of this processor and how efficient it is at stepping (I'm presuming it has a dynamic clock). Anyways I wouldn't mind either seeing some data on the impact of higher clock (both perf and effect on battery life) and perhaps having a user option to set it low or high or something to that effect (I'm assuming the impact on battery life is significant but that might be a bad assumption on my part).

  3. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    If all things were equal, you're right - no such thing as a free lunch - so running faster means using more juice and lots of it goes to wasted heat.

    In this case (for Evo users) - it's using a more advanced manufacturing process where the stuff in the SoC (transistors, etc, etc, etc...) are smaller and closer together - lots smaller. Smaller stuff takes less power to run than the same stuff when bigger.

    So - in this case, if you put an Evo side by side with an equivalent made with the newer process, the newer one will be more power efficient - enter the Thunderbolt. In that case, tho, they made the battery smaller, so on that one, there wasn't the big gain in advantage.

    In this case, the silicon is made with the smaller manufacturing process (45nm vs. 65) _and_ the battery is bigger.

    The SoC - the MSM8660 - in the E3D does indeed have a dynamic clock like the Evo (it's pretty much the rule now).

    And - we tend to expect a dual-core to run any given process at lower speed than if run on a single-core (providing things are optimized sufficiently for dual-core use - we won't know that until it's here).

    Downside - higher resolution. With more dots to update on graphics-intensive tasks, more processing is required at the end. More pixels also mean more control transistors on the display itself (by definition for LCDs).

    There are just too many factors to know in advance if this will act same, worse or better than an Evo on power.

    It could be way more power-efficient - or it could be worse - we'll have to wait and see.
    novox77 likes this.
  4. drexappeal

    drexappeal Well-Known Member

    Could anybody tell, from the pics that had already been taken of the EVO 3D, if the batteries for the current EVO could possibly be used for the EVO 3d OR are the battery dimensions different this time around?
  5. partridge

    partridge Well-Known Member

    I consider the 3D aspect to be a gimick, I'm not sure I see all phones having this feature in the future, but even as a gimmick it's one I'm keen to try out.

    The whole "3D at home" market is still in the early stages and I don't know if it will catch on, but one things for sure; if you can make your own 3D content then you're likely to consider a 3D tv.

    I'm sure it won't be long until movie making software offers support for 3D media and that could be the thing that really drives it forwards; not Hollywood 3D movies, but 3D home movies of your kids parties, days out, etc. At some point watching them on your handset won't be good enough and you might then consider a nice new shiny 3D tv...
  6. toad6386

    toad6386 Well-Known Member

    I concur. The 3D aspect of the phone is definitely more gimmicky than most of the other features of the phone. That aspect provides a wow factor easily seen. But the true wow factor for me is the muscle behind it. I can't me having the same attitude for this phone as I do for my 21 month old Pre in 22 months, either.

    I just want it already. I don't know of any other Sprint devices coming that appeal to me as much, and I don't know how long I can resist turninig my Pre into a human launched projectile...
  7. you2

    you2 Well-Known Member

    I'm really surprise a release date has not yet been given. I wonder if the 3d aspect is causing delays. Isn't the sensation basically the same hardware but without the second camera and software for 3d; or does the 3d feature actually require a different display technology beyond just software tweaks ?
  8. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    The display itself is different plus 3D software on top of that.
  9. mkokotovich

    mkokotovich Active Member

    Maybe you can inform me - what are some of the things you anticipate a dual-core phone being able to do better than a single core phone? I understand how dual-core processors help with parallelization, but what sort of apps would actually benefit from this? I suppose if you have widgets/apps running in the background it would allow them to work and your foreground app to still process data, possibly leading to a "snappier" feeling phone.

    I've also heard that Android doesn't currently have very good support for parallelization - is this true? To what extent?
  10. Vanquished

    Vanquished Well-Known Member

    Multi-media stuff, including the Sense 3.0 UI. Games will benefit from the dual-core processor significantly as well.
  11. Why all the dual core talk? You guys do realize every version of Android is written for single core and its going to be about a year before dual core is even utilized right? Bringing it up all the time is silly since its a non issue as of now.
  12. Sketchr

    Sketchr VIP Member VIP Member

    If no one brought up and talked about future technology there wouldn't be any technology:cool:
  13. novox77

    novox77 Leeeroy Jennnkinnns! VIP Member

    You seem to have fallen for some FUD out there...

    Excerpted from someone else:

    Not to mention the lower voltages required to do the equivalent task on a single core. There's the improvement in power consumption as well (longer battery life).
  14. cobalt

    cobalt Well-Known Member

    My understanding is this: (big grain of salt required; I am not an expert)
    - Android has supported SMP since 2009, though I don't know which OS version numbers that corresponds to
    - Android supports multi-tasking, this should result in smoother performance in general with dual cores, and a slight single-app performance boost
    - within-app SMP support is supported in 3.0+ and upcoming 2.4 releases; I can't easily determine whether e.g. the 2.3 series supports it

    So you may be correct that few apps, and possibly none when run in 2.3.x, utilize dual-core within the app. As such, single-app performance gains from dual-core on this phone may be minimal until later Android releases.

    But saying Android is "written for single core" seems a bit strong; heck, it's built on the 2.6 Linux kernel, which isn't exactly weak in the multi-core support department.....

    (Edit: novox77 quoted a link which pointed right to threading support in API level 3, which corresponds to Android 1.5! So my original reading was incorrect; looking deeper, I may have been reading something obscure about supporting multi-threaded apps on single-core processors. So ignore that part.)
    novox77 and EarlyMon like this.
  15. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    No, I don't realize that, honestly and not sarcastically.

    Dual-core, general audience apps? Yeah, ok, that will take a little bit.

    But at the heart of Android is Linux. In fact - take Linux, add the Dalvik Virtual Machine (that apps typically run in) and that's Android.

    Android apps - within the Dalvik VM - are small and compact because they all call common system services - in other words, they call the Linux stuff.

    And Linux has been multi-core aware and capable for some time.

    All it really takes is a little kernel and system legerdemain and that dual-core will be giving immediate benefits.

    And the HTC-customized Sense 3.0 is probably using the dual-core - and I have no doubt whatsoever that the 3D feature requires it in this case.

    Maybe see also - http://androidforums.com/htc-evo-3d/305679-evo-3d-speculation-specs-3.html#post2617934

    Anyway, my opinion is that it's far from silly and far from far future needed.

    PS - Wow. A salvo response. :D
    DCLocal, deltatko and novox77 like this.
  16. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    novox77 - have you considered rounding up the many good replies hereabouts for the wiki?

    Surely these questions will all arise again when the phone is released. ;)
  17. novox77

    novox77 Leeeroy Jennnkinnns! VIP Member

    definitely. i've taken some notes but haven't updated the wiki. maybe i'll get some of this dual core stuff posted.

    A lot of what's in these threads is speculation, but whenever factual stuff is posted, I do note it. you want to author some stuff? could use the help.
  18. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    Want to, but presently over-subscribed just modding and work stuff. Have kept in mind, tho.
  19. novox77

    novox77 Leeeroy Jennnkinnns! VIP Member

    I do get anonymous edits and additions, which is good. I could use someone who is very into the hardware specs of the phone, particularly CPU/GPU stuff; that's where I'm kinda weak.
  20. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    You didn't read to the end of the article, that said what I did here and in the link I gave you.

    So - it said we were exactly right.

    Except for the part that Smartbench walks on water - I'll never agree to that.

    In fact - leave out the benchmarking malarkey, and simplify the wording, and you've got my post above.
  21. Yes but there are pretty much no apps written to take advantage of dual core, so whats the point? Its like having a 4G capable phone in a 3G only area. It wont matter.
  22. EarlyMon

    EarlyMon The PearlyMon Moderator

    Once more - apps are not monolithic in Android.

    One part runs within the Android bit of the OS - the heavy lifting is done by the underlying Linux services, and this is most especially true for media-processing apps.

    Apps may not be dual-core optimized yet - but if you provide that for the parts of the heavy-lifting services, immediate benefits accrue.

    And nothing prevents native - read: non-Dalvik - apps from accruing those benefits, either. See: Sense 3.0 and 3D processes.

    And then any apps that go on to engage in dual-core optimization simply continue the benefits accrual.

    So - it's more like getting an immediate 3.5G while you wait for the 4G completion for some things, and total 4G for other things, all right away - and not like getting nothing as you state so far.
  23. novox77

    novox77 Leeeroy Jennnkinnns! VIP Member

    Immediate benefit:


    [​IMG]

    Yes, this is the ideal. But as explained by previous posts, the linux-side of things will utilize the dual cores to some extent. You therefore get some reduction in power consumption that would not show up in any speed test benchmarks.
    sergi0wned likes this.
  24. Jensen

    Jensen Well-Known Member

    FocusFreak, I am an Android developer and you are mistaken on this issue. I would say that the vast majority of apps will benefit from dual cores. You do NOT need to write apps specifically for two (or more) cores. The Android OS will automatically take advantage of multiple cores assuming your app uses more than one thread.

    Current best practices for Android development heavily rely on using background threads. You are not supposed to do ANY heavy lifting on the main (UI) thread, as this will stall the users' interaction with the device.

    Android has specific APIs that even make this very easy. My apps all use background threads.

    See this Google IO video from last year for more info on what I am referring to:
    YouTube - Google I/O 2010 - Writing zippy Android apps

    Even if the app you are currently running happens to only use one thread, if you had, say, Pandora playing music in the background - that process could spawn threads on the other core - making life easier on the app you have in the foreground.

    Please stop spreading misinformation.

Share This Page