Atom Z3370-D 3Dmark Cinebench11.5 etc

[tempestglen]

These data from nowhere, don't ask. I have no idea about the correctness.

J1850, bay trail @2Ghz qual

Fritz Chess Benchmark:6.67

ice storm GPU:14256
physics: 15051
total :14425


cloud gate GPU:1264
physics :1409
total :1293



Cinebench11.5 32bit multithread: 1.35

 

[strata8]

This is a Celeron J1850 with a 10W TDP.

If these results are correct, performance per clock in Cinebench looks to be somewhere between the original Atom and Bobcat. The Pentium J2850 (2.4 GHz) would edge out the A4-5000 (1.5 GHz) in CPU performance, but GPU performance looks pretty anaemic.

 

[mikk]

These data from nowhere, don't ask.

I have to ask. The scores are probably from here: http://we.poppur.com/thread-2140962-1-1.html

The Pentium J2850 (2.4 GHz) would edge out the A4-5000 (1.5 GHz) in CPU performance

J1850 CB11.5 score looks comparable to A4-5000. It's a 32bit result and also Cinebench 11.5 is floating point heavy which should favour Jaguar.

 

[tempestglen]

I have to ask. The scores are probably from here: http://we.poppur.com/thread-2140962-1-1.html





J1850 CB11.5 score looks comparable to A4-5000. It's a 32bit result and also Cinebench 11.5 is floating point heavy which should favour Jaguar.

Yes, I gather from there, but the data is still questionable. Just to say if those information wrong, don't blame me.

 

[Nothingness]

The Ice storm score is lower than Snapdragon S800: http://blog.gsmarena.com/samsung-galaxy-s4-lte-a-with-snapdragon-800-gets-gpu-benchmark-action/

 

[mikk]

Which is no surprise.

 

[Nothingness]

Which is no surprise.

Oh I thought HD graphics in Bay Trail was supposed to be way faster than chips already on the market. That's no sarcasm, that really was my understanding...

 

[tempestglen]

Oh I thought HD graphics in Bay Trail was supposed to be way faster than chips already on the market. That's no sarcasm, that really was my understanding...

only 4 EU of Gen7?

 

[mikk]

Oh I thought HD graphics in Bay Trail was supposed to be way faster than chips already on the market. That's no sarcasm, that really was my understanding...

It was never supposed to be a new GPU king. The specs are known since months. With 4 Gen7 EUs it is a midrange tablet GPU and nothing more. Z3770 does 11-12k in 3dmark ice storm.

 

[beginner99]

Oh I thought HD graphics in Bay Trail was supposed to be way faster than chips already on the market. That's no sarcasm, that really was my understanding...

faster than any other Atom...meaning the bar was already pretty low. On the other hand I don't mind because those other GPUs are way overpowered.

 

[Nothingness]

faster than any other Atom...meaning the bar was already pretty low. On the other hand I don't mind because those other GPUs are way overpowered.

Yeah Intel claimed 3x over Clover Trail. Nice to see Intel didn't try to win at all price the performance race.

 

[Arkadrel]

Ice Storm Graphics Scores

A6-1450 (8W, HD 8250): 21790
Snapdragon 800 (Adreno 330): 21680
A4-1200 est. (3.9W, HD 8180): 11830
Snapdragon 600 (Adreno 320): 11250
Tegra 4 (?): 11050
Exynos 5 Octa (PowerVR SGX544MP3): 10560

Look at the A4-1200 thats like a 3.9w TDP APU, and it scores like ~12k.

If this Atom Z3370-D scores like ~14k and has a TDP of 10w,
that just doesnt seem so impressive to me.

 

[mikk]

Look at the A4-1200 thats like a 3.9w TDP APU, and it scores like ~12k.

If this Atom Z3370-D scores like ~14k and has a TDP of 10w,
that just doesnt seem so impressive to me.

There is no Z3370-D, it's nonsense. Z3770 scores 11-12k and is in the same TDP range.

 

[monstercameron]

Look at the A4-1200 thats like a 3.9w TDP APU, and it scores like ~12k.

If this Atom Z3370-D scores like ~14k and has a TDP of 10w,
that just doesnt seem so impressive to me.

i was just about to post this as well, but if these scores are for the 10W part then maybe we can assume that the z3770 will perform a bit lower given its bursty turbo nature to maintain tablet thermal levels. Also the a4-1200 seems like a great tablet chip, why wont any one make something with it...

 

[mikk]

Also the a4-1200 seems like a great tablet chip, why wont any one make something with it...

Not really. A4-1200 has a very slow CPU. Only 2x1.0 Ghz. This is not competitive. It's way too slow to be a decent tablet chip.

 

[Abwx]

Not really. A4-1200 has a very slow CPU. Only 2x1.0 Ghz. This is not competitive. It's way too slow to be a decent tablet chip.

With a way better GPU CPU utilisation will be way lower as well...

And how much better , supposedly , would 3.5W atoms
perform ..?

 

[podspi]

Not really. A4-1200 has a very slow CPU. Only 2x1.0 Ghz. This is not competitive. It's way too slow to be a decent tablet chip.

That should be faster than current Atom, and that does pretty well in a tablet imho, as long as you don't touch the GPU

 

[mikk]

With a way better GPU CPU utilisation will be way lower as well...

And how much better , supposedly , would 3.5W atoms
perform ..?

Are you aware of that the Bay Trail Tablet chips all are around 4W? 3.6W afaik for the Z3770. How much they are faster depends on the workload. The biggest difference should be on CPU workloads with full 4 thread usage. We can expect a difference of factor 2 to factor 3 faster than 3.9W Temash.

 

[Sweepr]

With a way better GPU CPU utilisation will be way lower as well...

And how much better , supposedly , would 3.5W atoms
perform ..?

With 4 cores @ up to 2.4GHz (2W SDP, 3.0-3.5W TDP?) it should perform quite bit better on the CPU side. Without GPU specs its kinda pointless to speculate about graphics performance. 14-15k on Ice Storm is actually better than I expected (this thing has 1/4 the number of EUs of an IB ULV that scores ~35k) and depending on power comsumption and CPU performance numbers it could be a worthy trade off vs Snapdragon 800/Tegra 4's 30-35% extra GPU performance (that is, if these numbers are true).

 

[Khato]

Not only that, last time I checked none of AMD's attempts thus far at making an SoC have had acceptable 'active idle' power usage.

With respect to these scores, they certainly look reasonable. As mikk already pointed out, Baytrail is behind the A4-5000 due to different design goals resulting in Silvermont having weaker FPU performance. Similarly it's also slightly behind the A4-5000 in 3dmark physics. But then it appears to have a slight lead on the chess benchmark (the one result I found for the A4-5000 had it at 6.44.)

Real question though is what percentage of TDP the chip is actually using to provide that level of performance.

 

[mikk]

32bit scores of CB11.5 are 10% slower, if we remove 10% from a A10-5000 64bit score they are both almost identical in Cinebench 11.5.

 

[monstercameron]

Not really. A4-1200 has a very slow CPU. Only 2x1.0 Ghz. This is not competitive. It's way too slow to be a decent tablet chip.

I disagree the dual 1GHz should be fine
http://www.3dmark.com/is/187221
my c-50 9w scores
3DMark Score 10053.0
Graphics Score 12461.0
Physics Score 5998.0

so the a4-1200 should score a little higher around 7200 for the physics score.

compared to a nexus 10
est. a4-1200 | exynos 5 octa
graphics :12500 | 7952
physics :7000 | 8127
overall :11500 | 7990

and the exynos 5 dual is clocked higher, faster memory and uses a similar amount of power.
exynos 5 source http://www.anandtech.com/show/6875/3dmark-for-android-performance-preview

 

[AtenRa]

Not really. A4-1200 has a very slow CPU. Only 2x1.0 Ghz. This is not competitive. It's way too slow to be a decent tablet chip.

I have a tablet with a Dual core 1.5GHz ARM and crapy iGPU, im sure A4-1200 dual core 1GHz is way faster, not to mention the iGPU performance.

The only problem i see is Windows price, but they could use Ubuntu.

 

[lefty2]

According to here: http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/...nch_J1750_J1850_and_J2850_ULV_processors.html J1850 is a notebook CPU, not tablet and has TDP of 10W.
These figures show it has CPU and GPU performance considerably lower than A4-5000, and is a lot more expensive ($82).
The performance matches Intel's marketing information, more or less.

 

[SPBHM]

According to here: http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2013/...nch_J1750_J1850_and_J2850_ULV_processors.html J1850 is a notebook CPU, not tablet and has TDP of 10W.
These figures show it has CPU and GPU performance considerably lower than A4-5000, and is a lot more expensive ($82).
The performance matches Intel's marketing information, more or less.

according to this site the 1007U costs $86, but you can buy an entire mitx board with one + pch for $90

as for performance I do think Silvermont is not going to beat Kabini, but it might be close for some stuff, like the old Atom was slower than Bobcat overall, but could be faster for some things...

the biggest thing will be power usage and pricing, both seem to be pretty good, but Intel looks like they can go lower, also Intel have a greatly improved IGP I would think.