I'm sure some people has seen this, but:
Random
|
10-10-2012, 12:19 AM
10-10-2012, 05:08 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-10-2012, 05:09 AM by NaturalViolence.)
Quote:Advanced multitasking? One of the things that annoys me most in current mobile OSes is that they never evolved to the kind of multitasking we have on desktops, like, being able to have as much programs as the user wants running on the screen on different windows. But everything you just listed can be done just as well with a dual core cpu...... A quad core cpu will only help with multitasking if you're running several DEMANDING tasks at once such as video encoding, virus scanning, etc. It's not going to help you browse the web or run multiple simple apps any faster even if the OS/browser implements proper multitasking.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 10-10-2012, 06:42 AM
It isn't hard to max out the CPU on a phone, so extra cores could help fix this.
Also, increasing clock frequency isn't the best option on a fanless system to get more power, so adding extra cores could also help this.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT 10-10-2012, 11:00 AM
Quote:It isn't hard to max out the CPU on a phone, so extra cores could help fix this. How? The applications can't use the extra cores unless they are programmed to use them.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony 10-11-2012, 03:13 AM
And what better way to get developers to start programming for 4 cores than to make four cores available. They definitely won't program for 4 cores if only 2 exist.
OS: Windows 10 64 bit Professional
CPU: AMD Ryzen 5900X RAM: 48GB GPU: Radeon 7800 XT 10-11-2012, 05:36 AM
(10-11-2012, 03:13 AM)AnyOldName3 Wrote: And what better way to get developers to start programming for 4 cores than to make four cores available. They definitely won't program for 4 cores if only 2 exist. You don't really program for 4 cores, you just use more threads (which can be extremely difficult for a linear process as I'm sure you understand). Developers don't make apps based in hardware; the make apps base on consumer taste. No one wants to do anything that requires 4 cores on a phone yet, so no apps can really be made for it. Apps follow demand, and hardware follows the requirements of apps (and demand as well). Apps aren't developed just because they can be.
Desktop:
OS: Windows 7 64 bit CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.4 GHz GPU: EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti (Factory OC'ed) RAM: 16 GB @ 1600 MHz Dolphin Revision:3.0, 3.0-784, 3.5, latest 3.5 10-11-2012, 05:44 AM
(10-11-2012, 05:36 AM)Axxer Wrote: Apps aren't developed just because they can be. Most aren't, but even with Apple's policing, I still find tons of (what I consider, at least) garbage apps out there that someone made just for the sake of making it. I don't see how some people could profit from them (or their poor ratings) but they're still there. And this speaks nothing of offerings like Cydia or the Android marketplace, where the rules are certainly looser on what's allowed. 10-11-2012, 05:57 AM
(10-11-2012, 05:44 AM)Shonumi Wrote:(10-11-2012, 05:36 AM)Axxer Wrote: Apps aren't developed just because they can be. That is all just hobbyist programmers making small utility apps or basic games most of the time. That doesn't really change the argument (but I'm sure you understand that).
Desktop:
OS: Windows 7 64 bit CPU: Intel Core i5 3570K @ 4.4 GHz GPU: EVGA NVIDIA GeForce GTX 550 Ti (Factory OC'ed) RAM: 16 GB @ 1600 MHz Dolphin Revision:3.0, 3.0-784, 3.5, latest 3.5 10-11-2012, 06:07 AM
(10-11-2012, 05:57 AM)Axxer Wrote: That is all just hobbyist programmers making small utility apps or basic games most of the time. That doesn't really change the argument (but I'm sure you understand that). I have seen companies pump out some pretty useless stuff; it's not restricted to hobbyists at all. At any rate, consumer "tastes" aren't always entirely independent of what developers push. Things like quad-core support become attractive when consumers want it. They can want it on their own, or devs can make it appealing (e.g. the whole "look what your phone can do now" pitch). 10-11-2012, 06:41 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-11-2012, 06:41 AM by NaturalViolence.)
I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned yet that many applications that use more than 2 cores like video encoders are designed to spawn X number of threads based on X number of logical cores. Therefore they can automatically scale to higher core counts in the future without any changes to the code. Because of this the transition from dual core to quad core cpus on desktops was painless for many applications. This alone disproves the idea that developers won't develop quad core applications unless quad core cpus exist.
"Normally if given a choice between doing something and nothing, I’d choose to do nothing. But I would do something if it helps someone else do nothing. I’d work all night if it meant nothing got done."
-Ron Swanson "I shall be a good politician, even if it kills me. Or if it kills anyone else for that matter. " -Mark Antony |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 67 Guest(s)