I remember my 166MHz Pentium MMX, 16mb RAM and Windows 98. IE5 represent!
And now, my 3 year old phone is twice as powerful.
[QUOTE=codenamecueball;24804424]I remember my 166MHz Pentium MMX, 16mb RAM and Windows 98. IE5 represent!
And now, my 3 year old phone is twice as powerful.[/QUOTE]
Wow, I almost had the same specs back then :v:
[QUOTE=Unreliable;24794772]I hope it doesn't kill the battery more than it has (for my HTC Hero)[/QUOTE]
ARM crunched the math on it, a processor with 2 cores both running at 1GHz uses less energy than 1 core running at 2GHz.
More performance for less power consumption.
When in standby you can just run background crap on one underclocked core.
Mayby they'll finally make a Folding@Home smartphone client.
They really need to make a very small but powerful computer to use for hosting stuff. Just plug it in, put on some shelve and there you go.
[QUOTE=johan_sm;24805348]They really need to make a very small but powerful computer to use for hosting stuff. Just plug it in, put on some shelve and there you go.[/QUOTE]
There's already one, it's essentially a wall plug.
Look up SheevaPlug.
Somehow, I don't see this being as useful for cell phones. With the exception of high-end games (think iPhone Rage, not Plants vs. Zombies), quad-core is massive overkill.
This would be useful for power-efficient cluster computing, though. Get a couple of these, and you've got a 64-core computer with the same power draw as a single Xeon quad-core. It won't be as powerful clock-for-clock, but for massively parallel problems, this could let you build a supercomputer for a fraction the cost. Said fraction would still be several hundred million dollars, though, so don't take this as "everyone gets a supercomputer"
Well first of all, I doubt we will have some type of huge jump of battery technology, and a quad core processor is useless without a good graphics accelerator. Because I really don't see anything else than the average consumer playing games.
Curious, if they could make those cheap enough would it be effective to have multi-cpu laptops/desktops with the same processor?
A new type of board with sockets for 10+ of those/similar?
[editline]04:24PM[/editline]
It really seems to me that developers have been moving away from desktop/stationary platforms in the past few years. Hopefully people don't start buying into the 'gaming' laptop/netbook nonsense.
[QUOTE=Biotoxsin;24808486]Curious, if they could make those cheap enough would it be effective to have multi-cpu laptops/desktops with the same processor?
A new type of board with sockets for 10+ of those/similar?[/QUOTE]
Possibly, although then you'd run into bus bandwidth problems. If you used a single bus (think the old FSB), you run into problems as you add more and more devices, what with traffic collision and all that. If you used an interconnect (think HyperTransport or QuickPath Interface), you run into problems routing all those wires, since you need one per interconnect, not per processor. For instance, QPI needs 84 wires to link two processors, but 504 to connect four, and 3024 to connect eight processors. That really adds to the cost of the motherboard, not to mention each processor would need eight i/o managers.
And you can forget about using these to max out Crysis. ARM chips (the type this uses) are incompatible with PC programs. If you remember the old Macs, before the Intel switch, they were similar. They were fundamentally incompatible. You practically need to rewrite programs to get them to run without an emulator.
ARM is also a RISC processor, compared to the x86 hybrid RISC/CISC method. The processors do a lot less per clock cycle, so a 2.5gHz ARM has the same processing capabilities as, say, a 1.5 gHz x86. They make up for that by being much cheaper to make and by using very, very little power. A single-core ARM system can use as little as 10 watts, for the processor, memory, mobo, and some flash storage.
Like everyone is saying. I hope batteries get an incredible upgrade.
My Blackberry 9700 has an AMAZING battery life. That's why I'm scared to upgrade to a new Android phone... I can literally go a week without charging my phone... That's while using it too. I can let it just sit there for a month before it will die with no use.
[QUOTE=Squad;24809624]Like everyone is saying. I hope batteries get an incredible upgrade.
My Blackberry 9700 has an AMAZING battery life. That's why I'm scared to upgrade to a new Android phone... I can literally go a week without charging my phone... That's while using it too. I can let it just sit there for a month before it will die with no use.[/QUOTE]
The new ARM15 core is more power-efficient than an equivalent ARM9. The quad-cores will probably still drain faster, but not four times faster. Especially since three cores will be shut off most of the time.
folding@phone
Great. Now all we need is new battery technology to prevent smartphone batteries being depleted in 2 hours.
That's amazing. Not sure why you would need a quad core for a phone though.
[QUOTE=Shoe Phone;24810696]That's amazing. Not sure why you would need a quad core for a phone though.[/QUOTE]
So we can play actual games on it?
I would rather have improved battery cells first.
[QUOTE=Shoe Phone;24810696]That's amazing. Not sure why you would need a quad core for a phone though.[/QUOTE]
Real Man's Gaming, hi-def video streaming. Maybe multitasking; have video chat going on while typing up some notes.
This is going to be awesome, can't wait to see that upcoming LG phone
[QUOTE=gman003-main;24809787]The new ARM15 core is more power-efficient than an equivalent ARM9. The quad-cores will probably still drain faster, but not four times faster. Especially since three cores will be shut off most of the time.[/QUOTE]
I understand that, it has already been stated.
That doesn't really mean we don't need better batteries... We should have devices that don't need to be plugged in every day.
Breaking news! Texas Instruments has released a dual 8-core CPU calculator.
I would love to see two quad-core ARM CPUs used in the iPad II.
ipad the second
If a phone can run computer apps with no porting shit required, then I would buy that so fucking fast even if I do need to get it shipped
[QUOTE=Squad;24809624]Like everyone is saying. I hope batteries get an incredible upgrade.
My Blackberry 9700 has an AMAZING battery life. That's why I'm scared to upgrade to a new Android phone... I can literally go a week without charging my phone... That's while using it too. I can let it [b]just sit there for a month before it will die with no use.[/b][/QUOTE]
that's with no use on the phone, if you can't find time at the end of the day to charge it..then i don't really know.
Sooner or later, either Nvidia or AMD will cotton on and produce mobile phone graphics chips.
[IMG]http://img251.imageshack.us/img251/355/93046820.jpg[/IMG]
But will it run Crysis?
it's safe to say some guy will try overclocking his phone, if it hasn't been done already. better yet a tiny pocket watercooling loop.
[QUOTE=Nerdrage;24819382]Sooner or later, either Nvidia or AMD will cotton on and produce mobile phone graphics chips.
But will it run Crysis?
it's safe to say some guy will try overclocking his phone, if it hasn't been done already. better yet a tiny pocket watercooling loop.[/QUOTE]
Nvidia already has Tegra 2.
[QUOTE=Armotekma;24818111]that's with no use on the phone, if you can't find time at the end of the day to charge it..then i don't really know.[/QUOTE]
I know... That's why I said "with no use" at the end of that sentence... You even made it bold...
Sometimes you're in a situation where charging every night isn't plausible. I know some phones that die by the end of the day, so heaven forbid you have something else going on where you can't charge it.
[QUOTE=johan_sm;24810761]So we can play actual games on it?[/QUOTE]
You don't buy a phone so you can just play games on it. If you want to play "actual games" buy a Nintendo handheld or a laptop.
well games on a phone is a very accurate form of gauging overall performance.
in the most recent case, if it can play quake 3, it can do "everything" phones can currently do.
[editline]08:26AM[/editline]
and besides mobile games are actually getting much better, tremendous progress over the last 2 or 3 years. iD and EPIC are sort of battling to see who can get the best/prettiest game and engine out there, which can and only will end in great
[editline]08:31AM[/editline]
these are both iphone but that's more or less irrelevant as both also want to bring it to android and windows phone 7 or whatever
Rage - iD Software - a lot of iD Tech 5, obviously not all of it
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=52hMWMWKAMk[/media]
(side note - john carmack is annoying sounding)
Epic Citadel/Project Sword - EPIC Games - a lot of Unreal Engine 3, also obviously not all of it
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK9PCpN4MrI[/media]
to be fair to the epic citadel video, i can't seem to find a good quality version
Haha that's great I know it'll happen but right now it sounds really funny.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.