Editorial

Windows Phone needs dual-core processors, and soon

When I browse the comments here on the Neowin front-page, I see a lot people saying, for various reasons, that Windows Phone doesn’t need dual-core processors; that the platform is fine without devices powered by multiple-cores. Well, this simply isn’t true, for a number of reasons.

I acknowledge the fact that in all cases, a Windows Phone powered by a single-core Qualcomm chipset such as the MSM 8255 or QSD 8350 is perfectly fine to use. It's smooth, fluid and everything is very responsive, leaving you with a very positive outlook on the performance of the platform. Playing games is lag-free, browsing the web is fast and navigating the UI on just a single-core is a smooth as butter.

However, this isn’t a reason for preventing dual-core processors from entering the Windows Phone market. If all developers of technology stuck with the “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it” mentality, nothing would ever advance and we would still be stuck with horrible Windows 95 interfaces and 256 kB of RAM. Simply put: Windows Phone needs to adapt to modern developments in technology.

The potential packed into a dual-core processor is quite amazing for mobile devices, and it honestly doesn’t matter that single-cores are fine because anything more powerful is setting up the platform for the future. When I go to a store to buy a new mobile phone, I want to make sure that during my two-year contract my phone isn’t going to become massively out-dated, and having the most powerful chipset available in my device is certainly going to help get rid of this feeling.

Put it this way. If I bought a HTC Titan, Samsung Focus S or Nokia Lumia 800 today, I would be on contract and stuck with this single-core device until November 2013. In that time, not only will Windows Phone 8 be released and on the market for a year, but Qualcomm’s quad-core Snapdragon S4 processors will be filtering into the market in mid-2012, a full year before I can give up my Titan. Along with developments from Qualcomm, NVIDIA will have released two new chipsets according to their roadmap: Kal-El (~3x the speed of the dual-core Tegra 2 chipsets) and Wayne, which will allegedly deliver 10x the performance of Tegra 2.

So by mid-2012, my Titan, Focus S or Lumia 800 will be outmatched by computing power by around 4x, and then by the end of my contract by more than 10x. Who knows what sort of gaming will be possible with more than 10x the power; imagine what sort of tasks your Windows Phone could do with that sort of power properly harnessed.

Now of course any phone you buy today will be out-dated by the time 2013 comes around. However, if you decided to buy a Samsung Galaxy S II or iPhone 4S, by the time you’re reaching the end of your contract you will be only one or two technologies behind. The Titan is possibly three technologies behind at this stage and begging for an upgrade to Wayne or the next-gen Qualcomm.

Oh wait, I forgot. If I had the Titan, no doubt Windows Phone wouldn’t be ready to adopt the Wayne or (yet-to-be-mentioned) S5 Qualcomm chipsets. It’ll most likely just be adopting the S4 quad-cores from Qualcomm, a year too late. Playing console-quality games wouldn’t possible like it would with my 2013, Wayne-powered Android device. I would still be stuck with out-dated technology and this cycle would continue.

Microsoft needs to break out of the pattern now of waiting more than a year to allow manufacturers to adopt new technologies. By 2013 your HTC Titan would look like a joke much like the operating system that failed to push new hardware out quick enough. If Microsoft had allowed dual-cores now, by the time quad-cores and beyond technology had started filtering through the market, dual-core devices would still be holding up and you wouldn’t be feeling massive buyer’s remorse.

Even worse, it looks like dual-core support will be added to Windows Phone after NVIDIA, Qualcomm and other companies start producing their next-gen quad-core technology. That’s even more of a joke.

For those of you worrying about dual-cores sucking battery and causing your phone to die earlier this is a common misconception and only comes about due to poor optimization on the part of software. Windows Phone could actually power down one core while not in use, leaving the phone with an effective single-core for texting and using the main UI. Then, where needed such as gaming, it can ramp up the second core and utilize both for amazing performance.

Having a dual-core doesn’t have to mean sacrificing battery, and there is even a possibility that by not using a core when it’s not needed you will use less battery than a comparable single-core as the thermal design power (TDP) of both chips will be very similar. As you’re only using half the chip, you’ll theoretically consume half the power as outlined in the TDP.

But it isn’t just with actual performance that Microsoft needs to adopt dual-cores soon, it’s for its overall image. When a consumer goes into a store and they see the top-of-the-line HTC Titan and Focus S sitting next to the Samsung Galaxy S II and (soon-to-be-released) HTC Rezound, they likely won’t care what OS is on the device, how intricately it operates or the annoyances with the platform. They’ll be looking at numbers and first impressions.

Now both the Titan and Galaxy S II and very smooth to use (and before you start whinging the Galaxy S II lags, it doesn’t in my experiences using one). Both appear to be able to do basic tasks, browse the web, go on Facebook and play games. They’re also both the same price ($200) on a contract. The consumer goes to the numbers.

HTC Titan: 1.5 GHz processor. Samsung Galaxy S II: 1.2 GHz dual-core processor. iPhone 4S: dual-core A5 processor. HTC Rezound: 1.5 GHz dual-core processor. Said consumer is now wondering why the Titan doesn’t have a dual-core processor. “Dual-core sounds fancy and fast. Look, there’s even one in the new iPhone!” It’s this sort of reaction that consumers are having.

A Windows Phone without a dual-core processor is a massive marketing disadvantage. Nokia can’t market that they have the fastest processor in their Lumia 800, because they don’t; not even by a long shot. Whereas the HTC Rezound can come out and say that it does, because the 1.5 GHz dual-core is, even by numbers, blasting past the Lumia.

So not only is any Windows Phone outdated as soon as you buy it, it’s not going to hold up in the long run, an appropriate upgrade will not be available once the contract is over and it loses out on a massive marketing front. Microsoft needs to get their act together and allow Windows Phones with faster processors, dual-core or even quad-core CPUs, as soon as they can to avoid being left behind.

If not, I’ll be enjoying my quad-core Android device next year while I laugh at Microsoft still waiting to adopt dual-cores with Windows Phone “Apollo”.

Images courtesy of Pocket-Lint, AT&T

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Motorola tablet-like "Corvair" TV controller revealed

Next Story

Nintendo shows Wii touch screen accessory in new patent filing

162 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Eff that, Mr. Tim Schiesser.

The Windows Phone Platform needs Unicorns in the SoC, then they can advertise that they're the only platform with Unicorns!!!!

But, I get where you're going with this. With every dual core Android phone marketing themselves as 'superphones', many people don't want less than super.

And at the same time, there's something to be said for consistency across the platform.
Imagine taking one of those old single core 800Mhz android sets and installing ICS on it.

Yeah, that wouldn't be laggy at all, which is why the handset manufacturer says no ICS for that!

I'm absolutely LOVING the pathetic defensiveness of WP7 fanboys here. It's even more funny than I imagined it would be when I read the article. Face it, idiots: If the new iPhone or top of the line Android phone came out with these specs, you would all be laughing your asses off at it. But since it's your beloved WP7, suddenly specs don't matter. The hardware for WP7 is generations behind, yet they are still charging about the same price. There's really no excusing that, but you're all defending it vehemently. Thanks for the laugh. I'm sure there will be many more in this topic.

JPXi said,
I'm absolutely LOVING the pathetic defensiveness of WP7 fanboys here. It's even more funny than I imagined it would be when I read the article. Face it, idiots: If the new iPhone or top of the line Android phone came out with these specs, you would all be laughing your asses off at it. But since it's your beloved WP7, suddenly specs don't matter. The hardware for WP7 is generations behind, yet they are still charging about the same price. There's really no excusing that, but you're all defending it vehemently. Thanks for the laugh. I'm sure there will be many more in this topic.

No, thank you and the author for the laugh. Specs matter is a great way to discern idiots from those that think and those that have actually used the OS.
-Zomg sent from my Omnia 7 single core, how does it even run a browser, its magic!

It's not the dog in the fight that matters - it's the fight in the dog.
Wp7's got more than enough to fight!

It's obvious Android needs all the steroids in the world to PERFORM !
Wp7's got the real thing that matters.

Osiris said,

No, thank you and the author for the laugh. Specs matter is a great way to discern idiots from those that think and those that have actually used the OS.
-Zomg sent from my Omnia 7 single core, how does it even run a browser, its magic!


Ridiculous. Specs aren't everything, but they allow more possibilities. Try and run Crysis on a GeForce 256 and tell me how that works. "Good drivers" will never get it to run. Fact is that WP7 hardware is generations behind everyone else. If you don't think that's going to effect what software is available for it compared to more powerful devices, you're dreaming.

It's simply absurd that MS, at a whopping 2% marketshare, would come out with such underpowered devices and try and compete with that.

have dual core windows phone now is like living alone and owning 2 cars....

by the time the OS needs multithreading in applications, new phones will be built to specifications.

<sigh> AGAIN, with the dual core issue? I am so sick of you speeds & feeds people. I use to play that game, and it's now almost pointless. I use to chase after the fastest processor, the most high-end video card, blah blah blah. At this point in the tech meme I treat almost everyone who resorts to <name your rationalization for Jonesing> as lacking credibility. The very fact that the devices are outdated so quickly is perfectly reason enough NOT to go chasing after the latest & greatest. Anyone stuck on hardware as the keystone for their choices is simply lazy and unintelligent about the choices. I want an excellent user experience. If I can get that without having to pay for top of the line hardware, then I feel I've got the best value. As it is, my Focus still outperforms just about everyone who comes at me with a competing device. And it's not because the hardware is all that spectacular. It's the entire package: nice looking hardware, great screen, wonderful battery life, and what I believe is easily the most intelligent, smoothest and attractive OS for smartphone. I can do more of the things I need/love to do on it much better than other devices or platforms. THAT'S value. BTW, if it's true that Windows 8 and WP8 will essentially be the same thing, then no doubt support for multiple cores will be there.

Man, you're an idiot. If I wanted the ****ty battery life of a dual core system, I'd buy an Android.

"They'll be looking at numbers and first impressions"...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA, god that was a good laugh ***wipes the tears away***

Average consumers don't give two sh**s about numbers, 2 cores, 50 cores, 11PB of RAM is irrelevant, plain and simple.

Wow this is one of the best WP 7 articles I have seen!

I just can't agree more with this article, it is the very hard truth which as you can read in the comments isn't accepted by the fanboys! Why because it is to painfull! Most people are even missing the whole point of the article, it doesn't go about cores it goes about the fact that the hardware specs of the WP are too far behind of the modern hardware specs. Mango hardware is as if you buy a Pentium 4 as a high end device and paying the price of a i7 2600K!!!

And after WP8 they will probably make up for the run behind in hardware specs what means that your very expensive phones can be thrown away after just one year because they are to far behind! While you have still one year to go with your subscription! You will feel as you have a dumb phone when 2013 starts!!!

While mango feels like windows phone RTM, comming out of beta, the hardware didn't got a make over. Most people are very dissapointed with me about this!!! Nokia was the biggest dissapointment of all!

Look at the Nokia Lumia 800, they ask 480 euro for that device! Take the HTC Radar they ask 310 euro for it. Look at the LG e900 Optimus 7 they ask 170 for it.

You pay 2x LG for the radar and what do you get? same cpu speed slightly improved gpu and the half of the memory 16GB vs 8 GB and pay double!!!! Compare the Lumia with the LG and don't know a reason why anyone would buy it!!! Only if you have tomuch money in your pockets! And that for a phone you can throw away after just one year!!!!!!

I love mango but I am very dissapointed in its hardware and this article really hits the nail! I can only hope it's not on the coffin of WP!

It's a bit of a silly article really. It's like saying a PC needs a higher clocked processor to survive and sell. Only the tech savvy people will care about specs, not the average buyer. Example, ask the average iPhone owner how many cores are in their smartphone? Do you think 80% would have a clue? of course not!!!!

I'm also not sure where you going with the whole having a phone for 2 years thing. I mean all hardware improves in 2 years, not just the processor, so at the end of it your going to be with a outdated phone regardless.

Average joe doesnt care about specs - they want a good experience. This is why they opt for Apple iPhone. This is why Windows Mobile decided to make their next OS (WP7) like it is today - a great experience first; then specs second. Only people who know what a 'Neowin' is will bother to argue over specs and software implementation of cpu optimization.

Yes and my server needs quadcores to fileserve...my desktop cant run office 2010 without 8 cores!!

Cores cores cores!!!

The argument that you would be stuck with a single core device is irrelevant and next year your iphone is getting updated anyway and you're device is obsolete once more, plus by 2013 youre looking at quad core chips so even your dual core bulky ass android device which you're still waiting for the latest update for (if it even gets one) is still only on dual cores.

WP needs dual cores for 1 reason and 1 reason only and that would be for the marketing perspective and if there is a second reason it would be to stop flame-trolling editorials like this. The end.

Good article, well it's true that Windows Phone is very fast and everything but it's also true that the core of the hardware it uses is outdated, and the worse of all is that we pay for this old hardware what people from other platforms pay for the latest hardware.

I'm considering to buy the Focus S but only if the price for an unlocked device is really good, otherwise I would wait for the next generation of Windows Phone that's the current generation of Androids and iPhone

I do not care about the number of CPUs in my phone. I however would not mind a quad core PowerVR SGX Series 6 GPU in my phone.

Most of the devices big on harware nowadays are so because they need to make up for what the OS does not handle well. If you have never objectively used or even played with a WP7 device like the Lumia 800 you have no justifyable reason to post your drivel here. I come from Android, will for personal reasons never own an iPhone and have had some serious recent experience with the Lumia 800.. I think it's an awsome phone. In all honesty I eventually settled on the Nokia N9, but that was for practical reasons more then a dislike of the Lumia..

IIt's just funny to read the comments from those here who have their head in the sand or up Apples behind. My question to all those remains: Show me real world proof that this generation of OS is any faster by having a dusl core cpu to run on. Show me proof that the UI is more responsive and the overall user experiance benefits from more then 512 MB

I love reading through all of the Windows Phone apologists and defenders....The devices have ANCIENT specs, end of. Most people don't want to pay for last years tech. And its not just the CPU either, they also have low resolutions, old GPU's (Adreno 205 that was used in Androids over one year ago ), only 512MB RAM etc....

Who cares how smooth the UI is, what happens next year when all Windows Phones are dual core and the current devices are going to be obsolete.

Cash you continue to amaze me and as well as others on your ability to not really know what you are talking about.

Let me put something in another perspective for you.

What is more of an engineering feat? More horsepower per liter or more liters for horsepower?

WP is optimized to take advantage of the Single Core Processor that it runs. It is not lazy engineering it is intelligent engineering. Dual Cores will come for WP but until then find me reviews where they said the phone is lacking in speed? It takes bettery engineering to make an OS efficient at less processing power. It also lets it take upgrades for a longer shelf life. iPhone is an example of this and WP is another. Android is not optimized as many have stated here. It does not utilize dual cores and it does not utilize higher resolution screens well at this moment either. The Nexus Prime is supposed to be the pinnacle of the Android devices? Lag, lag and more lag. Optimization would benefit them much greater than more GHZ. ICS well that remains to be seen.

512MB pretty nice to be so fast and efficient with that right? So what has your 1GB done for Android so far? 512MB WP and 512MB for iPhone 4S. The iPhone 4S wiped the floor with Android did it not recently?

I love my Android Devices and the least laggy of the Android devices I have is the HTC EVO 4G. That's right the out dated phone is the least laggy in comparison to my newer Android phones.

JPXi - WP fanboys are pathetic? Then why are you here posting this and not writing better code to use the other CORE your Android device does not know how to use?

WP users and reviewers are not saying it is "just fast enough" they are just saying it is FAST overall. WP 7.5 was a large update that went very smoothly worldwide. MS is learning from Androids fragmented mistakes as well as their own from the previous Windows Mobile failures.

WP fanboys are pathetic. If WP7 had actually come out with up to date hardware, and the new iPhone or top of the line Android phone came out with what the specs WP7 has, they would all be laughing at them like "LOLOLOL!!!11 Is this for real?" and " 3 years ago called, they want their phone hardware back!!". But since it's their beloved WP7, it's totally "good enough" and "WP7 is fast enough anyway" and every other pathetic excuse they can come up with. Hypocrites.

Myabe for marketing you have a point but really your whole argument comes down to better gaming support. Not really the point of a phone though is it. Anyway, the basic games that sell best on phones such as Angry birds wont need dual core.
If Android is better off with dual cores then I dont need dual cores. I have a Samsung Galaxy S and HTC Mozart and all I can say is my Windows phone doesnt make me force close almost every program, almost every time I use it. Now maybe I need a newer Android phone with dual core to solve that but thats not something I am willing to try. Android is (for now) a badly implemented os and best and dual core isn;t about to fix that.

wp needs dual core, 4cores, LTE, 4G...basically they need things that iOS and android dont have to stand out of the comptt so that people take notice....as of know, only a few know little or anything about wp...this all changes once they are ahead of the curve with there products

WP7 does not need dual cores.. WP8 on the other hand will probably be the best implementation of dual cores in a phone.

Let's see.. Where is the proof today dual core phones outperform single core phones in everyday use .. Where is it? Oh yeah.. there is none..

The only advantage todays phones have from dual cores is that sloppy or badly optimized code gets blanketed by more cpu power. Something a better job by the programmers could achive just as well, maybe even better.

So either put up or shut up. show the proof (and I am not talking raw benchmark specs here) and I'll be a believer.. Sofar there is _NO_ evidence real world use of dualcore phones is exceedingly better then single cores. In fact modern single cores running a properly optimized OS outperform dual cores in reallife user experience.

Just for a few hours pop your head out of the sand and ask normal people around you, not the to the big companies limited sample group of overall unintersting target audiences you find in these forums, to try either.. you'll be surprised what they are gonna tell you..

...

Edited by paulheu, Nov 6 2011, 5:44pm :

You may disagree and that is your right but, you must have a true argument aside from the fact that in 2013 single core is gonna be outdated and the fact that games will run better in a multiple core processor. Its the name of the beast in tech world. Everything as you know it will be completely outdated in two more years, with a few exceptions.

With all due respect, If you want to sound less like a troll you will back up your statement here with some true raw data and benchmarks. I honestly didn't see Android running smooth on most phones till this year. Of course there is a need to look to the future and not get stagnant in the present or the past but your argument about windows 95 is quiet ridiculous. WP7 has been out for little over a year and now you're comparing it with windows 95. Do you remember what the big complaint about Windows Vista was?? if you don't, it was Spec requirements. People couldn't stop complaining because you needed so much more ram and processing power. Why? Because no OEM wants to spend so much money making faster hardware while racing end user costs at the store. In this case, WP7 is playing it safe as the new guy on the block.

Yes there should be phones with more cores, better cameras, longer lasting battery, and larger memory. But! all these components need to come together seamlessly in one device. Your example of shutting on and off a core is a software thing is just a patch for the true problem. More cores call for more battery capacity and simply having software that resolves the battery problem is just a work around more than a solution. This is the reason why you need data to show your point. You must show battery consumption data in order to convince the reader about what you're saying here. I am sure you omitted this info because it would prove you wrong. As an example let's look at the new phones with 1080P video capabilities. Look at the data and you'll see that most of them use about half of their battery life on just 5 minutes of 1080p video recording. I am sorry but that is ridiculous and obviously a marketing gimmick. Who wants to drain their phone battery for the day just to record a few minutes of recording? Even though every consumer wants a better camera, they would not pick a phone that runs out of battery the minute they start using it. At this moment in phone technology newer cameras as well as multiple core processors are technologies that have been improved without considering battery technology.

The masses don't care about processors as much as you do. They are more impressed with better screens, overall design, cameras, keyboards and brand. Right now the most annoying issue is running out of battery. Most people much rather have a smart phone that only records on 720 with a battery that lasted them for a week than buying one that did exactly the opposite. This is the same for multiple processors. I do not want software patching the gap between better cameras/processors and crappy batteries. I want a phone that brings all technologies together instead of having the geek at the store pointing at a phone telling me “look at this phone it's got a dual core processor and a 1080p video recording” that's what they all do until you inquire about battery consumption.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/1...e-4-galaxy-s-ii-nokia-n8-a/

wow... troll post lol. whilst you may think this is true, the great thing here is that Microsoft is building software that can truly take advantage of a single core, Apollo included. you arent going to see a massive degradation, because from the beginning its been planned to optimize this software for older devices.

That demo of the galaxy nexus in hong kong proved to me how badly android takes advantage of even a dual core. android 4 was laggy ON STAGE, and is supposed to be the future. good luck with that. you will need a quad core for android 5, that is certain

Yea.. troll post. Thank you for admitting before you post.

Btw, aren't you bashing your own fellow member? At the editorial of your own online blog? How are we going to take serious about neowin?

Well.. you may be 20 years old kid, but you are in News Editor group. I would think twice before I post a comment.

Smartphones today ( except Androids which are used by the majority of users as a phone and text machine) are not different from pcs. No one buys today a single core PC even if Windows/OSX/Linux run just fine on them. Smartphones OS, can benefit from muli-core cpus if the OS is well optimized (iPhone 4s running rings in performance around the best of Androids and WP7s).

alexalex said,
Smartphones today ( except Androids which are used by the majority of users as a phone and text machine) are not different from pcs. No one buys today a single core PC even if Windows/OSX/Linux run just fine on them. Smartphones OS, can benefit from muli-core cpus if the OS is well optimized (iPhone 4s running rings in performance around the best of Androids and WP7s).

Many young people today have their smartphone as their only computer. So it makes sense for them to have beastly hardware.

alexalex said,
Smartphones OS, can benefit from muli-core cpus if the OS is well optimized (iPhone 4s running rings in performance around the best of Androids and WP7s).

Where's the proof.. don't talk BS when you cannot back it up..

I think that once they support dual core, they'll make a big jump and support something like up-to 16 cores as well.

Meph said,
I think that once they support dual core, they'll make a big jump and support something like up-to 16 cores as well.

technology will be the death of us someday.

Just because it is said that the OS doesn't need it for working properly and fluent, It doesn't mean double core won't or doesn't need to come.

We all know, WP7 fans and haters, that the system will evolve into something that demands more resources, and in any case double core, as someone said above, will empower more demanding applications.

But saying that actually it doesn't need it is not just only true, but objetive and testable. Out of discussion, because they talk about NOW. In future, of course, and yeah maybe immediate future.

Also, as people said above, dual core or not, iPhone sold and sell and will sell very well, what phone makers have to focus (and Microsoft) is into design better phones, and battery life, however they want. Lumia 800 will be bestseller in many countries (as already is in France) because of it design, way much better than any other Windows Phone (I've to say my Omnia 7 is the second best designed phone, not because it is mine).

So I see the article more like a provocation and a way to fish comments than anything.

The Question is not whether it will or will not come. The question is whether _NOW_ the pros of dual core justify the cons.. The answer in November 2011 syill is NO.

Right now all DUal core does is patch badly written code and evn that is marginal since the code has no idea it has dual cores to play with. An t=when the code is the core of the OS that is kindof like killing the whole point.

In a year or two Dual cores will be comon place if only because they will be at a pricepoint where singles cores are now.. If there's one thing that drives hardware advancement it's cost.

In a year WP8 will zoom along on dual core phones and the whole issue will be moot.. and Android will still be playing catchup in technology.. I still believe the whole smartphonelandscape will look quite different in a year..

While there are some semi-good points, just the fact that the author wants to play console quality games on a fing phone makes everything else he says irrelevant.

It is in NO WAY possible to make "serious" gaming on a PHONE pleasant due to catastrophic controls where half the time you don't see half the screen and the other half you struggle to hit the correct control.

markizvonschnitzel said,
While there are some semi-good points, just the fact that the author wants to play console quality games on a fing phone makes everything else he says irrelevant.

It is in NO WAY possible to make "serious" gaming on a PHONE pleasant due to catastrophic controls where half the time you don't see half the screen and the other half you struggle to hit the correct control.

That's why simple games like Angry Birds and racing games that utilize the gyroscope are popular on smartphones.

Ok, I think this is just not a good article, I mean, why would you need a dual core processor in this platform if everything runs smooth on a single-core. Doing this you save people money by making the phones dirty cheap for consumers and you preserve mad battery. Just check how poor battery is on the latest Android phones! And what about the iPhone 3GS, that's a two years old phone and ATT said that it has a terrific demand RIGHT NOW IN 2011 almost 2012 how about that! and that's not even a 1GHz processor phone, which means that the majority of the people don't care about your article, in other ways you are hurting Microsoft and the latest Windows phone by making believe people what you just said and what would happen to them with their two year contract which is not true.

I think the article has validity but fails on the premise that everyone in the world cares about the hardware specs. Ppl (especially teens) go in a shop pick the prettiest phone or get a phone like what there mates have got, as long as it looks good to them and have the wow factor thats all there bothered about. or for the older generation similar premise but theyll want know if things are easy to use and maybe how good the camera is etc, but the main problem is with the ppl working in the phone shops when asked for a comparison and theyll prolly push em to an android handset or iphone. also most ppl do only use it for simple functions, also the simpler games sell alot better than complex games where it takes hours to complete, take angry birds you dont need a dual core for that. decent sound for there music and ease of use.

The techie ppl who read this site and other hardware review sites may want a dual core phone just cus its dual core, but we guys are of a small minority compared to the rest of the world. Every piece of tech is considered outdated after about 6 months (usual timeframe for something to come out to beat something previous). My last computer was an athlon 64 3800xp which lasted me 5 years, only thing i upgraded was my gfx card. sure i couldnt run everything at max rez but could always play games even crysis low rez but still looked alright. My point - who gives a shiz, as long as it works.

i don't think any "phone" needs a quad core, these aren't computers people. your are not using photoshop or playing high tech games. it's getting to a point where im ready to go back to a basic flip style phone.

smooth3006 said,
i don't think any "phone" needs a quad core, these aren't computers people. your are not using photoshop or playing high tech games. it's getting to a point where im ready to go back to a basic flip style phone.

The only application that I can see that it would work great on would be a Tablet based on Windows 8. Even dual core tablets now are more than fine.

So many people are blinded by the speed and marketing hype they forget that it's just a phone and if pushing a dial button on your dual core phone is 1/1000 second faster and you can see that speed increase then go for it.

mrmomoman said,

The only application that I can see that it would work great on would be a Tablet based on Windows 8. Even dual core tablets now are more than fine.

So many people are blinded by the speed and marketing hype they forget that it's just a phone and if pushing a dial button on your dual core phone is 1/1000 second faster and you can see that speed increase then go for it.

don't forget intel is getting in the game too now. i am curious how a intel x86 cpu will play with a android based smartphone.

Simple: release dual core windows phones when wp7 is ready for them (I.e. Supported and optimised for them). Ms needs to speed up the support for dual core, then the manufactors can make them, not the other way round.
Ps my hd2 is 2 years old now, any still at the forefront - mango and ice cream sandwich!

It doesnt need dual core at all, the platform and current phones handle anything that is thrown at them fine.

Marketing wise, it's not going to hurt Windows Phone, for several reasons.

1. The marketing so far has been abysmal (prior to Nokia).
2. They never marketed their phones to be "beasts" per se.
3. They are going to support it later in 2012, why try to rush it now? For the holiday season? There are better ways to market (price and ease of use) than just on dual cores.

Dual cores will most likely be used in games, video editing is a niche category so I won't even comment on that. One thing you have to notice is that, yes, you do get more power for your video games, but the ones that would really be taking it to the "next level" would be bigger gaming companies who use licensed game engines like Unreal engine. The thing about the Unreal Engine and others is that they use Unmanaged code, which is impossible on Windows Phone for 3rd parties. So therefore, the developers would be unable to use the engines that they use on other platforms to make these beautiful looking games and would render using the dual-core useless. XNA is still a very powerful and capable framework for making beautiful games. Just until Windows Phone 8 allows certain parties to use unmanaged code for game engines...those cores wouldn't be used to their greatest ability.

Android doesn't support dual-core so buying/using one now doesn't give any edge over a WP7 phone. The only question is : Will it receive ICS which supports multi-core.

I honestly don't think the hard core phone based gaming crowd will drive this particular end of the market. Not a Front Facing camera? That's a different story. Dual cores will probably be here this spring for WinPH7. Microsoft's dilemma was to get the OS OUT. They OBVIOUSLY aren't ready for dual cores, that is why they are defending the fact that they are not needed. But the reality is, they kind of aren't needed now.

Yeah.. I don't buy it. I have a Focus, and having a 2nd core wouldn't make it recieve phone calls any faster, or text my girlfriend any better. Come to think of it, I'm not sure there's a single tast I do on my phone that would benifit from more CPU power.

greenwizard88 said,
Yeah.. I don't buy it. I have a Focus, and having a 2nd core wouldn't make it recieve phone calls any faster, or text my girlfriend any better. Come to think of it, I'm not sure there's a single tast I do on my phone that would benifit from more CPU power.

better battery life for starters.

smooth3006 said,

better battery life for starters.

.. or not, first, for the same usage, the difference between single and dual core "should" be similar, without real world usage significance, but, with a dual core and third party apps that would use intensively the cores your battery would be dead before you say "Supercalifragilous Expialidocious"! And there is also the price....

So the main argument in this article is really about the "marketing need" and not the "actual need" of Windows Phones right?

Since a person earlier stated that current Android phone are only utilizing a single core of the dual core processor and this has been known the a while now and yet Android Phones are being touted around in marketing as DUAL CORE this and DUAL CORE that. Let's change the marketing efforts that says that "Yes, we are selling you Dual Core and hyping up it's speed potential but currently we really can't use it. Please buy our phones so that in the near future when we reach Quad Core we can make the Dual Cores work"

Microsoft has stated they are moving into Dual Cores, NFC, Higher Screen Resolution and more Memory. Their pace is a slow but steady one and it works for them.

The tweakers and techies will always have a love for something that they can mod and say they made it unique to them. Windows Phone won't offer them that yet or at least not in a more robust or open way currently.

November 7th you will hear some major announcements about the future of Windows Phone. Let's see where their marketing dollars will be spent.

Also the article mentioned that Dual Cores don't actually mean sacrificing battery life yet Apple went ahead and lowered their Dual Core speeds to "save" battery. Guess what? So far they SUCK at it. I have to be around a damn plug constantly with my new IPHONE 4S. I tried the Beta 2 of the IOS 5.0.1 and it helps a little but still can't get through half the day without a recharge or being plugged in somewhere.

Apollo will be a major shift for MS and the Windows Phone. Nokia and the other OEM's will really make it shine with the new release. They have said it and I tend to think they will have to knock it out of the ballpark to get a foothold into the mobile market.

Microsoft has already stated that a future version of Windows Phone will support dual core. But that isn't enough, now people are saying they should do it right away. And I have to agree, think of all the time and energy saved by all the people not having to write articles and comment about the timeframe of dual core support. I am truly amazed at how many people have pressing needs to do hard core video editing on their phone.

Tim.. whilst writing this article has it ever occurred to you why WP7 doesn't have dual cores?

I mean its the whole point of your article right?!

I laugh at you for not understanding/not doing research on why WP7 only has limited RAM and does not support dual cores in its current form.

How about you do some research on the limitations of the WP7 kernel base and where the platform is heading with WP8.

Anyone outside a "fan boy" perspective can explain to you in detail why dual core will only be possible with WP8.

Hint: Check up on windows CE and which kernel they will use for Apollo.

FunkyMike said,
Hint: Check up on windows CE and which kernel they will use for Apollo.

I do know that. You can, however, accelerate and bring changes to the platform sooner than 2012, even if they are on a kernel level. "Saving" support until WP8 is stupid, and I am absolutely sure that if they really tried they could include support before Apollo.

Not only that, Windows CE 7 (released in April of this year) supports dual-core processors. Absolutely no reason not to include this portion of the tree into Windows Phone 7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Embedded_Compact_7

Scorpus said,

I do know that. You can, however, accelerate and bring changes to the platform sooner than 2012, even if they are on a kernel level. "Saving" support until WP8 is stupid, and I am absolutely sure that if they really tried they could include support before Apollo.

Not only that, Windows CE 7 (released in April of this year) supports dual-core processors. Absolutely no reason not to include this portion of the tree into Windows Phone 7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Embedded_Compact_7

I agree that the process has to be accelerated and is sluggish at best right now. Unfortunately WP7 isn't based on Windows CE 7. It is Win CE 6.0 R3 (with some code from CE7).The current form of the kernel is limited but it would also be a huge undertaking to port it to CE7 just to end up releasing WP8 on a windows 8 core.

We have a little more than half a year left till Windows 8 releases and with it MS will align its Xbox and WP8 marketing the Metro interface.

It is by no means ideal but creating support for a dual core based on Win CE 7.0 just to scratch all of the code for WP8 doesn't make any sense.
It also has to be considered that the development branches for Apollo have been ongoing since the release of WP7. At this stage a version of WP8 already exists running on a windows 8 kernel.

I agree with you that the better question on whether the release of Windows 8 + WP8 just for a marketing campaign justifies the slow speed of releases and support for hardware that should have been standard from Mango onwards.

Scorpus said,

I do know that. You can, however, accelerate and bring changes to the platform sooner than 2012, even if they are on a kernel level. "Saving" support until WP8 is stupid, and I am absolutely sure that if they really tried they could include support before Apollo.

Not only that, Windows CE 7 (released in April of this year) supports dual-core processors. Absolutely no reason not to include this portion of the tree into Windows Phone 7

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Embedded_Compact_7

Windows Phone 7 is based off of a CE 6, not 7...

Isn't the plan that Windows Phone will eventually move to the ARM-based variant of the NT kernel that is part of Windows 8 and ditch Windows CE? In which case they probably don't want to spend a huge amount more on extending a kernel which may be ditched in the next 18 months or so.

I don't see what the big draw is with gaming on a touch screen phone. Even with 10x the power, sure it'll have some nice graphics, but the controls won't be very good. Aside from a few novelty games and maybe board game style stuff, you're not going to have a very compelling experience on a phone.

Your argument is that because of the future the phones need to adapt to a dual core. This is just stupid. They were on getting prices down and then slowly upgrade the phones down the line. This article seems like it was written by someone who wants a free phone for writing an article.

Here's the funny thing:
iPhone 4S is 0.8GHz dual-core.
HTC Titan is 1.5GHz single-core.

Dual-core has inherent inefficiencies and overhead which results in less than linear improvements.
So, they should effectively be the same in the CPU department.

GPU of course the 4S is in another league.

Sacha said,
Here's the funny thing:
iPhone 4S is 0.8GHz dual-core.
HTC Titan is 1.5GHz single-core.

Dual-core has inherent inefficiencies and overhead which results in less than linear improvements.
So, they should effectively be the same in the CPU department.

GPU of course the 4S is in another league.

The CPU in the iPhone 4S, from GSM Arena (http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_4s-4212.php) :

● 1 GHz dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 processor, PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU, Apple A5 chipset

Marius F said,

The CPU in the iPhone 4S, from GSM Arena (http://www.gsmarena.com/apple_iphone_4s-4212.php) :

● 1 GHz dual-core ARM Cortex-A9 processor, PowerVR SGX543MP2 GPU, Apple A5 chipset

They're 1 Ghz cores clocked at 800 Mhz to save battery. That's why, despite being the same chip as the iPad 2, the iPad 2 gets notably better benchmark numbers (as the iPad 2 runs them clocked at the full 1 Ghz)

Sacha said,
Here's the funny thing:
iPhone 4S is 0.8GHz dual-core.
HTC Titan is 1.5GHz single-core.

Dual-core has inherent inefficiencies and overhead which results in less than linear improvements.
So, they should effectively be the same in the CPU department.

GPU of course the 4S is in another league.


Why are you comparing two complete architecture with the frequency only?

It's like the Intel / AMD war, even with lower clock speed, AMD get pretty results (at least it used to do so).

Anthonyd said,

Why are you comparing two complete architecture with the frequency only?

It's like the Intel / AMD war, even with lower clock speed, AMD get pretty results (at least it used to do so).

They're mostly running the same processor architecture internally - most of these SoC's are using a ARM Cortex-A8/ A9's with slight variations as their main CPU basis - of course the rest chips on the SoC's tend to be designed different (noteably the GPU's), but CPU wise they're not *that* different, unlike with Intel & AMD

I don't think the majority of customers cares if they get a dual core or single core phone. Look how successful the iPhone 3GS has been since AT&T lowered the price to $0. First of all people care about price, second it must have an Apple logo on it. It's only a very small percentage like us that reads tech blogs which is always looking for the latest and greatest gadget.

Gungel said,
I don't think the majority of customers cares if they get a dual core or single core phone. Look how successful the iPhone 3GS has been since AT&T lowered the price to $0. First of all people care about price, second it must have an Apple logo on it. It's only a very small percentage like us that reads tech blogs which is always looking for the latest and greatest gadget.

How many 3GS have been given away so far since it became "free"?

KingCrimson said,

How many 3GS have been given away so far since it became "free"?

AT&T said half of all iPhones sold in October are 3GS phones. Of course they are not free since you have to sign a two year contract.

Look, iphone 4 had a single core processor for a year and no one in the tech world said that its a disadvantage. Only 4s came with a dual core chip and looking around the forums around the web people moving from 4 to 4s find marginal performance improvement over the predecessor.

people dont have to run massive scientific simulations. they need to run the apps and check their emails and send and receive sms and not to mention the calls. out of all these activities, i would say that the apps espacially gaming would benifit from the dual core chips. But they are mostly dependent upon the graphical chipsets present. Even in desktop landscape where octcore processors are available, very few games tend to utalize the full potential of all the cores.

Plus you need to look at how wp7 handles multitasking. One benifit of having a dual core chipset would be that multitasking would be speedy. But wp7 doesnt support full multitasking. It suppports app pausing and resuming, thus the current app running will benfit from the whole 1 Ghz of my omnia 7. Will my flickr app load better in dual core processor, i bet it would. But it already opens instantly. So anything better then that is only elementry and would be benificial for benchmarking purposes.

There are two of vuilding the softwares. One is to build it first and optimize the hardware for it. Thats whewre dual or even quad core devices come into act. What microsoft has done with wp7 is to optimize the software wrt to the current hardware they are running. And i will welcome the dual core phones but will i see any perofrmance improvements over my omnia 7? i dont think so.

Lastly, average customers dont really bother with the specs too much. If they did then cheap android sets would never cell as they provide the worst smart phones experience of all eco systems with their lesser clocked processors and very little RAM or internal storage, but they do sell very well. The dynamics of forums or engadget or theverge is very different from the actual market where brands sell and people know they are buying an HTC or a Samsung but they dont really know for their lives which processor the mobile is using or how much RAM it has.

Two things:
a) There's no reason to assume that WP8 won't support quad-core processors as it will use the same NT kernel as Windows 8 which we know will be optimised for quad-core.
b) Rather than complaining about the lack of dual-core hardware in Windows Phones you should be asking why Google expects you to pay for hardware that the OS they develop isn't optimised for. By optimising their software for particular processors MS are ensuring that their customers get the best performance and the best value for money.

Well, if you tend to use your mobile phone for gaming and such tasks, by all means get something with a dual or quad-core chip. But don't forget that the batteries are still way behind and all the power is pointless in situations where you need to keep the phone alive for at least a couple of days without constantly charging it.

Edited by deactivated170812, Nov 6 2011, 1:21pm :

juresp said,
Well, if you tend to use your mobile phone for gamin and such tasks, by all means get something with a dual or quad-core chip.

And how many games and "such apps" are for dual and quad core? No developer is so stupid to make apps for multicore phones cause theres not enough money in it (dev costs get higher, income will be much-much smaller).

This may change VERY SLOWLY with the introduction of the i4S, so WP devices can wait as long as Tango and wont feel any disadvantage. DC on Android is just pointless until ICS... then pray the OEM feels like upgrading your device, or youre just jolly well f*cked.

You don't NEED dual-core+. IF you are a tech dude then perhaps for your e-penis, but the main question is WHAT DO YOU USE YOUR PHONE FOR?

Me...phone/text/email/fb/general browsing, and that's it, so for the average user it's all about the Operating System and how it works with the hardware. I've been playing with a demo Nokia Lumia 800 and it doesn't NEED a faster chip or more cores to get the job done.

Well you do make a good point. Android phone manufacturers are marketing on techical specs like multi core, LTE and other features. That said, I've never met anyone who owns an Android phone tell me how great the battery life is. Maybe the Adroid tagline should be "The freedom to do what you want, so long as you have a charger with you."

Yes multi-cores allow developers more room to develop and I have no doubt there are some things that could be done on WP7 if they were there. I might even want them too.

I think what you're missing is that a lot of people want an easy device that just works. Multi-core may appeal to the people that come to this site, but count for squat for the people that read Consumer Reports.

Face facts. Android phones will proably always have bleeding edge hardware, which appeals to hardcore techies (who don't have a problem carrying extra batteries and chargers) WP7 isn't targeted at that group. Isn't now, never will be. As such your editorial is likely to get chuckles from Redmond and that's about it.

I'm sorry but i cannot understand this. Theres no need for dual core on the smartphone market AT THE MOMENT. OEMs sell Android devices with DC for a while but always forget to mention that until ICS it does not do crap. The only somewhat-useful DC smartphone is the iPhone 4S.

Of course there will be a great need for multiple cores, just think about really-really HC games on mobile devices. But until the dual core market is extremely small developers wont do squat - so i could buy something with two cores, yeah... just it'll be totally pointless.

When DC chipsets became low-cost their number will grow and we'll get applications to run. Until then this whining for DC devices are just silly and matters only to a few tech geeks and some android fans who think their devices are superior because of an unused processor core.

If want something to whine about then here you are: there's not one WP7 device with 32gigs of storage. Now THATS A SHAME. Yeah, Focus S has a card slot, but who wants that horrific plastic excuse for a high-end phone?

Edited by deleted_acc, Nov 6 2011, 1:29pm :

I think it has more to do with software than hardware at this point. If I were to use a laptop as an example. I have an older laptop that runs very efficiently with Linux but runs pretty ****ty with WindowsXp.
Go figure.
But then again. I guess depending on what you want to do with your phone (you really edit videos on your phone, seriously?) It may have a slight impact.
If everything is optimized for the hardware there is no real need for anything bigger.

Stupid article. Based on this logic whenever a new technology is available anything that doesn't support it is worthless so when quad cores are available the call will then be for WP to support it just because, regardless of whether the OS takes proper advantage of the faster hardware. Why stop there though, why not say it needs 2GB or more of memory just so it can look good on the shelf next to its competition, whether it needs it or not?

This editorial sucks... it doesn't explain anything. It just says "market has dual-core, so you have to use a dual-core".

And if everybody would say "drug is good" you're going to take drugs everyday?

I have to disagree with this article. People like my parents don't care about stats. Their biggest concern is price and the brand. They upgraded their dumb phone with a cheaper BlackBerry because it was $50, had a keyboard and they've seen people with BlackBerries before. The Droid Bionic was the latest and greatest at the time, but they had no interest spending $300. We need to stop applying techie logic to the rest of the world.

It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone

Scorpus said,
It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone

It's a similar story on the iPhone. The iPhone 4 as you know has a Single Core processor. When editing video, applying effects to photos or finalising a video in iMovie it takes some time. From a few seconds to a minute depending on what task and the size of the media. With the iPhone 4S and its dual core processor all of these tasks take exactly half as long.

It's not all about the interface smoothness, I mean hell if the interface is hardware accelerated by the GPU (which it is) how is the CPU core count even coming in to the equation? - People need to realise the CPU is important for tasks beyond showing you the operating systems GUI.

Scorpus said,
It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone

What's the point when nearly all of the Android apps don't use both cores?

Scorpus said,
It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone


The question is are you really suppose to render a movie using the in-built movie maker software?
Really?

Scorpus said,
It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone

Good luck wanting to do that on a Windows Phone But quite simply you could due to the way SoC's are designed, where video rendering and encoding are handled by dedicated parts of the chip. The CPU still gets involved, but it's perfectly doable encoding a 720p without lag. Would certainly be a lot slower than a Galaxy Note for obvious reasons though

And benefits from updated processors are obviously obvious - afterall S4 snapdragons have 600% of the GPU performance of the GPU used in first-gen Windows Phone devices. There's also power savings not only due to smaller die size and less heat wastage - but improvement in the rest of the SoC components - for instance the modem chips use 20-30% less power, solving signal interference, simultaneous voice & data on LTE handsets, etc.

And yet despite all that, the phone still has brilliant perceived performance Unfortunately a lot of prospective buyers won't even pay much heed to "dual cores", they'll just go for the bigger number >.< Or whatever is shoved in their face at a store.

Video rendering involves the CPU heavily, due to calculating various effects, color corrections and whatever else might apply. Even if you have a fancy shmancy 1080p encoder submodule, that doesn't mean much if the CPU can't keep it supplied with data.

Superluminal said,
Video rendering involves the CPU heavily, due to calculating various effects, color corrections and whatever else might apply. Even if you have a fancy shmancy 1080p encoder submodule, that doesn't mean much if the CPU can't keep it supplied with data.

Aye but if you're smart, you'll use the GPU for those effects instead - which Microsoft can do.

Scorpus said,
It's also kind of funny how people don't realize what you can actually do with multi-core processors. On this dual-core Galaxy Note I have here I can easily put together and render a movie using the in-built movie maker software. It's not even laggy

Good luck doing that on a single-core Windows Phone

Why on earth would I ever want to do that on my phone? At least try and come up with realistic examples to justify your argument.

jakem1 said,

Why on earth would I ever want to do that on my phone? At least try and come up with realistic examples to justify your argument.

I think the bigger question is: Why can't you?

Vice said,

I think the bigger question is: Why can't you?

Because the results that you'll produce on a tiny phone interface are rubbish. I would use the right tool for the job and I wouldn't attempt to edit and encode a video on my phone any more than I would attempt to create a large spreadsheet full of complex formulae on my phone. It's just not worthwhile.

Rendering may be slower on a single core phone compared to a dual-core phone but that's nothing compared to the limitations imposed by a tiny, finger driven touch interface. For that reason, the example is silly and pointless.

jakem1 said,

Because the results that you'll produce on a tiny phone interface are rubbish. I would use the right tool for the job and I wouldn't attempt to edit and encode a video on my phone any more than I would attempt to create a large spreadsheet full of complex formulae on my phone. It's just not worthwhile.

Rendering may be slower on a single core phone compared to a dual-core phone but that's nothing compared to the limitations imposed by a tiny, finger driven touch interface. For that reason, the example is silly and pointless.

Obviously you've never tried iMovie on the iPhone. It's excellent for editing the 1080p video the phone produces. And it renders a lot faster on the 4S than on the iPhone 4 as the Dual Core processor speeds the whole thing up. The results from iMovie for iPhone look better than Windows Movie Maker on windows! LOL

~Johnny said,
Aye but if you're smart, you'll use the GPU for those effects instead - which Microsoft can do.

No. Microsoft restricts you from using custom GPU shaders. If there's going to be a video editor on WP, it'll be third-party. And if it'll be third-party, it'll be in .NET, too, which is horrendous for doing fast DSP. Trust me, I have an image effects app on the store, I know. If Microsoft would enable unsafe code, things would be different, but they don't. The way I access image data is mind-boggingly unintuitive to get the most bandwidth out of .NET arrays, and it's still not as fast as it could be. There's no SIMD support in .NET either (not on ARM, not on Intel). That alone could speed up things a lot, too.

Superluminal said,
...

And that is why I specifically said Microsoft can do it, and not third party app developers. Of course they probably won't because they have more important, useful goals to target, but it's a possibility. (I've also made image editing applications for Windows Phone amongst others)

No offence but why are you editing video on your phone? I could understand in the future, if you were running a full OS and could dock your phone to a larger screen and keyboard but editing video on a phone is retarded. I have enough trouble editing video on a 22" inch display.

blueboy75 said,
No offence but why are you editing video on your phone? I could understand in the future, if you were running a full OS and could dock your phone to a larger screen and keyboard but editing video on a phone is retarded. I have enough trouble editing video on a 22" inch display.

Because we can and the results are amazing? Get an iPhone and try it. It's easy and the results are great.

Although I have long said that WP7 is fine on single core, image/public perception is important sadly and it MAY it may hinder long term sales numbers if MS do not allow Multi-core based hardware.

I have an Omnia 7 on contract till 12/2012 & i will hope that the hardware on wp8 phones will not be too behind hw advances expected in 2013...

MAYBE next year i'll have to start buying phones outright & going sim-only (i'm based in UK) or try adopting a 12 month contract.

I hope to stay with WP8

I'll be enjoying my quad-core Android device next year while I laugh at Microsoft still waiting to adopt dual-cores with Windows Phone “Apollo”.

Then laugh, but none cares about you.
Just use the device that matches the best for you. If you really think that Android/iOs/WP are meant to be used in the same way, then you are totally wrong. Each one has its own pros&cons, and their own identity.

Well at least maybe with a quad core you'll get android close to WP speed using a single core CPU...

What these silly WP fanboys don't understand, it doesn't matter that the damn core user interface is smooth as butter on a lowly single core, it's that a way faster dual core platform allows for better and more innovative third party applications, specifically gaming. More CPU power lets you do better and grander things.

And it isn't "dual core support" that's lacking. Everyone calls it that, but it's plain wrong. It's symmetric multiprocessing support, also known as SMP. If WP can support two cores, its kernel will also be able to deal with more cores. If the WP kernel finally can do SMP, the only thing that prevents quad core Windows Phones is Microsoft's stupid chassis specs.

Superluminal said,
What these silly WP fanboys don't understand, it doesn't matter that the damn core user interface is smooth as butter on a lowly single core, it's that a way faster dual core platform allows for better and more innovative third party applications, specifically gaming. More CPU power lets you do better and grander things.

And it isn't "dual core support" that's lacking. Everyone calls it that, but it's plain wrong. It's symmetric multiprocessing support, also known as SMP. If WP can support two cores, its kernel will also be able to deal with more cores. If the WP kernel finally can do SMP, the only thing that prevents quad core Windows Phones is Microsoft's stupid chassis specs.

Uhm, yes it is 'dual core' support, or 'multi-core' support. Yes, you are correct in saying the Kernel needs to support SMP, but also the managed code layer isn't set up to protect developers from being able to 'drain a battery'.

Both the kernel teams and the managed code teams are working to ensure that SMP is supported in the app framework in such a way that it offers consistent experience without hampering the developer trying to implement it.

WP7 does not need dual-core processors. Android does need dual-core and the lag will never go away. So enjoy your forever laggy phone.

TechJunkie81 said,
WP7 does not need dual-core processors. Android does need dual-core and the lag will never go away. So enjoy your forever laggy phone.

My single-core Galaxy S is not laggy. The Galaxy S II is not laggy. The HTC Sensation is not laggy. Maybe try an Android phone first...

Scorpus said,

My single-core Galaxy S is not laggy. The Galaxy S II is not laggy. The HTC Sensation is not laggy. Maybe try an Android phone first...

The difference is I have tried an Android phone and found it to be just as laggy as any Windows Mobile device.

Scorpus said,

My single-core Galaxy S is not laggy. The Galaxy S II is not laggy. The HTC Sensation is not laggy. Maybe try an Android phone first...

I believe they're confusing laggy with smoothness - Certainly every Galaxy S I've ever tried likes to drop a lot of frames scrolling along menus, it's not jumpy but it's not buttery smooth either, compared to what you can experience with the same hardware on a Windows Phone.

Scorpus said,

My single-core Galaxy S is not laggy. The Galaxy S II is not laggy. The HTC Sensation is not laggy. Maybe try an Android phone first...

It is not laggy until you try a Windows Phone device.

TechJunkie81 said,
WP7 does not need dual-core processors. Android does need dual-core and the lag will never go away. So enjoy your forever laggy phone.
Again, like I said, I dont know if you have tested a Android phone or are simply seeing videos/reviews, but my Android phone (single core) is not laggy. I dont seem to see the lag anywhere at all....

TechJunkie81 said,
WP7 does not need dual-core processors. Android does need dual-core and the lag will never go away. So enjoy your forever laggy phone.

have you ever even tried a android phone or are you talking out your rear?

neo158 said,

The difference is I have tried an Android phone and found it to be just as laggy as any Windows Mobile device.

My HD2 with WM 6.5.3 was not laggy at all................ and it is still able to perform many tasks that my HD7 does not support.........

smooth3006 said,

have you ever even tried a android phone or are you talking out your rear?

I have an Omnia 7 and Galaxy S II, believe me whe I say my Omnia 7 is "buttery smooth" compared to my Galaxy S II, that's just FACT!

Having Dual core doesn't mean the OS lags, it just makes the Phone future proof and attracts People. Windows 7 runs fine on P4 with 1 GB RAM, but we still add Powerful hardware to make it more future proof and have ability to run programs even more faster. Same goes for the phone. I think WP7 should support Dual core or Quad core chips. Having something extra doesn't make it bad.

Does the Windows Phone OS even support SMP? Its all good saying we'd be stuck with windows 95 etc but we've seen what happens when we give developers loads of memory to play with or lots of disk space or as this case, lots of cpu power. They become very lazy and don't bother to optimize things. On a mobile platform were a battery is the very limitation of how long you can use it for, the last thing I would like to see is developers just multithreading away and not giving a toss about how much power they've thrown away on crappy code just because it works on dualcore bettre then single core when the same thing with a bit of effort could be made to work.

sagum said,
Does the Windows Phone OS even support SMP? Its all good saying we'd be stuck with windows 95 etc but we've seen what happens when we give developers loads of memory to play with or lots of disk space or as this case, lots of cpu power. They become very lazy and don't bother to optimize things. On a mobile platform were a battery is the very limitation of how long you can use it for, the last thing I would like to see is developers just multithreading away and not giving a toss about how much power they've thrown away on crappy code just because it works on dualcore bettre then single core when the same thing with a bit of effort could be made to work.

Indeed. There are plenty of crappy apps in the Windows Phone Marketplace. Imagine how much fun these developers could have with the ability to drain your battery twice as fast.

I was one always saying that Windows Phone doesn't need support for dual-core processors, but you've made some excellent points in this editorial, Tim, and I actually agree with you. Microsoft should stay ahead of or inline with the competition regarding processing power and other hardware specifications for the reasons you've stated.

Just because Android and iOS need Dual-Core to perform all their task correctly does not mean that it's the same thing for WP7.5

Why would it need something that is not required to function well? Just for PR?

TruckWEB said,
Just because Android and iOS need Dual-Core to perform all their task correctly does not mean that it's the same thing for WP7.5

Now now, let's not talk rubbish. Pretty much anything that can run on the iPhone 4S (dual core) can run on the iPhone 4 (single core), including Siri. I can't speak for Android as I've not spent much time using one.

Why would it need something that is not required to function well? Just for PR?

If you'd read the article, one of the main reasons mentioned was for future-proofing purposes. Sure the Lumia 800 is a more-than-capable device now, but what about with future WP updates over the next 2 years? (Yes all phones will start showing their age, but this point was also covered in the article.)

You see, the only reason I think a phone needs dual core is to say, do photo-editing, or in gaming. But honestly, does anyone really care THAT much about gaming on a ****ing phone, they're not playing COD4 here. And basic photo editing, gee, just wait a few more second for a filter to process?
So no, WP7 ONLY needs dual core if that's supposed to be the be-all-and-end-all of sales pitches. Seriously, is that all Android has going for the platform?

cooky560 said,
What was horrible about the Windows 95 gui exactly?

In the mind of many, that it's not Windows 7. You see, a lot of people think that everyone should use always the latest, even if you dont really need it. The same with hardware.

cooky560 said,
What was horrible about the Windows 95 gui exactly?

That was the point. There was nothing wrong with the win95 GUI just as there's nothing wrong with WP7 single-core processor.

Windows 7 GUI is better though. As is WP7 dual-core processor.

I challenge you to go back to Win95 and try to do many of the things you do today. It's not 'broken', but it's certainly suboptimal.

cooky560 said,
What was horrible about the Windows 95 gui exactly?

Being able to move the start button to the middle of the taskbar (fixed in 95b).
Having 'system tray' actually running as 'system'
the drab grey, and the stark eggplant.

I have an HTC Trophy running WP7.5. Never in my usage has processing been the bottle neck. Now you want to talk 3G versus 4G that's a different discussion entirely. Having said that I love this phone and am very happy with WP 7.5. Almost all of my 'droidish freinds turn 4G off on their phones because of how it sucks the battery life and say that they've noticed very little real difference in overall speed.

The thing is that the industry always tries to inflate specs instead of optimizing the experience. This is why the experience with platforms like WP7 it's so good and stable across devices while android it's more irregular.

sanctified said,
The thing is that the industry always tries to inflate specs instead of optimizing the experience. This is why the experience with platforms like WP7 it's so good and stable across devices while android it's more irregular.

When Microsoft was pushing the envelope of system requirements, people complained about bloatware and made fun of Microsoft's ability to write software.

Now that Microsoft has adopted the "do more with less" philosophy (Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows Phone), people are complaining that Microsoft needs dual-cores on Windows Phone.

I, for one, am *thrilled* that the tech industry has finally realized that it needs to work within constraints. Art thrives under constraints, and so does engineering.

Without constraints, we get sloppy engineering that just brute-forces its way through any problem. The Intel Pentium 4: "fry an egg on your CPU!" Or Windows Vista: "I'll take 30 seconds to shut down, thank you very much."

With constraints, we get careful engineering that is optimized to the requirements. The Core processor and now the i-series, which deliver better performance using less wattage. Or Windows 7, which uses fewer resources than Vista, followed by Windows 8, which uses fewer resources than Windows 7.

TomJones said,

With constraints, we get careful engineering that is optimized to the requirements. The Core processor and now the i-series, which deliver better performance using less wattage. Or Windows 7, which uses fewer resources than Vista, followed by Windows 8, which uses fewer resources than Windows 7.

I totally agree with you there, but I think Microsoft's history of bloatware has poisoned their reputation and it's non-recoverable.

KingCrimson said,
... I think Microsoft's history of bloatware has poisoned their reputation and it's non-recoverable.

THAT, there is the #1 problem with Windows Phone's adoption. Nail on the head KingCrimson!!!!

Let me break the ice... Windows Phone doesn't need Dual Core. There.

I'm not going to bother writing why it doesn't need it, and why specifically Android needs it. I'm sure we're all grown up to understand that.

kavazovangel said,
Let me break the ice... Windows Phone doesn't need Dual Core. There.

I'm not going to bother writing why it doesn't need it, and why specifically Android needs it. I'm sure we're all grown up to understand that.


Currently IN STORES, there is no version of Android THAT SUPPORTS OFFICIALLY DUAL CORE PROCESSORS ON PHONES

htcz said,

Currently IN STORES, there is no version of Android THAT SUPPORTS OFFICIALLY DUAL CORE PROCESSORS ON PHONES

Exactly, until Android is optimised properly for Dual Core then it'll still be the laggy POS it always has been. At least Microsoft is optimising Windows Phone to run properly on Dual Core processors that's why Apollo will be the first version to support Dual Core.

Tim, Dual Core processors might be the ONLY selling point for Android phones. Windows Phones on the other hand have a lot more going for them than just specs. Enjoy your laggy POS Quad Core Android phone though.

neo158 said,
Tim, Dual Core processors might be the ONLY selling point for Android phones but not for Windows Phones.

Of course it isn't the ONLY. Neither is it for Android. Just in a market where WP7 is not doing well, it needs anything it can get, and being a generation or two behind is not a selling point at all

neo158 said,

Exactly, until Android is optimised properly for Dual Core then it'll still be the laggy POS it always has been.

Again, I dont know what Android you have tested (there is a difference between testing something and reading reviews or seeing videos) but my Android personally has never lagged or anything. Smooth as the first day.

If you want to spread BS around on what you HEARD, thats your problem. If it makes you feel better about your fantasy lag, 4.0 supports dual core processors.

neo158 said,

Exactly, until Android is optimised properly for Dual Core then it'll still be the laggy POS it always has been. At least Microsoft is optimising Windows Phone to run properly on Dual Core processors that's why Apollo will be the first version to support Dual Core.

Tim, Dual Core processors might be the ONLY selling point for Android phones. Windows Phones on the other hand have a lot more going for them than just specs. Enjoy your laggy POS Quad Core Android phone though.

I don't know what Android phone you are/were using, but my Galaxy S2 (T-Mobile) has not seen any lag what so ever.

htcz said,

Again, I dont know what Android you have tested (there is a difference between testing something and reading reviews or seeing videos) but my Android personally has never lagged or anything. Smooth as the first day.

If you want to spread BS around on what you HEARD, thats your problem. If it makes you feel better about your fantasy lag, 4.0 supports dual core processors.

And you done this on some cooked rom or the official POS that came with the device? Cause i"ve even seen an Optimus 2X lag with the out of the box rom.

Of course custom roms surely can resolve problems, if you have the willingness to mess around. I personally dont.

neo158 said,

Exactly, until Android is optimised properly for Dual Core then it'll still be the laggy POS it always has been. At least Microsoft is optimising Windows Phone to run properly on Dual Core processors that's why Apollo will be the first version to support Dual Core.

Tim, Dual Core processors might be the ONLY selling point for Android phones. Windows Phones on the other hand have a lot more going for them than just specs. Enjoy your laggy POS Quad Core Android phone though.

Android hasn't seemed laggy on any phone I used. If you want laggy get a Blackberry Torch.

Scorpus said,

Of course it isn't the ONLY. Neither is it for Android. Just in a market where WP7 is not doing well, it needs anything it can get, and being a generation or two behind is not a selling point at all

I agree that for marketing to specific demographics, they will need to catch up on the specs game. But there are far more people out there that are going "Gigawho? Gigawhat? I really don't care as long as it has a lot of space for my apps and music." All that most consumers want is the ability to play there games, music and apps. They don't really care about the experience. Then there's screen size vs type. That's another one where most don't care about the quality of the screen, it's size.

So I agree that they need to bring the specs up to speed with the rest for purely for marketing reasons but also agree that the phones really don't need that to be done to actually perform just as good as the newer more powerful spec'd phones.

Sartoris said,

Android hasn't seemed laggy on any phone I used. If you want laggy get a Blackberry Torch.

My friend's unlock screen on Galaxy II S2 is laggy.

Sartoris said,

Android hasn't seemed laggy on any phone I used. If you want laggy get a Blackberry Torch.

Use a windows phone, then you will see just how laggy android is..

htcz said,

Currently IN STORES, there is no version of Android THAT SUPPORTS OFFICIALLY DUAL CORE PROCESSORS ON PHONES

Rubbish. Dual core support was added in Gingerbread. Honeycomb made massive improvements to it though. And ICS will have the best of both. Stop spreading your FUD.

micro said,

Use a windows phone, then you will see just how laggy android is..

Android actually runs concurrent code, unlike WP7.

Joey S said,

Android actually runs concurrent code, unlike WP7.

And, as a result of running sequences in parallel methods, you get undesired effects, such as the occasional cancellation of programs once the withdraw amount is overflown. For example, search up instances of Android shutting down the "Phone" app due to an overflow in processes.
Concurrent code is actually a very good concept, but Android doesn't bring this concept with much ingeniousness. Windows Phone may not use concurrent code, but its display of efficiency shows that an operating system can be designed for more efficiency without the principle of concurrency. How embarrassing is this for Android now?

geoken said,
I'm convinced some people's eyes are locked at 15fps or something.

Or just people who are such apologists of their own chosen platforms that they deny the obvious truth before them.
Or, it could also be that they've never seen a phone without lag that they don't understand what's right in front of them.

I can only imagine the kind of comments that are going to come from this news. Every Windows Phone defender on the forums has been harping on and on about how Windows Phone doesn't need Dual Core, now you make this post on the front page eep.

Good luck weathering this storm Tim.

Vice said,
I can only imagine the kind of comments that are going to come from this news. Every Windows Phone defender on the forums has been harping on and on about how Windows Phone doesn't need Dual Core, now you make this post on the front page eep.

Good luck weathering this storm Tim.

Oh I know, but I disagree with everyone about that...

Scorpus said,

Oh I know, but I disagree with everyone about that...

Me too. I think it does need Dual Core, if not for the Operating System itself, for the 3rd party software it will enable.

Vice said,

Me too. I think it does need Dual Core, if not for the Operating System itself, for the 3rd party software it will enable.

Yeah it's all about future potential. Single-cores can only go so far, and despite the interface being smooth, 3rd party apps and games are limited. Why have that limitation?

Scorpus said,

Yeah it's all about future potential. Single-cores can only go so far, and despite the interface being smooth, 3rd party apps and games are limited. Why have that limitation?

Your argument makes no sense for the simple reason that the software doesn't support dual core processors. Why pay for hardware that isn't going to be used?

It seems to me that you are better off not signing up to a two year contract if you don't want to be stuck with a particular type of phone. Just get a SIM-only contract and buy your phones off contract so you can switch when new tech becomes available.

jakem1 said,

Your argument makes no sense for the simple reason that the software doesn't support dual core processors. Why pay for hardware that isn't going to be used?

Why develop for hardware that isn't there? The hardware must come first, only then will you see software that supports it

Scorpus said,

Why develop for hardware that isn't there? The hardware must come first, only then will you see software that supports it

What? Microsoft is working towards supporting multiple cores in Windows 8/WP8 but there's no point making users pay a premium for hardware that won't work properly for a year or more. Until the OS supports multiple cores you're not going to get any software that takes advantage of the hardware so your point is moot. You might enjoy paying for useless features but I'm sure the majority of people don't.

Vice said,
I can only imagine the kind of comments that are going to come from this news. Every Windows Phone defender on the forums has been harping on and on about how Windows Phone doesn't need Dual Core, now you make this post on the front page eep.

Good luck weathering this storm Tim.

I played with a WP in my carrier's store and it was really snappy on just the single core. I really hope this platform picks up to be honest...

jakem1 said,

What? Microsoft is working towards supporting multiple cores in Windows 8/WP8 but there's no point making users pay a premium for hardware that won't work properly for a year or more. Until the OS supports multiple cores you're not going to get any software that takes advantage of the hardware so your point is moot. You might enjoy paying for useless features but I'm sure the majority of people don't.

You misunderstood what I said. First comes the hardware in the devices (with the OS support, obviously). Then comes the apps. This is why you don't see laggy apps, because developers are sensible and don't code apps that won't run on single-core processors.

Microsoft need to get their act together and bring support sooner

Scorpus said,

Yeah it's all about future potential. Single-cores can only go so far, and despite the interface being smooth, 3rd party apps and games are limited. Why have that limitation?

Your reasons for wanting dual cores are exactly why most of us don't want dual cores too fast. Supporting the latest and greatest doesn't make you future proof. Look at Apple and MS. The 3GS lasted 2 years because Apple didn't put a dual core in the iPhone 4. My Samsung focus is going to last 2 years because MS is holding back phone specs.

I'll give you an example, when my Focus came out the top dog Android phones where the Droid X and the Galaxy S phones. By Android standards those phones are outdated and people are wondering if they will even get ICS, let alone future updates.

Another example. Google's own Nexus One, the self proclaimed first 'superphone' has been EOL'd in less than 2 years. Google has already said no official ICS for it.

In other words, what you think is making these phones future proof is actually causing them to EOL much faster than Apple and WP7 phones.

Scorpus said,

You misunderstood what I said. First comes the hardware in the devices (with the OS support, obviously). Then comes the apps. This is why you don't see laggy apps, because developers are sensible and don't code apps that won't run on single-core processors.

Microsoft need to get their act together and bring support sooner

So you agree that the OS support must come first and that without this there's no point selling dual-core phones.

To be honest, I can't think of any specific examples of phone software other than the OS that could really benefit from multiple cores. You mentioned video encodeing below but that's really such a fringe example (and such a silly example on a phone) that I doubt it's worth worrying about. No doubt some people would argue that games need multiple cores but when you consider that proper multi-core gaming has only recently come to PC gaming I doubt that a game capable of utilising multiple cores would really run that much better than a game that's heavily optimised for a single core at this stage. Games for phones are light-years behind PC games as it stands so there's no need to worry about multiple cores just yet. That may well change in the future but it's a long way off and the type of simple game that's popular at the moment (Angry Birds, etc.) aren't going to benefit from the extra hardware. I'm unlikely to do any real heavy lifting on my phone and I suspect I'm not alone.

At the end of the day, the benefits of having an OS that's well optimised for a specific chip currently outweigh the benefits that come from just sticking a dual-core chip in a phone. There's no better example of that than Android which suffers from laginess regardless of the chip under the hood. Whether you like it or not, WP7 runs exceptionally well on Snapdragon chips and so does the 3rd-party software that's available for the platform. It might be nice to be able to say that this phone or that phone has a dual-core chip for penis-size comparisons but it would serve no other useful purpose for the time being.

If you're concerned about Microsoft's ability to market their OS in a dual-core world then I suspect they could gain a lot by simply promoting the efficiency of their software over their competitors.