Hacker News Reader

Comment by ClassyJacket | Hacker News Reader

>I think the real performance story with the A10 Fusion is not what it scores on benchmarks, nor how fast it feels in use, but what it does for battery life with its truly innovative dual two-core design. When high performance is called for, the A10 Fusion uses two performance optimized cores. When it’s not, is uses two energy-efficiency-optimized cores. To my knowledge there has never been a system like this in a phone.

Well, that's just wrong. Android phones had this years ago. The near ubiquitous Snapdragon 810 uses a Big.Little architecture.

View on HN

There's a handy list of phones with this architecture here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_big.LITTLE

Technically the Android phones using Big.Little are (correct me if I'm wrong) all octacore which is somewhat different than his claim (dual two core design; although there are/have been other chips with this).

No, there are dual 2-core big.LITTLE implementations (the K3V3): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARM_big.LITTLE#Implementations

Besides, Using 2 instead of 4 cores isn't really a notable difference. It's certainly not enough of a differentiator to make his claim meaningfully true. But that's beside the point because dual 2-core chips exist.

My comment acknowledged that other dual core chips exist, the question is whether phones used them. None are listed.

Come on, he's a huge Apple fanboy, so of course he's going to get some facts wrong.

I know a few Apple people. They are so impressed by Apple because they REALLY think that whatever Apple has on their devices every year is something that no other company has done EVER.

The Nintendo DS did it over 10 years ago.

The NDS case is a completely situation, the second core is a coprocessor with its own specific duties, it's not a low-power "step down" core. And that system (CPU + coprocessor(s)) has a long history — though you could argue that historically coprocessors were more DSPs than general-purpose.

Technically, it's not wrong because the statement is prefaced with 'To my knowledge'. Whether the author's knowledge is more extensive in the domain of the history of Apple's iPhone color offerings than the domain of mobile processor technologies implemented withing the industry does not alter the technical correctness of the statement.

Oh, come on! It would take 2 minutes for him to verify his statement.

Technically, the author already verified their statement by examining the extent of their knowledge. Personally, I would not be surprised if the author chose their words with an eye toward ensuing social media interactions and the nature of the blog's readership.

It is not a technique about which I believe I am unaware or have not employed on the interwebs to dampen the apparent appeal of argumentative replies, and I suspect that I am probably not mistaken about that belief. YMMV, but I feel it is probably sometimes advantageous to write in such a way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com