The Office benchmark numbers in OP were done using emulation and still beat Core i5 8250u according to Qualcomm. Yes, it's a stop-gap solution, but always better than no software support at all.
The Office benchmark numbers in OP were done using emulation and still beat Core i5 8250u according to Qualcomm. Yes, it's a stop-gap solution, but always better than no software support at all.Forget emulation, just forget it. Its is a stop-gap solution at best. The best dynamic translators i am aware of are still factor 2-3 slower than native. If we assume that ARM is 2x as effcient as x86, then with emulation you throw this advantage right out of the window ...period.
That does not mean, that applications are necessarily too slow for usage under emulation ...it is just that the advantage of ARM is gone.
When buying an ARM device you want to have highest performance in a power constrained device. Thats precisely what you get - when running native apps.
It is 73.27mm^2.Do we have an actual mm2 number for SD 855?
My bet would be it not being enormous. Pricing being bad is QCOM's thing.
This x10.The Office benchmark numbers in OP were done using emulation and still beat Core i5 8250u according to Qualcomm. Yes, it's a stop-gap solution, but always better than no software support at all.
Damn that is small, just slightly larger than Zen 2 CCX chiplet, albeit with all the extra stuff too (GPU, mem controller, modem, audio, video codecs, IPU, NPU/Hexagon DSP and whatever else is in there).It is 73.27mm^2.
Enviado desde mi SM-G975F mediante Tapatalk
Very encouraging results. Hope the cheaper 7cx would be almost as good to enable mainstream adoption.As posted by @Gideon at http://www.portvapes.co.uk/?id=Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps&exid=threads/speculation-ryzen-4000-series-zen-3.2567589/post-39902153
Thought this is worth a dedicated thread as this market is one Intel is currently strongly focusing on.
Caveat: private event, no independent benchmarks outside of that so far.
https://www.windowscentral.com/snapdragon-8cx-benchmarks
"Interestingly, Microsoft Office is not natively compiled for ARM and technically runs emulated, meaning the Snapdragon 8cx was actually at a disadvantage."
"That said, the Snapdragon laptop was running at full HD while the Intel one was 2K, which is a bit unfair though it would not explain the nearly 7-hour difference either."
Youtube playlist
TSMC 7nm explains a significant part of it at least."That said, the Snapdragon laptop was running at full HD while the Intel one was 2K, which is a bit unfair though it would not explain the nearly 7-hour difference either."
Are we sure Office is being emulated?The Office benchmark numbers in OP were done using emulation and still beat Core i5 8250u according to Qualcomm. Yes, it's a stop-gap solution, but always better than no software support at all.
On the other hand, from https://www.techrepublic.com/article/windows-10-on-arm-what-we-learned-at-build-2018/When we reviewed the Lenovo Yoga C630 ($850 MSRP), we found that software with ARM-native versions performed well. These included key software like Microsoft Edge and Microsoft Office, covering the vital combination of browser and office suite.
Some applications — like Microsoft Office — can mix x86 and Arm code using CHPE (Compiled Hybrid Portable Executable) DLLs with Arm64 code but 32-bit x86 interfaces; as a result, hundreds of third-party Office add-ins that expect Office to be an x86 application will work with Office on Arm too.
This x10.
It's all well and good saying we need native, but a vast library of legacy x86 software is not something to sniff at.
Many apps will never get updates even for modern x86, let alone ARM native support.
Do we have any idea what DX level support WARM has? Obviously some degree of DX12, and likely DX11 - but what about DX10/10.1 and DX9?
I have taken a look at x86->ARM translated code. It's quite nice, but the price to pay still is high (about 2x), so I doubt you'd get such good results by being fully translated on the fly.
Forget emulation, just forget it. Its is a stop-gap solution at best. The best dynamic translators i am aware of are still factor 2-3 slower than native. If we assume that ARM is 2x as effcient as x86, then with emulation you throw this advantage right out of the window ...period.
That does not mean, that applications are necessarily too slow for usage under emulation ...it is just that the advantage of ARM is gone.
When buying an ARM device you want to have highest performance in a power constrained device. Thats precisely what you get - when running native apps.
I suspect its more likely a long standing financial incentive program (contra revenue) from Intel to keep Chromebooks from becoming another entrenched beach head of ARM, as Android already was by the time Intel finally got there.thats the ONLY reason for using x86 in that market.
I suspect its more likely a long standing financial incentive program (contra revenue) from Intel to keep Chromebooks from becoming another entrenched beach head of ARM, as Android already was by the time Intel finally got there.
With the support for Android apps in Chrome, given the prevalence of ARM code in Android apps, we should have seen far more ARM based Chromebooks, it's counter intuitive that the opposite is true.
The only thing stopping me taking the plunge for one is a high end ARM chip to succeed the aging MT8173 and RK3399 based designs (yes 3-4 year old SoC's are the best you can get currently for ARM chromebooks).
I would prefer SD 855, but I would settle for RK3588 if it is significantly cheaper.
i think AMD is just dumping garbage they have to buy from GF. probably darn near giving those processors away.Intel isn't doing contra-revenue anymore but you can be sure they aren't making much if anything on Chromebook processors.
AMD did manage to get a design win for Chromebooks but I imagine it had more to do with Intel's shortages than anything else.
AMD also has some designs wins with a ancient core whiout even trying. There is more than just contra revenue going on here. Im going back to the RPI 4... that cheap A72 quad core CPU has similar scores to a old Z3735F, thats a 1.3Ghz Quad Core Bay Trail... this most likely means that MT8173 and RK3399 are slower than a modern quad core Atom. Thats no good in my book, you probably need newer cores than A72 on the low end to match Atom price-performance, and price may not be that good, and this is were power efficiency goes out the window. This is problably why Intel small cores are doing that well in Chromebooks and why ARM has no penetration on notebook market. But this is going to change very very soon. But Intel also has Little.Big coming to fight back. Not sure if it going to be enoght, ARM premium chips already showed they can at least match non-emulation X86 performance.
i think AMD is just dumping garbage they have to buy from GF. probably darn near giving those processors away.
RPi4 uses 28nm, it's neither A72's ideal process nor a fair comparison point to a 22nm finfet or 14nm finfet atom where clock speed is concerned.Im looking at results in Geekbeench 4... the RPI 4 has a little higher ST score but slower MT score than a Z3735F and thats the SLOWER Bay Trail Quad Core CPU and the one i have in my 5 year old $99 tablet.
With Active-Cooling the RPI 4 has higher ST and MT scores. But Again thats the SLOWER Quad core BT CPU, the Z3775 has a far higher scores than the RPI 4 even with active cooling. And thats still not the faster BT.
RPI4 passive
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13701853
RPI4 Active cooling
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/13864995
Z3735F
https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/1642
Z3775
https://browser.geekbench.com/processors/1647
With 64 bit Linux those scores are going to be better, so i consider RPI4 A72 cores to be about equal to a quad core BT.
-this is also the reason of why i think RPI4 can run Windows 10 perfectly, if a GPU driver is developed-
Im looking at results in Geekbeench 4... the RPI 4 has a little higher ST score but slower MT score than a Z3735F and thats the SLOWER Bay Trail Quad Core CPU and the one i have in my 5 year old $99 tablet.
With Active-Cooling the RPI 4 has higher ST and MT scores. But Again thats the SLOWER Quad core BT CPU, the Z3775 has a far higher scores than the RPI 4 even with active cooling. And thats still not the faster BT.
No WiFi built in?I'm still really looking forward to Rockchip's A76 SoC. All those 8cx machines look like "5G always-on" machines that don't even have wifi built-in. What a crock.