Newly bought Xperia C3, responding slowly for a quad core processor phone.

My Xperia C3 is just a week old sincebI bought it and my very 1st Sony phone. Doing simple task is so annoying because of phones slow response to command wether doing browsing to text messaging, i would have to wait for the right screen to come up, or even from stadby mode to making a call, or txt, it responds so slow.. Totally different from other brand of quad core processor I've tried. My phone memory or sd card memory is is not even 1/4 full. Why is this behaving like this?
Could someone Sony-brilliant user or support personnel help me on this please. Kindly help me make my Sony experience a better one.

My Samsung Galaxy S1, which is still fully functional up to now, does not even have a quad core processor, but its not slow like this C3. Same with Lumia 520 & 630.. So I don't know why would a new phone behave like this... Really annoying

Similar Messages

  • Dock-station for T520, Quad-Core.. (+long life battary)

    Hello,
    I've just bought Lenovo ThinkPad T520 (4242RK2), and looking for dock-station, the problem is that everywhere is written "suitable for  ... T520 Dual-core..." Why is it so? Does it mean that if I have i7 Quad-core processor, then there is no dock station yet?
    and one more question, you have 9-cell battaries, do you have long-life 9-cell? or all of them are long-life? Mybe just tell me which battary do you advice to use with t520 for the longest time to use lapton without charging, and also considering battary live overall.
    thank you!
    Max
    Solved!
    Go to Solution.

    T520 quad core CPU uses the Series 3 dock for mobile workstation with the 135 watt adapter.
    Basically the version with 90 watt adapter would also work, but you would need to use your 135 watt adapter with it to get the maximum speed.
    There are the 9 cells normal that you insert in the battery bay, and there is another 9 cells slice (called 27++) that you can attach to the bottom of the laptop to use in conjunction with the normal 9 cells battery.
    http://forums.lenovo.com/t5/T400-T500-and-newer-T-series/Pics-of-9-cell-battery-and-Slice-27-T520/td...
    Regards,
    Jin Li
    May this year, be the year of 'DO'!
    I am a volunteer, and not a paid staff of Lenovo or Microsoft

  • Quad-Core Processor useful for Lightroom?

    Hi
    I need to upgrade my PC in a couple of months time and I was wondering if there is any merit in going for an Intel quad core processor. Intel are reportedly almost halving the price of the Q6600 to $266 on the 22nd of July.
    Does anyone know if Lightroom can take advantage of all 4 cores? Or, am I better off getting a faster Dual Core processor for the same price?
    Regards, Nigel

    I see that Jeff Schewe mentioned that he was getting a 2xQuad Core (Octa Core?) machine so there must be some benefit in more than 2 cores.
    ]See
    Jeff Schewe, "Lihtroom does not do it's job...full stop" #22, 16 Jun 2007 4:31 pm
    Anyone else here with first-hand experience with this?
    Regards, Nigel

  • Is the mac mini server the same hardware as the other mac minis (except for the quad core i7 and dual hard drives) with different software or is it configured differently?

    I have a mac mini with an i7 dual core processor. It is perceptably slower than my macbook pro with a quad core i7. Does the mac mini server have the same hardware configuation as the regular mac mini with server software or is the hardware different (aside from the i7 quad core and dual hard drives)? I want a mini with a quad core i7...

    Your assumption is correct.  The server does however only
    have the Intel HD3000 graphics like the base model with
    no option, at this time, for the discrete graphics chip.  So,
    depending on what you are using it for, that could be a deal
    breaker.  Remember that your MBP does have a discrete
    graphics chip.
    I have a 2011 Mini Server connected to a Thunderbolt display
    that gets used as an engineering workstation and general
    personal use (some photo editing, LP restoraton, general
    internet browsing).  You simply just not enable any of the
    server services.  I find the combination to work quite well
    for my purposes.  I also have a 13" 2.7 GHz i7 Macbook Pro
    which is pretty much strictly for work.  As far as CPU
    power it is pretty much equivelent to your Mini.  For the most
    part I find the Mini does outperfom my MBP.  I heavily use
    Parallels and Windows7 virtual machines, so the more cores
    the better.
    So, If you do a lot of CPU intensive stuff that is multithreaded,
    the Server may help.  If it is graphics intensive and your software
    heavily leaverages the GPU, you may actually take a hit on
    performance.

  • P965 Neo-F Support for Q6600 Quad Core?

    Will it work with current 1.9 BIOS or not?
    Can't seem to find any definitive answers using 'search'
    Thanks,
    Glenn

    Quote from: Jack the Newbie
    I wonder why the Q6700 is listed as OK and the Q6600 is not. Faulty list?   
    Quote from: Frankenputer
    I saw that as well...seems a bit odd.
    The CPU support list has been fixed.
    http://global.msi.com.tw/index.php?func=prodcpusupport&prod_no=265&maincat_no=1&cat2_no=&cat3_no=#menu
    As I said from beginning, the Kentsfield core processors (Core 2 Quad) are not supported (hardware limitations) on this mainboard.
    That "YES" was for an X6700 (a "rare" Core 2 Extreme).
    cheers

  • Optimization for quad core processor

    HI.. i want to know if there is a flag to allow gcc to use 100% of the cpu.. I've got a intel quad core but i noticed that when gcc start to compile mi cpu utilization graph is well behind 50% threshold..
    Thanks

    Runni gcc with for threads.. It was a dummy question ? Next time i'll try to search a little bit deeper
    Thanks

  • Using Quad core processor for PE7

    If I run PE7 on a quad core 2.5GHz processor, will it perform better than on a dual core 3GHz (planning to use 4GB RAM in both cases)?
    I am planning on a pc upgrade for processing AVCHD movies taken on a Sony HDRSR11e.

    Generally, I don't recommend laptops for video editing. They're built for portability, not power. Besides, this program needs A LOT of screen space, and most laptops can't give you the real estate of a 22" desktop monitor.
    That said, these are very powerful machines, and the monitors can be set to a pretty high resolution -- so the interface should fit, although the type might be pretty tiny.
    I do highly recommend, though, that if you go this route you select the one with the 32-bit operating system. Most of the software world isn't quite ready for 64-bit Vista yet.

  • I recently bought a 13" Mac Book Pro i7 dual core processor and everything was just fine until now. I have been using iMovie for about a month and it runs perfectly, but now I can't seem to use it for more than 20 minutes without iMovie crashing. Help?

    When iMovie crashes it also makes my compute very slow and unpleasant to use. Has anyone else had this problem before? Should I take my laptop to the genius bar? I owned this computer for over a month now.

    check out this link which answers your question http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1242
    after re reading your post, I think you need an SMC reset instead: http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3964
    what does activity monitor show? screenshots?

  • New Videocard for Mac Pro 3,1 - Xeon 3.2 GHz (X5482) Quad-core processors

    Hi guys
    Am hoping you can advise me.
    Currently I have a
    ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT with 256 MB of GDDR3 SDRAM (two dual-link DVI ports). It was the card that was already installed at the time of purchase.
    I have not had any problems with it at all but as I do a lot of 3D (Cinema 4D) I think I would benefit from something more powerful.
    Can anyone recommend a powerful card that would 100% be compatible with my mac spec please?
    I have read an Nvidia Quadro FX 5600 is compatible. Does a Quadro 4800 for mac work also or any others?
    I look forward to hearing your responses.
    Thanks
    Sophia

    http://blog.weareboy.co.uk/why-you-need-a-better-graphics-card-for-cinem
    Graphic cards hierarchy chart:
    http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.ht%20ml
    Card chooser:
    http://www.welovemacs.com/apvica1.html

  • Best SSD for w520 quad core

    i have a Crucial C300 128gig in my dock slot now with the factory 500 gig in the hdd slot... the crucial sucks. any good one that works great with the w520, i know a lot are problematic.

    Storeagereivew.com did a comparison test of the intel 520 SSD vs Intel 510 vs corsair P 3 vs Crucial C300 in a 2 SSD RAID configuration in a Lenovo W520:
    (see the last part of the page
    http://www.storagereview.com/intel_ssd_520_raid_review
    Intel is known for its reliability.
    I also heard from Lenovo that the BIOS team found the issue causing the warm boot delay with Intel 510 SSD, but it will take a while to fix (perhaps a couple months). 
    W520 4270CTO i7-2820QM Quadro2000M 1920x1080 Display 16GB RAM 2x240GB Intel 510 SSDs (RAID 0) - BIOS 1.42 - PCMark7:4,568
    Samsung Series 9 15-inch NP900X4C-A03US - PCMark7: 4674

  • Max ram size for a quad core Mac pro tower?

    I have a 4-Core, Xeon 3500 series, 3rd gen Mac pro tower with four DIMM slots and would like to know what is the largest size ram I can put in each slot and what is the best configuration for that ram?  My main concern is maximizing the rendering speed of Final Cut Pro X and I have read that since it is a 64 bit program it can utilize much more ram than the previous version.
    Can I get the benefit out of 8G sticks?  Is it better to have the ram spread across multiple slots??
    Thanks!

    Andy Drefs wrote:
    Just installed my 3 new 8G sticks and I see NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER!!!!  And now suddenly the cooling fan has kicked in to overdrive and is buzzing away - this is such a great result of spending over $300!  What a waste of $$$$$$
    Sometimes when you change hardware configurations --  internal drives, dimms. video cards -- it may help to do a smc reset.
    If adding memory didn't change your performance perhaps you should look at how much disk space you have for your boot drive or consider a ssd as a boot drive.

  • Minimum PSU for a Quad Core and a G80 or R600....

    What's the minimum PSU wattage you'd recommend for a system?  I'll tell ya what I currently have and what I'm planning on getting.  Here's what I have: A64 X2 [email protected], 2GB 4x512MB of PC3200 Corsair ValueRAM, MSI K8N Neo4 Platinum mobo, GF 7800 GTX 512, Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty sound card, 1 Lite-On DVD-ROM, 1 Lite-On DVD burner, 1 WD IDE 7200RPM HD, 1 Seagate SATA 7200 RPM, 1 Floppy, 1 Enermax 535 watt PSU, 5 80mm case fans.
    Now, here's what I want to build:  Core 2 Quad Q6600, 2GB 2x1GB of DDR 667MHz Corsair XMS RAM, G80 or R600 (whichever comes out first), MSI P965 mobo, Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer Fatal1ty sound card, 1 Lite-On DVD burner, 1 Floppy, 1 WD IDE 7200 RPM HD, 1 SATA Seagate 7200 RPM HD, 5 80mm case fans and I want to use my 535 Watt Enermax PSU if I can.  According to this PSU calculator, I'll only need a 408 watt PSU if I buy the G80 (GF 8800 GTX) http://extreme.outervision.com/psucalculatorlite.jsp
    My Enermax 535 PSU says on the sticker that is has two 12v rails and they each have 18a.  The total 12v amperage is 34a.  Is that enough or am I cutting it too close? 
    Now, do you guys agree with that assessment or should I get a new PSU too?  The problem is, I really don't have enough money to buy a new PSU, otherwise, I'd get one in a heartbeat...the PC Power and Cooling Quad 750 watt PSU to be precise for $199 at Newegg, but I don't have the extra $200 or else I would.  I'd rather have allot of overhead but I just can't afford it now.  Another alternative is getting the E6600 Dual Core, in which case I'll have enough money to buy the PCP Quad 750.  Whatever happens I'm waiting until April 22nd where Intel drops their prices on their CPU's so the currently expensive Q6600 will drop down to a more manageable $530.   

    Quote from: Jack the Newbie on 29-March-07, 07:35:00
    I just read a thread in which someone had some problems with his system.  He was using a 550W DUAL-RAIL PSU (18A and 16A).  The combined maximum power for both +12V-rails was 250W (250W/12V=20.8A).  That means if the 18A-rail is at its maximum only 2.8A are left for the 2nd rail.  If you think about it, it sounds like a yoke, but it seems to be true:
    It's not a joke. All these multi rail 12V PSU's only have a single rail control circuit inside, wich is split into multiple rails each with 20A or less current limit. I've only seen 1 multi 12V rail PSU in all these years wich truly has 2 control circuits inside.
    The reason for this is plain safety. There is a safety standard IED 60950 wich limits wiring to a 240VA limit (12V * 20A = 240VA) and thats the only reason they make these multi rail psu's.
    I've seen single rail PSU's with more then 50A on the 12V rail, that's enough to weld with ! But still they use the same thickness of wires as other PSU's otherwise people would complain about the wires not beeing flexible etc.
    Such a single rail psu can deliver 49A trough 1 wire without tripping any safeties - melt the wire and cause fire because standard 1.5mm² cables used for PSU's are only rated about 20A - A multi rail PSU, even when its a just a single rail internally with splits will limit every outgoing connection to 20A or less thus protecting the wires.
    The only reason you could call multirail psu's bad is because of bad specification by the manufactureres, who don't always supply the right numbers like combined power. But they are safer.
    You should look at the psu above as a single rail 20.8A PSU with a 16A current protection on the CPU power connector and a 18A current protection on the other wires. When you look at it like that its not so bad is it ?

  • Oracle Licensing for a server with Quad Core Processor

    I know Oracle Standard Edition ONE is only licensed to install on a server with a max of 2 processors.
    1) Now when it comes to the type of processor does it matter what type of processors they are ?
    2) Can we have 2 Quad Core Processors on the server and install the Standard Edition One ( and comply to Oracle Licensing) ?
    Please do not direct me to Oracle Sales Rep, I want inputs from the Oracle experts from this forum

    johnpau2013 wrote:
    I know Oracle Standard Edition ONE is only licensed to install on a server with a max of 2 processors.
    1) Now when it comes to the type of processor does it matter what type of processors they are ?
    2) Can we have 2 Quad Core Processors on the server and install the Standard Edition One ( and comply to Oracle Licensing) ?
    Please do not direct me to Oracle Sales Rep, I want inputs from the Oracle experts from this forumUnfortuinately, no matter what you hear on the net, it ain't worth anything in front of a judge. Therefore you MUST get the final answer from someone with authority to speak on behalf of Oracle - and that is a Sales Rep.
    However, in the mean time, you can read http://www.oracle.com/us/corporate/pricing/sig-070616.pdf .
    SPECIFICALLY LOOK AT PAGE 15. Many people (including some in this thread) are totaly wrong about how Standard Edition is licensed.
    Edited by: Hans Forbrich on Mar 9, 2011 12:27 PM

  • VISTA Support for Multiple Dual Quad Core Processors

    Sorry if I missed this in my search.
    Does Windows Vista Home Basic support dual quad core processors?
    Windows Help & Support:
    Under System, you can view the processor type and speed, as well as the number of processors installed, if your computer uses multiple processors.
    Yet I see no mention of multiple processors there -- what am I missing?

    Hi -g,
    all Windows Home versions (XP and Vista) only support one physical prcossor with multiple Cores.
    Windows Professional versions (XP Professional and Vista Business+Ultimate) support two physical processor with multiple Cores each.
    Regards
    Stefan

  • Macbook Pro 15-inch, Late 2011. I'm 100% certain that I bought it with the AMD Radeon HD 6770M graphics processor with 1GB of GDDR5. It says that I have HD Graphics 3000 384 MB. WHY?

    I don't understand why my MacBook Pro 15-inch, Late 2011 version is reporting to me that I only have the Intel HD Graphics 3000 384 MB card in it. Why is this? When I bought it I was given the choice to choose between the 500 mb or 1 GB video card and I chose to pay extra in order to get the 1 GB, but now it says that I don't even have that( I can't find it anywhere). I never realized this until now. I was just looking at my specs again to make sure if my Macbook Pro was ready for the upcoming Mountain Lion OS. Please help me understand why this is happening. I'm 100% certain I bought the 1GB video Card and that my mac is supposed to have a quad core processor. I also ordered with the highest resolution screen available at that time which was something like an extra $100. I made sure that I had these extras because I wanted a mac that was going to perform great and not skip a beat. I have noticed it's been skipping here and there and I have been surpirsed at how slow it can get sometimes. I only have 4 GB ram at the moment, but I know that I can upgrade to 16 GB if I need to and have been contemplating on whether i should or not. I also like to do some gaming when I have the extra time and I've noticed that sometimes it has a hard time with some games. I bought this mac around January of this year. Is it possible that there was just a mess up in the shipping on the extras I had added? Thank you for your help.

    You are looking here?

Maybe you are looking for