All these talks of dual-core and quad-core can get a little out of control. For the general population it doesn’t mean a whole lot. It just sounds super cool to say, “I have a quad-core tablet, hows that dual-core one treating you?” It is all a bunch of rubbish if you ask me. There are still to many things that a device relies upon to even be able take advantage of the additional power of a multi-core device. The GPU and memory play a key roll in how the device actually operates. Not to mention the software. We have all seen devices with amazing specs but sub-par performance puts it the gutter. I don’t think Android fragmentation is as big of an issue as manufacturers trying to out do the competition with bigger chips.
For the techie out there reading this, please correct anything that I say if it is wrong. I am far from an expert and would never claim to know enough about how hardware operates to pass judgment.
One of the issues that I think we are already facing is the speed at which they drop new technology into devices with out the support to back them. Developers still haven’t had a chance to even utilize the Tegra 2 or the Exynos chip to their full potential yet. They have the ability to do amazing things. Much of their limitations are based on graphics chips, RAM and software. So much time, money and energy are dumped into the processor that the other aspects of our devices that need to be addresses are left sitting on stand by. Granted, if the processor can handle multi-tasking better and more efficiently, we are looking at longer battery life. Are we going to be happier with longer battery or better visuals?
Take a real world scenario that many average people can understand. If you have a dual-core AMD Athlon chip in my PC and a stock graphic/video card, you are left wishing you could play the latest video game. The dual-core AMD has plenty of power to push F.E.A.R 3 but the stock video card that probably came with your budget PC can’t handle it. Add RAM to the picture. If my PC only had 1G of RAM I would also be suffering in my abilities to enjoy many games and some software to their full potential. The primary advantages that desktop PCs have is the ability to change out those parts. For under $200 you can up your RAM and pick up a new graphics card and you are set for a while. We don’t have that ability to do this with products whose components are hardwired inside the device.
Same thing rings true in any device that is graphically dependent. We see dual-core devices land on our shelves with 512 RAM and a 2-year-old graphics chip, but the way it is marketed states Android 3.2 with 1.5Ghz dual-core chip. So we spend our money and find out it slow and can’t handle intense games. For some, this is their first experience with anything running Android and we get a bad name. I don’t think it is fair nor right in any way.
This little bit of conversation has been spurred by the recent announcements of ZTE’s latest ventures in the tablet world. They are already in the process of creating and testing out their 7-inch T98 and another 10.1 inch tablet, still unnamed. Both devices are packing in a quad-core Tegra 3 chip with 32GB of memory.
I am all for people bragging, but shouldn’t people be more interested in bragging because of how it can render graphics, perform and looks then what is inside and most likely not being used to its potential. I know this will always be a continuing issue in my book. These types of things will never change. It is part of the technology driven world that we live in. This is probably why I am content with my 2-year-old PC and my 1-year-old phone.
What are your thoughts and opinions? Are the other factors that make a device perform even close to being ready for the Tegra 3 chips or any quad-core chip for that matter? Will Ice Cream Sandwich, which is supposed to bring the software up to speed for dual-core use, be enough to utilize what is out and coming? I’d love to hear some programmers and developers side. Please leave some comments, get technical, help the average Joe understand.
