2 GHz Motorola Android Phone May Arrive in Q4

what about the heat.....

or battery life...

It will probably be some sort of mobile P IV ... all the GHz you want but grabage in terms of processing power.
You just can't go from 1 GHz to 2 GHz like that in my opinion. Given a new architecture though you could do it though it remains to be seen how power efficient it will be and if those 2 GHz really translate into CPU power or it will be just for show off.

It won't stay on long enough to get hot.

I really think that consumers and power users would benefit from a dual core 600-1000 mhz processor. It would help cut down on the heat, and would make multitasking more seamless.

I wonder if it's based on one of the new z6xx chips Intel will be officially releasing in Q3 or Q4.



It's a tough call considering that it uses an Nvidia tegra chip. My next guess is the VIA Nano processor. I guess we'll see.

Evolution of the Snapdragon? Moto doesn't use Qualcomm processors. They use TI. Its probably a 45nm dual core TI A9 chip.... OMAP4 platform. Tegra2 is a whole different platform, Nvidia's also using a custom A9 chip for it, but the GPU is significantly faster...

Nowhere in the article you referenced did I see anything mentioning Tegra2. Its probably OMAP4... but if that's the case, its going to blow what we are seeing right now in smartphones out of the water anyway. 5x better graphics than what's in the iPhone4, with a processor that's about 4x as fast.

Oh, and heat and battery life would both be improved compared to the single core 65nm processors in most "current" smartphones.

With a solid die shrink and a few architectural changes they could achieve that without much more power or heat.

No i will be something from Global Foundries at 28nm like dual core A9 plus some decent graphic chip.

wait and see ~
their phone always looks ugly ~
just not into it ~ sorry MOTO,

http://www.linuxfordevices.com/c/a [...] ils-OMAP4/

this isn't new, or surprise information ^

"This date would also give Motorola enough time to take notes from Apple's current mobile phone and incorporate features that will raise the ante until the next iPhone revision."

I forgot to comment on this idiocy. The iPhone4 has no new ideas. It just has a good screen... the rest of the specs are standard nowadays, except for the front facing camera, and dual glass panels... which are questionable design decisions at best. The Galaxy S' Super AMOLED screen is probably going to prove to be superior to Apple's "retina display" anyway.

What would they be taking notes on? I'm starting to get the idea that you know absolutely nothing about mobile phones, Kevin. How you're payed to write about news regarding them, is a mystery.

***Giving a reason to why the AMOLED screen is superior, before someone comments on pixel density... Yes, the iPhone4's IPS LCD technology provides a tiny bit more clear picture than the AMOLED screen Samsung is using, but at the cost of much more power consumption.

More likely a 45nm OMAP4 platform Cortex-A9. They've been planning to mass manufacture dual core A9s for a looong time now. That was always the roadmap. The 28nm stuff is going to be more impressive than this... Quad cores, probably, I haven't looked that far ahead.

Lets not confuse anybody here, it's not 2Ghz, but a 1Ghz dual core. Besides marketing it will only be different than the 1Ghz Snapdragon depending on the apps that make use of it. With the PC it took years before dual cores were being made of any true use and I can think of maybe a few things on a phone that would make complete use of dual cores at this moment.

Most important thing to consider is the battery life and how big of an impact these future multiple core phones are going to have on battery technology. I assume they will have technology in place similar to AMD/Intel that down clocks each core by 50% or so for regular usage and clicks on at full power when apps demand it.

Thinking about this... the clockspeed mentioned does seem fishy. OMAP4440, and OMAP44430 are going to be at about 1GHz... but... Osprey based A9s will run at about 2GHz. Moto couldn't have something with a 40nm Osprey in the works to release at Christmas, could they?

This has to be.... I was wrong about OMAP4. If its 2GHz.. this is Osprey. Would be manufactured on TSMC's 40nm process... but, who's designed the chip? I don't think TI has one of these, Qualcomm's doing their dual core Snapdragon's at 1.2-1.5GHz... Samsung designed maybe? This is out of left field.

Very interesting news indeed, but..Hello? Battery life? Cost? Heat? SIZE? Looks? Before anyone decides to try and make yet another phone to try and kill the iPhone (which other phones have in certain areas), let's see the actual product.

Intriguing news indeed, though.

I just re-skimmed the source article, and apparently there was something in there about an exec mentioning Tegra2 off the record. Maybe Moto does have a Tegra2 device on the way, I mean, that wouldn't be completely crazy... cut a 2GHz Tegra2 is. Everything out there about the Tegra2 platform that I've seen has said that Nvidia was using 1GHz dual core A9s, similar to what TI's OMAP4 has...

Yup, on Nvidia's site for Tegra2 they say:
"Processor and Memory Subsystem
* Dual-core ARM® Cortex-A9 MPCore™ processor, up to 1.0 GHz"

If this device has a 2GHz something or another, and is going to release by the end of the year... it has to be an Osprey dual core A9. So, either Moto has a Tegra2 based device AND an Osprey based device on the way, or one of the execs had "miss-spoke".

People need to stop thinking that a quad 1ghz processor ='s 4ghz. Or, that a dual 1ghz processor ='s 2ghz.

If you drive two cars at the same time at 60MPH are you driving the car at 120MPH? NO! why? Because when you put it in perspective it sounds retarded!

Sounds fast. But I want improved battery life.

I'm probably coming across as something of a crazy person, chatting with myself, but nobody else has any input, I guess. The Moto execs were both probably speaking inaccuracies, from what I can tell, but maybe not. TSMC should be able to produce 40nm "Osprey" Cortex-A9 parts by the end of the year. The IP was released end of 09, and there's been sufficient time. They're the same gen as the 1GHz A9s in the Tegra2, and OMAP4 platforms, but with architecture differences that let them hit 2GHz. They're similar, its just that the lower clockspeed version is optimized for battery life, and the 2GHz version is optimized for speed.
- The 2GHz A9s were supposed to be a competitor for Atom in the smartbook, tablet, netbook, type of markets... but I've never heard of someone wanting to use one in a phone.

i think that in the current state of technology governing mobile devices a two CPU core design at relatively lower clock speeds would benefit more than having a single CPU clocked much higher...i believe it pays more respect to conserving battery power because you can control in a more finite manner the power management properties based upon user's demands and inputs...its more intricate yes, but if well executed it will yield a much more efficient machine capable not only amazing abilities, but with responsible battery usage as well...

Don't worry, they'll use a mini nuclear reactor

Anyways, it's great to see the speed/performance race going on, but I do tend to worry about heat and battery life now, esp. with what happened between AMD vs Intel in the P4 era.

I wonder at what moment in the near future smartphones cpus will match desktop clock rates. Maybe we are not so far away when our phones will suffice most computing needs and we will be able to carry them anywhere. Put 2 or more of them together for network processing power. Software developers will need to create powerful apps to put those cpus in good use. Can we dream?. Get a folding HD screen and keyboard and you are done...

No you are not driving at 120 but you are carrying/processing more information at the same time.

World of Warcraft anyone?

call of the day
+1

Give me a call when one hour of continuous usage of cell phone apps don't drain the battery, and I don't mean just talking on the phone. I might get one, then.