What makes the Galaxy Nexus so special

[nleksan]

No, it's cooled.

Hahaha, nice

Your first mistake.

Oh? How is that? The way I see it, I'm getting ~85-90% of the performance of an i7-980x/990x, but for $230 instead of $1100.... Sure, the Intel CPU's ARE BETTER, I won't argue that, but they are not 5x better AT ANYTHING, and the 10% difference in performance (avg) isn't worth 5x the money to me. Instead, I've been able to use the money to end up with an all-around superior system... If I'd gone with Intel, I wouldn't have dual-6970's, 32GB RAM (4x8GB), 4 2.5" SSD's, 4 2TB HDD's, 1 PCIe x4 SSD (OZC Revo 2), etc...
Unless you have a fat wallet and a fatter bank account, you have to compromise somewhere... I figured that AMD was a safer bet, as their next two CPU's will be able to use the same exact AM3+ MoBo I have, while Intel has released 3 different sockets in what, 1 and a half years??? That's insane, and I like being able to keep the same system but simply swap in a hotter proc instead of having to take the whole thing apart and buy a new MoBo too!

That's my opinion, but I really am curious as to why you disagree...

[ThaSurgeonGeneral]

That's a good point (including your previous, much longer post), as I hadn't been thinking of it as quite so similar to X86 CPU's as that, but I suppose the architecture is going to be more or less the same at some base level.

I think what is important, regarding dual-channel vs single-channel RAM in these dual-core phones is knowing if the 1GB is a single 1GB DIMM, 2x 512MB DIMMs, 4x 256MB DIMMs, etc... From my understanding, the OMAP4460 should theoretically function most efficiently if the memory is set up as two 512MB DIMMs, while the Snapdragon (despite being dual-core) will function most efficiently if it is only 1 1GB DIMM. This is due to the integrated memory controllers and their inherent limitations, which is why the fastest RAM they're putting into phones runs at ~500mhz or so, although likely with relatively low CAS timings, at least as I understand it.

This has me wondering...

If these manufacturers have yet to "master" dual-core CPU's and dual-channel memory in these phones, especially when integrated together...what kind of mess are we gonna see when the quad-core processors come out in the not-so-distant future? Take the Tegra3, with it's 4+1 core design and its 12-core GPU, limited to a dual-channel memory controller. How are 5 CPU's and 12 GPU's (17 cores, essentially) going to work with 1-2GB of dual-channel memory?
I think the BIG LEAP we're going to see is not the quad-core CPU's, the multi-multi-core GPU's, or whatever... It will be when they are able to integrate a combination of a DDR3-type RAM running as many channels as there are cores, as well as dedicated GDDR5-type memory for the GPU('s).

It's almost as if they're all trying to one-up another so badly, they're putting stuff out on the market before the last product they put out is even optimized! Imagine that!




For the record, I am an AMD/ATI guy... so your comparison seems backwards to me

+1
I couldn't agree with you more!

But my comparison isn't off really. For gaming and tasks where one or two threads is being performed, it really does benefit from a pool. But for multi multi threads, like Video, Audio, Photoshop and CAD, 64bits is actually the better performer as resources are direct and constant instead of shared...

Which is why I say technically efficient, as opposed to gaming/cinema efficient...

My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted

[nleksan]

+1
I couldn't agree with you more!

But my comparison isn't off really. For gaming and tasks where one or two threads is being performed, it really does benefit from a pool. But for multi multi threads, like Video, Audio, Photoshop and CAD, 64bits is actually the better performer as resources are direct and constant instead of shared...

Which is why I say technically efficient, as opposed to gaming/cinema efficient...

My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted

I understand where you're coming from, I was just kidding around about your comparison I don't disagree with it at all, hence the winky-face

[ThaSurgeonGeneral]

I understand where you're coming from, I was just kidding around about your comparison I don't disagree with it at all, hence the winky-face

Good deal, no worries, that's just me being literal as usual! Lol

My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted

[Liderc]

Hahaha, nice






Oh? How is that? The way I see it, I'm getting ~85-90% of the performance of an i7-980x/990x, but for $230 instead of $1100.... Sure, the Intel CPU's ARE BETTER, I won't argue that, but they are not 5x better AT ANYTHING, and the 10% difference in performance (avg) isn't worth 5x the money to me. Instead, I've been able to use the money to end up with an all-around superior system... If I'd gone with Intel, I wouldn't have dual-6970's, 32GB RAM (4x8GB), 4 2.5" SSD's, 4 2TB HDD's, 1 PCIe x4 SSD (OZC Revo 2), etc...
Unless you have a fat wallet and a fatter bank account, you have to compromise somewhere... I figured that AMD was a safer bet, as their next two CPU's will be able to use the same exact AM3+ MoBo I have, while Intel has released 3 different sockets in what, 1 and a half years??? That's insane, and I like being able to keep the same system but simply swap in a hotter proc instead of having to take the whole thing apart and buy a new MoBo too!

That's my opinion, but I really am curious as to why you disagree...

I was joking more than anything, I happen to work for Intel heh.

I've just always built my PC's with Intel chips because of their better performance when I was working with EVGA's mod team and since AMD's architecture was way behind 3-5 years ago it was only natural for us to use them. I ended up joining their forces four years ago (Wafer Manager) and so my fanboi habits continued.

[nleksan]

I was joking more than anything, I happen to work for Intel heh.

I've just always built my PC's with Intel chips because of their better performance when I was working with EVGA's mod team and since AMD's architecture was way behind 3-5 years ago it was only natural for us to use them. I ended up joining their forces four years ago (Wafer Manager) and so my fanboi habits continued.

Ah, I gotcha. Well, the first PC I built was in 2004 I believe... I got my AMD FX51 CPU the day it was released, same thing for my ATI X800XT-PE. That system was awesome, despite the EXPENSIVE required registered RAM, it out-performed my friends' Pentium4-based rigs up-and-down.

That CPU ran so much cooler than Pentium 4's did, and was able to perform significantly better at a lower clock speed; FX51 was running at 2.2ghz, while equivalent P4's were running at 4.1ghz. It overclocked well, too, with a stable 2.5ghz on air being my standard gaming speed, but I could get it to keep stable at 2.8ghz on air in the winter (with a dryer vent pumping air into the PC Case lol), and eventually 3.2ghz on water. The X800XTPE was an awesome card in its day, but didn't overclock well on air (I could get maybe an extra 7-10% clock, 8-10% shader, and 10-12% memory speeds before it was in the danger zone).

I just loved being able to play Doom3, Half-Life 2, Quake 4, Far Cry, FEAR, and all of the games that came out around that time, and do so at 1920x1200 with "Ultra-High" detail settings, 8x AA, 16x AF, etc... all while maintaining an average of >70fps!

I DO NOT MISS spending $650 for 4GB of RAM, however... :O

[Big Ry]

Haha, thank you both! Big Ry, I simply try to be as "logical" or (can't think of the right word) while remaining unbiased, or as unbiased as possible, when comparing things like this. It's a result of my education being so heavily-focused on science (chemical engineering and psychopharmacology), but it has trickled into my "normal" life as well
I do have to say, though, at this point we are all pretty much simply "armchair benchmarking", as none of us has two completely-virgin phones (one Rezound/RAZR and one Nexus) in our hands with everything 100% "factory", to set side-by-side and have them both run through the same exact set of benchmarks at the same exact time (to rule out variables such as ambient temperature, humidity, elevation, tidal pattern, planetary alignment, and all of the other variables people will no doubt bring up ).
THEN, and ONLY THEN, will we as a community be able to say which is the "better phone" out of the box.

Well Schrodinger says that both the Gnex and rezound will exist in any and all possible states simultaneously until someone takes a measurement. Simple solution: don't benchmark the phones. Everyone wins!

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

[ThaSurgeonGeneral]

Well Schrodinger says that both the Gnex and rezound will exist in any and all possible states simultaneously until someone takes a measurement. Simple solution: don't benchmark the phones. Everyone wins!

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

Sounds Good! Lol

My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted

[Big Ry]

Sounds Good! Lol

My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted

I was just trying to nerd up this thread even more with some physics (I don't know computer stuff like you guys) lol

Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk

[bacK_N_87]

Played with gnex today and its not bad camera again is incredibly fast. The image quality however is only good when still. The 720p on the gnex is okay too if it wasn't for samsungs over saturation of colors it would be like every other screen I've seen. Android 4.0 is incredible though. That is all.

Sent from my DROID3