Dual core or quad core
- Thread starter bdfull3r
- Start date
Honestly a dual core should be fine. Android is more optimized for 2 cores technically, but the most important factor at this point is the gpu
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda premium
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda premium
Similar threads
Top Liked Posts
-
There are no posts matching your filters.
-
7Honestly... Every time someone says that buying a quad-core future-proofs your phone makes me want to do a -facepalm- the size of Texas....
Quad-cores have weak cores! Tegra 3 is an A9 where the strongest core is 1.4. In comparison, Krait S4 is an A15 where both cores are 1.5. In real life testing, Krait S4 gives twice the performance of Tegra 3.
99% of everything you do on your phone only needs 1 core. Developers won't bother to make their apps multi-core capable because it won't improve the performance at all! And even if Android 5.0 is optimized for multiple cores, only HD gaming will see any improvement from it.
It's like buying your grandmother a Ferrari. Quad-cores have all this "potential" that they're trying to convince you of so you go out and buy their product. But like your grandmother, who'll never try to push past 60 in her Ferrari, a mobile device simply won't see the use of a quad-core engine.
One possible exception. One single possible use of quad-cores in everyday phone use is battery power. Specifically, A fully optimized OS can split all workload between all the cores, dividing your battery consumption between them. So a single core device running at 100% uses 4 times the battery power of a quad-core device running at 25% on all cores. But Tegra 3 doesn't support this! Tegra 3 cores run all or nothing, it's just the way they're designed. Krait, on the other hand, has dynamic voltage, so they can actually do this to save battery power!
If I ever get a quad-core device, it will never be a Tegra core. The only possible situation where having a quad-core CPU on your phone makes actual sense, is if Krait makes a quad-core version of their flagship CPU.
This conversation should not be on the benefits of quad-core vs. dual-core. While informative, that conversation would have no real world benefit to those looking to buy a new phone. What is really relevant information however, is a comparison between the Krait S4 chip and the Tegra 3 chip. It does no good to make vague references to the "potential" of quad-core devices, without considering what it is we will actually have in our hands in the end.
You can brag all you want about how many cores you have in your Tegra 3 device, but it won't change the fact that my Padfone running Krait S4 will still run miles around it, no matter how much you try to "optimize" that poorly designed Tegra 3 chip. Four sedans will never be as fast as two Lamborghinis.5I think benchmark will tell you which is better. Just wait for reviews
You can't judge technology by it's benchmark scores alone. Let me try and make a good analogy to explain this....
Let's say you're shopping for cars. Car 1 (Tegra 3) has a much higher top speed than Car 2 (Krait). It can go up to 300 miles an hour while Car 2 can only go up to 200. Judging by that fact alone, it's "obvious" that Car 1 is better.
But, don't roads have speed limits? What's the point of a car that can go to 300 miles per hour if the highest possible speed limit is only 70? I doubt you'd ever get a chance to go 300 miles an hour, even if the benchmarks say that you theoretically could.
This is the limitation of the Android Market. Developers won't want to make an app that takes full advantage of Tegra 3 because if they did so their app wouldn't be able to sell to weaker phones. Tegra 3 will be a small part of the Android community, even if there was no Krait to counter it, simply because it's the expensive high-end phone. Developers will always prefer making $1 dollar on 10 million devices than $20 on 100,000.
Now, let's consider other factors. When you drive, you're constantly accellerating and decelerating. Stop light to stop light or whenever you take a turn. Let's say Car 1 goes from 0 to 60 in 10 seconds, while Car 2 goes 0 to 60 in 6 seconds. Car 2 will be much more useful for your daily driving needs. If you race from stop light to stop light, Car 2 will always get there first. In that same way, Krait is a more advanced chip than Tegra 3.
Let's consider fuel efficiency. Tegra 3 has that huge top speed. But in return, if you want to go that fast you burn through your gas like nothing else. Car 1's engine goes at 15 miles per gallon. Car 2's engine, on the other hand, gets 30 miles per gallon. Therefore, you'll need to refuel on Car 2 only half as much as Car 1. Car 2 is twice as fuel-efficient as Car 1.
Tegra 3 is built at 40nm while Krait is built at 28nm. This results in the fact that, when the task is not the pinnacle of HD gaming, for any given task compared between Tegra 3 and Krait, if the task is multi-threaded, Krait and Tegra 3 will both finish the task at the same time, but Krait will use only half the battery power Tegra 3 needed to do so.
If that same task is not multi-threaded, as 99% of Android apps aren't, Krait will finish that task in half the time as Tegra 3 while still only using half the battery power.
If you don't pay attention to anything else about this post, read the sentence right above this one. Then read it again.
Any multi-threaded benchmark will show that Tegra 3 is the "stronger" device, but the environment is not optimized to take advantage of that power! Just like both of the cars above being limited to the speed limit on the highways you'd drive them on, the power of the Tegra 3 engine will be wasted by the environment that surrounds it.
You wouldn't get a special exemption from speed limits just because you have a very fast car, so why expect that to occur when buying a Tegra 3 device?
While on the other hand, the Krait chip is more dynamic, able to adjust to your needs on the fly, and optimized for the stuff you'll actually do day-to-day on your phone. Yet at the same time, will inherently do it all using half the battery power of Tegra 3.
I can't imagine someone wanting to buy Car 1 over Car 2, so why would you want to buy Tegra 3 over Krait S4?
Have you ever noticed that, while companies are putting Tegra 3 in their high end phones, the very highest end flapship phones are all getting Krait S4? This means something...3-facepalm- Why don't people ever bother reading before posting?
I'll say it again, and if anyone needs more details look up my other posts.
In this current generation, dual-core Krait S4 outperforms Tegra 3 in every way.
Better battery life, faster speeds, dynamic voltage, A15 vs A9, more future-proof!
Please, learn about the science behind these chips and consider the current software environment before airing your ignorance for all to see. In principle, with all other factors being the same, and in an environment not hostile to multiple cores, then and only then is a quad-core phone viable.
Until such a day comes, always go with the dual-core Krait or Exynos chipset. Because frankly, Tegra 3 was outdated the day it was released.
Many of you keep assuming that quad-core vs dual-core is essentially a trade-off between performance and battery life. This is not true. Dual-core Krait S4 has the edge in -both-.
There is literally no viable reason to prefer the Tegra 3 over the Krait S4, and thus, no reason to get a quad-core Tegra 3 over dual-core Krait S4.2
Almost correct: Android the OS is optimized for multiple cores as of the release of ICS. It's the apps that aren't optimized for multiple cores, and are unlikely to see more than a 10% gain in their user experience from becoming optimized (Krait gives 100% more gain compared to Tegra 3 without optimization, and will see the same 10% gain from optimization as the Tegra 3 regardless), and the vast majority of apps are unlikely to ever push the Tegra 3 to its limits even if they ever get optimized either, a highly unlikely scenario.
But apart from that minor detail your post is correct. I've been trying to spread the facts all week now. I've seen so many "Quad-core is future-proof!" "Quad-core gives more power!" "Dual-core to save battery power even though it must be weaker!" posts everywhere, and the sheer ignorance of the community frustrates me to no end.
Judging by my thanks meter, I've at least managed to show some people the truth of the matter. It makes me feel a little hope for humanity. ^_^
