Active Topics
-
Sailfish OS for the Motorola Moto G7 Power (XT1955-5) - (ocean) (3)
to SailfishOS by edp17 - 12 hrs, 45 mins ago -
The N900 is now 15 years old! (6)
to Nokia N900 by Macros - 1 day, 16 hrs ago -
F(x)tec Pro1x (QWERTY) for sale (0)
to Buy & Sell by aln00000 - 2 days, 5 hrs ago -
n770 youtube video (0)
to General by nmdv - 6 days, 4 hrs ago - more...
|
2018-06-16
, 18:35
|
|
Posts: 300 |
Thanked: 962 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ USA
|
#2562
|
Originally Posted by peterleinchen
Significantly smaller lithography - less power consumption, better efficiency. Two more cores with all the same extensions, higher maximum clock. Significantly larger battery - I already get 4 days to a week on Xperia X. That alone is worth it to me.
Reading this comparison I do not really ee the XA2 as enhancement
https://www.phonearena.com/phones/co...nes/10772,9986
https://m.gsmarena.com/compare.php3?...&idPhone2=7948
Plus, the design of the XA2 is reminiscent of the Nokia N9 - flat top and bottom, rounded corners. At least to me.
__________________
Sony Xperia XA2 Ultra SFOS 3 + Sony Xperia X SFOS 3, Nokia N810
Sony Xperia XA2 Ultra SFOS 3 + Sony Xperia X SFOS 3, Nokia N810
|
|
2018-06-16
, 23:24
|
|
Posts: 1,548 |
Thanked: 7,510 times |
Joined on Apr 2010
@ Czech Republic
|
#2564
|
Be careful when comparing the X & XA2 by core number. As you can see:
Xperia X:
Hexa-core (4x1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 & 2x1.8 GHz Cortex-A72)
Xperia XA2:
Octa-core 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53
While XA2 has 8 cores, it's 8 times the simpler less advanced A53 core, while X has a big-little cluster with four simpler A53 cores and two more advanced A72 cores. This could have some advantages in single core performance and also in the rather important "race to idle" (getting task done as soon as possible so that the phone can quickly return to low power states).
On the other hand, it might still not be really noticeable with real world usecases (maybe people already did some comparisons/benchmarks on Android ?).
Xperia X:
Hexa-core (4x1.4 GHz Cortex-A53 & 2x1.8 GHz Cortex-A72)
Xperia XA2:
Octa-core 2.2 GHz Cortex-A53
While XA2 has 8 cores, it's 8 times the simpler less advanced A53 core, while X has a big-little cluster with four simpler A53 cores and two more advanced A72 cores. This could have some advantages in single core performance and also in the rather important "race to idle" (getting task done as soon as possible so that the phone can quickly return to low power states).
On the other hand, it might still not be really noticeable with real world usecases (maybe people already did some comparisons/benchmarks on Android ?).
__________________
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)
modRana: a flexible GPS navigation system
Mieru: a flexible manga and comic book reader
Universal Components - a solution for native looking yet component set independent QML appliactions (QtQuick Controls 2 & Silica supported as backends)
|
|
2018-06-16
, 23:35
|
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 1,284 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
@ Enschede, The Netherlands
|
#2565
|
Originally Posted by deprecated
Yet those cores are not faster than those of even the JP1. Not many apps will actually use those eight cores. I have an 1.4GHz quad core tablet (Ubuntu Touch). It uses the same A53 cores. It is slow.
Significantly smaller lithography - less power consumption, better efficiency. Two more cores with all the same extensions, higher maximum clock. Significantly larger battery - I already get 4 days to a week on Xperia X. That alone is worth it to me.
|
|
2018-06-17
, 02:31
|
|
Posts: 300 |
Thanked: 962 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ USA
|
#2566
|
XA2's Snapdragon 630 uses big.LITTLE as well. 4 x 2.2GHz + 4 x 1.8GHz with the 630 vs 6x 1.2GHz + 2x 1.8GHz with the 650. Watching AIDA on various benches on my Xperia X, I rarely ever get the more advanced cores to spin up, so I don't count on them doing a lot.
The lithography and clock speed differences are monumental. At worst, the 630 will be as fast as the 650, but with much less power consumption.
JP1 is a dual core 1.4GHz Krait 300, with really slow (by modern standards) LPDDR2. That's a huge bandwidth and clock/core hit. That's why it's slow.
The lithography and clock speed differences are monumental. At worst, the 630 will be as fast as the 650, but with much less power consumption.
JP1 is a dual core 1.4GHz Krait 300, with really slow (by modern standards) LPDDR2. That's a huge bandwidth and clock/core hit. That's why it's slow.
__________________
Sony Xperia XA2 Ultra SFOS 3 + Sony Xperia X SFOS 3, Nokia N810
Sony Xperia XA2 Ultra SFOS 3 + Sony Xperia X SFOS 3, Nokia N810
 |
|
2018-06-17
, 09:11
|
|
Posts: 943 |
Thanked: 3,228 times |
Joined on Jun 2010
@ Zagreb
|
#2567
|
Originally Posted by lantern
sure, if we are talking about price. It was just an overpriced midranger. Even X Performance was quite behind other flagships.
Because it's not. It's a low-mid range phone, whereas X was almost top of the line.
Specs are almost the same. So I don't understand what clovis86 is so excited about.
|
|
2018-06-17
, 09:57
|
|
Posts: 479 |
Thanked: 1,284 times |
Joined on Jan 2012
@ Enschede, The Netherlands
|
#2568
|
Originally Posted by deprecated
That's not what the spec sheet says. big.LITTLE is not just about clock speeds, it's about mixing low-powered and high-powered cores, using them when needed. The 650 does have a big.LITTLE set-up, the 630 hasn't.
XA2's Snapdragon 630 uses big.LITTLE as well. 4 x 2.2GHz + 4 x 1.8GHz with the 630
My claim is that for most intents and purposes the XA2 isn't (much) faster than the JP1, despite the much newer tech.
From Wikipedia: Cortex A53 scores 2.24 DMIPS/MHz; Krait 300 scores 3.39 DMIPS/MHz. Converted to their maximum frequency on these devices: A53: 4928 DMIPS. Krait 300: 4746 DMIPS. Based on this, the A53 at 2.2GHz is barely 4% faster than a Krait 300 at 1.4GHz.
Sure there are other factors, and yeah the 630 has four times the cores, but I'll kinda doubt you'll notice that when doing some browsing.
Given my experience with a A53-powered device, I'm not too compelled to buy another one.
Last edited by Fuzzillogic; 2018-06-17 at 10:02.
 |
|
2018-06-17
, 10:18
|
|
Posts: 60 |
Thanked: 179 times |
Joined on Jan 2018
@ Netherlands
|
#2569
|
Originally Posted by Fuzzillogic
Maybe ur right but i would like to see a review of testing between those Phones u mentioned and on a different OS , user experience etc.?
That's not what the spec sheet says. big.LITTLE is not just about clock speeds, it's about mixing low-powered and high-powered cores, using them when needed. The 650 does have a big.LITTLE set-up, the 630 hasn't.
My claim is that for most intents and purposes the XA2 isn't (much) faster than the JP1, despite the much newer tech.
From Wikipedia: Cortex A53 scores 2.24 DMIPS/MHz; Krait 300 scores 3.39 DMIPS/MHz. Converted to their maximum frequency on these devices: A53: 4928 DMIPS. Krait 300: 4746 DMIPS. Based on this, the A53 at 2.2GHz is barely 4% faster than a Krait 300 at 1.4GHz.
Sure there are other factors, and yeah the 630 has four times the cores, but I'll kinda doubt you'll notice that when doing some browsing.
Given my experience with a A53-powered device, I'm not too compelled to buy another one.
Already have an XA2 (waiting for SFOS 3), used xperia x before with sfos and andy. and user experience is totally different even specsheets say otherwise!
|
|
2018-06-17
, 15:27
|
|
Posts: 575 |
Thanked: 621 times |
Joined on May 2010
|
#2570
|
All that I can tell is that XA2 is also running really smoothly on Oreo.
I can compare to the X before I switched it to SFOS and we are talking about 2 different experiences.
I can compare to the X before I switched it to SFOS and we are talking about 2 different experiences.
 |
| Tags |
| sailfish os, sony xperia x |
«
Previous Thread
|
Next Thread
»
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 01:46.