08-27-12 12:34 AM
82 123 ...
tools
  1. gregorylkelly's Avatar
    Impressed by the new Blackberry OS (or how iOS ate dust) Thoughts Serializer

    Interesting read from an iOS developer that had NO prior BlackBerry developing knowledge and how he ported his iOS game to the PlayBook in 2-3 days and it actually runs better on the PlayBook.

    Since my last post you must already know that I was porting Pop Corny to Blackberry. I can’t hide that I was really impressed by the way the platform is engineered. You know you have done something right when it allows a developer that had never even used the platform, come in and port his game in 2-3 days. But that, coupled with the fact that the game actually runs better than it does on the platform that is was originally written for, makes for something really impressive.

    To showcase what I mean, I recorded a video with the game launching in parallel on both my iPad 2 and my Playbook. Since on both platforms the game actually achieves 60fps its hard to notice the difference in game, but the launch sequence really shows the difference. The bottom line is that given 2 devices with almost identical hardware (the same 1GHz dual core CPU, and same GPU), running the same game, with the game optimized using the iOS device and only later ported to the Playbook, the Playbook manages to launch the app (load all textures, decompress them and upload to GPU, load sound effects, etc) 30% faster! In my book.. this is a huge achievement.
    Click the source link to see the video in action.
    08-25-12 09:46 AM
  2. mikeo007's Avatar
    Impressive. But I have some doubt towards the developer's actual technical knowledge.
    "(the same 1GHz dual core CPU, and same GPU)" Really?
    Playbook processor is more powerful than iPad processor, and iPad GPU is considerably better than Playbook.

    Still impressive, but its not magic...the application loads faster on the faster tablet. Seems like common sense to me.
    Last edited by mikeo007; 08-25-12 at 10:06 AM.
    08-25-12 09:50 AM
  3. gregorylkelly's Avatar
    Impressive. But I have some doubt towards the developer's actual technical knowledge.
    "(the same 1GHz dual core CPU, and same GPU)" Really?
    Playbook processor is more powerful than iPad processor, and iPad GPU is considerably better than Playbook.

    Still impressive, but its not magic...the application loads faster on the faster tablet. Seems like common sense to me.
    While I do agree with you, it's not just hardware that makes things faster. Sure, if you take iOS on 2 different hardware sets, the faster hardware will produce faster software. However, if you have 2 different operating systems, the faster hardware won't always produce the faster software.

    For example, lets say you have hardware A and B, A being faster and more powerful than B, and you have software C and D, C being better optimized and faster than D. (A>B & C>D).

    Now, if you combine the faster combo (A & C vs B & D) you will see that the faster hardware will be better and faster. However, if you cross combine the better hardware with the slower software and visa versa (A & D vs B & C), you may see that the faster/more powerful hardware will actually respond more slowly than the slower less powerful hardware in some cases.
    pcguy514 likes this.
    08-25-12 10:17 AM
  4. mikeo007's Avatar
    You're right, I'm just saying his comparison is flawed. He's assuming (wrongly) that the processors are identical. It is a combination of processor and OS on the Playbook that make the Playbook faster.
    08-25-12 10:25 AM
  5. sk8er_tor's Avatar
    The PlayBook is awesome. End of story.
    crackcookie likes this.
    08-25-12 11:12 AM
  6. dentynefire's Avatar
    His description of why PB was faster is wrong but the results are nice to see. Really its the end result that matters most and not to speak for the guy but I will go on record as saying a lot of people just think Apple is the best no questions asked. So here is a guy seeing first hand the power the PlayBook has in it. Now that's not to say that the iPad doesn't beat the PB is other areas, but here it didn't. Plus it was easy for him to port which is another bonus!
    08-25-12 11:22 AM
  7. spike12's Avatar
    [YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK7aV1dZShI&feature=player_embedded[/YT]
    08-25-12 11:41 AM
  8. VerryBestr's Avatar
    Impressive. But I have some doubt towards the developer's actual technical knowledge.
    "(the same 1GHz dual core CPU, and same GPU)" Really?
    Playbook processor is more powerful than iPad processor, and iPad GPU is considerably better than Playbook. ...
    Why is the PB CPU more powerful than the iPad 2 processor? As far as I can tell from a quick look, both are 1GHz dual core chips based on ARM Cortex-A9. Apple specs its processor at 1GHz, but says the processor speed can be slowed. I saw some tests that found the speed to be 900MHz, but that could be because iOS was throttling the processor.
    08-25-12 01:40 PM
  9. mikeo007's Avatar
    Why is the PB CPU more powerful than the iPad 2 processor? As far as I can tell from a quick look, both are 1GHz dual core chips based on ARM Cortex-A9. Apple specs its processor at 1GHz, but says the processor speed can be slowed. I saw some tests that found the speed to be 900MHz, but that could be because iOS was throttling the processor.
    ARM is only an instruction set. There are dozens of different processors based on the ARM architecture. They're all unique and have different applications. The A5x in the newer Apple products is significantly different from the TI OMAP processor used in the playbook. Clock speed of processor is only one factor that contributes to the speed of a device. I have a 1.2ghz laptop. Do you think the 1.5ghz playbook 4g will be faster than my laptop?
    08-25-12 03:28 PM
  10. GTiLeo's Avatar
    Why is the PB CPU more powerful than the iPad 2 processor? As far as I can tell from a quick look, both are 1GHz dual core chips based on ARM Cortex-A9. Apple specs its processor at 1GHz, but says the processor speed can be slowed. I saw some tests that found the speed to be 900MHz, but that could be because iOS was throttling the processor.
    when RIM and QNX designed the playbook OS they incorperated the same sort of feature and also incorperated a feature to distibupt CPU usage evenly to each of the cores to save battery life. it is able to smartly anticipate how much power is needed to load up the software, so while the iPad may be runnign at 900 MHz the playbook may be pulling 500MHz from each core and technically be clocked slower in that catagory.

    whats great abotu the QNX kernel is its a real time OS so when you click somethign to open it it happens in realy time and the kernels so all the background work happens as soon as you press the app button and say load this. power shifts to the kernels that are in use rather then having to pass through a branch of kernel that is not required, a key advantage over the microkernel architecture over the hybrid of darwin
    08-25-12 04:00 PM
  11. samab's Avatar
    ARM is only an instruction set. There are dozens of different processors based on the ARM architecture. They're all unique and have different applications. The A5x in the newer Apple products is significantly different from the TI OMAP processor used in the playbook. Clock speed of processor is only one factor that contributes to the speed of a device. I have a 1.2ghz laptop. Do you think the 1.5ghz playbook 4g will be faster than my laptop?
    ARMv7 is an instruction set.

    ARM, the company, also created the Cortex A9 core based on the ARMv7 instruction set. Qualcomm licenses the ARMv7 instruction set and created its own core. Qualcomm is like AMD --- AMD licenses the x86 instruction set and creates an x86 clone.

    Both Apple and TI license the Cortex A9 core and bundled with their choice of GPU to create the A5/A5X and the OMAP4 chips. If A5 and OMAP4 operates at the same speed, they will have the same computational performance because they have the same CPU.
    08-25-12 04:12 PM
  12. mikeo007's Avatar
    when RIM and QNX designed the playbook OS they incorperated the same sort of feature and also incorperated a feature to distibupt CPU usage evenly to each of the cores to save battery life. it is able to smartly anticipate how much power is needed to load up the software, so while the iPad may be runnign at 900 MHz the playbook may be pulling 500MHz from each core and technically be clocked slower in that catagory.

    whats great abotu the QNX kernel is its a real time OS so when you click somethign to open it it happens in realy time and the kernels so all the background work happens as soon as you press the app button and say load this. power shifts to the kernels that are in use rather then having to pass through a branch of kernel that is not required, a key advantage over the microkernel architecture over the hybrid of darwin
    The only true statement in this post is the fact that QNX is an RTOS. The attempted description of what an RTOS is and the attempts explanation of multi-core processing tr way off. Also, the A5x is dual core just like the TI OMAP. Both processors can clock their cores as low as 100mhz.
    08-25-12 04:13 PM
  13. GTiLeo's Avatar
    The only true statement in this post is the fact that QNX is an RTOS. The attempted description of what an RTOS is and the attempts explanation of multi-core processing tr way off. Also, the A5x is dual core just like the TI OMAP. Both processors can clock their cores as low as 100mhz.
    and i never said they couldn't i stated that the was coding built in that evenly distributes power evenly to each corre rather then maxing out one, i'm trying to find where i read this but i can't seem to find it. i will continue to look and will post the quote when i find it


    EDIT: i stated it wrong the OS is able to clock task to set cores to manage heat and battery

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

    under bound multitasking
    Last edited by GTiLeo; 08-25-12 at 04:26 PM.
    dentynefire likes this.
    08-25-12 04:20 PM
  14. mikeo007's Avatar
    ARMv7 is an instruction set.

    ARM, the company, also created the Cortex A9 core based on the ARMv7 instruction set. Qualcomm licenses the ARMv7 instruction set and created its own core. Qualcomm is like AMD --- AMD licenses the x86 instruction set and creates an x86 clone.

    Both Apple and TI license the Cortex A9 core and bundled with their choice of GPU to create the A5/A5X and the OMAP4 chips. If A5 and OMAP4 operates at the same speed, they will have the same computational performance because they have the same CPU.
    The chips are more than just A9 + GPU. There are a series of other chips on each SOC. A5x has various coprocessors and I would imagine that the OMAP has a number of customizations as well. Apples customizations are based on specific functions, while TI's seem to be based more on all around speed and efficiency.

    Also, again, the processor is only one factor that contrives to the speed of a device. Even more specifically, the loading speed of an application like this developer is describing. How much actual processing is going on while the application is loading?
    08-25-12 04:35 PM
  15. samab's Avatar
    when RIM and QNX designed the playbook OS they incorperated the same sort of feature and also incorperated a feature to distibupt CPU usage evenly to each of the cores to save battery life. it is able to smartly anticipate how much power is needed to load up the software, so while the iPad may be runnign at 900 MHz the playbook may be pulling 500MHz from each core and technically be clocked slower in that catagory.

    whats great abotu the QNX kernel is its a real time OS so when you click somethign to open it it happens in realy time and the kernels so all the background work happens as soon as you press the app button and say load this. power shifts to the kernels that are in use rather then having to pass through a branch of kernel that is not required, a key advantage over the microkernel architecture over the hybrid of darwin
    You are incorrect about what is real time OS.

    Real time OS has nothing to do with fast or slow computational performance. It has to do with reserving enough CPU for the important jobs --- whether its turning on and off the laser for your lasik eye surgery or controlling a nuclear power plant.

    iOS and Android are general purpose OS that handles the GUI and the apps --- but the baseband functions (the actual telephone call) is handled by a separate real time OS (you don't want your iphone to drop telephone calls as soon as you launch Angry Birds).

    Remember how it took forever for hackers to unlock the iphone 4 --- the reason was that Apple switched the real time OS from Nucleus RTOS to ThreadX RTOS.

    http://www.ijailbreak.com/cydia/the-...than-expected/

    For now on, QNX will run EVERYTHING on the Blackberry 10 phones/tablets --- the GUI, the apps and the baseband functions.

    QNX will be "fast" because they are in the embedded business for 30 years and historically been deployed in much slower CPU's and much fewer memory --- that means they are extremely light weight. It adds up when your GUI is a few kb smaller, your file system is a few kb smaller, your wifi driver is a few kb smaller...
    Taka313 and Mecca EL like this.
    08-25-12 04:36 PM
  16. GTiLeo's Avatar
    You are incorrect about what is real time OS.

    Real time OS has nothing to do with fast or slow computational performance. It has to do with reserving enough CPU for the important jobs --- whether its turning on and off the laser for your lasik eye surgery or controlling a nuclear power plant.

    iOS and Android are general purpose OS that handles the GUI and the apps --- but the baseband functions (the actual telephone call) is handled by a separate real time OS (you don't want your iphone to drop telephone calls as soon as you launch Angry Birds).

    Remember how it took forever for hackers to unlock the iphone 4 --- the reason was that Apple switched the real time OS from Nucleus RTOS to ThreadX RTOS.

    http://www.ijailbreak.com/cydia/the-...than-expected/

    For now on, QNX will run EVERYTHING on the Blackberry 10 phones/tablets --- the GUI, the apps and the baseband functions.

    QNX will be "fast" because they are in the embedded business for 30 years and historically been deployed in much slower CPU's and much fewer memory --- that means they are extremely light weight. It adds up when your GUI is a few kb smaller, your file system is a few kb smaller, your wifi driver is a few kb smaller...
    i stated that in my explination, i was talkign about code built in about power management which i got wrong and edited it in my next post after mike called me out on it
    08-25-12 04:39 PM
  17. samab's Avatar
    The chips are more than just A9 + GPU. There are a series of other chips on each SOC. A5x has various coprocessors and I would imagine that the OMAP has a number of customizations as well. Apples customizations are based on specific functions, while TI's seem to be based more on all around speed and efficiency.

    Also, again, the processor is only one factor that contrives to the speed of a device. Even more specifically, the loading speed of an application like this developer is describing. How much actual processing is going on while the application is loading?
    There are no performance customizations other than whether you put in the NEON SIMD instruction set. Tegra2 doesn't have NEON instruction set vs. TI/Apple both put in the NEON instruction set. Therefore, Tegra2 is extremely slow in some areas.

    Apple's customizations are more about cutting cost. TI's customizations are more about serving as many customers as possible. TI needs to make a CPU with 2 LCD outputs --- just in case somebody wants to make a flip smartphone. Apple knows that they will never make a flip iphone therefore all the A4/A5/A5x has only 1 LCD output. TI has to pay a licensing fee for HDMI output, Apple doesn't pay for that because they have a proprietary cable out.

    QNX is more light weight because they are in the embedded OS business for 30 years. Their GUI is going to be a few kb smaller, their wifi driver is going to be a few kb smaller, their file system is going to be a few kb smaller... and they all add up when you launch a pure native c/c++ game.
    Last edited by samab; 08-25-12 at 04:54 PM.
    08-25-12 04:50 PM
  18. mikeo007's Avatar
    There are no performance customizations other than whether you put in the NEON SIMD instruction set. Tegra2 doesn't have NEON instruction set vs. TI/Apple both put in the NEON instruction set. Therefore, Tegra2 is extremely slow in some areas.

    Apple's customizations are more about cutting cost. TI's customizations are more about serving as many customers as possible. TI needs to make a CPU with 2 LCD outputs --- just in case somebody wants to make a flip smartphone. Apple knows that they will never make a flip iphone therefore all the A4/A5/A5x has only 1 LCD output. TI has to pay a licensing fee for HDMI output, Apple doesn't pay for that because they have a proprietary cable out.

    QNX is more light weight because they are in the embedded OS business for 30 years. Their GUI is going to be a few kb smaller, their wifi driver is going to be a few kb smaller, their file system is going to be a few kb smaller... and they all add up when you launch a pure native c/c++ game.
    I have to disagree about Apple's customizations being about cost cutting. Firstly, most of their customizations aren't published. Secondly, of the ones that are published, they don't seem to be cost cutting measures. For example, an image processor would sure seem like a performance improvement customization to me.
    08-25-12 05:22 PM
  19. dentynefire's Avatar
    @GTiLeo I think you are reading a bit too much into what the OS is doing (the OS really isn't smart it does the same thing all the time [Distribute the processing] unless told not to) but the real strength of the OS is its ability to efficiently schedule, although there are settings available to optimize/tweak. So like what Mike007 says a faster CPU and efficient OS yields pretty good results. So what this tells me is that people are starting to take notice of what a great tablet we have here. Keep the apps coming!!

    Clearly PlayBook/QNX is better if fast means anything to you! Question is does this belong in the News section lol
    08-25-12 05:33 PM
  20. GTiLeo's Avatar
    one thing i would liek to see is video proccessing abilities over QNX and iOS accordign to QNXs website they boast about multimedia output of the QNX OS i really would liek to see how, but the onyl way to really do so is to compare hardware to hardware and run seperate OSs
    08-25-12 05:37 PM
  21. mikeo007's Avatar
    QNX makes a lot of claims that they haven't yet proven in the consumer market. They're more than capable of producing the results they're bragging about, but until they present proof, it will all just be marketing hype. Saying you can do something vs actually executing are 2 different things.

    It's also got to be a total package. I don't care if QNX can push 120hz video to my 60hz LCD at full HD if it can't scrub though the content worth a crap (only an illustration, not actually true).
    08-25-12 05:43 PM
  22. GTiLeo's Avatar
    agreed, it would be nice to get a comparison though. logic would make it seem liek it can do it all seeign as how its little sub servers are able to control its own section of the OS so it could in some ways be more efficient at it, correct me if im wrong
    08-25-12 05:49 PM
  23. samab's Avatar
    I have to disagree about Apple's customizations being about cost cutting. Firstly, most of their customizations aren't published. Secondly, of the ones that are published, they don't seem to be cost cutting measures. For example, an image processor would sure seem like a performance improvement customization to me.
    They ALL put custom DSP's into their chips. TI also put in DSP's that will do face detection (like the Apple A5) and other image processing stuff. Just look at the Blackberry 10 demo of the camera app --- the app knows that was a face and put a circle on it.

    The major difference is that the A5/A5X has SGX543 which is OpenCL capable --- which Apple can take advantage of that by writing photo filters for their photobooth app.
    08-25-12 06:14 PM
  24. samab's Avatar
    QNX makes a lot of claims that they haven't yet proven in the consumer market. They're more than capable of producing the results they're bragging about, but until they present proof, it will all just be marketing hype. Saying you can do something vs actually executing are 2 different things.

    It's also got to be a total package. I don't care if QNX can push 120hz video to my 60hz LCD at full HD if it can't scrub though the content worth a crap (only an illustration, not actually true).
    QNX never made any sort of claims. They just said that they are light weight, POSIX certified, fault tolerant, real time OS that uses all sorts of open source API's --- which is what this particular blog post is about how quick he ported the game because it's all POSIX, uses all sorts of opence api's (like OpenGL and OpenAL) and extremely light weight.

    You are basically discussing about people who don't know what they are talking about --- i.e real time OS mean really fast OS.
    Last edited by samab; 08-25-12 at 06:47 PM.
    08-25-12 06:44 PM
  25. VerryBestr's Avatar
    ... There are a series of other chips on each SOC. ...
    You mean other functions on each SoC? A SoC is, by definition, a single chip. Although I have read that, in some designs, the RAM is stacked on the SoC so that the package has more than one chip. I believe that is done in the PlayBook.
    08-25-12 06:46 PM
82 123 ...
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions. Please check them out.