|
||||||||
Qualcomm - 'less cores = more' advert |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Qualcomm - 'less cores = more' advert
|
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: London, UK
Posts: 8,759
|
Quote:
It's a marketing thing. Qualcomm released Snapdragon 615 which is 8 cores. The fact is that Mediatek are getting loads more customers at the moment and are growing at a very fast rate. Qualcomm are doing stupid marketing shit like the above in order to show how they're better than Mediatek, but then they end up copying Mediatek anyway..... |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Yep, I had sort of realised it was likely quite old, and came more to better light when they started copying Mediatek.
Its like when Intel had to copy AMD who got to 64 bit first with consumers buying into 'more bits is better' which, as we know is the both true and false. |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 25,199
|
I'd say until there are batteries that can feed those cores when they are actually doing something, four is about right. You want one process preparing work for a GPU without hiccups. You do not want background processing to make the foreground process stutter. And perhaps the app you are running is making use of threads and it actually makes sense. Having eight real cores in a mobile phone is a luxury. You do not find so many in laptops or desktops that often.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
Having eight real cores in a mobile phone is a luxury.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,883
|
I think its widely acknowledged Android doesn't take full advantage of multi process architecture. ARM is constantly working on new reference designs, which form the basics for processors made and designed by the likes of Samsung or Qualcomm.
When Apple makes and designs their chips they are in the very fortunate position of also controlling the software that they run on. Which is why you will see iPhones having weaker grunt power (comparatively) than Android devices. Although Samsung and HTC (et al) put their own custom skins atop of Android, the underlying code goes unchanged from its source. Naturally with each Android release Google will modify the code and further enhancing it. Android compared to a couple of years ago has come a long way since those heedy days of Gingerbread and the OS not being able to take full advantage of multiple cores. The problem with Qualcomm is down to their own designs and sometimes not being as efficient as those offered by Samsung/Mediatek/Huawei. You may notice that new CPU technology from the latter 3 often has a clock speed lower than that of Qualcomm, however they also have implemented 64bit far sooner. Its fair to say that Samsung ditching Qualcomm for their next flagship device is going to hurt the CPU maker's profits. Its expected as Samsung moves towards premium materials in their devices they will also utilise their own CPU division more to enhance their own product offerings. Qualcomm are being bitten in the arse against their 810 being subject to overheating issues. I suspect this will lead to delays from some manufacturers flagship devices. Samsung is lucky in thay it has divisions which can supply all of the materials and technology for any forthcoming device, something the rest of the industry (bar apple) can't do. |
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Most apps do not need multi core. Yet it is multi apps/backgroud that benefit.
Even Apple found using that 90nm Cortex M3 saves them energy whilst leaving its two main cores free to do grunt work. Well written games are obviously where more processors come in useful, and I really cant see why an extra core of 1mm, turned off when not needed costing very little is a luxury. After all, those first 4 core 64 bit SOCS are already selling at $5 a piece, exactly why Qualcomm had to act fast with theirs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
Even Apple found using that 90nm Cortex M3 saves them energy whilst leaving its two main cores free to do grunt work.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 3,918
|
Quote:
I think its widely acknowledged Android doesn't take full advantage of multi process architecture. ARM is constantly working on new reference designs, which form the basics for processors made and designed by the likes of Samsung or Qualcomm.
When Apple makes and designs their chips they are in the very fortunate position of also controlling the software that they run on. Which is why you will see iPhones having weaker grunt power (comparatively) than Android devices. Although Samsung and HTC (et al) put their own custom skins atop of Android, the underlying code goes unchanged from its source. Naturally with each Android release Google will modify the code and further enhancing it. Android compared to a couple of years ago has come a long way since those heedy days of Gingerbread and the OS not being able to take full advantage of multiple cores. The problem with Qualcomm is down to their own designs and sometimes not being as efficient as those offered by Samsung/Mediatek/Huawei. You may notice that new CPU technology from the latter 3 often has a clock speed lower than that of Qualcomm, however they also have implemented 64bit far sooner. Its fair to say that Samsung ditching Qualcomm for their next flagship device is going to hurt the CPU maker's profits. Its expected as Samsung moves towards premium materials in their devices they will also utilise their own CPU division more to enhance their own product offerings. Qualcomm are being bitten in the arse against their 810 being subject to overheating issues. I suspect this will lead to delays from some manufacturers flagship devices. Samsung is lucky in thay it has divisions which can supply all of the materials and technology for any forthcoming device, something the rest of the industry (bar apple) can't do. Unless Samsung and Mediatek support devs in the way that Qualcomm do then I personnaly wouldn't be interested. My son has just sold his SGS3 due to the crap support from devs for AOSP builds. |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: North West
Posts: 4,883
|
Quote:
According to LG there are no overheating issues with the 810. Samsung say otherwise.
Unless Samsung and Mediatek support devs in the way that Qualcomm do then I personnaly wouldn't be interested. My son has just sold his SGS3 due to the crap support from devs for AOSP builds. |
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
But Apple doesn't use Cortex which is ARM's own design, Apple designs their own, so I don't understand?
So its a renamed NXP one that uses the Cortex M3. 90nm wont matter as that power usage is still tiny compared to those bigger 64 bit Cores. I have a couple of those Cortex M3s in my Nook HD+. |
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
They have a license to adapt ARM designs but it looks like they never had the time to add their own for that co-processor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Quote:
From Anandtech's and Chipworks reports, and the fact that Apple bought a chip design company, I'm pretty sure they don't adapt ARM's designs, but design from scratch using ARMs patents.
How I read into in the past(Anand explained it I'm sure) was that they took all the designs and modified them in various ways such as creating shorter interconnects and adding only parts of the ARM A15 design into an ARM A9 design to create the Apple A5. The A7 and A8 likely use that same principal with ARMs A53 and A57 cores. Qualcomm did the exact same with Krait. As we know, ARM released a Cortext A12 very similar to the Apple and Qualcomm stuff. So, we even have a chicken and egg question with all 3 of the 32 bit designs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
Nope.
How I read into in the past(Anand explained it I'm sure) was that they took all the designs and modified them in various ways such as creating shorter interconnects and adding only parts of the ARM A15 design into an ARM A9 design to create the Apple A5. The A7 and A8 likely use that same principal with ARMs A53 and A57 cores. Qualcomm did the exact same with Krait. As we know, ARM released a Cortext A12 very similar to the Apple and Qualcomm stuff. So, we even have a chicken and egg question with all 3 of the 32 bit designs. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Others ?
(You can't quite compare to Apple as different compilers usually mean you are comparing Apples and Oranges) |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
Others ?
(You can't quite compare to Apple as different compilers usually mean you are comparing Apples and Oranges) |
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Its an area I'm still well baffled by.
Another thing I'm well puzzled on is why the Cortex A15 did not show big gains on certain situations compared to Krait. Maybe the Android compiler is not optimized for the A15 or maybe no tests have been publicised. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: This forum
Posts: 3,388
|
Quote:
Maybe the Android compiler is not optimized for the A15 or maybe no tests have been publicised.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
Its maybe not even that. I think I recall reading that they used GCC to compile the Android code to benchmark test.
It could be that Apple has a far better compiler, and for Android versus Android GCC may have lots of factors leading to bad code. |
|
|
|
|
|
#20 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: the wild world web
Posts: 28,132
|
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/...-and-618-chips
Well, they much new 8 core stuff coming out. More importantly they also look to be the first to use the new Cortex A72. So, rather than do a 64 bit Krait they have now opted to use the A72, which by the looks of it is looking similar to the Cortex A12, that 32 bit ARM chip that is very Krait like. I guess they got wrong footed by Apple and way back, did not choose to work alongside ARM on 64 bit architecture. |
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Kent
Posts: 2,854
|
Wonder if 16 cores will ever appear?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,875
|
Quote:
Wonder if 16 cores will ever appear?
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 17:47.


