ASUS state 72% NTSC for 100% sRGB displays.
And IPS is always mentioned if possible.
All in all this means a pair of really ugly TNs.
This is really sad in 2016.
You get what you pay for.
not any mac though. air's don't exactly have the best displays out there.Truth. Want a good display? Buy a Mac.
http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=270298&pid=2444740#pid2444740
http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=270298&pid=2446410#pid2446410
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HjXbAPXf_Vo
Kodi users have confirmed Apollo Lake supports full fixed function HEVC Main10 hardware decoding with very low CPU usage, this is not hybrid/partial decoding like previous generation.
http://forum.kodi.tv/showthread.php?tid=231955&pid=2408646#pid2408646
Kodi developer posting what VAAPI reports on Linux.
"VAProfileHEVCMain10 : VAEntrypointVLD" VLD = Variable Length Decoding.
Cinebench R15
Celeron N3150 (Braswell): 35 ST/130 MT
Celeron J3455 (Apollo Lake): 50 ST +42,8%/181 MT +39,2%
https://www.heise.de/ct/artikel/Int...leron-schneller-und-mit-4K-60-Hz-3457002.html
Nice find guys.
That will make Apollo Lake viable for low cost HTPCs, and hardware decoding does wonders in terms of power consumption (great for mobile!).
Respectable IPC gain here. Goldmont beating Puma+ performance per clock:
Celeron J3455 (Apollo Lake - 1.5-2.3 GHz): 50 ST / 181 MT
A8-6410 (Beema - 2.0-2.4 GHz): 49 ST / 156-166 MT*
*NotebookCheck results
Pretty much bang on what I estimated - slightly higher than Puma IPC
@ 10w though, it's not exactly earth shattering, nor particularly compelling. We've had 15w Puma based solutions for years now @ this performance level. 15 to 10w doesn't make a huge difference in total platform power for the sort of devices these would go in (i.e small laptops, and fanless motherboards) to get excited about.
Essentially, these chips have found themselves in an awkward position, with little mainstream appeal.
Wait... isn't that Puma only?Respectable IPC gain here. Goldmont beating Puma+ performance per clock:
Celeron J3455 (Apollo Lake - 1.5-2.3 GHz): 50 ST / 181 MT
A8-6410 (Beema - 2.0-2.4 GHz): 49 ST / 156-166 MT*
*NotebookCheck results
Pretty much bang on what I estimated - slightly higher than Puma IPC
@ 10w though, it's not exactly earth shattering, nor particularly compelling. We've had 15w Puma based solutions for years now @ this performance level. 15 to 10w doesn't make a huge difference in total platform power for the sort of devices these would go in (i.e small laptops, and fanless motherboards) to get excited about.
Essentially, these chips have found themselves in an awkward position, with little mainstream appeal.
Pretty much bang on what I estimated - slightly higher than Puma IPC
@ 10w though, it's not exactly earth shattering, nor particularly compelling. We've had 15w Puma based solutions for years now @ this performance level. 15 to 10w doesn't make a huge difference in total platform power for the sort of devices these would go in (i.e small laptops, and fanless motherboards) to get excited about.
Essentially, these chips have found themselves in an awkward position, with little mainstream appeal.
Was this J4205 score posted yet?First Passmark score for J3455:
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Celeron+J3455+@+1.50GHz
CPU marks: 1960 MT, 678 ST
That is lower than I expected considering Bay Trail J1900 scores 1883 MT and 533 ST
However, it should be noted the J3455 score is achieved by using a single 4GB DDR3 1333 SO-DIMM:
http://www.passmark.com/baselines/V9/display.php?id=70259937880
With dual channel, I would expect the score for J3455 with dual channel to be at least 200 CPU marks higher. This based on comparing passmark cores of J1900 with single channel and dual channel.
Pretty much bang on what I estimated - slightly higher than Puma IPC
@ 10w though, it's not exactly earth shattering, nor particularly compelling. We've had 15w Puma based solutions for years now @ this performance level. 15 to 10w doesn't make a huge difference in total platform power for the sort of devices these would go in (i.e small laptops, and fanless motherboards) to get excited about.
Essentially, these chips have found themselves in an awkward position, with little mainstream appeal.
Was this J4205 score posted yet?
https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Pentium+J4205+@+1.50GHz&id=2877
Looks nice from a single thread perspective, but the multithreaded score is not all that great. I guess it simply has to lower its frequency a lot to keep within its TDP rating...
I guess it simply has to lower its frequency a lot to keep within its TDP rating...
Here's a review of the Asrock J4205-ITX: http://www.technikaffe.de/anleitung...test__apollo_lake_mit_hdmi_2.0_und_hevc_10bit
This review leaves some things to be desired. They only seem to test with Cinebench R15 and from that testing they conclude that the J4205 is 20% faster in CPU and 25% faster in GPU than the old ASRock N3710-ITX.
Some pre release publicity noted that Apollo Lake was designed for a reduced bill of materials. I am curious where prices settle for the ASRock motherboards, but something bothers me. ASRock motherboards are stating to drift into retail distribution (at inflated prices) but most major motherboard manufacturers have not yet announced their retail plans for Apollo Lake motherboards. Where are the retail motherboard product announcements, or are there basically none? 14nm is yielding OK or better so an availability issue is unlikely. Did ASRock get some sort of preferred status at release? Are manufacturers waiting for LPDDR4 module availability?
Apollo Lake for notebooks is only 6W TDP (4W SDP). That's for a quad-core with >Puma+ level of performance per clock, respectable 18 EUs Gen 9 iGPU and Main10 hardware decoding. If anything it's the best small core solution from Intel yet, and there's no direct competitor this time (Stoney Ridge is 1M/2C at 15W TDP).
Not to mention, even AMD's E-350 (Brazos), and AM1 (Kabini - is that with "Puma" cores, or was that before Puma?) didn't see huge successes. (Initially, Brazos did, because it served a fairly unique niche, and had "Good Enough" performance. 1080P video decoding back then, on a 15W power budget, was pretty amazing. The only alternative solution to doing that, was Atom with an NV ION/ION2 chipset.)
I'm still looking forward to a Brix unit, with quad-core Goldmont cores, and HDMI2.0 output, with HEVC Main10 decoding. Could still be a winner, for desktop / media-consumption tasks.
Has anyone conclusively compared the Goldmont cores? Are they finally equivalent performance to a similarly-clocked Core2? Minus the AES benchmarks, of course, because Core2 never had those features, and they tend to skew overall benchmarks.