Asus Crosshair V, Phenom II X6 1100T @ 4.7ghz
Your first mistake.
Asus Crosshair V, Phenom II X6 1100T @ 4.7ghz
BTW, just to test my theory I tried something with my gaming rig:
I've got a heavily-OC'd and liquid-cooled AMD/ATI setup (Asus Crosshair V, Phenom II X6 1100T @ 4.7ghz, 32GB DDR3-1600 RAM, 2x Radeon HD6970's OC'd, 2x240gb SSD's, 2x120GB SSD's, 1x240GB PCIe x4 SSD, RAID10 2TB 7200rpm HDD's, external-enclosure water cooling w 3 main 360mm radiators with 3push/3pull fans each, 2L refrigerated reservoir, 3 main pumps, 3 inline pumps, 3 inline 120mm radiators, 1/2" tubing, pure-copper heatsinks, etc - resulting in 3 separate H2O lines and temps that STAY at ambient unless pushed hard).
Just to see what difference the RAM makes on its own, I took out 3 of the 4 8GB sticks and ran PCMark. Then, I took out the last 8GB stick and tossed in 2x4GB DDR3-1600 RAM sticks (both are 4/8GB sticks are G.Skill Ripjaws X series, timings were set identically) and ran the same exact PCMark test with the ONLY difference being dual-channel versus single-channel.
423point difference overall, in favor of the dual-channel. There are likely many more variables at play, seeing as how I have a processor running 1.5ghz higher than normal, both GPU's running almost 200mhz faster than normal (with shader and memory speeds increased by ~400mhz and ~1ghz respectively), while NB/SB on the MoBo are liquid-cooled and overclocked, as is the HyperTransport-Link.
Clearly, dual-channel versus single-channel will have noticeable performance effects, particularly combined with a dual-core processor, assuming that the memory controller is optimized to take advantage of dual-channel DDR2, which is 4x effective memory bandwidth.
^^^ I like what this dudes saying
Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
Nerdgasm! Man I bet that PC smokes!!
Think of it as AMD (Qualcomm) vs Intel (TI/Samsung)... It's actually very similar...
My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted
No, it's cooled.
Your first mistake.
That's a good point (including your previous, much longer post), as I hadn't been thinking of it as quite so similar to X86 CPU's as that, but I suppose the architecture is going to be more or less the same at some base level.
I think what is important, regarding dual-channel vs single-channel RAM in these dual-core phones is knowing if the 1GB is a single 1GB DIMM, 2x 512MB DIMMs, 4x 256MB DIMMs, etc... From my understanding, the OMAP4460 should theoretically function most efficiently if the memory is set up as two 512MB DIMMs, while the Snapdragon (despite being dual-core) will function most efficiently if it is only 1 1GB DIMM. This is due to the integrated memory controllers and their inherent limitations, which is why the fastest RAM they're putting into phones runs at ~500mhz or so, although likely with relatively low CAS timings, at least as I understand it.
This has me wondering...
If these manufacturers have yet to "master" dual-core CPU's and dual-channel memory in these phones, especially when integrated together...what kind of mess are we gonna see when the quad-core processors come out in the not-so-distant future? Take the Tegra3, with it's 4+1 core design and its 12-core GPU, limited to a dual-channel memory controller. How are 5 CPU's and 12 GPU's (17 cores, essentially) going to work with 1-2GB of dual-channel memory?
I think the BIG LEAP we're going to see is not the quad-core CPU's, the multi-multi-core GPU's, or whatever... It will be when they are able to integrate a combination of a DDR3-type RAM running as many channels as there are cores, as well as dedicated GDDR5-type memory for the GPU('s).
It's almost as if they're all trying to one-up another so badly, they're putting stuff out on the market before the last product they put out is even optimized! Imagine that!
For the record, I am an AMD/ATI guy... so your comparison seems backwards to me
+1
I couldn't agree with you more!
But my comparison isn't off really. For gaming and tasks where one or two threads is being performed, it really does benefit from a pool. But for multi multi threads, like Video, Audio, Photoshop and CAD, 64bits is actually the better performer as resources are direct and constant instead of shared...
Which is why I say technically efficient, as opposed to gaming/cinema efficient...
My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted
I understand where you're coming from, I was just kidding around about your comparison I don't disagree with it at all, hence the winky-face
Hahaha, nice
Oh? How is that? The way I see it, I'm getting ~85-90% of the performance of an i7-980x/990x, but for $230 instead of $1100.... Sure, the Intel CPU's ARE BETTER, I won't argue that, but they are not 5x better AT ANYTHING, and the 10% difference in performance (avg) isn't worth 5x the money to me. Instead, I've been able to use the money to end up with an all-around superior system... If I'd gone with Intel, I wouldn't have dual-6970's, 32GB RAM (4x8GB), 4 2.5" SSD's, 4 2TB HDD's, 1 PCIe x4 SSD (OZC Revo 2), etc...
Unless you have a fat wallet and a fatter bank account, you have to compromise somewhere... I figured that AMD was a safer bet, as their next two CPU's will be able to use the same exact AM3+ MoBo I have, while Intel has released 3 different sockets in what, 1 and a half years??? That's insane, and I like being able to keep the same system but simply swap in a hotter proc instead of having to take the whole thing apart and buy a new MoBo too!
That's my opinion, but I really am curious as to why you disagree...
I was joking more than anything, I happen to work for Intel heh.
I've just always built my PC's with Intel chips because of their better performance when I was working with EVGA's mod team and since AMD's architecture was way behind 3-5 years ago it was only natural for us to use them. I ended up joining their forces four years ago (Wafer Manager) and so my fanboi habits continued.
Haha, thank you both! Big Ry, I simply try to be as "logical" or (can't think of the right word) while remaining unbiased, or as unbiased as possible, when comparing things like this. It's a result of my education being so heavily-focused on science (chemical engineering and psychopharmacology), but it has trickled into my "normal" life as well
I do have to say, though, at this point we are all pretty much simply "armchair benchmarking", as none of us has two completely-virgin phones (one Rezound/RAZR and one Nexus) in our hands with everything 100% "factory", to set side-by-side and have them both run through the same exact set of benchmarks at the same exact time (to rule out variables such as ambient temperature, humidity, elevation, tidal pattern, planetary alignment, and all of the other variables people will no doubt bring up :wink: ).
THEN, and ONLY THEN, will we as a community be able to say which is the "better phone" out of the box.
Well Schrodinger says that both the Gnex and rezound will exist in any and all possible states simultaneously until someone takes a measurement. Simple solution: don't benchmark the phones. Everyone wins!
Sent from my DROID2 using Tapatalk
Sounds Good! Lol
My Rezound Rocks the Red n Black... Get over it... Now to get this thing rooted