S1nnless
What is folding?
Vi este editorial no PocketNow e achei que valia a pena partilhar porque, apesar de alguns erros, explica relativamente bem as razões pelo qual o Snapdragon S4 é superior ao Tegra 3.
http://pocketnow.com/2012/06/15/why-is-the-dual-core-qualcomm-sometimes-faster-than-the-quad-core-nvidia/
Aproveito para deixar a thread para discutirmos SoC's, arquitecturas e afins.
Joe Levi do PocketNow disse:Why Is the Dual-Core Qualcomm Sometimes Faster Than the Quad-Core nVidia?
Have you ever gone to the supermarket and found several lanes open? It doesn’t matter which lane you pick, your lane is the slowest. It’s inevitable! What do you do when you see the lane next to you moving faster? You move to that lane! But then that one slows down, and you move to another, then another, and another. Soon you realize that the people who got in line after you are all done and heading out the door, and you’re still at the end of the line!
The same could be said of the cores in our smartphones and tablets. We start out with one core and everything’s just fine. We add a second core and things speed up a bit. It stands to reason that if we add a couple more cores things should really scream, right? But they don’t. Let’s see if we can get to the bottom of “why” the dual-core processors are sometimes faster than their quad-core siblings.
It all comes down to the Cortex
The first, and most obvious reason one is faster than the other is that we’re really comparing oranges to … another type of spherical fruit. (I can’t say “the other word” because this is an Android article, right?)
It’s not so much the dual- versus quad-core competition as it is the Cortex A15 versus Cortex A9. Without getting into a lot of technical mumbo jumbo, think of it as an original Intel Pentium versus a Pentium III. Sure, there was a huge jump in clock frequency between those two chips, but there were also improvements to the architecture that resulted in greater speed and more capabilities.
The comparison between the Qualcomm and the Tegra isn’t that much different from the Intel comparison. Qualcomm’s S4 processor is based on the more recent (and more powerful) Cortex A15. Not only are these cores faster, they’re also more energy efficient than their A9 siblings. The Tegra 3, although quad-core, is based on the Cortex A9. Don’t get me wrong: the Cortex A9 has a reliable track record and is an awesome platform!
All that having been said, it’s not surprising that an A15 would outrun an A9. But in some cases, the A9 wins — which is where things get confusing.
Most of us don’t know what “Cortex” our CPUs are based upon. Before you started reading this article did you even know what a Cortex was?
Marketing drives us to faster clock-speeds and more cores: those two are easier to quantify than knowing the ins and outs of ARM architecture. Quad-core A9s can still outperform dual-core A15s in certain applications, but in day-to-day use, the newer though “only dual-core” A15s may be speedier and last longer on a charge than the A9 quad-cores.
Does that explain every nuance of why the dual-cores are just as fast as quad-cores? Not even close. Hopefully it starts to paint the picture that it’s not always the number of cores or even the clock frequency that determines overall performance. Sometimes it’s a bit more “interesting” than the raw numbers.
And we haven’t even talked about RAM… but we’ll save that topic for another day.
http://pocketnow.com/2012/06/15/why-is-the-dual-core-qualcomm-sometimes-faster-than-the-quad-core-nvidia/
Aproveito para deixar a thread para discutirmos SoC's, arquitecturas e afins.
Última edição: