Cell processors

[pl8er]

I know you all have hard-ons for whatever cell phone you have sworn allegience too, but truth be told, I just love the hardware.

So check out this shit!

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Qualcomm-Snapdragon-ARM-Dual-Core-Smartphones,10555.html

Qualcomm Announces First Dual-Core Snapdragon
5:00 PM - June 1, 2010 by Jane McEntegart - source: Tom's Hardware US
Computex has already shown us more tablets (sorry, "Pads") than we care to remember and there'll be plenty more of them, so this announcement is quite refreshing. Qualcomm is today showing off it's first dual-core Snapdragon processors.

We're all used to seeing devices powered by Qualcomm's single core Snapdragon (such as the Nexus One and the DROID), which boasts clock speeds of up to 1GHz. Today's Mobile Station Modem MSM8260 and MSM8660 Snapdragon chipsets are capable of up to 1.2GHz. Qualcomm says the latter is a multimode chipset that can connect to HSPA+ or EV-DO Rev. B, high-speed networks, while the MSM8260 supports only HSPA+.

Though Qaulcomm wasn't quite ready to dish the deets in terms of a release date, the company said the new chipsets would be used in high-end smartphones enabling them to handle 1080p video and screen resolutions of up to 1280x800.

[J31Bro]

I'm not really swayed one way or another.. I just think hoss is a dipshit.

Though I've been much more into HTC phones for a looong time, the fact they utilize Android OS & Snapdragon processors are just +1s.

[slim8605]

:fap:

[kurnlesbiskuits]

That is too awesome. I want it now.

[pl8er]

kinda worried about batterylife

[jesus]

kinda worried about batterylife

This

Battery technology is way behind.

[kurnlesbiskuits]

Supposedly, the droid incredible has pretty poor battery life. Hopefully they can figure something out.

[jesus]

Supposedly, the droid incredible has pretty poor battery life. Hopefully they can figure something out.

:crap:

Forizzle?

[ngsm13]

Yeah, battery technology is definitely not keeping up...

nG

[hoss]

These phones have all converted over to LiOn batteries, right?

And those LiOn's still cant hold up to the processors?

[pl8er]

Here is the real problem with battery life. There are plenty of alternatives for batteries. The primary issue is that they use rare earth materials, which are almost entirely controlled by China.

China continues to say they are cutting off the export of those rare earth metals, but instead just limit the exportation. We need that material in order to make batteries that can really provide the power needed. Die reductions can only take us so far, so quickly.

There are many places in the US that can produce rare earth, BUT, you run into a big dilemma in the fact that upstart is over a billion, China could easily lower the cost and make no investor even look twice at building a domestic refinery. Batteries are here to stay for awhile, I think.

I hope they come up with something that doesn't use rare earth, but I have yet to see anything.

[hoss]

Have any of the processor manufacturers started focusing on processors that do the same amount of operations/functionality, but consume much less power?

I mean, if battery life is the real hold up, seems like people would focus more on doing the same amount of stuff for longer, instead of more stuff for less time...

[pl8er]

Have any of the processor manufacturers started focusing on processors that do the same amount of operations/functionality, but consume much less power?

I mean, if battery life is the real hold up, seems like people would focus more on doing the same amount of stuff for longer, instead of more stuff for less time...

That is the die shrink I was referring to. As you move from 200mm to 300mm and now to 450mm parts you get much smaller chips that require less power, and can operate faster.

It is a constant evolution.

[pl8er]

If you want to see state-of-the-art, always look at what Intel is doing. Nothing comes close to their up-to-date fabs.

[_AnGeL_]

hawt. i want.

[jesus]

Have any of the processor manufacturers started focusing on processors that do the same amount of operations/functionality, but consume much less power?

I mean, if battery life is the real hold up, seems like people would focus more on doing the same amount of stuff for longer, instead of more stuff for less time...

That is the die shrink I was referring to. As you move from 200mm to 300mm and now to 450mm parts you get much smaller chips that require less power, and can operate faster.

It is a constant evolution.

Ehh......................

Heat is why processors aren't really getting faster anymore. Because there is no easy way to contain all that heat they have moved to placing multiple cores on 1 dye rather than making them faster. This is also the only real hold-back when overclocking systems. If you have some liquid nitrogen on-hand you can get some crazy numbers out of a stock CPU.

Current high-end chips are being produced at 32nm & 45nm. The nm process doesn't necessarily just provide a cooler chip so much as it allows more transistors per die, which means a smaller die, which means more cores per chip; hence why you are starting to see 4,6, even 80 cores on a single CPU.

http://news.cnet.com/Intel-shows-off-80-core-processor/2100-1006_3-6158181.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wB0JodKgZ0A

[ngsm13]

I think you mean nm, right pl8?

Also, this thread seems to be talking more about SoC's than cell processors...

nG