Snapdragon 800 Vs Apple A7

[pappy53]

Well I read that the A7 is developed in house by apple so it's got special attention while the snap800 is just an off the shelf component that multiple companies use. I'm more interested in how the rumored A7x will fare against the snap800 seeing as how the 800 is the current flagship processor for android.

I don't know, as the A7 already beats the 800. I don't know anything about the A7x.

 

[anon8126715]

It amazes me how people can talk about "Future potential" of device hardware and maintain a straight face when it comes to mobile technology. Sure it's nice when a company pushes the limits when it comes to technology, but if it has no current real world application then what's in it for consumers? Given the rate at which mobile technology becomes obsolete, why build up a device that won't be relevant by the time the technology is applicable? Definitely sounds like a marketing ploy to me.

 

[pappy53]

It amazes me how people can talk about "Future potential" of device hardware and maintain a straight face when it comes to mobile technology. Sure it's nice when a company pushes the limits when it comes to technology, but if it has no current real world application then what's in it for consumers? Given the rate at which mobile technology becomes obsolete, why build up a device that won't be relevant by the time the technology is applicable? Definitely sounds like a marketing ploy to me.

Huh? What are you talking about?

 

[anon8126715]

Huh? What are you talking about?

The fact that some people claim 64 bit on a phone that doesn't really have the hardware nor the applications to fully take advantage of 64 bit and insist that down the line it will be an asset. Do some of you not understand that most phones are obsolete within a year of them coming out? And it's not as if you can just throw better hardware at a device like you can with a full sized computer. Like someone else said, marketing gimmick.

 

[Botti]

Good thing the topic doesn't say anything about 32 vs 64 bits, because that is a pointless topic. 1+1 calculations won't be any faster even if it was 8 vs 64 bits. Floating points on the other hand are normally handled on a integrated floating point unit, which has nothing to do with the famous debate. The only place where 64 bit integer registers might speed things, is the one which actually needs to go beyond the 2 or 4gb limit (and I'm not talking about only ram). I'm trying to say, that you don't get such benefits only by toggling some setting in your compiler, your computing task really has to be such that it can use the added bits.

The real benefits of A7 are in the extended amount of registers (which reduces need to use stack) and the new instructions (which reduce need to emulate things). That includes the brand new version of FPU, which it also has.

 

[Weaser999]

I don't know, as the A7 already beats the 800. I don't know anything about the A7x.

Um mm if you load up 3d mark you will see that in ice storm ultra the note 3 scores about 5000 points higher than the iPhone 5S.. 13000 vs 18000. It's not even close in that benchmark.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk 2

 

[pappy53]

The fact that some people claim 64 bit on a phone that doesn't really have the hardware nor the applications to fully take advantage of 64 bit and insist that down the line it will be an asset. Do some of you not understand that most phones are obsolete within a year of them coming out? And it's not as if you can just throw better hardware at a device like you can with a full sized computer. Like someone else said, marketing gimmick.

You keep on believing that. 64-bit apps are already being developed for the 5s, and it will be an asset down the line. When you speak of phones being obsolete within a year, obviously you are speaking of Android phones, as they don't seem to get any more updates after that.
Marketing gimmick? Only because Apple released 64-bit first. Had Samsung done it, it would be a game changer. BTW, Samsung has announced 64-bit for their next phones.

 

[pappy53]

Um mm if you load up 3d mark you will see that in ice storm ultra the note 3 scores about 5000 points higher than the iPhone 5S.. 13000 vs 18000. It's not even close in that benchmark.

Sent from my SM-N900W8 using Tapatalk 2

It shouldn't be close in any of them.

 

[mavrrick]

You keep on believing that. 64-bit apps are already being developed for the 5s, and it will be an asset down the line. When you speak of phones being obsolete within a year, obviously you are speaking of Android phones, as they don't seem to get any more updates after that.
Marketing gimmick? Only because Apple released 64-bit first. Had Samsung done it, it would be a game changer. BTW, Samsung has announced 64-bit for their next phones.

The problem is you don't understand what 64-bit computing is. And yes when the next note has 4gb of ram, 64-bit addressing will be beneficial. The improvments are in overall design not the fact it is able to do 64 bit computing.

A interesting thing that some site found was that there was like a 20% difference in performance between 32 and 64 bit applications on the A7. They were touting that as a sign of how much improvement the processor gave to go to 64 bit computing. What that finding really means is that the chip is poorly optimized for 32bit work. Kind of like the old Intel Itinuim processors. It is all about how marketing can spin it.

Posted via Android Central App

 

[mavrrick]

It shouldn't be close in any of them.

You are right they aren't close at all. The S800 seems to destroy the A7 based on 3dMark. As you can see in the screen shots below my note 3 is about 5k above the A7. Now I would assume you will talk about some other benchmarks. The problem is benchmarks as a general rule are crap anyways, and don't yield much as to how something will really run.

 

[pappy53]

The problem is you don't understand what 64-bit computing is. And yes when the next note has 4gb of ram, 64-bit addressing will be beneficial. The improvments are in overall design not the fact it is able to do 64 bit computing.

A interesting thing that some site found was that there was like a 20% difference in performance between 32 and 64 bit applications on the A7. They were touting that as a sign of how much improvement the processor gave to go to 64 bit computing. What that finding really means is that the chip is poorly optimized for 32bit work. Kind of like the old Intel Itinuim processors. It is all about how marketing can spin it.

Posted via Android Central App

Spin it any way that you want. All I know is that the 5s seems to be faster than any Android on the market at this time. And 4gb ram is not needed for all 64-bit functions, and the Galaxy S5 probably won't have 4gb, but will be 64-bit. Will it be a gimmick then?

 

[pappy53]

You are right they aren't close at all. The S800 seems to destroy the A7 based on 3dMark. As you can see in the screen shots below my note 3 is about 5k above the A7. Now I would assume you will talk about some other benchmarks. The problem is benchmarks as a general rule are crap anyways, and don't yield much as to how something will really run.

View attachment 86259View attachment 86260

You are showing and bragging about benchmarks, but then you say they are crap anyway. Which way is it? As I said earlier, I am not bashing the Note 3. I'm sure that it is a fine phone. I just don't understand how a low spec dual core 1.3ghz 5s can outperform all of those phones. If Apple had a quad core processor like the Note 3 has, and 3gb of ram, when they got through with their magic with optimization it would absolutely blow everything out of the water. It really wouldn't be close then. But that is just an testament to Apple's way of optimizing. Samsung needs to learn how to do that. With the specs that their phones have, they would be awesome if correctly optimized.

 

[CR6]

The problem is benchmarks as a general rule are crap anyways, and don't yield much as to how something will really run.

Thank you Mavrrick! :thumbup: After reading through dozens and dozens of comments within this topic, you summarized it perfectly, This is something every smartphone user should know by now. At least smartphone "enthusiasts".
And whoever thinks current smartphone technology is "obsolete" within a year, all I can say is

Stop believing everything you read on the interwebz. This is what the manufacturer's WANT you to believe so you continue to purchase the "latest and greatest" device each year or two. What makes a smartphone "obsolete" in your eyes? When a manufacturer refuses to release the latest OS update? That certainly doesn't make a device obsolete. Especially when most new devices have such small incremental updates from the previous model hardware & software wise. If and when you do upgrade, you're better off waiting 18-24 months anyways. We all know manufacturers don't do this because the technology isn't available, they do this because they're greedy and want to sell more phones. And they know the consumer is addicted to "consuming". I'm not trying to be sarcastic, it's just a ridiculous thing to believe your device is obsolete after a year. My Samsung Fascinate still runs like a top, albeit a tad slower than my S3....yet it still performs every daily computing task I've been performing for years.

The majority of smartphone users perform about a half dozen tasks, give or take, on a regular basis. E-mail, Text, phone calls, internet (which includes web browsing, forum posting, social media, etc), taking photographs and listening to music. Maybe the occasional game. Everything else is basically smoke being blown you know where by the manufacturers, making you think you need an extra gig of ram, 2 more MP for your camera, 50 more dpi resolution, and the list goes on and on. When 5-10 years from now you'll be performing the exact same hand dozen daily tasks that you do today.

Don't get me wrong, I love technology as much as the next guy. Would I like a faster processor, better camera technology, higher dpi and faster data speeds...of course! Is my current Galaxy S3 "obsolete" because it's a year and a half old? Not by a long shot. What do I care if the current iPhone opens up a particular app a fraction of a millisecond faster than my Android?
The fact is, smartphones are about to reach a plateau, and benchmarks on today's smartphones don't mean squat.

tap'n

 

[Botti]

Spin it any way that you want. All I know is that the 5s seems to be faster than any Android on the market at this time. And 4gb ram is not needed for all 64-bit functions, and the Galaxy S5 probably won't have 4gb, but will be 64-bit. Will it be a gimmick then?

Yea, that is what you see with some tasks. And with heavy multi-tasking things you propably see other side of the truth. However, just remember it is not the 64 bits you see, but a lot of other things starting from overall cpu architecture and ending to the software architecture where code is native.

And yes, Samsung is forced to mimic Apple by saying they bring 64 bits too. No matter if the next phone really needs it more than the ip5s does. That is because people exist who don't know any better.

Sent using Note3

 

[CR6]

The fact is, 64 bit IS a gimmick at this stage in the game, whether it's on an iPhone OR Android. It really doesn't matter who came out with it first as it won't really be utilized to its fullest potential for quite some time. Most people usually perform one, maybe two functions on their phones at any given time and it's usually something simple like your music player running in the background while performing other "simple" functions.
The 5S is a nice device that performs well, but as we all know, it's nothing groundbreaking, it's simply Apple's "latest device" catching up to Android in most areas. Nothing more, nothing less. People will buy it because it's Apple and it's easy to use. The never-ending debate between Apple and Android will continue just as it always has, with continuing arguments from both sides stating that one is better than the other. Fact is, (as others have mentioned) they are both great in their own way and they will both enjoy continued success .

tap'n

 

[pappy53]

it's simply Apple's "latest device" catching up to Android in most areas.

Yeah, right.:rollseyes

 

[Farish]

The problem is you don't understand what 64-bit computing is. And yes when the next note has 4gb of ram, 64-bit addressing will be beneficial. The improvments are in overall design not the fact it is able to do 64 bit computing.

A interesting thing that some site found was that there was like a 20% difference in performance between 32 and 64 bit applications on the A7. They were touting that as a sign of how much improvement the processor gave to go to 64 bit computing. What that finding really means is that the chip is poorly optimized for 32bit work. Kind of like the old Intel Itinuim processors. It is all about how marketing can spin it.

Posted via Android Central App

The only way you can come to close to find out is running a 32 bit binary with a built in benchmark on the iPhone 5 and iPhone 5s to see what is the performance differences. While trying to calculate what would be the natural difference to do the slight increase in clock speed.

Well I read that the A7 is developed in house by apple so it's got special attention while the snap800 is just an off the shelf component that multiple companies use. I'm more interested in how the rumored A7x will fare against the snap800 seeing as how the 800 is the current flagship processor for android.

Apple has an ARM licensing agreement. Starting with the A6 chip, Apple custom designed them in house. They design the OS and chip side by side so they can optimize performance. It is why they can get away with using a dual core chip and still have phone run so smoothly.

The fact is, smartphones are about to reach a plateau, and benchmarks on today's smartphones don't mean squat.

tap'n

We hit a plateau, but the plateau in gaming will go away once people start releasing unneeded 4k screens on smartphones. The reason why there was always a benchmark race in the gaming world was because of constant improvements and changes made to directX. But when it comes to office applications, opening up a word document has been as fast it could get for years.

 

[mavrrick]

You are showing and bragging about benchmarks, but then you say they are crap anyway. Which way is it? As I said earlier, I am not bashing the Note 3. I'm sure that it is a fine phone. I just don't understand how a low spec dual core 1.3ghz 5s can outperform all of those phones. If Apple had a quad core processor like the Note 3 has, and 3gb of ram, when they got through with their magic with optimization it would absolutely blow everything out of the water. It really wouldn't be close then. But that is just an testament to Apple's way of optimizing. Samsung needs to learn how to do that. With the specs that their phones have, they would be awesome if correctly optimized.

My posting of benchmark scores was more to show you don't know what you are talking about more then anything else. I had never downloaded 3d mark on my phone prior to running that test. Stop posting complete BS if you are flat out wrong. I do believe the are complete crap. They are software and often manipulated.

 

[mavrrick]

The only way you can come to close to find out is running a 32 bit binary with a built in benchmark on the iPhone 5 and iPhone 5s to see what is the performance differences. While trying to calculate what would be the natural difference to do the slight increase in clock speed..

That was actually the problem with the review I saw stating 20% improvement. They did both there test on the A7 and not the previous chip in the Iphone 5.

I just don't get why so many people seem to completely forget about the fact this was a major CPU architecture upgrade. Basically Apple implemented the next step for ARM CPU's. Kind of like Intel going from the Pentium 4D to the Core architecture. The improvements are from that.

 

[Weaser999]

I think Apple took a step in the right direction going 64 bit, but they used that as a marketing feature to compensate for all the things they didn't put in their phone..like a bigger, higher res screen, etc. If you want to see a smooth experience on the Note 3 just run everything at half resolution. 4K recording will be helpful once the tv's become mainstream. Monitors already support it. Why didn't Apple go with a higher resolution screen or bigger screen? A lot of people are saying it would have blown everything out of the market if they did this, and if they did that. Well, apparently their flagship device has a faster CPU and GPU and thats about it. I think Apple is in trouble without the guidance of Steve Jobs. But 64 bit is the natural progression of computers so it makes sense for smartphones as well... only thing is IOS isn't really known for an OS which makes better use of 64 bit CPU so Apple probably figured ahead of schedule and figured they'd get developers to start making 64 bit apps and then release a 64 bit phone that can make use of them properly. Pretty smart come to think of it. Currently though, with a better, bigger and badder Note 3 out right now, Apple is looking to probably just maintain their market share until they can put out a monster phone.