Intel Disses Android's Dual-core Support

Intel is relatively new to the smartphone game, with just a couple of Medfield devices available today. However, the company is making waves this week thanks to comments made by its General Manager of Mobile and Communications. According to Mike Bell, Android and multiple cores just don't mix. At least not at the moment.

The Inquirer cites Bell as saying Intel's own testing shows that multi-core implementations can actually run slower than single core solutions. What's more, it's not really clear how much of a benefit there is in turning the second core on because of the way 'the people' have not implemented their thread scheduling.

"If you are in a non-power constrained case, I think multiple cores make a lot of sense because you can run the cores full out, you can actually heavily load them and/or if the operating system has a good thread scheduler," Bell explained to the Inquirer.

"A lot of stuff we are dealing with, thread scheduling and thread affinity, isn't there yet and on top of that, largely when the operating system goes to do a single task, a lot of other stuff stops. So as we move to multiple cores, we're actually putting a lot of investment into software to fix the scheduler and fix the threading so if we do multi-core products it actually takes advantage of it."

Intel's Medfield chip is a single core mobile platform launching at a time when solutions like the quad-core Tegra 3 is well established in the market, not to mention dual-core solutions from the likes of Qualcomm, so Intel would have had plenty of multi-core options to test against Medfield. Unfortunately Bell didn't mention which multi-core chips tested poorly when compared to Intel's single core.

Follow @JaneMcEntegart on Twitter.   


Create a new thread in the US News comments forum about this subject
This thread is closed for comments
45 comments
    Your comment
    Top Comments
  • husker
    Here is how to parse these kinds of articles and find the real truth. The article states:

    The Inquirer cites Bell as saying Intel's own testing shows that multi-core implementations can actually run slower than single core solutions.

    Notice that it states it "can" run slower. Not will run slower, or usually runs slower. This is not a strong statement, and can be taken with a grain of salt. For example I can confidently state that laptops "can" spontaneously explode, and Intel chips "can" arrive brand new and fail after 1 day.

    I also don't think they are talking about actually running separate tasks, but single multi-threaded tasks, so you are still getting the benefits of multi-core when doing more than one thing at a time, such as listening to streaming media while surfing the web.
    15
  • acerace
    How about a much polished OS for low end devices? Take Windows Phone for example.
    14
  • eddieroolz
    While I'm sure there's some self-promotion interests involved, Intel is probably right on this one. Dual-core/Quad-core is great for benchmarks and bragging rights, but what can dual-core devices do that single-core can't? So far, I haven't received a good answer from any Android users I know.
    13
  • Other Comments
  • eddieroolz
    While I'm sure there's some self-promotion interests involved, Intel is probably right on this one. Dual-core/Quad-core is great for benchmarks and bragging rights, but what can dual-core devices do that single-core can't? So far, I haven't received a good answer from any Android users I know.
    13
  • saturnus
    So what Intel is basically saying is that multi-core ARM chips should beat Medfield down even more than they already do but are let down by Androids scheduler.
    13
  • outlw6669
    I can see the logic behind their argument.
    Even if the scheduler was optimized in Android, how many high priority threads are you realistically going to be throwing around?

    With a limited power budget, I would much rather have a much more powerful single core.
    If anything, I could see a low power 'Companion Core' being integrated into the package to handle background tasks and operations while sleeping.

    Wasting the power/thermal budget in mobile devices on more, lower performing, cores has never made sense to me :/
    7