Database Users

Possible Port for Windows 8 ARM for mobile

Hello,
I've owed an x10 and SGS-II.
Windows 8 ARM hasn't been released as of now but is someone planning to port it to SGS-II?
The reason I ask is because it looks very nice & would love to see something different on SGS-II
This is just a discussion any constructive comments are welcome.

as a pure development project it might be fun to do such
but as a daily driver OS, Win8 is definitely a no go

maybe will see win8 in our sgs III with 2ghz quad core

onbacardi said:
maybe will see win8 in our sgs III with 2ghz quad core
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i agree
as Win8 is basically = Win7 + Windows Mobile 7 Launcher + ARM CPU support
so that is basicaly a super beefup version of Win7, which translates into very heavy hardware requirement for it to run properly
basically you need a laptop the size of a phone, for it to run

Haven't people been able to "run" it with ancient Pentiums and 128 MB ram?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

AllGamer said:
i agree
as Win8 is basically = Win7 + Windows Mobile 7 Launcher + ARM CPU support
so that is basicaly a super beefup version of Win7, which translates into very heavy hardware requirement for it to run properly
basically you need a laptop the size of a phone, for it to run
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've read that it has lower requirements. There are also some other changes(some of them also improvements like reduced boot time)

AllGamer said:
i agree
as Win8 is basically = Win7 + Windows Mobile 7 Launcher + ARM CPU support
so that is basicaly a super beefup version of Win7, which translates into very heavy hardware requirement for it to run properly
basically you need a laptop the size of a phone, for it to run
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't think so mate. The requirements for Windows 8 ARM is pretty low. Microsoft announced that it will run very smooth on tablets (they did a demo as well) and it requires pretty low resources (since windows 8 itself uses a Very low ram).
People at xperia x10 are looking forward to port it so I thought why not?
SGS-III? lol. I'd dream about it.

Neo said:
I don't think so mate. The requirements for Windows 8 ARM is pretty low. Microsoft announced that it will run very smooth on tablets (they did a demo as well) and it requires pretty low resources (since windows 8 itself uses a Very low ram).
People at xperia x10 are looking forward to port it so I thought why not?
SGS-III? lol. I'd dream about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+ 1
It works on my old desktop so our super fast dual core phone should take it easily
Sent from my GT-I9100

+1 win 8 for sgsII is like child playing with toy... ARM version will req a very low hardware spec. Hoping too see it on this mean machine

Win8 ARM hardware drivers for the SGS2-specific hardware would need to be written from scratch, so don't hold your breath.

MaBlo said:
Haven't people been able to "run" it with ancient Pentiums and 128 MB ram?
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't make the mistake of comparing mobile to desktop. MHZ/GHZ processor speeds don't mean jack when comparing between CPU/GPU architecture types.
Just because some spec somewhere says it's designed to be able to run on ARM processors and some or our phones use ARM processors, doesn't mean we are go for launch. We may not be comparing apples with oranges here, but we certainly are comparing tangerines with oranges. Some of these chips can be much bigger and power-hungrier than anything we see in the SGS2

kal-el can totally Handel it perfectly.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk

I guess they will eventually merge WP7 and W8 for ARM, same thing that is about to happen to Android.
For now I am quite happy with Android on my phone, and if the Win32 pogramms wont work on a W8 tablet I see no point in getting one either. Android is growing like crazy (software and hardware), so I can not see a reason to abandon this platform (except maybe for MeeGo, incredible what the people did with the n900).
Although Tablet+VLC would make a hell of a mediaplayer....

Win phone 8 on SGSII
Reviving this thread...considering now much is known about the platform, is there a chance of a port on SGSII?

i think we will see some tryout ports coming very soon.
ive run w8 on some really crappy machines, much more worse specs then s2.
however i think port is depending on the fact how many people will really want it and how many devs
are willing to do it..

whats the OS in nokia lumia 920 windows 8 or windows 7?

This probably isn't possible because I think windows phones are partitioned differently. Basically its gonna be difficult or nearly impossible.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app

You guys do realize that the GSII is more than capable of running WP8? The Lumia 920 has a S4 dual core and handles it effortlessly, the GSII would be able to handle it aswell since the Exynos 4210 is still very damn good.

Phistachio said:
You guys do realize that the GSII is more than capable of running WP8? The Lumia 920 has a S4 dual core and handles it effortlessly, the GSII would be able to handle it aswell since the Exynos 4210 is still very damn good.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not the matter of hardware. There are many other things to consider too. Already we have problems with CM10. WP8 just spells more trouble.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app

MarioFan1998 said:
It's not the matter of hardware. There are many other things to consider too. Already we have problems with CM10. WP8 just spells more trouble.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I know, as everyone was just talking about hw, I gave my opinion I'm not even going to talk about the complications with porting the kernel, drivers, gpu drivers, adapting thethe mali to a whole new os, surfaceflinger, hwcomposer and so much more...

[Rumor]Samsung Galaxy S III is powered by Exynos 4412 Quad-core at 1.5Ghz

I just got a Galaxy S II and now Samsung is gearing up for the Galaxy III powered by Exynos 4412 @ 1.5Ghz.
Sources:
http://pinoydroid.net/samsung-galaxy-iii-quadcore-smartphone-samsung-exynox-4412
http://androidandme.com/2011/11/new...-exynos-4412-could-power-samsung-galaxy-s-iii
http://www.devicemag.com/2011/11/22...e-powered-by-quad-core-exynos-4412-processor/

Come at me bro

That would be very nice. A little sad I couldn't upgrade to the GS II but I think I can shell out for a new phone next year and a quad core Galaxy S would fit the bill.
I kinda want a galaxy Nexus, I missed out on the N1 so I do want a pure google device but samsung just gets it so right. Can't wait to see what they do with ICS.
Sent from my GT - I9000M running Tornado JVR Gold with Tornado kernel.

wtf do we need a quad core phone for when very little use dual core. Now quad core on a tablet i can somewhat understand

Gonna stick with the SGS2, unless of course the SGS3 has improved everything in which case I'll get it on launch day..

Seems pointless to me.... quad core will b battery hungry and bare use both cores on gs2 lol. Meeeeh
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium

Overkill...

I this going to be the future of Android, constant hardware updates that totally outdo the previous model in a matter of months, its already a fragmented nightmare, coders cant cope with dual core, let along quad, to be honest I am getting fed up with the constant changing and new models all the time, getting ridiculous

na its for tablets. a dual A15 with A7 more likely.

THUDUK said:
I this going to be the future of Android, constant hardware updates that totally outdo the previous model in a matter of months, its already a fragmented nightmare, coders cant cope with dual core, let along quad, to be honest I am getting fed up with the constant changing and new models all the time, getting ridiculous
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Then don't upgrade! you forget the other millions who didnt update this year and will be looking at 2012 for the latest and greatest. Where is the sense in wanting an Apple like crawl in progression. Android gives companies like Samsung the freedom to concentrate on the hardware. It can only be a good thing for the consumer. What I take from your post is "WWAaaAaa my fones not the bestest anymore!!11!!"

androidkid311 said:
Seems pointless to me.... quad core will b battery hungry and bare use both cores on gs2 lol. Meeeeh
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
While I do agree that it is somewhat pointless at this point in time, it's a common misconception that newer CPUs = more power usage. By that logic, a Core i7 will consume more power than the Core 2 Quad, which it does not.
CPU manufacturers control power consumption in a number of ways. The most common is a die shrink, manufacturing the CPU at a smaller level. The Exynos is a 45nm chip, and the next generation is supposed to be 28nm. Thus, we can expect power consumption to stay the same, or even decrease.
The other way is through the use of core gating. The OS simply shuts off the cores that are not in use, and wakes them up when they are needed.
Hopefully this helps to clear up some of the misunderstandings regarding CPUs and power consumption.

quad core has already been stated to be more battery friendly and the tegra3 chips is very clever only using more cores when needed and even having a stealth 5th core for mega low idle speeds
obvously the exynos is not a tegra3 but i am sure samsung will do some clever stuff too
quad core will be awesome , i am happy with my dual core sgs2 so wont upgrade for a while ive also bought extras etc so its not worth upgrading for me , however that doesnt stop quad core from being gooooooooooood
have you seen the gfx power it will bring , the extra camera capabillities it allows the manufactuers to use , the speed that the browser will work , how smooth the ui transisitions and scrolling will be even when multi tasking , it also brings support for up to 2gb of ram which alone is great stuff everyone knows the only thing better then ram is more ram
i think if we want our mobile to be proper mobile computers connected to bluetooth keyboards and usb hardrives then linked up to hdmi or dlna while doing back ground tasks , followed by some high end intensive 3d gaming with a bluetooth pad over hdmi while still doing background tasks , encoding high quality media on the fly and editing it without having to wait an age for it to finalise then qua core is a great thing as is the way that tech is moving so fast
the only problem i can see is fragmentation as things move so quick
its got to make it hard for devs etc which in the long turn could damage the platform a bit , however i am sure it will come to the point it will smooth out and tech wont accelerate so fast , maybe? lol
nvidia have a road map and it shows that they will be releasing a new cpu/gpu combo each year for at least the next 3-4 years before they think we will be at mobile maximum potenial , so get ready for this tradition to carry on for a while yet

Sadly I think this fragmentation might become a very big problem in the future, and is one area where Apple is unfortunately right.
Look at PC Gaming. A lot of people buy PCs not knowing exactly what the PC they bought at capable of. When it fails to run Battlefield 3 at an acceptable framerate they are not going to be happy.
For us techies, it's easy to know that you need at least a GTX 560Ti or something, but for Joe Sixpack out there they obviously don't know these things.
I think perhaps Google should enforce some sort of system requirement rating system. Give it a number scale to make it simple. So maybe the SGS2 scores 9/10, and Contract Killer requires a phone with at least 7 to run smoothly. So Joe Sixpack who bought a Galaxy 3 GT-i5800 that scores a 3 doesn't get all pissed off.
Hope I'm making sense here.

Nah fragmentation will be fine. Pc is still the choice for gamers over Apple mac, not including consoles. Transfer that to mobile phones, and as long as the android mobiles become popular enough, games will be great for them. Everyone will just know they have to have a good mobile just like their pc.

I read somewhere it would feature the AMD's new 8 core bulldozer CPU with nVidias GTX 590 in SLI.
Sent from my GT-I9100 using XDA App

i dont really understand people complaining about fragmentation. Android isnt a phone, it isnt a manufacturer, its an operating system. Do people complain the laptop market is fragmented because some computers are on xp, vista or 7? Some are on faster processors than others? Did people ever complain that symbian updated on some phones but not others?
I just dont get it, Id rather new phones/tech come out than only one release every 18 months.

Who cares? My upgrade isn't due until 2013... When I will get the top of the line handset again. I'm sure that model will be usurped within 4-6 months too.
Maybe we should all keep our phones in their original packaging like toy collectors, so they can't contribute to the disastrous fragmentation issue.
The actual effect of this media-inspired phenomena on consumers is negligible.

LOL sorry - had to point out the galaxy s III still has an 8mp camera. =p
Almost sounded like the Samsung Nexus with the 5mp camera... ahaha.
Just kidding. The phone should be solid. =)

Samsung g3 will be have 1.8 ghz processor not 1.5 ghz and will be dual core
Sent from my GT-I9100

biffsmash said:
Pc is still the choice for gamers over Apple mac, not including consoles
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android phones vs iPhone is basically like PC vs console since PC has a billion different hardware and software configs where as a console as 1 (There are a few iPhones but you generally only support the latest 2-3 versions).

Android and Multi-Core Processor

Bell points the finger at chipset makers - "The way it's implemented right now, Android does not make as effective use of multiple cores as it could, and I think - frankly - some of this work could be done by the vendors who create the SoCs, but they just haven't bothered to do it. Right now the lack of software effort by some of the folks who have done their hardware implementation is a bigger disadvantage than anything else."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What do you think about this guys?

He knows his stuff.
Sent from my GT-I9300

i would take it with a pinch of salt, though there are not many apps that takes advantage of multi core processor lets see what intel will tell when they have thier own dual core processor out in the market

Pretty good valid arguments for the most part.
I mostly agree though, but I think android makes good use of up to 2 cores. Anything more than that it doesn't at all.

There is a huge chunk of the article missing too.
Sent from my GT-I9300

full article

jaytana said:
What do you think about this guys?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.

Reckless187 said:
I think they should all be covered in honey and then thrown into a pit full of bears and Honey bees. And the bears should have like knives ductaped to their feet and the bees stingers should be dipped in chilli sauce.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?

Actually is a totally fail but in android 5 I think it's can be solved
Sent from my GT-I9300 using XDA

This was a serious problem on desktop Windows OS as well back when multi cores first starting coming out. I remember having to download patches for certain games and in other cases, having to set the CPU affinity to run certain games/apps with only one core so that it wouldn't freeze up. I am sure Android will move forward with multi-core support in the future.

simollie said:
wow, saying Android isn't ready for multip-core deserves such treatment? or this guy had committed more serious crime previously?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Its a harsh but fair punishment imo. They need to sort that sh*t out as its totally unacceptable or they're gonna get a taste of the Cat o Nine Tails.

Android kernel is based on Linux. So this is suggesting the Linux kernel is not built to support multi-core either. Not true. There is a reason the SGS3 gets 5000+ in Quadrant, the the San Diego only gets 3000+. And the San Diego is running 200MHz faster.
Just look at the blue bar here. http://www.engadget.com/2012/05/31/orange-san-diego-benchmarks/ . My SGS3 got over 2.5K on just CPU alone.

What Intel said was true. Android is multicore aware but the os and apps aren't taking advantage of it. When this user disabled 2 cores on the HTC one x it made no difference at all in anything other than benchmarks.
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showpost.php?p=26094852&postcount=3

Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?

I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3

916x10 said:
I've been hearing this for some time now and is one of the reasons I didn't care that we weren't getting the quad core version of the GS3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Okay folks... firstly linux kernel, which android is based on, is aware of multicore (its obvious) but most the applications are not aware, thats true!.. but is not the android which to blame neither the SoC makers. This is like the flame intel made that they wanted to say their single core can do faster to a dual core arm LOL, (maybe intel will make 1 core has 4 threads or 8 threads) <- imposibruuu for now dunno later
you will notice the core usage while playing HD video that require cpu to decode (better core decode fastly)... and im not sure single core intel does better to arm dual core.. ~haha~
but for average user the differences are not noticable.. if intel aiming for this market yes that make sense... but android user are above average user.. they will optimize its phone eventually IMO

What they have failed to disclose is which SoC they did their test on and their methodology. Not much reason to doubt what he's saying but you gotta remember that Intel only have a single core mobile SoC currently and are aiming to get a foothold in the mobile device ecosystem so part of this could be throwing salt on competing products as it's something that should be taken care of by Google optimising the CPU scheduling algorithms of their OS.

The problem is in the chip set. I currently attend SUNY Oswego and a professor of mine Doug Lea works on many concurrent structures. He is currently working on the ARM spec sheet that is used to make chips. The bench marks that he has done shows that no matter how lucky or unlucky you get, the time that it takes to do a concurrent process is about the same where on desktop chips there is a huge difference between best case and worse case. The blame falls on the people that make the chips for now. They need to change how it handles concurrent operations and then if android still cant use multi-core processors then it falls on the shoulders of google.
that is my two cents on the whole situation. Just finished concurrency with Doug and after many talks this is my current opinion.
Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201 using XDA

Flynny75 said:
Disabling the CPU cores will do nothing to the GPU, hence still getting 60 FPS. And you say that like you expected to see a difference. Those games may not be particularly CPU intensive, thats why they continue to run fine. They will more than likely be GPU limited.
Android is not a difficult OS to run, thats why it can run on the G1, or AOKP can run smooth as silk on my i9000. If it can run smooth as silk on one 2yr old 1GHz chip, how COULD it go faster on a next-gen chip like in the SGS3 or HOX? In terms of just using the phone, ive not experienced any lag at all.
If youre buying a phone with dual/quad CPU cores, and only expecting to use it as a phone (i.e, not play demanding games/benchmark/mod/what ever else), of course you wont see any advantage, and you may feel cheated. And if you disable those extra cores, and still only use it as a phone, of course you wont notice any difference.
If a pocket calculator appears to calculate 1+1 instantly, and a HOX also calculates 1+1 instantly, Is the pocket calculator awesome, is the HOX not using all its cores, or is what it is being asked to do simply not taxing enough to use all the CPU power the HOX has got?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That doesn't mean daily task doesn't need the cpu power. When I put my sgs 3 in power save mode which cut back the cpu to 800mHz, I feel the lag instantly when scrolling around and navigating the internet. So I can conclude that performance per core is still much more important than number of cores. There isn't any performance difference either with the dual core sensation xe running beside the single core sensational xl.

The hardware needs to be out for developers to have incentive to make use of it. It's not like Android was built from the ground up to utilize 4 cores. That said, once it hits enough hand it and software running in it will be made to utilize the new hardware.

do these pc parst work together?

do these parts work together
motherboard: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Asus-M5A78L...1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242271&sr=1-1
2 graphics cards: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sapphire-11...V8SI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1355241889&sr=8-3
case: http://www.amazon.co.uk/CiT-Vantage-Gaming-Audio-Reader/dp/B0071KZNUY/ref=pd_sim_computers_1
psu: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cooler-Mast...AKOM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355242153&sr=8-1
ram: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-CMZ...1_2?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242548&sr=1-2
cpu: http://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Bulldoz...1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242232&sr=1-1
hdd: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-ST3...AGSO/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1355242411&sr=8-3
are the specs good enough to run battlefield 3 smoothly on high settings

frederic2707 said:
do these parts work together
motherboard: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Asus-M5A78L...1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242271&sr=1-1
2 graphics cards: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Sapphire-11...V8SI/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1355241889&sr=8-3
case: http://www.amazon.co.uk/CiT-Vantage-Gaming-Audio-Reader/dp/B0071KZNUY/ref=pd_sim_computers_1
psu: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Cooler-Mast...AKOM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1355242153&sr=8-1
ram: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Corsair-CMZ...1_2?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242548&sr=1-2
cpu: http://www.amazon.co.uk/AMD-Bulldoz...1_1?s=computers&ie=UTF8&qid=1355242232&sr=1-1
hdd: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Seagate-ST3...AGSO/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1355242411&sr=8-3
are the specs good enough to run battlefield 3 smoothly on high settings
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your build is very similar to my current one. The mobo, case, cpu, psu and ram will all be fine. But you will not be able to run two gpus on that system. It only has one pcie x16 slot and can only take one graphics card. You'd be better off getting something like a 6850 or gtx 550/560.

HazzaBlake said:
Your build is very similar to my current one. The mobo, case, cpu, psu and ram will all be fine. But you will not be able to run two gpus on that system. It only has one pcie x16 slot and can only take one graphics card. You'd be better off getting something like a 6850 or gtx 550/560.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would add that, as a general rule, if you don't do any video-editing or high-GPU intensive calculations (gaming is not one), a 2-cards setup is rarely worth it. You usually have a better deal by buying one high-end graphic card than 2-medium.
Of course, if you don't care about money, two 600$ cards will do wonders

Motherboard?¿ really good parts
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-T989 using xda app-developers app

I'm not a huge fan of the case, you'd be better off having the PSU at the bottom of the case, not up top like it looks like. Tom's Hardware has a great article about air cooling set-ups that really helped me plan my set-up.
I'd also go for one better GPU than two, like roninfight said. Look up cards and how they run BF3 at your resolution. BF3 is gpu-dependent from what I remember, so the CPU isn't such a big issue for that particular game, but can be for others like Skyrim. Dual GPU can lead to micro-stuttering and other issues, even with the top-of-the-line cards - so unless you have a compelling reason to need the processing power, it's not really worth bothering with.
If you're looking for a gaming machine, I'd look at Intel processors. Unless things have had a big shake-up in the AMD camp (which I wouldn't really guess since AMD has publicly announced they're going to focus on the mobile market instead of desktop - but maybe they had something in the line). For most of the games I was planning on playing, the testing done put Intel CPUs ahead on pretty much all of them. I don't have hardware loyalty
If you were going with that set-up, I'd question if the PSU was enough - also, I would check out if it has enough connectors for two GPU. I'd have to look at it in-depth, but it seems from a glance that you'd be cutting it close and might only support one card, but I didn't go track down the specs on it.

Are these parts better http://www.amazon.co.uk/registry/wishlist/P4J2K9GHTWJ9

frederic2707 said:
Are these parts better http://www.amazon.co.uk/registry/wishlist/P4J2K9GHTWJ9
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
PSU needs to be at least 500w and i recommend you get a single gpu instead of sli. It really isn't worth the hassle unless your running three screens or 2560x1600 resolution.
Change PSU to corsair as they're much better and I'd suggest nvidia instead as nvidia drivers are still better than amd's at the moment.
I'd also change from the 8 core amd to a quad core intel. I have a 2500k and its brilliant. make sure u get 64 bit os aswell!
Sent from my GT-I9100 using xda app-developers app

your build is all ok and puts well together in every aspect

Yes those are better
Sent from my SGH-T989 using xda premium

IPCPARTPICKER is a great website that checks for compatibility and finds the best prices for your build. It uses many sources: Amazon, Newegg, etc.
Check it out, enter your build there.

Hardware requirements for Android studio 2.1

Hi Everyone,
I wish to start learning android development in android studio but I have a major concern about the hardware requirements. I have two machines at hand, First one is a very old desktop with an athlon 64 2800+ single core with just 2.5GB ram and Windows xp sp3 which i know would be a big no. Second one is a new HP laptop with 5th gen core i3 and 4GB ram on windows 10. I wish to know, if the laptop will be able to run it with reasonable performance or if I should certainly look at upgrading the desktop. The problem is that I can't afford the latest hardware for desktop so I will be looking at some used hardware online. I am getting some affordable deals on a used AMD phenom II X2 555 and an AMD Phenom 9550 quad core, both coupled with decent motherboards. So basically its between the laptop and those phenom processors. Which way will it be better?

vikrant1982 said:
Hi Everyone,
I wish to start learning android development in android studio but I have a major concern about the hardware requirements. I have two machines at hand, First one is a very old desktop with an athlon 64 2800+ single core with just 2.5GB ram and Windows xp sp3 which i know would be a big no. Second one is a new HP laptop with 5th gen core i3 and 4GB ram on windows 10. I wish to know, if the laptop will be able to run it with reasonable performance or if I should certainly look at upgrading the desktop. The problem is that I can't afford the latest hardware for desktop so I will be looking at some used hardware online. I am getting some affordable deals on a used AMD phenom II X2 555 and an AMD Phenom 9550 quad core, both coupled with decent motherboards. So basically its between the laptop and those phenom processors. Which way will it be better?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the laptop will run it. I've tried making app on a very old pc with barely 1 or 2 gb ram and successfully completed till the basic "hello world" app. Runs very slow though. But i think your laptop is good enough for app building
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk
---------- Post added at 07:20 AM ---------- Previous post was at 07:10 AM ----------
simranjitsingh said:
I think the laptop will run it. I've tried making app on a very old pc with barely 1 or 2 gb ram and successfully completed till the basic "hello world" app. Although runs very slow. It all depends on the ram. But i think your laptop is good enough for app building
Besides you should have a look at this excellent free pdf guide for beginners. Easy and noob friendly,Helped me a lot
http://www.ebooksfeed.com/16/head-first-android-development-free-pdf/
Happy app building[emoji4]
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Sent from my SM-N930F using Tapatalk

simranjitsingh said:
I think the laptop will run it. I've tried making app on a very old pc with barely 1 or 2 gb ram and successfully completed till the basic "hello world" app. Runs very slow though. But i think your laptop is good enough for app building
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks a lot Simranjit, really appreciate your inputs.

I'd say your notebook shoud run Android Studio quite ok. Don't expect great performance though. Especially if you plan on using original Emulators, they are eating RAM like dogs.
I'm running AS on my 8 years old computer with Core2 Duo E6400 and 4Gb of RAM. Works ok, but not ligthing fast.
I've recently added an SSD to the configuration. Boy, that did speed things up! So, consider getting SSD if you will buy a new system. Or installing it to your notebook will also definitely boot overall system performance and loading times.

In Linux, (SWAP)
In Windows, (Paging File)
This can be considered equal to RAM and can actually be used as a substitute.
It is possible with a big enough SWAP or Paging file to use really old HW, your build-times will suffer but it's feasible if it has to be done.

I wish to start learning android development in android studio but I have a major concern about the hardware requirements.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Let me give you the respect of a truly proper reply. Since you're actually buying stuff....
1 ) Hardware
CPU: Intel Pentium G4400 - 60$
GPU: Integrated HD510
MOBO: GIGABYTE GA-H110M-S2H - 60$
SSD: Intel SSD 600P - 70$
PSU: Standard 30$
Case: 15-30$ standard case
DDR4-2133: $40~ for 2x4GB sticks
Dual-memory is important here; the PCIE SSD will have a write speed fast enough to compensate for the dual-core CPU.
This is also a semi-future proof model too, since adding an i3-6100 at a future time will yield a huge improvement as it has 4 threads; the next biggest upgrade is an i7 which has 8 threads the i5 is insignificant in this.
This build will actually allow you to produce AOSP and things like this in under 1 hour.
IF YOU USE AN OVERCLOCK MOTHER BOARD:
G4400 can be brought to like 4.5 GHz which is insanely fast but you need a fan, i3 won't do anything for you as the non-K overclock kills hyper-threading; reducing it to being the same as a G4400.
i5 is the same as an i7 here for the same reason; no hyper-threading.
So if you could spring for an i5 you may as well go for an overclocking build.
I mean doing it either way would yield good results, but it is just a little more expensive in the MOBO area.

InterfaceNode said:
Let me give you the respect of a truly proper reply. Since you're actually buying stuff....
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is some great info. Also, I have one more doubt, the reason why I looked at those used AMD chips is that I have read a couple of times people mentioning that the AMD chips handle android studio better due to better multi threaded performance than intel. If that really is the case then I can stretch a tiny bit more and get an FX-4300 since there isn't a lot of difference here between the G4400 and an FX-4300 but, thats only if i absolutely decide to build a new PC. Right now I am having a hard time considering an entirely new machine. Actually I had to leave my job two months back after a 10 years service. I saved up money all those years so decided to take a plunge and learn android and find a new job. Though I have healthy reserves today, I am not sure how long will it take for me to learn, be productive and find a new job.
Also, I want to add that those prices are inflated here in my country. For reference, that G4400 is around 80$ due to import duties and thats an online price on Amazon. On local stores it can be even more.

vikrant1982 said:
That is some great info. Also, I have one more doubt, the reason why I looked at those used AMD chips is that I have read a couple of times people mentioning that the AMD chips handle android studio better due to better multi threaded performance than intel. If that really is the case then I can stretch a tiny bit more and get an FX-4300 since there isn't a lot of difference here between the G4400 and an FX-4300 but, thats only if i absolutely decide to build a new PC. Right now I am having a hard time considering an entirely new machine. Actually I had to leave my job two months back after a 10 years service. I saved up money all those years so decided to take a plunge and learn android and find a new job. Though I have healthy reserves today, I am not sure how long will it take for me to learn, be productive and find a new job.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Learning Android is worth it; and it will enhance your knowledge of Linux in general and yes you will make money eventually.
Also, I have one more doubt, the reason why I looked at those used AMD chips is that I have read a couple of times people mentioning that the AMD chips handle android studio better due to better multi threaded performance than intel.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's very correct, but... well.
There is really no situation where an FX CPU will beat an Intel CPU.
I'm saying it because I love you and don't want to see you make a huge mistake.
Do not mess with future-proofing ok?
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/AMD-FX-9590-vs-Intel-Core-i7-3930K/1812vs1487
These CPUs are roughly the same price (refurbished or used i7-3930k is fine, nobody uses them hard compared to us.)
But the 3930k has 4 more threads; it is significantly stronger in single-core power as well so naturally the workstation score will be higher; and will build an entire OS in under 35 minutes no matter what.
When paired with strong Read/Write HW such as a PCIe SSD which should be considered REQUIRED if you value your time (you should, time is money here in regard to testing) you will be able to whack a build in under 15 minutes with this kind of HW probably.
Lesser builds such as Apps will probably take a minute or less.
You can obtain a 3930k for under 200$ no problem.
You will never be able to find a FX CPU that is worth it over an intel CPU.
FX CPU require tremendous cooling power to use! They pull a ton of energy too!
You can even run Android Studio on ARM CPUs if you're really struggling cash-wise and I can make suggestions here too.
Let me accommodate you ok?
I feel you work too hard for your money to burn it on a bad choice, tell me exactly how much you're looking to spend and I will give you an EXACT list of HW that will be unbeatable.
Dude, if you need help I can absolutely direct you to someone in China who can obtain these units are an incredibly reasonable price because these things are all made in China.
They are drowning in these parts.
I can find you a 3930k for uh, around 130$?
Look, it is a very effective CPU.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-3930K/3502vs1487
This is what I suggest you use, seriously.

InterfaceNode said:
Dude, if you need help I can absolutely direct you to someone in China who can obtain these units are an incredibly reasonable price because these things are all made in China.
They are drowning in these parts.
I can find you a 3930k for uh, around 130$?
Look, it is a very effective CPU.
http://cpu.userbenchmark.com/Compare/Intel-Core-i7-6700K-vs-Intel-Core-i7-3930K/3502vs1487
This is what I suggest you use, seriously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Great, let me just work it out and see how much I can pull it up to and then I can just get back to you. Again, thanks a lot for you time and help.

vikrant1982 said:
Great, let me just work it out and see how much I can pull it up to and then I can just get back to you. Again, thanks a lot for you time and help.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If it takes you 2 hours to build, you can only test a thing 5 times a day roughly.
Because it will take a LOT of time to trouble-shoot a project, you won't be able to build back to back as soon as the next build is finished :x
Trust me, if you strengthen your HW you will advance very fast it matters a LOT.
Even to rent a Cloud VM would be acceptable, Google offers the service man