• After 15+ years, we've made a big change: Android Forums is now Early Bird Club. Learn more here.

Dual-Core Processor Debate

Vanquished

Vanquished

Android Expert
I've seen various bench marks and quite a few debates as to which dual-core processors are the best, whether or not they are really that much better than current processors such as those with the Hummingbird GPU and what not, so I was curious as to what people here thought about the current line-up of processors (Mainly in terms of media and gaming, since that's where these will really make a difference).

I'm going to put RAM down as well, since that helps alot with system functions as well.

HTC EVO 3D
1.2GHz Dual-Core Qualcomm MSM8660
1GB RAM

HTC Pyramid
1.2 GHz Dual-Core Qualcomm MSM8260
768MB RAM

LG Optimus 2X
1GHz Dual-Core Nvidia Tegra 2
512MB RAM

LG Thrill 4G (Optimus 3D)
1GHz Dual-Core TI OMAP4
512MB RAM

Motorola Atrix
1GHz Dual-Core Nvidia Tegra 2
1GB RAM

Samsung Galaxy S2
1GHz Dual-Core Exynos
1GB RAM
 
The thing about benchmarks is that everyone optimizes just to look good on those benchmarks. The real test is how it performs on something new.
 
Which is why I am asking here. =p Refining the question a little more, which of the three processors has the better GPU? This may be hard to tell right now since only the Tegra 2 is in use, but people are saying the Adreno 220 rivals Xbox360 graphics, while others say the new TI processor and GPU will be the next power house.
 
Dual core processors are part of the SoC platforms where different GPUs exist.
For example Hummingbird on SGS came combined with PowerVR SGX540 GPU, and this same GPU now is coming with TI OMAP4 processor in LG Optimus 3D.

If I may add to your list:
LG Optimus 2X
1GHz Dual-Core Nvidia Tegra 2
512MB RAM

LG Optimus 3D
1GHz Dual-Core TI OMAP4
512MB RAM

Samsung Galaxy S2
1GHz Dual-Core Exynos
1GB RAM

There are bunch of things to consider here, like the power of GPU, the operationalization of software, the popularity of a certain platform...
 
The Optimus 3D is the Thrill 4G, if I'm not mistaken. But yes, that is my main question, of the different processors, which is considered to have the most powerful GPU?

IE, what is better, the "old" PowerVR SGX540 or the new Adren 220?

Another question that arises is apps. Obviously there aren't too many apps made specifically to take advantage of dual-cores yet, but games comes up as an example. With the release of the Tegra Zone and it's "exclusive" games, will those same developers only keep that particular game exclusively on a Tegra powered device or optimize it for the others as well?
 
The Qualcomm Snapdragon is the only one that will support Netflix streaming, AFAIK; so right there makes the two phones with it top-contenders.
 
Ignore the SOC. A Hummingbird and an OMAP3 are essentially the same when it comes to CPU. The key difference there is the GPU. All of these CPUs are based on two things; an instruction set (ARMv7 for all), and an MPCore (Cortex A8, Scorpion, and Cortex A9).

When it comes to the MPCore, Qualcomm did their own thing and make Scorpion. It has many similarities to Cortex A8, to include NEON support, but also has some nice benefits, such as multi-core support and a 128-bit SIMD instruction set. In real world performance today, with the A8 as baseline, a Scorpion will outperform the A8 by about 5% at the same clock speeds, and an A9 will beat the A8 by about 20% at the same clock speeds.

So, all of these dual-core CPUs using A9 (Tegra 2, OMAP4, Exynos/Orion), are going to offer the same performance at the same clock speeds with two exceptions; GPU, and NEON support.


  • Tegra 2 is the only one to NOT support NEON, giving it reduced performance in some multimedia tasks.
  • Exynos/Orion uses the PowerVR SGX543 GPU, which is arguably the fastest GPU out today for mobile. It's essentially the Apple A5.
  • Tegra 2 uses NVidia's own proprietary GPU, which is debated to be on par with SGX 543, but until we see the 543 compared on an Android platform, we can't say for certain. Only SOC on the 40nm process, giving it the best potential battery life.
  • OMAP4 is a lower cost solution that uses the SGX540 used in last year's Hummingbird.
  • The dual-core Snapdragon will still use the Scorpion MPCore, meaning that at 1.2ghz, it is about 5% faster than the 1ghz A9-based dual-core above, but uses more battery. Also uses the Adreno 220, which is comparable to the SGX 540, considered slightly slower.
So, in simpler terms:

Raw processing power - Snapdragon 1.2ghz > OMAP4/Exynos 1ghz > Tegra 2 1ghz (but all in the same neighborhood).

Graphics - Exynos > Tegra 2 > OMAP 4 > Snapdragon (the big jump being OMAP4 to Tegra 2)

Potential Battery Life - Tegra 2 > Exynos/OMAP4 > Snapdragon (dependent on MANY other factors of the handset)

There is no clear winner. Until Exynos is compared on Android, we can't say for certain that it's more powerful than Tegra 2. It looks like OMAP4 will be the budget SOC, Exynos the gamer/power user SOC, Tegra 2 the jack of all trades that Snapdragon was last year, and Snapdragon will once again try to compete at the high end while offering inferior battery life and graphics, but edging out the competition in raw performance by a near useless amount.

You can't go wrong with any chip, but if you're a 3D gamer, ONLY get Tegra 2 or Exynos.
 
Awesome, thanks! I like to be able to play the latest games, but I get the phone for all around usage (media, internet, and what not). The one thing I find slightly "concerning," particularly with the Tegra enabled phones are the exclusive titles companies are making. Obviously there is no way to really tell what they will do now, but from a business standpoint do you think they'd optimize them for the other chipsets as well?
 
Medion said:
Raw processing power - Snapdragon 1.2ghz > OMAP4/Exynos 1ghz > Tegra 2 1ghz (but all in the same neighborhood).

Graphics - Exynos > Tegra 2 > OMAP 4 > Snapdragon (the big jump being OMAP4 to Tegra 2)
Click to expand...

Based on benchmarks of HTC Pyramid this is not true, looks to be slower even with a higher clockspeed, I don't think I need to tell you clockspeed isn’t everything.

Also based on Anandtech benchmarks OMAP 4 is faster than Tegra 2 in games, shocking I know but the old PowerVR SGX540 is faster.

Exynos is still an unknown, Anandtech didn't show it in a good light but others have, even showing it to be competing with the A5.
 
The benchmarks on Pyramid are not reliable, because the tests may have been done on a final model.

Exynos is not clear yet to have SGX543 GPU. The preliminary tests on GLBenchmark Pro show SGS2 with a Mali-400MP GPU, which showed lower performance than Tegra 2 ULP GeForce GPU.
 
Usta said:
The benchmarks on Pyramid are not reliable, because the tests may have been done on a final model.

Exynos is not clear yet to have SGX543 GPU. The preliminary tests on GLBenchmark Pro show SGS2 with a Mali-400MP GPU, which showed lower performance than Tegra 2 ULP GeForce GPU.
Click to expand...

Final model or not we don't have much else to go on.

Check out the link below, it's not the Galaxy S2 but it is Exynos/Mali 400MP.

http://androidforums.com/2463404-post10.html
 
Medion said:
Ignore the SOC. A Hummingbird and an OMAP3 are essentially the same when it comes to CPU. The key difference there is the GPU. All of these CPUs are based on two things; an instruction set (ARMv7 for all), and an MPCore (Cortex A8, Scorpion, and Cortex A9).

When it comes to the MPCore, Qualcomm did their own thing and make Scorpion. It has many similarities to Cortex A8, to include NEON support, but also has some nice benefits, such as multi-core support and a 128-bit SIMD instruction set. In real world performance today, with the A8 as baseline, a Scorpion will outperform the A8 by about 5% at the same clock speeds, and an A9 will beat the A8 by about 20% at the same clock speeds.

So, all of these dual-core CPUs using A9 (Tegra 2, OMAP4, Exynos/Orion), are going to offer the same performance at the same clock speeds with two exceptions; GPU, and NEON support.


  • Tegra 2 is the only one to NOT support NEON, giving it reduced performance in some multimedia tasks.
  • Exynos/Orion uses the PowerVR SGX543 GPU, which is arguably the fastest GPU out today for mobile. It's essentially the Apple A5.
  • Tegra 2 uses NVidia's own proprietary GPU, which is debated to be on par with SGX 543, but until we see the 543 compared on an Android platform, we can't say for certain. Only SOC on the 40nm process, giving it the best potential battery life.
  • OMAP4 is a lower cost solution that uses the SGX540 used in last year's Hummingbird.
  • The dual-core Snapdragon will still use the Scorpion MPCore, meaning that at 1.2ghz, it is about 5% faster than the 1ghz A9-based dual-core above, but uses more battery. Also uses the Adreno 220, which is comparable to the SGX 540, considered slightly slower.
So, in simpler terms:

Raw processing power - Snapdragon 1.2ghz > OMAP4/Exynos 1ghz > Tegra 2 1ghz (but all in the same neighborhood).

Graphics - Exynos > Tegra 2 > OMAP 4 > Snapdragon (the big jump being OMAP4 to Tegra 2)

Potential Battery Life - Tegra 2 > Exynos/OMAP4 > Snapdragon (dependent on MANY other factors of the handset)

There is no clear winner. Until Exynos is compared on Android, we can't say for certain that it's more powerful than Tegra 2. It looks like OMAP4 will be the budget SOC, Exynos the gamer/power user SOC, Tegra 2 the jack of all trades that Snapdragon was last year, and Snapdragon will once again try to compete at the high end while offering inferior battery life and graphics, but edging out the competition in raw performance by a near useless amount.

You can't go wrong with any chip, but if you're a 3D gamer, ONLY get Tegra 2 or Exynos.
Click to expand...

This is a great post and has some great information but it may not be 100% accurate. The Exynos/Orion is said to have the Mali 400 GPU. That may change and could be why its delayed (and the possible reason Samsung is using Tegra 2) but is accurate as far as we know. Also the PowerVR SGX 540 in the TI OMAP 4430 is clocked at 300 Mhz as opposed to the current 200 Mhz giving it a nice speed boost. Also the new Snapdragon SoC is still based on the Scorpion core and is slower clock speed for clock speed when compared to the newer SoC's. So at 1.2 Ghz its about even with the other 1 Ghz SoC's.

If the preliminary results by Anandtech hold true than the TI OMAP 4430 may prove to be the overall fastest SoC. Another thing to consider is the possible overclocking headroom of these SoC's. The Tegra 2 is proving to be quite the overclocker and the TI Omap's are traditionally decent overclockers as well.
 
FragDroidX said:
Also the PowerVR SGX 540 in the TI OMAP 4430 is clocked at 300 Mhz as opposed to the current 200 Mhz giving it a nice speed boost.
Click to expand...

Is that confirmed or still a rumour? it only takes a small CPU overclock I can pump out higher scores than tegra 2 in graphics benchmarks.
 
lack of NEON instructions could hurt tegra 2 in benchmarks that depend on it (such as video decoding). nvidia thinks those apps could be recoded to use the gpu instead but that will take time
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom