Single core, dual core ,quad core??!

[Socrat3s]

Is there really a need for all of these cores when the battery and the software hasn't even caught up? Single core phones like the thunderbolt run perfectly fine. Now Nvidia Kal -el is going to be quadcore. But most of us can barely get through a full day with a full charge. What's your opinion?

 

[trampeze]

I belive you, my mesmerize can barey make it thorugh the day. I have 2 batteries for it and it's brand new, these phones nowadays are battery hogs.

 

[Casual Pete]

The NVIDIA KAl-El seems to work a bit different to most though, it uses a companion core to save battery life.

Have a look at this article.

It should definitely help on the battery side of things,how well remains to be seen.

 

[Socrat3s]

The article was interesting, now lets see how they can implement that into smartphones.

 

[MyNamesTooLong]

Seems un-needed to me. my G2 has a 800mhz(I think) processor and it does just fine. No lag issues or anything

 

[chrlswltrs]

I personally am really looking forward to a quad core phone with 1+ GB of RAM (2 would be great). I use my phone for everything and do a lot of multitasking. I just hope battery technology starts advancing as quickly as evything else. Once a normal person can get through 2-3 days on a charge I should be able to make it through 1 entire day.

 

[dan330]

with more CPUs and faster processing power...

when you are not using the phone.. it dont matter... they should sleep all the same. and use power all the same.

the higher the mghz the more heat it will create and more power used.

these are multi-tasking devices.. a single core will run at it highest speed and take longer to finish a big jobs and more jobs.. even if they are a bunch of small commands...

with more CPUs .. each can handle the job faster .. and even at lower speeds..

ex: if you are doing something simple like making a call.. it will only turn 1 cpu on.. and should not eat your battery any more than a 1 single core phone.

then you decide to surf the net and look up some file on your sdcard.. while on the phone talking.... your phone will start up other CPUs to get the job done quickly and then back to sleep (maybe even at lower mghz too).
this on a single core.. it will have to go full speed.. take much longer.. eat more battery... create more heat...

 

[Pepee63]

Smart phones are getting larger each year due to the public wanting larger screens. Larger screens = larger frames = more room for larger batteries

 

[Lombardi]

U guys kill me with the battery life thing, I get very reasonable battery life, for what these little gadgets do. The battery life is good.

 

[Medion]

Smart phones are getting larger each year due to the public wanting larger screens. Larger screens = larger frames = more room for larger batteries

Also keep in mind that first-gen LTE chips are a bit bulky (and CDMA chips are notorious for being larger than GSM). Add a 1st-gen LTE + CDMA chip, and you get a large footprint.

However, Qualcomm is making a smaller LTE chip for 1st quarter 2012, and they integrate CDMA into their Verizon/Sprint chipsets. So, by summer 2012, we should see smaller LTE devices.

 

[Snow_Fox]

Eh.. I went with single core captivate over dual core atrix.

The truth is, even now in the desktop world, there are times when dual core yields better performance than quad.. The reason being the software is optimized for dual core, and it doesn't scale automatically to quad core.

To be honest.. your really better of not worrying about the specs, and asking yourself "can it do what I want now?".

I'm speaking as someone who is a hardware junkie honestly.. A lot of the "high end now" is really just taking advantage of a new market.

Your average person does't go out and buy an I7 quad core desktop. They find something that works, and run with it.

I mean, unless you have some *serious* needs out of your phone.. your really just wasting money...

 

[dan330]

^^^^ that is true to an extent..

now ..most of us are getting into 2 yr contracts with new phones...
so it is pretty accurate to say most will have that phone for 2 yrs.

mobile tech.. hardware and software is moving extremely fast.
2 yrs is an eternity!
G1 (first android phone) is has just 3 yrs old (last week).

true most software are not scaled to utilize the multi-core CPUs, now.
but how long do you think it will take for developers to adapt? 2 yrs? or a few months?

so if you are getting a new phone now? are you really going to get a single core and sign a 2 yr contract?

 

[Medion]

The truth is, even now in the desktop world, there are times when dual core yields better performance than quad.. The reason being the software is optimized for dual core, and it doesn't scale automatically to quad core.

Partly right, I just want to expand on this. If you take a dual-core @ 2.8ghz, and a quad version of the same chipset at 2.4ghz, the dual will be faster in anything that uses only one or two cores. Going from dual to quad wasn't nearly as drastic as single to dual because most system processes only use the first core (meaning the main app can be partially offloaded to the second). The problem with quad-core is after the second core, there's rarely any spill over unless it's designed (optimized, as you said), or you're encoding.

So, I'll take a cual-core phone over a single-core, but quad isn't a necessity for me at this point. Now, for my desktop, that's different, as I do a TON of encoding, and I use it as an internal web server.

 

[AndroidSPCS]

My dual core Evo 3D battery life is vastly better than my single core Evo 4G. I'll take a quad-core in the future as they can be more efficient.

However, reliability is #1 for me. The phone must work 100%. It's a huge part of my life. Not having a reliable working is a non starter for me.

 

[dan330]

e3d does have a bigger battery than the evo. but i am sure the dual core helps too

 

[Snow_Fox]

Partly right, I just want to expand on this. If you take a dual-core @ 2.8ghz, and a quad version of the same chipset at 2.4ghz, the dual will be faster in anything that uses only one or two cores. Going from dual to quad wasn't nearly as drastic as single to dual because most system processes only use the first core (meaning the main app can be partially offloaded to the second). The problem with quad-core is after the second core, there's rarely any spill over unless it's designed (optimized, as you said), or you're encoding.

So, I'll take a cual-core phone over a single-core, but quad isn't a necessity for me at this point. Now, for my desktop, that's different, as I do a TON of encoding, and I use it as an internal web server.

Er.. wasn't trying to get super specific. I mean even in the gaming world.. a 3ghz dual core can still beat a 2.4 ghz quad core depending on the games level of optimization.

With that in mind, I really didn't feel bad about skipping on the atrix.. which would have required waiting one month for it to come out, another month for bug fixes and roms.. ect ect.

The idea that a quad core would be anything other than wasteful in a phone is well.. funny.

 

[EarlyMon]

Dual cores indeed run more efficiently and use less battery while running faster and smoother.

The idea that the software isn't ready is a myth.

The kernel is optimized for it, and app threads are automatically distributed to the two cores.

We'll know about quad cores when we see them.

 

[Medion]

The idea that a quad core would be anything other than wasteful in a phone is well.. funny.

This is actually a very ignorant statement. A true dual-core made on a 45nm process uses about the same power as a single-core made on the same 45nm process (assuming same MPCore, we're not comparing A8 to A9 here). So, with that said, for apps/processes that utilize only one core, the dual-core will be significantly more power efficient. When fully utilizing both cores, the dual-core is about as power hungry (give or take) as the maxed out single core.

As we've seen from the Kal-El info lately, the cinco-core chip will be very aggressive at power management. When the primary four cores are maxed out, it uses a little less power than a maxed out OMAP4 (dual-core). When utilizing only two cores, Kal-El uses about 40% of the total power as that same dual-core OMAP4.

So, to dismiss multi-core is simply ignorant. It may not be for you, but don't assume that others don't have a use for it. You remind me of the people that were trying to get that high-clocked Pentium 4 w/HT when the Athlon 64 X2s were out. Fast forward a year, and the X2 users were still content, while the P4 users were screaming for Intel to release the Core 2 Duo (or jumped ship to AMD).

 

[Socrat3s]

Well I'm satisfied with two cores.

 

[bioforce]

Dual cores indeed run more efficiently and use less battery while running faster and smoother.

The idea that the software isn't ready is a myth.

The kernel is optimized for it, and app threads are automatically distributed to the two cores.

We'll know about quad cores when we see them.

I would disagree with this statement... Just having a dual core phone doesn't magically make it run better. For instance, I recently had a choice between the dual core X2 or the single core DInc2. In every comparison I read, the later was smoother for day to day and the only advantage to the X2 was in video and flash. I know there are other factors involved there, but the point is, its still highly dependant on the indvidual phone.

 

[Shocky]

I would disagree with this statement... Just having a dual core phone doesn't magically make it run better. For instance, I recently had a choice between the dual core X2 or the single core DInc2. In every comparison I read, the later was smoother for day to day and the only advantage to the X2 was in video and flash. I know there are other factors involved there, but the point is, its still highly dependant on the indvidual phone.

This is true, the Cortex A9 comes in single and dual core versions and unless the application uses the second core the dual core version won't be any faster.

I would imagine the single core versions run cooler and uses less power, probably clocks higher as a result.

 

[Medion]

I would disagree with this statement... Just having a dual core phone doesn't magically make it run better. For instance, I recently had a choice between the dual core X2 or the single core DInc2. In every comparison I read, the later was smoother for day to day and the only advantage to the X2 was in video and flash. I know there are other factors involved there, but the point is, its still highly dependant on the indvidual phone.

When Earlymon and I are talking specs, we're usually referring to "all other factors being equal." In the phones you compared, there was one key difference, HTC Sense. The Sense UI uses hardware acceleration for many UI task, whereas Blur does not. This leads to much smoother panning, scrolling, zooming, etc. No CPU is going to fix that.

But yes, you are absolutely correct in that there are other factors to consider. I just wanted to point out the factor in this particular example.