*** iPhone 5 - Revealed! ***

King Damager said:
I really hope rather than trying to improve the Megapix rating of the camera, they focus on software/image stabilisation, lens quality etc... instead. I don't need more than 8mpx on my Phone. Just give me one of the Carl Zeiss Lenses in the Sony phones please xD

kd
Click to expand...

Would love it if they came out today and trumped Nokia by having optical image stabilisation on iPhone 5 :cool: (clearly not going to happen)
 
Robbo said:
The camera on the One X and One S is excellent. Really, really good.
Click to expand...

Skillmister said:
The One has a brilliant camera ;)
Click to expand...

For the average consumer, my personal opinion is that the iPhone edges it (just) because my friend and I were comparing the two and the One X had more nifty features, but we both found them to be unrefined. For standard autofocused stills, the iphone was clerer, but in poor lighting the One X was a little better

Robbo said:
Yep (allegedly, of course).
Click to expand...

Isn't that pointless on a phone though? Surely higher clocked dual core would be much better?
 
Cleeecooo said:
Isn't that pointless on a phone though? Surely higher clocked dual core would be much better?
Click to expand...

Not really, quad-core is a logical step forward in so much that it isn't about the power, it's more about the architecture using less power - making the battery life better.

The cores aren't all that important though, as evidenced by the S4 Snapdragon (dual-core 1.5Ghz) in Android phones more or less outperforming everything else. A quad-core one would just be even better.
 
Robbo said:
Not really, quad-core is a logical step forward in so much that it isn't about the power, it's more about the architecture using less power - making the battery life better.

The cores aren't all that important though, as evidenced by the S4 Snapdragon (dual-core 1.5Ghz) in Android phones more or less outperforming everything else. A quad-core one would just be even better.
Click to expand...

My point is that would the dual core version not be better at efficiency without being overpowered?
 
Cleeecooo said:
My point is that would the dual core version not be better at efficiency without being overpowered?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure, it might not affect the efficiency much... in which case it makes sense to have the quad-core.

It may even be more efficient (due to how it spreads the load)...!
 
Robbo said:
I'm not sure, it might not affect the efficiency much... in which case it makes sense to have the quad-core.

It may even be more efficient (due to how it spreads the load)...!
Click to expand...

I guess :p

Tri cores have always seemed a good idea to me, Dual core when you need the power, 3rd core just for idle/small tasks, IIRfC this is the most efficient way (some time ago)
 
Cleeecooo said:
I guess :p

Tri cores have always seemed a good idea to me, Dual core when you need the power, 3rd core just for idle/small tasks, IIRfC this is the most efficient way (some time ago)
Click to expand...

That's basically the idea behind Nvidia's 4plus1 in the tegra chips. 4 high powered cores for the intensive work, and a smaller 5th core for light work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom