okay, where are you getting your information for the iphone 5's cpu? Nothing has been confirmed.. rumors are stating it's slower than the galaxy S III?

okay, where are you getting your information for the iphone 5's cpu? Nothing has been confirmed.. rumors are stating it's slower than the galaxy S III?

OK, seriously guys the cell phone/tablet market is a "big boys market". The iPhone 5 is arguably the biggest consumer product being released this year period.
Video games are a tiny niche product compared to that.
With the intense competition of the cell phone market and the high stakes, Apple and Samsung are going to get the latest, greatest tech. There's just no question about that.
The idea that a tech vendor would withhold some level of chipset from Apple because they want to please Sony (who might as well be a nobody in the modern tech race as a whole) is laughable.
It would be like some discovering some kind of oil pump tech that made oil drilling 3x more efficient and thinking you could keep that away from Exxon Mobil because you wanted to use it as a farming tech instead.
Whatever edge the PSV had was going to be wiped out quickly, anyone who thought otherwise is simply naive about what makes the global economy move and which companies are a priority to parts/tech vendors.
Sales of iPhone 5 will probably overtake global worldwide sales that the Vita has managed in months within a day or two. If you're making that chipset, which of these companies is your priority to ensure they get the best tech? LOL.
| leo-j said: okay, where are you getting your information for the iphone 5's cpu? Nothing has been confirmed.. rumors are stating it's slower than the galaxy S III? |
source? I see no videos or otherwise that compare the two phones beyond spec sheet which would have same info I have.
Mine is from AnandTech, wikipedia, and others using Apple's statements from the conference and what is known in the A5X. It really can only be two possible choices... a quad-core A9 (identical to Vita if not faster clock cycle) or a dual-core A15 (better than vita)... and with that, all sources so far say its a dual-core meaning for it to be better than the orginal A5 or A5X it would have to be a lower clock cycle A15.
I know its not confirmed by Apple or from an official breakdown, but no matter what its at least equal to Vita, but with more RAM and likely faster clockspeeds.
If it is the quad A9, then I'll gladly change it, but the end result is the same.
superchunk said:
Mine is from AnandTech, wikipedia, and others using Apple's statements from the conference and what is known in the A5X. It really can only be two possible choices... a quad-core A9 (identical to Vita if not faster clock cycle) or a dual-core A15 (better than vita)... and with that, all sources so far say its a dual-core meaning for it to be better than the orginal A5 or A5X it would have to be a lower clock cycle A15. I know its not confirmed by Apple or from an official breakdown, but no matter what its at least equal to Vita, but with more RAM and likely faster clockspeeds. If it is the quad A9, then I'll gladly change it, but the end result is the same. |
since when is a dual core CPU faster than a quad core? That's what I'm being told by someone on here.. or something ugh whatever

leo-j said:
since when is a dual core CPU faster than a quad core? That's what I'm being told by someone on here.. or something ugh whatever |
A dual-core on a far more advanced architecture at a higher clock speed can and will be faster than a quad-core.
|
superchunk said: A dual-core on a far more advanced architecture at a higher clock speed can and will be faster than a quad-core. |
For single/duo threads? Yes. For more? No.
Old Arch (quad-core) > New Arch (duo-core) > Old Arch (duo-core) * When you use all four cores.
* Unless the clock difference is too big like Duo-core@1.8Ghz vs. Quad-core@1.0Ghz *
superchunk said:
"Im not saying the PSV is waaaay ahead of the rest, but what im saying is that it is ahead at the moment (especially in terms of gaming performance), im also saying that in the next year the PSV's chipset will stil be relevant, id imagine quad core cpu/gpu combinations will only become the norm then." Let's finish the rest of your quote, shall we? "And in the following year the psv will be overtaken, possible in that same year. My main point was that your statement about tablets already overlapping psv tec wise is simply not true at this point in time. Hell the new ipad hasnt even released yet." Which means Vita is not too far ahead. That NEXT year, i.e. 2013, it will still be relavent and you image similar chips to just become norm then. Then you followed that with you didn't think surpassing the Vita would happen until 2014 or very end of 2013. ******* Going through your quotes... I said the same thing in both those first quotes. My point in that thread was the new iPad3 matched the GPU. It was beginning to equal the Vita. That the convention just prior showed phones that would match and then exceed Vita. I said the same thing many times. 1) within 3 to 6 months Vita will be matched I think you are also reading too much into the MWC context. I did use those as examples, but clearly was talking in general terms to "phones/tablets". I only used MWC and expected launches of CPUs / GPUs as examples to show why Vita would be matched/exceeded in 2012. I also specifcally stated iPhone5 would likely have A6 that would at least match Vita. Granted, I was wrong and it exceeded it, but meh root point met. I think you either were not have the same discussion I was back then or you don't remember it well. But the quotes show I was right. ***** Lets recap (paraphrase) each post we made in that thread to eachother. (not too many) me: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4460421 you: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4460461 me: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4460746 you: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463496 you again: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463502 me: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463817 you: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463869 me: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463900 you (FINAL ONE): http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4463904 ****************** So that's great recap of our discussion. Just take your crow man, just take it!!!! ;) |
You are doing it again Superchunk.
I remember the conversation perfectly well.
Your main point of that initial thread was to prove that Vita was made obsolete by the then announced/available smartphones, you particularly brought up MWC phones being showed off as it happend at that exact point in time. I then showed you and PROVED YOU WRONG IN THAT thread that this was not the case.
I (as in me!!!!!) pointed out to you that possible exceptions would be the iphone 5 and samsung galaxy s3. You basically went with an extreme opinion saying no the iphone wont be as powerful as the android phones, and that ALL phones/tablets released this year will have the vita tec or surpass it. AGAIN you were wrong.
In reply to that extreme statement i made an extreme one of my own saying "no smartphone/tablet will surpass vita in the next 3 - 6 months". I guess i was partially wrong about the NO part, but yet we both KNOW that i had singled out the iphone 5 and S3 as a possible phones to surpass it. Which in iphones case is true. You on the other hand stated the very opposit saying no iphone 5 wont, but ALL smartphones and tablets will surpass the vita. Ya this is still bullshit superchunk. GET THE FUCK OVER IT.
| Shinobi-san said: You are doing it again Superchunk. I remember the conversation perfectly well. Your main point of that initial thread was to prove that Vita was made obsolete by the then announced/available smartphones, you particularly brought up MWC phones being showed off as it happend at that exact point in time. I then showed you and PROVED YOU WRONG IN THAT thread that this was not the case. I (as in me!!!!!) pointed out to you that possible exceptions would be the iphone 5 and samsung galaxy s3. You basically went with an extreme opinion saying no the iphone wont be as powerful as the android phones, and that ALL phones/tablets released this year will have the vita tec or surpass it. AGAIN you were wrong. In reply to that extreme statement i made an extreme one of my own saying "no smartphone/tablet will surpass vita in the next 3 - 6 months". I guess i was partially wrong about the NO part, but yet we both KNOW that i had singled out the iphone 5 and S3 as a possible phones to surpass it. Which in iphones case is true. You on the other hand stated the very opposit saying no iphone 5 wont, but ALL smartphones and tablets will surpass the vita. Ya this is still bullshit superchunk. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. |
Bolded is 100% false and proven by just rereading the quotes I summarized above. This must be where you are getting so wrong in this whole thing.
My only statements were that iPad3 and the stuff back then at MWC as well as launch details from CPU/GPU manufacturers showed that:
1) Vita would be matched within 6 mos (from March)
2) Vita would be matched and exceeded by end of year (2012)
3) Vita would be greatly exceeded in 2013
I never said, in March, that Vita was being surpassed or even matched at that time by anything currently in the market or launching right then (i.e. iPAd3)... hell even the summation right in the OP of that thread clearly shows that I never said iPad3 or anything else already known beat/matched Vita... just that FUTURE (from March) phones/tablets would within the dates I just mentioned above. Hell, the last two quotes show that we both were waiting to see how it all ends in the end of the year. Clearly we weren't talking about phones/tablets on the market right then. I mean why the hell would I even bring up the 3 to 6 months thing if I was talking about product that was available in March?
I never said ALL phones released this year would match/surpass Vita. I said exactly what is detailed in 1,2,3 above... it would be matched in 3 to 6, most match or exceed by end of 2012, and soundly exceed in 2013. Dude, calm down and just reread the quotes... its all there.
You also quoted me every time so its not like I could of changed it. The summations above clearly show that. Again, I think you had a different convo in your head than what is written above.
As for iPhone5, I said it will match Vita as I was thinking A6 would be same quad-core chip. Its right there in those linked quotes.
Simple fact is I was right on the 3 to 6 month part, you weren't. That's all I said in the OP of this thread, a thread that while called you out was for a lot more people that just you. Now we'll see if 'most' phones/tablets coming out at the end of the year (i.e. last few months) match or exceed Vita as well as everything in 2013. There should be obvious caveats with this. Android and WP OEMs do put out high-end and low-end product. Of course the low-end cheap shit is not included in this... only the high-end normal stuff.
Finally, there's nothing to get over. I actually don't know why you're pushing a different discussion that what is 100% clear in the linked quotes. I think you are taking this personally. Hell, I've been wrong, its not a big deal. Granted I don't make threads about me being wrong, but I do admit it when it happens.
Wanna know the big things I've been wrong about if it will make you feel better? One was my sig, two was that Wii would get 3rd party support where it would be the primary console around 2009, third was that PS3 would pass 360 in world wide sales in ... I think I said 2010 but can't remember if I meant early or late 2010 or maybe early 2011, fourth was that Kinect would flop and not sale to 10% of 360s userbase (I was good on Move though).. and so forth.
It happens and its not a big issue. Granted I've been right a far more things like Vita being matched (or exceeded) within 6 mos from March.
ethomaz said:
For single/duo threads? Yes. For more? No. Old Arch (quad-core) > New Arch (duo-core) > Old Arch (duo-core) * When you use all four cores. * Unless the clock difference is too big like Duo-core@1.8Ghz vs. Quad-core@1.0Ghz * |
Is it just me or are you actually agreeing with my quoted post?
I stated the A15 would be NEW ARCH and HIGHER CLOCK SPEED and that's why it would beat the quad core A9.
You said "Old Arch (quad-core) > New Arch (duo-core) > Old Arch (duo-core) * When you use all four cores."
But then agreed with me in regards to higher clock speed by saying "Unless the clock difference is too big like Duo-core@1.8Ghz vs. Quad-core@1.0Ghz".
Its specifically noted the A15 is far more efficient and faster. It has better cache and can do a much higher clock speed at the same power usage and heat. There is no way an dual-core A15 with a likely high clock speed (1.2Ghz or 1.5GHz) will get beaten by a likely 800MHz Quad-core A9 in the Vita.
| superchunk said: |
Vita doesn't use SD Card. Check your OP.