CTIA snooping is in full swing today, as the HTC EVO 3D has seen its major specs divulged courtesy of a document within the exhibition halls of the show. True to our initial scoop and subsequent spec leak, we’re looking at a 3D-capable successor to the EVO 4G, this one rocking a 1.2GHz dual-core processor (Qualcomm’s MSM8660), a 4.3-inch qHD ( 960 x 540) display, dual 5 megapixel cameras around back, and the sweet, sweet promise of 1080p video playback. That’s constrained to 720p for viewing 3D content, but there’s no denying this new Sprint smartphone’s shaping up to be yet another multimedia powerhouse. Specs of the EVO View tablet have also been snapped, marking it as indeed a Sprint rebadge of HTC’s 1.5GHz, 7-inch Flyer slate. Look for both to become official at Sprint’s presser later this week.
Remember how Intel got smacked in the face with a $1.45 billion fine in the EU for shadily suffocating AMD into submission? Today, New York’s Attorney General has brought the fight to the US. This is going to get messy.
From the looks of it, this case will mirror the European Commission’s case almost exactly:
“Rather than compete fairly, Intel used bribery and coercion to maintain a stranglehold on the market,” Mr. Cuomo said in a statement. “Intel’s actions not only unfairly restricted potential competitors, but also hurt average consumers who were robbed of better products and lower prices.”
The AG even echoes some of the same cases used in the EC’s investigation, like the time Intel allegedly paid $130 million to keep IBM from selling AMD-based servers, which IBM execs considered as much a business deal as a way to avoid incurring the “wrath of Intel.” I too avoid the wrath of Intel, by using AMD chips. Bam! Also: no. But still, dick move!
Cuomo is working with the same body of evidence that the European Commission was, and probably quite a bit more—the FTC’s been breathing down their necks for over a year now—so I’d expect this to get pretty uncomfortable for Intel. And by uncomfortable, of course, I mean very, very expensive.
Though the Motorola Droid and Apple iPhone have different chassis, their high-octane engines are similar.
“The Droid makes a big leap in internal performance. Compared with its rather sluggish Android predecessors,” CNET Reviews said, citing the speed at which the Droid opens applications and menus and scrolls through lists and switches display screens.
“We’re really pumped to see all the industry excitement it’s created,” said Jeff Dougan, the OMAP 3 product marketing manager at Texas Instruments, which supplies the OMAP 3430 processor that powers the Droid. “This is the first handset that truly realizes the full potential of Android,” he said, referring to Google’s Android 2.0 operating system that runs on the Droid phone.
The TI processor, like the one in the iPhone, is based on an a new architecture called Cortex-A8 from U.K.-based chip design house ARM, whose wide variety of chips populate most of the world’s cell phones. Dougan says most smartphones currently on the market use an older, lower-performance ARM architecture than the Cortex-A8–with the exception of the Palm Pre, which opted for the newer TI chip. The Cortex-A8 provides a “two to three times performance boost” over older architectures, according to Dougan.
Max Baron, an analyst at Microprocessor Report, says the chips in the Droid and the iPhone (see not below) are so alike that differences are more dependent on the operating systems the two chips use and how successfully each phone maker optimizes the OS. “With chips that have near-similar specs, the optimum OS and the look-and-feel of the user interface may make or break the product,” Baron said.
“The caveat, however, is that even small differences in chips will surface and become important differentiators as soon as the market forces you to increase the screen size or add more pixels per screen, or execute more power-consuming applications,” he added.
The raw MHz ratings on the chips are slightly different. The processor in the iPhone 3GS–which is believed to be based on the Samsung S5PC100 processor–runs at 600MHz, according to most accounts. The Motorola Droid’s TI chip is rated at 550MHz though theoretically it can be run as fast as 600MHz, according to TI’s Dougan.
Both phones also use PowerVR graphics from Imagination Technologies–a company that both Apple and Intel have invested in, testifying to how hot its ultramobile graphics technology is. The PowerVR is renowned for its ability to process several million triangles-per-second–a key indicator of graphics chip performance–blowing away other phones and the previous version of the iPhone.
Other internal specifications are similar between the two phones, including memory capacity (either 16GB or 32GB) and communications chips that offer 3G, Wi-Fi, and Bluetooth connections.
So, internally the Droid is every bit the iPhone’s equal. And future versions of TI OMAP 3 chips that may appear in upcoming Droids will be backed by formidable ecosystems, according to Baron. “Investments in application software may lean more toward the TI components,” said Baron, given TI’s strong support of the entire chip ecosystem, including auxiliary chips and software development tools.
Note:: Apple’s and Samsung’s reluctance to release information about the processor used in the iPhone 3GS has made it difficult to determine if the chip is based on the Samsung S5PC100, according to the Microprocessor Report’s Baron. Many iPhone 3GS reviews and teardowns, however, state explicitly that the iPhone’s processor is essentially the Samsung S5PC100 processor.
Look out, Intel. Fujitsu just unleashed the fastest processor in the world, a startling 2.5 times quicker than Intel’s speediest chip. Supercomputer users will love “Venus,” the eight core processor that’s capable of 128 billion computations per second.
What all those numbers mean? While its 45-nanometer architecture doesn’t pack its components together as tightly as Intel’s latest 32-nanometer configuration, it accomplishes that world-record blistering speed while sipping one third the power of Intel’s flagship chip.
Alas, this monster processor is not for you and me — it’s destined for enormously expensive supercomputers doing high-end research, and won’t see practical application for “several years.” But its power and design gives us a sneak preview into what’s possible, and hints at Intel’s next move to answer Fujitsu’s slam-dunk.
Just when you though you’d had your fill of insanely detailed benchmarks of processors you may or may not have ever heard of, AMD’s new Phenom II X4 955 and 945 hit the scene to get those overclockers all in a tizzy. The top of the line is the 955 “Black Edition” at 3.2GHz, while the 945 plays with a petty 3GHz. And the verdict? They’re clearly AMD’s fastest so far, but that might not be fast enough. AMD offers great value, but only really matches Intel’s Core 2 offerings on performance — Core i7 is still out in front. There is the fact that Phenom II offers a nice upgrade path for certain people who already do the AMD thing and are looking to upgrade, along with “enthusiasts” who are “enthused” by easy-access overclocking, but overall it looks like AMD is still playing catch-up with Intel.
While Gateway‘s been on the laptop bandwagon of late, it’s good to see the company doing its thang on the desktop front, too. Kicking things off is the bargain-priced LX6810-01, which houses 8GB of RAM, NVIDIA graphics, a built-in TV tuner and a $799.99 price tag. The even more affordable DX4200-11 gets going at just $609.99 and features an AMD quad-core CPU, ATI Radeon graphics, 6GB of RAM and a 750GB hard drive. Stepping things up quite significantly is the FX6800-09, which sports a Core i7 CPU and a $1,649.99 sticker. Rounding out the bunch is the $1,299.99 FX6800-11 and the currently unpriced entry-level FX6800-01e. If any of these caught your fancy, head on past the break for a look at the full release.
Just a month after AMD launched its Phenom II CPUs and Dragon desktop platform, the chip maker is hitting back with five new processors in the quickly expanding line. The newcomers include the planet’s first 45nm triple-core CPU and three more quad-core siblings, all of which can operate in either AM2+ or AM3 sockets. As for performance? We hope your expectations haven’t been set too high, as the chips were generally found to be just “a logical extension of [the company’s] piecemeal upgrade plan and a fill in [the] gap to its lineup.” Reviewers across the web were generally pleased but underwhelmed by test results, with HotHardware noting that “overall, Intel still has the performance edge clock-for-clock and core-for-core.” In fairness, these chips were found to be good for overclocking, and for the right price, we could certainly see a few gamers giving them a go. For the full spill, dive on into the deep, intricate reviews below.