Max performance numbers in phones are much less important than battery life numbers. Can't wait to see what Merrifield has to deliver. Any way, Intel still has a lot of room to improve Dalvik performance.
The New Sony Xperia z1 phone has an S800 in it, results seem very similar to Bay Trail T in the legitreviews tests.
http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-a...l-first-look-and-performance-testing_123335/3
The important scores being (S800 first)...
Quadrant 20912 vs 21.315
AnTuTu 33515 vs 36054
Vellamo Metal 1157 vs 1112
It would seem the S800 is capable of maintaining close to its maximum speed without throttling, even in a phone. Given the thickness of some of the Bay Trail tablets we've seen, I'm not convinced that Intel has what it takes to match this performance in phones.
When you think about it, that's a big "oh dear". If they can't beat S800 in a phone with all of their advantages now then what can they do? Integrated LTE isn't going to help performance either, more like hinder it. Is this why they are racing to 14nm? Trying to be two nodes ahead to beat Qualcomm isn't a feasible business tactic in the long run.
I find these results slightly surprising: both Native and Java scores show ~4x faster over RAZR i (z2460). I would expect the Java ratio to be higher than the native one as an in order CPU requires much more work in JIT to achieve good speed. Perhaps the work Intel has to do is more in support libraries than in the code generator of Dalvik itself? Or perhaps the native version was not using good flags for the old Atom...Max performance numbers in phones are much less important than battery life numbers. Can't wait to see what Merrifield has to deliver. Any way, Intel still has a lot of room to improve Dalvik performance.
The New Sony Xperia z1 phone has an S800 in it, results seem very similar to Bay Trail T in the legitreviews tests.
http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-a...l-first-look-and-performance-testing_123335/3
The important scores being (S800 first)...
Quadrant 20912 vs 21.315
AnTuTu 33515 vs 36054
Vellamo Metal 1157 vs 1112
It would seem the S800 is capable of maintaining close to its maximum speed without throttling, even in a phone. Given the thickness of some of the Bay Trail tablets we've seen, I'm not convinced that Intel has what it takes to match this performance in phones.
When you think about it, that's a big "oh dear". If they can't beat S800 in a phone with all of their advantages now then what can they do? Integrated LTE isn't going to help performance either, more like hinder it. Is this why they are racing to 14nm? Trying to be two nodes ahead to beat Qualcomm isn't a feasible business tactic in the long run.
What's missing from M and D that makes it smaller than T?
I was always under the impression that Medfield, CloverTrail and CloverTrail+ had 64-bit capability fused off.
Not specifically mentioning it in press material is one thing, but not listing it in their Ark information makes no sense - I don't see them omitting it just because none of the OS makers want to support it.
http://ark.intel.com/products/70100/Intel-Atom-Processor-Z2580-1MB-Cache-2_00-GHz
It would seem the S800 is capable of maintaining close to its maximum speed without throttling, even in a phone. Given the thickness of some of the Bay Trail tablets we've seen, I'm not convinced that Intel has what it takes to match this performance in phones.
Turbo is based on power and temperature considerations for Intel, I'm assuming it's not any different for Qualcomm so basically a better designed (or bigger) heatsink is going to help with performance.
What precisely does device thickness have to do with SoC power consumption? It doesn't even affect available thermal dissipation area by a tangible amount. If anything, the difference between the LG G2 and Sony Xperia Z1 performance implies that the Snapdragon 800 is using enough power under load that LG felt it necessary to reduce maximum frequencies while Sony let it run at speed.
Turbo is based on power and temperature considerations for Intel, I'm assuming it's not any different for Qualcomm so basically a better designed (or bigger) heatsink is going to help with performance.
Correct, however when it comes to tablets and smartphones the enclosure is responsible for thermal dissipation and a thicker enclosure has a minimal effect upon total dissipation area.
The sony phones there are pretty massive too. The Z Ultra is 6.4 inches and the Z1 is 5.0 inches.
But significant advantage because of higher thermal inertia,
in short you can use the turbo a longer time before being
constrained by the item thermal resistance.
To say it simply it takes twice the time to heat
twice a given mass of matter to reach same temperature.
But significant advantage because of higher thermal inertia,
in short you can use the turbo a longer time before being
being constrained by the item thermal resistance.
To say it simply it takes twice the time to heat
twice a given mass of matter to reach same temperature.
Except a device twice as think doesn't have twice the mass.
And you are severely overestimating the thermal load something like a small phone or tablet heatsink can contain.
Noticed you still appear to be posting from a phone.
Quite correct, which is why smartphones have a tendency to throttle if benchmarks are run repeatedly. Not that they typically have much in the way of actual 'heatsinks' to absorb thermal peaks - nope, that's typically just taken care of with the PCB to which they're attached. Sometimes there will be a thin aluminum sheet to help, but such hardly affects device thickness.
I still have no idea of what "IGP settings" means but i did tested on my E-350 last night on 1366x768 on the lowerest details as possible.
6 to 14 fps
as for the cpu
800x600 on a window (i know is not the best way to do it, but i did not have time)
it runs on 10-22 fps on fullscreen at 800x600.
i wouldnt care too much about that cuz even my lowly c-50 has better gpu perf than what was shown of baytrail.
Exophase talked about fusing off which is a hardware fusing. So if your chip has been fused off and MS or Google release a 64-bit enable OS, you won't be able to use it and would have to buy a new PC/tablet/whatever. That is unless Intel has some magic microcode update workaround...Which is what I mean by being 64 bit capable. The SoC itself was capable of x86-64, but due to its intended market having no support for such it was disabled. If 64 bit windows with connected standby had become available or a 64 bit enabled Android Intel could have taken advantage of it
Linus Torvalds about that: http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=136199&curpostid=136203But again, the only reason to enabled 64 bit processing in these markets is if memory limits become an issue.
He's saying that his CPU is too crappy to let the gpu stretch its legs.
E-350 dual core at 1.6 ghz
Jaguar at 1.2 ghz will equal it.
We can easily see then that we need jaguar at more than 1.2ghz to really play the game. Given jaguar's better GPU I think at least 1.8 ghz dual core is required to shift the bottleneck to the GPU (possibly more).
Correct, and I didn't deny that did I? We're simply talking about different things. The SoC itself is capable of x86-64. And if there was a reason to enable it for some products then Intel would simply not fuse it off.Exophase talked about fusing off which is a hardware fusing. So if your chip has been fused off and MS or Google release a 64-bit enable OS, you won't be able to use it and would have to buy a new PC/tablet/whatever. That is unless Intel has some magic microcode update workaround...
Pssst, I said memory limits, not 4GB. And applications in the tablet/smartphone space aren't there yet. They will be eventually, but there's still time for the operating systems to put in support. The hardware continues to be ready, it's just a question of getting software in place. (Which is why Samsung's claim of their next smartphone being 64 bit is quite amusing - unless Google adds support or it's running Tizen then what good is having hardware support going to do?)Linus Torvalds about that: http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=136199&curpostid=136203
But I guess that won't stop people from thinking 4GB is a requirement before moving to 64-bit
oh ok also think a6-5200...
Kind of a tangent, but I'm confused as to why Samsung would opt for Tizen. I haven't read up too much on it aside from the fact that it's a linux based OS for small devices? How does it manage to keep up with Android's software ecosystem?
I dont see why the a6-5200 cant go into a tablet. if the 35-45W i5 can why cant the 18-24W kabini?Yeah, from what I see, 1.4 ghz jaguar is simply too slow to play most games. 1.5 ghz jaguar is better but 2.0 ghz is really needed for the igp to stretch its legs, especially at lower playable settings.
For a tablet though jaguar is limited to 1.0 ghz which isn't going to be pretty.