Hi,
Been monitoring battery performance and CPU sleep states, and one thing I notice is that on my device the A53's spent a surprising amount of time at 1Ghz+ when the screen is on, and one of the A57 cores is always running a 384 when the device is idle, while the other 3 sleep. Is this Sony's attempt to keep the UI snappy? Having the A57 on all the time (screen on), even at that low frequency is going to use in the region of 100mW+ (which is about 4x that of each A53 core)
Can someone else sanity check my results?
I'm using perfmon, systempanel, and "floating monitors"
Perfmon can be found here: http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1933284
It's also on the market for the price of a coffee, please consider buying it - great tool!
Yep sounds about right this Greek review:
https://translate.google.co.uk/tran.../2015/10/24/sony-xperia-z5-review/&edit-text=
Found that in most cases only one A57 core runs in the Z5.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Pardon my ignorance but...how much worse do you think it is to run only the big cores and throttle them from 2Ghz to 300Mhz without turning ON and switching to the little ones? (In other words...disable the big little technology and just use the best 4 cores).
We're now using the little cores more than the big ones....and that 1.5Ghz cap could be the reason of a lot of stutters.
Changing the topic, now that Google is selling Nexus devices (5X and 6P) with big little. I think they will improve this ARM technology in future Android versions (including the kernel).
Sent from my E5823
thesebastian said:
Pardon my ignorance but...how much worse do you think it is to run only the big cores and throttle them from 2Ghz to 300Mhz without turning ON and switching to the little ones? (In other words...disable the big little technology and just use the best 4 cores).
We're now using the little cores more than the big ones....and that 1.5Ghz cap could be the reason of a lot of stutters.
Changing the topic, now that Google is selling Nexus devices (5X and 6P) with big little. I think they will improve this ARM technology in future Android versions (including the kernel).
Sent from my E5823
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The little cores will be perfectly fine for most daily mundane tasks, such as checking emails, messaging etc. The stutters you mention probably is because the phone launched just before Marshmallow and Sony are focusing more on that OS, same kind of thing with the camera. The current camera app is just a placeholder for the proper app due for release in a week or two.
thesebastian said:
Pardon my ignorance but...how much worse do you think it is to run only the big cores and throttle them from 2Ghz to 300Mhz without turning ON and switching to the little ones? (In other words...disable the big little technology and just use the best 4 cores).
We're now using the little cores more than the big ones....and that 1.5Ghz cap could be the reason of a lot of stutters.
Changing the topic, now that Google is selling Nexus devices (5X and 6P) with big little. I think they will improve this ARM technology in future Android versions (including the kernel).
Sent from my E5823
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In short, no. The little cores, whilst relative to the A57's are weak, they are by no means underpowered for running the UI and such. Do consider that the A53 core is faster than the A9 cores that powered previous flagships such as the Galaxy S3. Leaving one of the A57's ticking in the background is probably not such a bad idea having thought about it, as it allows fast handover when the high performance is required; I do however hypothesise that some of the stuttering might be due to threads being handed over to the A57, whilst it is running down at 384, which will be somewhat slower than the high frequency A53 core(s) the process is being passed from. It may be that we see a touch-boost or more aggressive CPU governor brought in to rectify this.
On a related note, there is a good article on the power-aware BIG.little implementation in the Snapdragon 810 here:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/8933/snapdragon-810-performance-preview/4
Definitely for performance.
If they weren't set is this fashion the UI would feel sluggish and sluggish on wake up.
Your findings sound perfectly normal/adequate, resemble a "interactive" CPU governor.
Related
I was looking into buying either the TF / Prime this past week, and have been looking into the benchmarks I see on the net. I've seen a few reviews, one from AnandTech, and the other one from Slashgear and random Antutu benches across the web.
If I'm understanding correctly, it seems the Prime obviously does have an edge, however for general non-gaming use it seems the differences are minimal? Can anyone confirm or if you own both to test it out?
In a javascript benchmark (AnandTech.com), I'd only see a 0.4-0.5 second difference loading JS heavy webpages?
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
The BrowserMark comparison at slashgear shows a 0.5-0.6 second gain by the Prime:
So are the benches really showing the difference is this minimal or are there more to talk about that I'm not seeing? (Not referring to game benches, not too interested in gaming)
From what I understand the main difference is in the GPU so for games and such it will matter... Also more hardware support for video making 1080p a feature now.
The cpu itself is clocked higher so I wonder what the differences would be with an equally clocked TF101. I guess barely noticable...
Off course there's the quadcore vs dualcore but I wonder if that really matters in day to day use. I don't expect a huge difference in user experience so in that regards I don't think there's a big reason to upgrade from TF101 to TF201.
I still will though, because the size decrease (and weight decrease) combined with the other factors still make it a nice upgrade. But looking at just performance, meh...
i overclock my Tf101 to 1.5ghz and its very fast now. i would argue an overclocked Tf101 would perform the same if not better than a prime in most of these tests.
But then again, the prime might have just as much overclocking room... Giving it the lead again.
The problem is that benchmarks generally mean absolutely nothing. Having a good benchmark doesn't mean you are going to get great real world use.
pside15 said:
The problem is that benchmarks generally mean absolutely nothing. Having a good benchmark doesn't mean you are going to get great real world use.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's the thing, having a machine that benchmarks 26% faster (TF201 vs TF 101) does not mean that it is going to necessarily be faster in real life depending on the software and how it uses it.
Benchmarks should prove the Prime to be a better machine, singularly. Dual/quad-core, it’s all about apps utilization and user functionality.
Then there’s price/performance, (in my case) a $250 101 beats the 201.
That's the part of what I've been trying to say. If I'm only going to see a split second of differences (0.5 second) in browsing around heavy javascript or just general web browsing performance, is there more than this?
Seems like so far the only argument I can see about getting a Prime is a GPU and CPU boost to gaming fps by 20-30 fps.
What about outside of gaming, in respect to general tasks that can take some time, like compressing a zip of a nand backup or large rom files, general encryption, etc.
The price per performance of the TF101 definitely seems to be taking the lead if we aren't talking about gaming apps.
dagrim1 said:
But then again, the prime might have just as much overclocking room... Giving it the lead again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My impression is that quad core performance vs dual core does not follow a linear scale.. If the way the architecture of 4x ARM CPU's (TF201) vs 2x (TF101) is any similar to how Intel Quad vs Duo started getting popularity a few years ago, I feel that there are going to be relatively few noticeable differences, when the dual can suit an average user without noticeably seeing any changes using a quad for their tasks... Mainly it will have to wait until which apps can utilize the multiple cores efficiently. Crysis for android?
Course I might be off base with this, that's why I wanted to ask you guys who have owned it.
Unless you are using high end games specifically designed for the Quad core/GPU, you should not notice a real difference. Much of what you do with any tablet or computer is speed dependent on outside sources ie network speed, ( both on your end and the other end) input speed etc. If you are using or rendering high end graphics, you will notice the difference, but then why use a tablet for that in the first place.
The first benchmark for Prime is done is slowest, power saving mode.
Asus TF201 Prime is the best
GasGuzz said:
Benchmarks should prove the Prime to be a better machine, singularly. Dual/quad-core, it’s all about apps utilization and user functionality.
Then there’s price/performance, (in my case) a $250 101 beats the 201.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 201 actually has a 5th core that is for normal usage, so most of the time you will be running a single core. I have seen in benchmarks that the internal flash on the 201 is slower than the 101. The 201 also has only a mono speaker compared to the stereo 101. The 101 right now has overclocking and custom ROMs. Add in price and that is the reason I just bought a 101 instead of a 201.
Cheers!
-M
Xda member since 2007
Look like my S3 is going to be down..someone explain and what you think about this ?
It has its crown
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
There was plenty of speculation what kind of CPU powered the new iPhone 5 and in the end it turned out to be a custom Apple design. So, how well did the Cupertino-based company did? According to an unverified Geekbench results, A6more than meets the 2x performance increase Apple promised.
The results are nothing short of amazing - the Apple A6 chipset has two custom cores rated at 1GHz with 1GB of RAM and it easily stands up to quad-core Cortex-A9 and dual-core Krait designs running at 1.5GHz.
The iPhone 5 has more than double the CPU performance of the 4S, beating it in every category that Geekbench tests. The RAM has gotten faster too. Even the A5X in the new iPad can't compete (understandable as A5X only improves GPU performance over the A5).
As for high-end Androids, Exynos 4 Quad and Tegra 3 based phones like the Samsung Galaxy S III and the HTC One X manage to outperform the iPhone 5 if they are running Android Jelly Bean. Under Ice Cream Sandwich, the performance of the One X drops down to the levels of the iPhone.
The HTC One S and its two Krait cores manage to match the iPhone 5 under Ice Cream Sandwich, so it should come out slightly ahead.
Just for fun, here's a dual-core Pentium 4 541 (Prescott architecture) downclocked to 2.4GHz matching the performance of the iPhone 5. This CPU came out in Q3 of 2004.
If these benchmark results do turn out to be from the iPhone 5 (results can be faked, so take it with a grain of salt) then Apple must have worked some serious magic. The Apple A6 chipset makes even Krait cores look slow (again, it's 1GHz vs. 1.5GHz).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1030202
http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/search?q=samsung+galaxy+s+III
See... How many S III scored lower than 1601...
All with JB leaks beats iPhone 5 score...
i think the benchmarking tool is a bit of weird. The One S also scored 1.5k... Not X but S.... S4 processor. Maybe it does not really use all the 4 cores?
the benchmark tool is useless... its more OS based then anything... change your launcher that u use and u'll get a different score every time...
I think you need to learn how to read geek bench the majority of iPhone 5 score is in fast memory the processor is still pretty slow by itself. Also mod please close this thread all iPhone threads crash and burn.
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda app-developers app
why people open everyday same **** again again(@OP : Is apple marketing team has ordered open new thread everyday?). the iphone 5 have nothing new. just to say thinnest and tallest (but these kind of models already available years ago. ). If you want compare iphone 5 to galaxy line you have to compare it with galaxy s, sII or galaxy sIII mini. It's not worth it to compare to with sIII.
(By the way iphone5 cpu and memory provided by Samsung.)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=1891076
©®™
I got a 1741 on mine with stock 1.4ghz and jellybean. No sweat!!
Sent from my GT-I9300 using xda premium
I think they used the US S3 which is dual cored, instead of the international S3. That's why the scores are lower.
1.Why post this on here?
2.A newer phone that is somehow faster....really? is that how technology works, well if it is then I guess the SGS4 to be even faster, and the SGS5, and I will go as far to say that the SGS24 will be greater still.
i think a lot of you who post Samsung s3 vs. whatever is insecure and are those who always want to have the best or be the best. People are competitive by nature but being obsessive, wasting your time and energy on products that serve the same purpose is a bit overkill. My advise is to find a cure for the disease you have. Just enjoy your phone.
swift2fly said:
i think a lot of you who post Samsung s3 vs. whatever is insecure and are those who always want to have the best or be the best. People are competitive by nature but being obsessive, wasting your time and energy on products that serve the same purpose is a bit overkill. My advise is to find a cure for the disease you have. Just enjoy your phone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very well said! the other word " BIASED"
hero000 said:
Very well said! the other word " BIASED"
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I get over 2000 with the jelly bean and the processor overclocked to 1.6
thread closed
Sony Xperia Z2 displaced the One (M8) at the Basemark OS II bench.
The two scored identical in the CPU and GPU test, but faster memory performance helped the Sony smartphone reach the top spot.
The Xperia Z2 is currently third in the gaming benchmark, but an update could push it forward – after all the M8 and Z2 use the same chipset and display resolution.
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Source GSM Arena
meyourchum said:
Sony Xperia Z2 displaced the One (M8) at the Basemark OS II bench.
The two scored identical in the CPU and GPU test, but faster memory performance helped the Sony smartphone reach the top spot.
The Xperia Z2 is currently third in the gaming benchmark, but an update could push it forward – after all the M8 and Z2 use the same chipset and display resolution.
Source GSM Arena
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I love the look of the back of the htc one (and m8) but its that bloody huge bottom bezel/htc logo area that for me is an eye-sore. It almost looks like it's got three bezels! I want a nice symmetrical front face to my phones, with thin side bezels. Hence my excitement at the z2, now that it's fixed the flaws of the z1. Barring any disasters rearing their heads when it gets reviewed, Sony is onto a winner here.
Well as far as benchmarks are concerned, I think the S5 might overtake them all as it's running at a slightly higher clockspeed of 2.5Ghz. Even the M8 Asian version is running at 2.5Ghz.
Having a higher battery.. it makes me wonder why Sony decided to go for 2.3Ghz instead. I feel it could be the cheaper batch of CPUs with low speed yields..
MasK said:
Well as far as benchmarks are concerned, I think the S5 might overtake them all as it's running at a slightly higher clockspeed of 2.5Ghz. Even the M8 Asian version is running at 2.5Ghz.
Having a higher battery.. it makes me wonder why Sony decided to go for 2.3Ghz instead. I feel it could be the cheaper batch of CPUs with low speed yields..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Cheaper batch of CPUs? No, the processor in all the 3 phones is the same. (Snapdragon 801)
Being a computer engineer it is my opinion that the practical differences between the same processor clocked at 2.3 GHz and 2.5 GHz will be little to none. Sure, the benchmarks would show a slight difference but during actual use? Nopes. However, the extra 1 GB of RAM can make a fair amount of difference in practical usage especially if you run memory intensive apps and games.
g4rvd4 said:
Cheaper batch of CPUs? No, the processor in all the 3 phones is the same. (Snapdragon 801)
Being a computer engineer it is my opinion that the practical differences between the same processor clocked at 2.3 GHz and 2.5 GHz will be little to none. Sure, the benchmarks would show a slight difference but during actual use? Nopes. However, the extra 1 GB of RAM can make a fair amount of difference in practical usage especially if you run memory intensive apps and games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, the chip binning is different, and that will constitute to different prices.
8974-AB vs 8974-AC. It's physically sold as a different part number.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snapdragon_(system_on_chip)
But sure.. in real life, the differences will be close to none. I'm thinking Sony added the extra 1GB RAM for 4K video and timeShift video.
IMO the hardware wars are coming to an end soon with cell phones and they will become appliances. This is generally considered to be the point where performance capabilities are no longer an issue and design, styling, and features become the selling points. The OEMs know it and outside of the ability to monetize proprietary software they are trying to capture buyers with it because the hardware itself wont be the thing they are selling in the not too distant future.
I have an N5, it has no lag and is completely fluid everywhere. Everything opens instantaneously unless it involves network connection speed. I do recognize there are people who game that will leverage further hardware advances but for me the future is already here, I don't care which processor the Z2 has because phones are flat getting kick ass on the upper end and I know it will make no difference as I click about the GUI.
hi
can someone install droidfish chess app, set on 4 cores and from initial board position will do analysis to see if knps passes 1000...lg g2 failed to pass 600 which is low. interesting to see it that aspect was improved with new chip/memory speed...
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
for example, galaxy note 3 result:
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
TheBenzinator said:
hi
can someone install droidfish chess app, set on 4 cores and from initial board position will do analysis to see if knps passes 1000...lg g2 failed to pass 600 which is low. interesting to see it that aspect was improved with new chip/memory speed...
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's 602k.
I got 608K, also running HolyAngel's kernel as well, FYI, with CPU at 2.5 and smartassv2 enabled.
thanks to all. I guess need to wait to new Quallcom chip 805 to see if this will be improved..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
TheBenzinator said:
thanks to all. I guess need to wait to new Quallcom chip 805 to see if this will be improved..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No problem, just don't forget the Thanks button.
I do wonder if it's the QHD display that drags down the nps with the G3, compared the Note 3 with similar specs...
JustLok said:
No problem, just don't forget the Thanks button.
I do wonder if it's the QHD display that drags down the nps with the G3, compared the Note 3 with similar specs...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My note 3 is with Exynos cpu so it performs much better in this kind of cpu load.... i dont see any relation to QHD display which is handled by gpu part..
Sent from my SM-N900 using XDA Free mobile app
This is L1 cache that matters to chess... not Ghz
Dear all,
Let me contribute to that topic with some more precision.
If you are looking for more Nodes per second, the decisive criteria is the L1 CACHE of the CPU. It plays much more on the outcome compared to the frequency. I am quite sure about that after trying this test on different Snapdragons.
Snapdragons have 16K data + 16K instruction cache. Therefore, even a Galaxy Note IV can barely reach 700K despite 2.65Ghz speed of the Snapdragon 805, while its Exynos brother boosts no less than 1400K.
You may recall the Exynos is octa-core. and SD805 is only 4 cores. If we are supposed to think that's the reason, come explain 730K made with the Exynos 4412 of Galaxy Note 2 which runs @ 1.6 x 4 cores.
Exynos CPU's have 32K+32K L1 cache! That's why they perform surprisingly better. But be careful with all this big.LITTLE thing which is extremely mind confusing. I did not test a note III or a Galaxy Tab with Exynos 4+4 cpu's. They all have low freq set of cores which, if used, could seriously reduce the speed. But i guess engines like Stockfish will force the hi-freq cores. In Note-III case, that means 1.9 Ghz x 4 cores.
The L1-cache effect is obvious on Apple CPU's which have 1.3Ghz x 4 cores but 64K cache. They perform easily around 1300K.
Finally, stay away from Snapdragons if you use Droidfish and check for octa cores, capable of working together at peak speed and insist on 32K+32K L1 cache minimum per core !!!
Alternatively Mediatek octa core CPU's have 8 cores working in parallel at speeds up to 2.0Ghz. They should give 1200 Knps. MTK6592 for example is a concrete low-cost potential. Give it a try if you can. Mediatek will soon release stronger CPU's but they will be big.LITTLE too, unfortunately...
All i say above applies to chess only. Real life usage, internet, movies, games, social media etc is totally a different world and Snapdragon 805 is a monster there! Qualcomm does not and should not focus on delivering the best chess CPU for mobiles., for us, freaks and they are right in what they are doing for mass users market.
So according android central's review, the Z3+ has two of the SD810's A57 cores disabled entirely. Only certain apps (literary a select few apps like the camera or antutu) will enable the phone to use all four A57's.
(can't post links, new user:crying
I don't own a Z3+, but I'm interested in getting one. Just curious if the Z3+ still has those A57's disabled under marshmallow, otherwise I might get a Z5.
Would someone on marshmallow test their Z3+ for me? All you need to do is download and use Trepn Profiler from the play store (Qualcomm's app, sorry can't post links).
According android central the A57's are cpu5, cpu6, cpu7 and cpu8.
According to the stats 5,6,8 were running on 0
Sent from my E6533 using XDA-Developers mobile app
Thanks for checking!
Ok so 3 of them were disabled, maybe that's why MM runs cooler?
If possible could you play a game or something, not a benchmark tool, and see how the cpu's behave?
In my case one was showing 0 (if I recall well, cpu7), rest were showing activity during ordinary tasks as browsing, moving through menus etc...
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
After some in depth investigation I can confirm that Z3+ won't use 3 of its A57 when it's gets hot specially during gaming. Only one core would work and that too at very low clock. After that no matter what you do it won't use the A57 cores. The cores would fire up only if you leave the device idele for some time. But as soon as you open Chrome the A57 cores would fire up but a low clock. This is happened in the lady update. Before that on MM even when the device was hot A57 cores would fire up. But after the last update Sony has done heavy change to the governor at the expense of performance. Even my 3 years old note 3 runs the game much faster after 5 mins into heavy gaming.
Sony should provide a performance mode option for people who need high performance during gaming irrespective of the heat. But the phone would never lag in the general applications. The only problem is that high level gaming and video editing impossible on this phone due to the A57 cores becoming inactive.
To be honest I think its actually making the battery last even less time, my z2 goes faster, cooler and much longer. Really really disappointed so far in this device and I dont know if they're going to bother improving on this.
I never used the device with mm because when I got it and added the 2nd user it gone into bootloop, so I had to flash it with the flashtool.
Sent from my E6533 using XDA-Developers mobile app
Just a quick one
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my E6533 using XDA-Developers mobile app
It's how the Big.little has been configured. How I see it though is that it's a 4 core with a boost function. Um sure the 810 Uses HMp
The most powerful use model of big.LITTLE architecture is?*heterogeneous multi-processing?*(HMP), which enables the use of all physical cores at the same time. Threads with high priority or computational intensity can in this case be allocated to the "big" cores while threads with less priority or less computational intensity, such as background tasks, can be performed by the "LITTLE" cores.[10][11] wiki
I also noticed that. 3 cores are dead under pressure of gaming thats creepy.. Im on the latest mm. Hope that they will do something with it because i can feel its getting slower in direct test with Galaxy alpha g850f (with exynos).. Do someone know if this is a feature of marshmallow only or it is included in lollipop
Sent from my E6553 using XDA-Developers mobile app
I just tested some gaming and security software scan, and all cores showed activity more or less..