Specs vs performance...

[Reflexx]

What if WP8 is not so great and apps keeps crashing? There is a lot of bashing towards Android, but with Ice Cream Sandwich, it became a very stable OS, WP7 was such a basic OS that if it had to crash all the time it would have been a shame...

...and you're off topic.

 

[freestaterocker]

Specs are irrelevant if the software isn't optimized. Performance is what matters. Performance=end user experience. Specs can certainly help deliver performance, but they are just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[Simon Tupper]

...and you're off topic.

This whole tread is off topic...

 

[Reflexx]

This whole tread is off topic...

Agreed.

All this talk about specs vs performance doesn't belong in a thread about specs vs performance.

But to get back on topic...how about them 49ers?

 

[1jaxstate1]

And I'd you dont have the proper hardware, you can optimize for decades, and it still will run like crap

Specs are irrelevant if the software isn't optimized. Performance is what matters. Performance=end user experience. Specs can certainly help deliver performance, but they are just one piece of the puzzle.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express

 

[freestaterocker]

And I'd you dont have the proper hardware, you can optimize for decades, and it still will run like crap


Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express

Like I said. Specs are one piece of the puzzle. Software is the other piece.

 

[a5cent]

Blah it may work, but it would be ****ty. Thus proving the point that specs matter.

I find that statement neither convincing nor do I think it proves anything in that form:

a) What is your definition of ****ty
b) On what do you base your assessment that it would be ****ty

Is bumping the ram up to 512 would allow better operations and the addition of being able to add more apps, that's proving the point for us that say specs matter.

As Winning Guy mentioned, I never said specs don't matter. What I said is that RAM capacity plays almost no role in determining computational performance, which is what we have been discussing so far in this thread. Of course RAM has other specs (like bandwidth and latency) which do have an impact on computational performance, but you won't find that information on any consumer accessible smartphone spec-sheet (unfortunately).

I would recommend you look at it this way:

Computer technology is complicated. Really really complicated. If you aren't a software engineer or design integrated circuits, then you can safely assume you have no snowball's chance in **** of really understanding how hardware specs impact performance (or very vaguely at best). Under these circumstances, your only chance of determining what you are getting for your hard earned cash is to measure a devices performance using real apps and games (or benchmarking apps if that is all we've got).

It's not that specs don't matter. It's that most of us have no chance of correctly interpreting them. Furthermore, those specs you see on consumer oriented spec-sheets don't even list 1% of the specs you would need to accurately judge performance... the notion you could is nothing short of ridiculous.

Measuring performance is simply a much more reliable way of getting that information... much more reliable than trying to guess how a device might perform based on very sparse consumer oriented spec-sheets.

 

[Simon Tupper]

Agreed.

All this talk about specs vs performance doesn't belong in a thread about specs vs performance.

But to get back on topic...how about them 49ers?

Is that even needed like come on... I gave my opinion and you guys act like smart asses.

I have a Windows 7 PC, I recently had to change my graphic card and add 2gb of RAM to play Battlefield on it, now tell that I did not need to up the specs on my PC because Windows 7 is so great and wont crash...

Specs are essential no matter which OS... There is HD games on Android and iOS that requires higher specs... WP7 was mid-range, no matter how stable it is, it was not good enough to runs big games and do real multitasking. Now WP8 devices are around the corner and they have higher specs and oh SURPRISE, real multitasking is coming...

Specs are essential..

 

[1jaxstate1]

I agree.

Like I said. Specs are one piece of the puzzle. Software is the other piece.

 

[1jaxstate1]

I have a electronics engineering degree. I've been part of the initial design, prototype, testing, and released product, I understand how it works. I've agree when it's a mixture of both specs and performance.

I find that statement neither convincing nor do I think it proves anything in that form:

a) What is your definition of ****ty
b) On what do you base your assessment that it would be ****ty

As Winning Guy mentioned, I never said specs don't matter. What I said is that RAM capacity plays almost no role in determining computational performance, which is what we have been discussing so far in this thread. Of course RAM has other specs (like bandwidth and latency) which do have an impact on computational performance, but you won't find that information on any consumer accessible smartphone spec-sheet (unfortunately).

I would recommend you look at it this way:

Computer technology is complicated. Really really complicated. If you aren't a software engineer or design integrated circuits, then you can safely assume you have no snowball's chance in **** of really understanding how hardware specs impact performance (or very vaguely at best). Under these circumstances, your only chance of determining what you are getting for your hard earned cash is to measure a devices performance using real apps and games (or benchmarking apps if that is all we've got).

It's not that specs don't matter. It's that most of us have no chance of correctly interpreting them. Furthermore, those specs you see on consumer oriented spec-sheets don't even list 1% of the specs you would need to accurately judge performance... the notion you could is nothing short of ridiculous.

Measuring performance is simply a much more reliable way of getting that information... much more reliable than trying to guess how a device might perform based on very sparse consumer oriented spec-sheets.

 

[PG2G]

It is a silly question because there are going to be so many interpretations, primarily due to this history of windows phone and the whole "our OS is smooth, we don't need dual cores" mantra.

 

[a5cent]

I have a electronics engineering degree. I've been part of the initial design, prototype, testing, and released product, I understand how it works. I've agree when it's a mixture of both specs and performance.

Then I'm at a loss as to why you have so far failed to explain, in technically coherent terms, what exactly it is you derive from hardware specs that you couldn't more reliably gain from actual performance measurements.

 

[Simon Tupper]

... They are both essential, the only thing we see here is show offs that says exactly the same thing that everybody else and tries to break one's argument with the same argument but with a higher knowledge about it... This is why I said that this thread makes no sense...

 

[selfcreation]

Without the proper specs. We wouldn't have wp7.

Sent from my Lumia 900 using Board Express

You mean wp8? Wp7 could run on 14year old hardware. Lol...

Sent from my SGH-i917R using Board Express

 

[a5cent]

I think some of you might be misunderstanding the issue at hand (or maybe I am):

As I understand XENOPHOS, his question is how we should evaluate hardware. Is it better to:

a) make purchasing decisions based on spec-sheets
b) make purchasing decisions based on the results of performance tests using actual apps/games

Nobody is arguing that we don't need powerful hardware. However, all we currently have is option "a". The "Performance" camp is postulating that option "b" would be much more helpful for almost everyone involved. One way or another, option "a" obviously won't be going away.

Android devices are sold and marketed almost exclusively based on option "a". WP has proven that you can get comparable or better performance out of inferior hardware, if the software is done right. Now imagine how that well-optimized WP code would run on equally powerful hardware. Wouldn't it be great if we could present those results with cold hard numbers to the entire smartphone market? That would be great, but all we're doing is engaging in these almost meaningless spec-sheet-based "pissing contests" revolving around core count and RAM. The "Performance" camp thinks option "b" is the better way. That is what we are talking about.

 

[a5cent]

... They are both essential, the only thing we see here is show offs that says exactly the same thing that everybody else and tries to break one's argument with the same argument but with a higher knowledge about it... This is why I said that this thread makes no sense...

Sorry, you make no sense.

 

[cckgz4]

What if WP8 is not so great and apps keeps crashing? There is a lot of bashing towards Android, but with Ice Cream Sandwich, it became a very stable OS, WP7 was such a basic OS that if it had to crash all the time it would have been a shame...

again that statement doesn't apply to everyone

 

[Simon Tupper]

Sorry, you make no sense.

Oh yeah sorry about it, I forgot that you are the one who knows it all.

 

[Reflexx]

I don't think the purpose of the thread was to say that specs don't matter at all. It shouldn't have to be explained that hardware has to exist. And that existing hardware must have some sort of specs. We really shouldn't have to go over this.

The real question is, when judging a phone, what should you do? What is the more reliable way of determining what will be a better phone for you to own?

Should you look at a spec sheet and choose the phone with the "best specs"?

Or should you look at how the phone performs, regardless of specs?

It's really a simple question that people are choosing to tip toe around without actually answering.

 

[AngryNil]

Now WP8 devices are around the corner and they have higher specs and oh SURPRISE, real multitasking is coming...

Real multitasking is not coming. No Android device is able to capably multitask properly without lagging. Jelly Bean, quad cores, doesn't matter. Microsoft and Apple value the end user experience, and they aren't introducing full, unrestricted background apps any time soon.

Oh yeah sorry about it, I forgot that you are the one who knows it all.

Almost a smart retort, with the only problem being that you have shown yourself to be significantly less knowledgeable than others on this forum.