March 6, 2015

Intel says Android is not ready for quad-core devices

intel

We recently saw the first ever Android phone with ‘Intel Inside’ power, and it was launched in India a short time ago. Intel is one of the most famous companies in the world when talking about processors and computer hardware; they are the leaders in the field, and they recently entered the world of smartphones to compete with other companies like Qualcomm, Nvidia, Samsung, Texas Instrument etc.. Every company loves criticizing their competitors (no, we don’t, of course!), and Intel also spilled some of the beans about theirs as Mike Bell, GM of Intel’s Mobile and Communications Group, said:

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.

What it seems he’s actually trying to say is that Android isn’t ready for quad-cores right now, and other companies should focus to improve the operating system multi-tasking support… instead of just focusing on the hardware. For example: even there are six cores, if the software isn’t properly optimized and well-managed with it, there’s merely no advantage.

When Intel will launch quad-core processors, I think that will be the right time for Android to have quad cores. The market is very strong right now, and what the customer believes is “more cores, more speed” – Do you think that’s right? tell us about it in the comment box below.

Source: Inquirer



Related Posts

55 Comments

  1. Brent Stewart
    Reply

    Like most stuff Google related I talk about and no one really listens is that I’ve been saying for some time now. If anyone here has followed anything I say on Google+ you’ll already know I’m no fan of Apple. But at the time the single core iPhone 3GS was out performing dual core Android devices. The problem is not so much the SoCs as Intel is stating. But optimization at the very core levels of Android OS itself. It took quad core processors to get Android even close to iOS performance. The problem isn’t the hardware, it’s the software. But if I understand correctly, any attempt to fix it at this point would require gutting and rewriting some pretty core stuff that could result in a lot of broken apps – a backlash Google is not wanting to risk.

    • Joe Malo
      Reply

      I disagree, iOS “outperforms” Android because it is simplistic in comparison. The 3gs didn’t multi-task, have widgets, live wallpapers, etc. If Android had only pages of Icons with no multitasking, Notification shade, etc, it would have been just as fast.

    • symbolset
      Reply

      Unlike other operating systems, in Linux the scheduler is a module. I believe you have your choice of at least 4 at compile time, and each have a variety of options for optimization. If you like, you can write your own. One kernel geek did it solo in a weekend, and it was so good it became default soon after.

      If you’re developing a bizzare new chipset that breaks all the rules, you can customize the scheduler and kernel to support utterly bizzare things like the Tegra 3 5th core – an asymmetric half-speed “companion core” so alien to Intel’s world view they may never get over it. Changing the scheduler is so common that it has a regular validation process. It is not that big of a deal.

      In short, if you make an Android device then just like a vast array of other things, this is entirely up to you. That makes the claim not just implausible, but completely impossible. It is simply not true. It is provably untrue. I expect a retraction or “explanation” vetted by engineering staff because Intel has a reputation for flat truthfulness to uphold. They are too proud to lie.

      I’m sure this wasn’t what he meant to say. The words came out wrong or he was misquoted. It happens.

      • symbolset
        Reply

        Maybe he meant to say that they have some confidential scheduling schizzle that is the Bees Knees, but aren’t ready to share it. That would do it.

    • ThomasD
      Reply

      Thats true. The Dalvik VM of android is young and immature. And alot of performance is lost. Some guys managed to boost performance of android 4.0 by no less then 100%, and as far as I know they submitted their work to TeamHackSung who are behind CyanogenMod. Hopefully we’ll soon see some amazingly effective custom roms. :-)

  2. anywherehome
    Reply

    Dear Intel….your thoughts are ridiculous…..just continue your bribing PC manufactures (to suppress AMD) but don’t mess with mobiles….you are poor there ;)
    https://sites.google com/site/corpsins/

  3. Gerhard Peters
    Reply

    Intel has and once the customer believe that more processor is better. Yes to a degree it is but I can still do my work just fine with a 2 year old PC. Perhaps on a benchmark test it would not do the same as a new processor but for every day use it does not matter. The amount of memory is more import then anything else. But it goes without saying that a Pentium 3 computer would not be up to task today. So yes a CPU plays a role but it is not everything.

    I can see that the same logic will be true for mobile phone. Perhaps I will be wrong.

  4. symbolset
    Reply

    Android is a flavor of Linux. Linux has supported multiple processor cores since the late 1990’s and has plenty of time to refine it to the point where it’s the preferred platform (91%!) for supercomputing the world over. Obviously all the SOC manufacturers making systems for Android have the source code and optimize it for their gear – developing their platforms at the transistor level to support the software and the software to support the hardware together in unison – just as the sensor and peripheral and other component manufacturers do.

    You’re just not going to get that in an Intel solution. Ever.

    • Arag0n
      Reply

      I remember to be in the mobile world congress in Barcelona some years ago talking with a Qualcomm guy and he told me that Android was unable to use more than 1 core. Of course it was with Android 2.1 by then, but still, just because it has linux under the hood doesn’t mean it has the same scheduler.

      • symbolset
        Reply

        I’ve made enough fun of this guy. I might want to work for him someday.

  5. ThomasD
    Reply

    Software is not developed for hardware that doesn’t exist. What I mean is that android may not be optimized for quad core, but thats because quadcore was only recently become available. Now we have quadcore phones, now developers will begin coding and optimizing for it. Again, developers (not working with the hardware company) don’t develope software for a device that doesn’t exist. So all in all the Intel statement is bull

POST A COMMENT.

Hide
Latest News