On 04/21/2017 02:18 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Hmm, your probably right, I since checked the speed of my processor, and
>> it is 2.4 per processor and its a dual core.
>> But, the arm processor is 1.8 per processor and its a quad core. So if I
> You can't usefully compare the frequency of proce
> Hmm, your probably right, I since checked the speed of my processor, and
> it is 2.4 per processor and its a dual core.
> But, the arm processor is 1.8 per processor and its a quad core. So if I
You can't usefully compare the frequency of processors that are
internally so completely different.
On 04/18/2017 05:09 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
4x faster than the fastest processor on that "x200 libreboot device I am
>>> I highly doubt it would be nearly that fast (at least for "general
>>> computing").
>> Intel is on about the same ballpark as the big arm tablet chips but they
>> can't
>> > 4x faster than the fastest processor on that "x200 libreboot device I am
>> I highly doubt it would be nearly that fast (at least for "general
>> computing").
> Intel is on about the same ballpark as the big arm tablet chips but they
> can't shrink it any further. They got this low simply from
Intel is on about the same ballpark as the big arm tablet chips but they
can't shrink it any further. They got this low simply from node shrinks,
but at this point making a new core design only for the tablet market would
require very high sale volumes. And they failed to infiltrate the tablet
mark
> 4x faster than the fastest processor on that "x200 libreboot device I am
I highly doubt it would be nearly that fast (at least for "general
computing").
Stefan
___
arm-netbook mailing list arm-netbook@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.
On 04/16/2017 06:53 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 10:56 PM, zap wrote:
>> something interesting I saw is that in the update picking a processor,
>> it shows rk3188 as the rockchip processor you were going to reverse
>> engineer. on the other hand, your rhombus-
On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 10:56 PM, zap wrote:
> something interesting I saw is that in the update picking a processor,
> it shows rk3188 as the rockchip processor you were going to reverse
> engineer. on the other hand, your rhombus-tech link shows that your
> looking at rk3288?
>
>
> Not to be ann
something interesting I saw is that in the update picking a processor,
it shows rk3188 as the rockchip processor you were going to reverse
engineer. on the other hand, your rhombus-tech link shows that your
looking at rk3288?
Not to be annoying constantly, but I am curious are you looking at one
