asynchronous dual core vs others

Yes, asynchronous is when something operates on another thread whereas the main thread is still available for operating. This allows for better performance in terms of managing tasks. Now just because it doesn't score high on a benchmark, it doesn't mean it is going to perform. Also this allows for better performance for the battery.

I haven't slept for the past 12 hours so if this doesn't help you, just let me know and I will fully elaborate on how the processor will operate on the phone. Now time for bed :'(

In short, asynchronous operation means that a process operates independently of other processes.

Think of transferring a file. A separate thread will utilized for doing so. You will then be able to do background things such as playing with the UI, such as Sense since you will be using the main thread. If anything were to happen to the transferring file (such as it failing), you will be able to cancel it because it is independent on another thread.

I hope this makes sense man, kind of tired. Now I'm really going to bed.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.

donatom3 said:

To be more specific by asynchronous they mean that each core can run at different clock speeds. Core 1 could be at 1.2 ghz while core 2 is at 200 mhz. Most multi core processors are synchronous meaning all the cores are running at the same speed.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

^This too

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

I was also very curious to learn a little more about the async cores and how it differes from a standard "Always-On" dual core arctechiure.

Thh first page/video I found talks about the SnapDragon core specifically.

http://socialtimes.com/dual-core-snapdragon-processor-qualcomm-soundbytes_b49063

From what I've gathered, it comes down to using the second core and thus more power, only when needed. Minimizing voltage and heat to preserve battery life.

The following video goes into similar and slightly deeper detail about the processor specifically found in the EVO 3D. The demo is running a processor benchmark with a visual real time usage of the two cores. You can briefly see how the two cores are trading off the workload between each other. It was previously mentioned somewhere else on this forum, but I believe by seperating a workload between two chips, the chip will use less power across the two chips vs putting the same workload on a sinlge chip. I'm sure someone else will chime in with some additional detail. Also, after seeing some of these demos, I'm inclined to think that the processor found in the EVO 3D is actually stable at 1.5 but has been underclocked to 1.2 to conserve battery. Only time spent within our hands will tell.


Another demo of the MSM8660 and Adreno 220 GPU found in the EVO 3D. Its crazy to think we've come this far for mobile phone technology.


What occurred to me is how complex Community ROMs for such a device may become with the addition of Video Drivers that may continue to be upgraded and improved (think early Video Card tweaks for PC). Wondering how easy/difficult it will be to get our hands on them, possibly through extraction of updated stock ROMs.

EDIT: As far as benchmarks are concerned, I blame the inability of today's bench marking apps to consider async cores or properly utilize them during testing to factor the over all score. Because the current tests are most likely to be spread across cores which favors efficiency, the scores are going to be much lower than what the true power and performance of the chips can produce. I think of it as putting a horsepower governor on a Ferrari.

The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.

Harfainx said:

The best demonstration is in the first video posted, notice when Charbax looks at the monitor. There on the top right are the frequencies of the two cores, and you'll notice the both of them jumping around a lot, independent of the other. Using the cores "on-demand" only when needed ends up saving a lot of battery power, but doesn't give you any performance loss.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Actually I was thinking that not just the battery savings but there could be a performance gain. Think of this if the manufacturer knows they only have to clock one core up to speed when needed they can be more aggressive about their timings and have the core clock up faster than a normal dual core would since they know they don't have to clock up both processors when only one needs the full speed.

I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.

I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.

mevensen said:

I wonder if the drop to 1.2 GHz also serves to keep heat under control. It might not just be battery savings, maybe the small case of a phone doesn't allow for proper cooling to hit 1.5 safely.

I'd love to see some confirmation that the asynchronous nature of this chipset is what's responsible for the seemingly lackluster benchmarking.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.

Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App

RVDigital said:

The "horrible" benchmark scores are simply due to the tests inability to consider async core performance. Wait till the tests are able to take this into consideration.

Sent from my HERO200 using XDA Premium App

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

I went through all of your links, I didn't see anything that confirms that the benches are somehow affected by the asynchronous nature of the chipset. It's not that I don't believe you, I actually had that same theory when the benches first came out. I just don't have any proof or explanation of it. Do you have a link that provides more solid evidence that this is the case?

NVIDIA actually tells a different story (of course)

http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/24/nvidia-tegra-2-outperforms-qualcomm-dualcore-1015/

AnandTech's article does explain some of the differences

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4144/...gra-2-review-the-first-dual-core-smartphone/4

It appears that Snapdragon (Scorpion) will excel in some tasks (FPU, non-bandwith constrained applications), but will fall short in others .

I'm pretty sure none of the benchmark apps have even been updated past the release of the sensation so yeah....How could they update the app to use the asynchronus processors the if the only phones to use them have only recently been released.

Sent from my zombified gingerbread hero using XDA Premium App

I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?

tyarbro13 said:

I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Yea, if someone were to develop an app for that. I do not see why not.


Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Hmm...

If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.

I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...

Ex:

2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.

The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...

Maedhros said:

Hmm...

If a program such as Smart bench (which takes advantage of dual cores) is stressing both cores to 1.2ghz then regardless of if both cores are active or not the bench will be accurate.

I would rather NOT have asyncronus cores as there would be lag during frequency changes...

Ex:

2 cores running at 500mhz vs 1 core @ 1ghz and other not active.

The 2 cores will produce less heat and use less energy...

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

tyarbro13 said:

I had the G2x for like 3 days and never got to root. Poor service where I live. But could the cores be set to a specific frequency independently when rooted like computers?

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

This is something that the hardware needs to be capable of. Software can only do so much. As far as I've seen Tegra isn't capable of it.

I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.

DDiaz007 said:

There dual, it would be better for them to run asynchronous. Not only that, but it is a phone so there will be no lag between frequency changing. 2 Cores running at 500mhz will perform better than 1 core at 1ghz.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA App

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?

nkd said:

I read the anandtech article and I came with conclusion that everyday task you might not see the difference between the two and while tegra2 might bench higher. The main thing people dont talk about is the GPU. Adreno 220 is a powerhouse GPU, it will probably stand strong when tegra 3 comes out.

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

What?!?

Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.

The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.

Arm 7 vs arm 9?

Maedhros said:

Huh... what are u saying? Sorry dont understand... On one hand you say asynchronous is better and on the other ur saying 2 cores @ 500 will work better?


What?!?

Andreno 220 is a horrible GPU. AT BEST it is equal to the GPU in the Original SGS.

The reason benches are so different is because Qualcomm has made NO improvements in the CPU. Desire HD CPU is the same as Sensations. While... SGS2 + Tegra have IMPROVED CPUs.

Arm 7 vs arm 9?

Click to expand...

Click to collapse

Dude go back to sleep. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App