The only thing that may be improved is the licensing cost, but it appears that MS is lowering 8.1 licensing prices for tablet form factors. What that actual cost is, I have no idea.
@VengenceIsMine
Well, two different points of view. I don't think that this chip is going anywhere while Intel is holding hands with Microsoft. Bay Trail based Android tablets will have to wait since they're not even close to be ready.
I don't think that Intel will do anything meaningful in the mobile space, it's too late for that. Just thinking about how Qualcomm has to update its old Krait cores while they're still kicking ass doesn't bode well for Intel... or anyone else for that matter except Samsung.
It's going to be fun checking quarterly reports from everyone.
Yes. And almost without exception, that kind of behavior would have had the exact opposite reaction if it were AMD, as we've seen in many other threads. That's viral marketing for ya.
Now you've likely got the lawyers coming out to publicly defend these practices as well.
The DT version at 1.46/2.4 is 10W TDP , only a gullible
can think that stripping a few functions will drop said
power to 2.5W with all four cores running at 2.4Ghz.
The vast majority of those design wins will be for Bay Trail M and Bay Trail D.
I don't recall much uproar whenever AMD provided coarse power measurements for their platforms to showcase how much more power Intel mobile solutions use while gaming? At least no claims that AMD was faking the power measurements to make them look good.
Regardless, like it or not the measurements were not tampered with. Unfortunately there's nothing anyone can do to keep those who disagree from claiming otherwise, but that's all it is - an unsubstantiated claim.
Was Baytrail running at 2.4 GHz in the multi-threaded Cinebench run though? Or was it dropping frequency in order to maintain a 2.6W power cap? (PC Perspective's preview noted SoC power hitting 2.6W under multi-threaded Cinebench.) I might be missing it, but I don't recall any reviews stating what frequency Baytrail was actually running at while running benchmarks?
I think somebody here was saying that if you ain't in an iPad or a Nexus, then you're not in anything...lol
But seriously, these are some VERY compelling designs and I think that Intel, Microsoft, and its long-suffering OEM partners are finally working together to bring something good to market.
Clover Trail kinda...erm, really...sucked, which kept anybody from really doing anything good, but BYT performs quite well and enables a lot of really neat designs. Is
I don't recall much uproar whenever AMD provided coarse power measurements for their platforms to showcase how much more power Intel mobile solutions use while gaming? At least no claims that AMD was faking the power measurements to make them look good.
Regardless, like it or not the measurements were not tampered with. Unfortunately there's nothing anyone can do to keep those who disagree from claiming otherwise, but that's all it is - an unsubstantiated claim.
Was Baytrail running at 2.4 GHz in the multi-threaded Cinebench run though? Or was it dropping frequency in order to maintain a 2.6W power cap? (PC Perspective's preview noted SoC power hitting 2.6W under multi-threaded Cinebench.) I might be missing it, but I don't recall any reviews stating what frequency Baytrail was actually running at while running benchmarks?
No argument that Bay Trail looks much better than Clover Trail - I buy my own Christmas presents these days and this year I'm thinking I need new Bay Trail tablet. That 8" Dell looks interesting to me also.
But .. I also currently have a Clover Trail HP Elitepad, - it does have some lags occasionally when opening a x86 program but all in all I'm not really disappointed in it. Prefer it to my android tablets and my lady's ipad.
How do we know intel hasn't manipulated results to showcase their product better than reality. The fake game play video comes to mind.
Based on market share that's pretty obvious.
Based on market share you're wrong (or nobody cares).
Why do you think that's true? It seems like Bay Trail's biggest value is in the power constrained environments, which would be the smaller devices.
Was Baytrail running at 2.4 GHz in the multi-threaded Cinebench run though? Or was it dropping frequency in order to maintain a 2.6W power cap? (PC Perspective's preview noted SoC power hitting 2.6W under multi-threaded Cinebench.) I might be missing it, but I don't recall any reviews stating what frequency Baytrail was actually running at while running benchmarks?
More conspiracy theories about anand being deceived eh?
Bay Trail T is going into real tablets that are ipad like size and has excellent battery life at that, so it's obvious that the power is where it should be. If the power were outrageous it would not end up in a slim tablet form factor, period. Speaking of which, where are the tablets with the A4-1200? The one that hasn't been benchmarked?
More conspiracy theories about anand being deceived eh?
Bay Trail T is going into real tablets that are ipad like size and has excellent battery life at that, so it's obvious that the power is where it should be. If the power were outrageous it would not end up in a slim tablet form factor, period. Speaking of which, where are the tablets with the A4-1200? The one that hasn't been benchmarked?
msi and toshiba have announced temash tabs.
Its drifting away.
Look at power numbers and performance.
We also got a look at the individual power consumption of our tablets' graphics and CPU components in two scenarios: gaming and SunSpider testing.
While gaming, the Clover Trail system's graphics drew about 650 mW, and the CPU drew 700 mW. The Bay Trail system's total power use wasn't far from Clover Trail's, but the mix was very different, with 1.2W going to the IGP and 100-150 mW heading to the CPU. To be fair, though, the Bay Trail IGP was driving a much higher-resolution display.
In SunSpider, the CPU/GPU split on Clover Trail was 900/350 mW, while Bay Trail's was 1000/475 mW—again, comparable total power use. Of course, Bay Trail finished the SunSpider test in half the time and then dropped back to idle, so it was easily the more power-efficient solution overall.
Under real games the difference between the two will decrease even more due to Baytrail's dual channel RAM and slightly better CPU performance (kabini is held back by CPU a lot).
I don't expect a successor to jaguar for more than a year. Looking at the time it takes for AMD to integrate its gpu ip into its APU designs we are not going to see anything better than GCN on its APUs for some time.
Adeline LeeSo, let's talk about the tablet market. It's clearly in an area where the high-end is accelerating and the area that’s growing is the 7 inch sort of smaller form factor tablets. What’s your intention here? Do you have a specific product that competes in that area or can we expect some of your current new products to be targeting that area?
Lisa SuYes, I think what you’ll see is particularly with X86 today the focus on tablets has been around Windows 8 and they have been at the larger screen sizes and the higher performance. I think over time you’ll see that come down. I think you’ll also see that our products I said Temash was a four watt product I think you’ll see new products coming out from us at much lower power that will support the 7 to 8 inch screen sizes. So I think overtime you’ll see Windows become a larger player in those spaces.
Are you sure they will even be made? The MSI one is back from Computex. And there was no info of any kind of any possible release date or price. Video with battery was also 6 hours. Or in other words, really terrible.
who knows and 6 hrs on an 11.6 display isnt too bad.
New leak: some of the Windows 8.1 devices based on Bay Trail-T
Toshiba: 8-inch "Bay Trail" Encore. Battery: 6-7 hours. Price: $329[/b]
Abysmal!
6-7 is great!
And the batterysize? That Bay Trail weight is almost half of the Temash
While gaming, the Clover Trail system's graphics drew about 650 mW, and the CPU drew 700 mW. The Bay Trail system's total power use wasn't far from Clover Trail's, but the mix was very different, with 1.2W going to the IGP and 100-150 mW heading to the CPU. To be fair, though, the Bay Trail IGP was driving a much higher-resolution display.
CloverTrail almost use half of the TDP for the CPU and Half of the TDP for the GPU. On the other hand, BayTrail uses 89% of the TDP for the GPU and only 12% for the CPU.
100-150mW for the CPU in Gaming ??? Well, that was an Android Game (i believe they used the Epic Citadel).