Nicolas F, 28 Nov 2018Maybe you can explain, why "that makes no sense"? =)You need to go back to the begginning of that thread of messages and drop your bias to understand why
HugoSteger, 28 Nov 2018Then where's your proof then? Benchmarks said that but we both have to wait for officials results at 4th december.
HugoSteger, 26 Nov 2018Did it beat A12X? Yes it did. Its a fastest CPU at the moment.
A lot faster than the second most fastest A12 bionic.
Anonymous, 28 Nov 2018That makes no sense.... But okMaybe you can explain, why "that makes no sense"? =)
[deleted post]Oh, so you can justify the overly high performance of modern "flagship" SoCs for smartphones? Otherwise, it's your remark that was pointless =)
Shanti Dope, 25 Nov 2018By your logic, the Galaxy Note 9 should've used the SD660 instead, as there's clearly no diffe... more..and SD660 would run these apps good :)
Also SGN9 should've had flat screen and convenient placement of fingerprint reader.
I wish any company would come out with a processor same powerful as Apple A12X & they could include visual cores(like pixels) along with ISP& DSP.in Android flagship segment,there is monopoly of Qualcomm.If this news is true,then it will be a disappointment & lot of people will be happy seeing the upgraded benchmark test,while the benchmark apps will simply take money from Qualcomm & other OEMs & show huge boost in every segment.
CptPower, 24 Nov 2018Well humans do mistakes.
For me is enough knowing its a lot faster than A12 bionic from that... more"its a lot faster than A12 bionic from that overpriced apple"
How exactly did you reach that conclusion?
O S, 25 Nov 2018This 10.5MB L2 cache would be awesome and would compete well with Apple A12 Bionic 8MB L2 cach... moreCache is expensive. Even Intel stayed in 8mb cache for mainstream DESKTOP for a loooooooong time and only add more when amd started threatening their market share.
Bigger cache will also increase latency slightly reducing overall performance, while increasing power consumption. but when cache to small for an app, there will be huge performance penalty. Multitasking also love bigger cache. Finding balance between these factor and cost production is what SoC maker tried to do.
erki, 25 Nov 2018The fastest core that is reserved for bechmarks ;)
Seriously though, I think one fast core fo... morewell not quite true(statement about benchmarks)
that single core is just for most of app's that only uses one tread(the problem curently we face even in PC OSs which can lead to ie: a 24 core intel xeon lose the game of running programes to a core i7 with 8 core just becuse of single tread higher performance of that i7) also a lot of devs are too much lazy to go for more then 1 core(or at best 2 tread if there is HT)
about UI, that might even being tasked to those very low power cores, cause it is not that much heavy(in pure android) and runs allways. thats why it is good idea, this task be given to a low power core!
Slight increase in performance as usual.
Not a big jump.
Kiyasuriin, 25 Nov 2018true. I personally think: 2MB for large core, 1.5MB for medium cores and 1MB for smalls will ... moreThis 10.5MB L2 cache would be awesome and would compete well with Apple A12 Bionic 8MB L2 cache; since the L2 cache is a documented bottleneck that cripples Qualcomm SoC compared to Apple SoC.