no, this is not the 1st of april ... x86 beats ARM at power efficency in Tablets

[kl0012]

These benchmarks tell you exactly nothing at all about ARM performance versus Atom performance.
They may tell you that the Chrome browser is much faster as Windows 8 plus IE 10 in javascript
except for an intriguing SunSpider result,

KRAKEN (lower is better) single threaded javascript (jit compiler), 

 9733    Chrome     1.70GHz Cortex A15
14229    Chrome     1.66GHz Atom (N570)
33855    MS IE10    1.80GHz Atom (Z2760)
49595    MS IE10    1.30GHz Cortex A9

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6385/m...face-review/10
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/s...s-cortex-a15/6

It's really doesn't matter in this case since WinRT is mostly limited to IE (MS didn't open Win API to third party, so no Google V8 javascript engine is expected in the near future). Someone was worried about how fast Atom can load web pages in Win8 - so it's pretty much fast (faster than tegra3 in IE and a lot faster when using desktop chrome)

The new Intel multimedia benchmark used by AnandTech: TouchXPRT 2013 is another brainchild
of dr Who's boss Shervin Kheradpir, General Manager of Intel's Performance Benchmarking and Analysis
Group and founding President of Bapco (via HDXPRT/Principled Technologies)

http://www.hdxprt.com/blog/2012/10/2...the-fast-lane/ AnandTech was the first to use the test
http://intel-mydreampc-1829796403.us...Whitepaper.pdf

You mean the benchmark is crippled?

The 1.3GHz Quad core A9 Tegra 3 comes out worse as the 1.8GHz Dual core Atom. Well for bandwidth limited
multimedia benchmarks that's not that hard to do considering the 32bit bus on the Tegra 3 versus the 64bit
bus on the Z2760, Apple uses 128 bit buses and Samsung's Exynos 5450 will have a 128 bit bus as well I guess.
Most of the other new SOC's use 64 bit buses.

Hans

Doesn't matter either. The only cpus currently supported by WinRT are tegra3, krait and something old from TI.

[Drwho?]

as Usual, Hans forget to say that the benchmark is open source, and he failed to find anything wrong with it ... (This is call FUD technic)

And then, well, Hans, please disclose your interest into this please? like, who is employing you etc ...



...

At least, I am open on my agenda, and don't hide who is my employer.

[Hans de Vries]

Someone was worried about how fast Atom can load web pages in Win8 - so it's pretty much fast (faster than tegra3 in IE and a lot faster when using desktop chrome)

The ARM Chromebook is twice as fast in Browsermark as this Clovertrail based system.

217,031 Chrome, dual core 1.7GHz A15 Exynos
101,644 MS IE10, dual core 1,8GHz Atom, Clovertrail

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/s...s-cortex-a15/6
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Intel...review/?page=3

They simply don't intent to compete against the $250 Chromebook considering
the $800 which is asked here for a (20% slower) version using a 1.5GHz Clovertrail.
Or a similar Clovertrail system from Dell for $829...

So from <$300 Atom based netbooks we are now going to $800 Atom based systems
We'll see how this all ends...

Hans

[Drwho?]

The ARM Chromebook is twice as fast in Browsermark as this Clovertrail based system.

217,031 Chrome, dual core 1.7GHz A15 Exynos
101,644 MS IE10, dual core 1,8GHz Atom, Clovertrail

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/s...s-cortex-a15/6
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Intel...review/?page=3

They simply don't intent to compete against the $250 Chromebook considering
the $800 which is asked here for a (20% slower) version using a 1.5GHz Clovertrail.
Or a similar Clovertrail system from Dell for $829...

So from <$300 Atom based netbooks we are now going to $800 Atom based systems
We'll see how this all ends...

Hans

your post are always so misleading , it is not even funny, you had to choose the most expensive Clovrtrail, and compare it with a system that have half the RAM and few other details, same song as acehardware 10 years ago. then, look at the battery life of the chrome book, and the one of clovertrail, it is almost double in the favor of clovertrail ...

then, comparing 2 totally different software stack (Android vs. Windows 8), and get to a definitive answer ... you are funny ...

you ll never change, what ever it takes to impose your opinion, even making honest people look like they are doing fishy things. you simply forget to say that everything is open source or part of consortium, like the Sysmark stuff you posted before, forgetting to say that AMD voted for 80% of the decision in sysmark. Since then, AMD changed their position on Sysmark, you should go and ask them , and let me know. Let me know if they decline agreeing with 80% of the decision there, or saying it is not a good benchmark, I would be VERY interested if they do so.

and yes, the little green men were in Roswell ... lol

With all due respect, you may want to join those consortiums , instead of always pretending that we are controlling every thing, like you did in the past, and see what is really happening.
(and you really think guys like AMD, NV and others join those benchmarks consortiums, and let us control every thing? they are smarter than this)

I have my hands clean, come and see, instead of repeating the same BS again and again for ages ...

[ajaidev]

then, comparing 2 totally different software stack (Android vs. Windows 8), and get to a definitive answer ... you are funny ...

you ll never change, what ever it takes to impose your opinion, even making honest people look like they are doing fishy things. you simply forget to say that everything is open source or part of consortium, like the Sysmark stuff you posted before, forgetting to say that AMD voted for 80% of the decision in sysmark. Since then, AMD changed their position on Sysmark, you should go and ask them , and let me know. Let me know if they decline agreeing with 80% of the decision there, or saying it is not a good benchmark, I would be VERY interested if they do so.

and yes, the little green men were in Roswell ... lol

With all due respect, you may want to join those consortiums , instead of always pretending that we are controlling every thing, like you did in the past, and see what is really happening.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze5z8...layer_embedded
(and you really think guys like AMD, NV and others join those benchmarks consortiums, and let us control every thing? they are smarter than this)

I have my hands clean, come and see, instead of repeating the same BS again and again for ages ...

Different software stack is the name of the game, people don't limit themselves to just one OS otherwise there would be no Android adoption with people who are not first time customers. Factors like price, build, functionality, etc help people decide what to buy its not always the iPad that wins. This gives android/window tab's a chance to get chosen over the iPad's of the world.

Now if we are talking about benchmarks if you may direct your attention to this:







As you can see Z2460 is among the top phones, Now see this video that was made by Qualcomm and i can confirm that the device is that bad. The benchmark n the video both are taken on android 2.3.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ze5z8...layer_embedded

[Drwho?]

There are now much better design than the Xolos, look at the Razr I vs Razr M, and you ll get your answer about it (real apple to apple comparison, with same form factor, same software stack, same price ... you ll find out that Atom has longer battery life too, and except on 3D gaming, Atom beats easily the ARM stuffs, especially if you try to match Atom battery life. the A15 is way too hot for the moment.

[ajaidev]

There are now much better design than the Xolos, look at the Razr I vs Razr M, and you ll get your answer about it

XOLO = Intel reference design, besides i am not saying anything against the XOLO but simply that the benchmarks DOES NOT reflect the real performance. This is specially true for this Intel powered device than say a Google Nexus S "Similar to the Sony Ericsson Arc the phone in the video"


EDIT: Forgot this old bit



http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/vi...d-fake-p1.html

[god_43]

XOLO = Intel reference design, besides i am not saying anything against the XOLO but simply that the benchmarks DOES NOT reflect the real performance. This is specially true for this Intel powered device than say a Google Nexus S "Similar to the Sony Ericsson Arc the phone in the video"


EDIT: Forgot this old bit



http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/vi...d-fake-p1.html

too bad we cant change the code on amd cpus, i would love to see if this is still an issue.

[Stevethegreat]

There are now much better design than the Xolos, look at the Razr I vs Razr M, and you ll get your answer about it (real apple to apple comparison, with same form factor, same software stack, same price ... you ll find out that Atom has longer battery life too, and except on 3D gaming, Atom beats easily the ARM stuffs, especially if you try to match Atom battery life. the A15 is way too hot for the moment.

Yeah this is true enough. But what's with intel's choice to couple the atom processor with such an average gpu? Or was it Motorolla's decision? Can you shed some light to this?

Because honestly the only reason that kept me from buying that phone was/is the less than stellar GPU performance.
An x86 processor would be a great deal for a guy like me who likes to experiments with his phone(s), and if Intel decides to release an atom processor coupled with a beefy GPU I would be the first in line to buy that phone. So, Dr, if you can pull some strings to make that so I (and I hope many others) would be truly grateful for that

[kl0012]

As you can see Z2460 is among the top phones, Now see this video that was made by Qualcomm and i can confirm that the device is that bad. The benchmark n the video both are taken on android 2.3.

If you don't believe in tests done by someone, who worked for Intel, then why would you believe in the tests done by Intel's competitors?

Here is something "independent" for you:

Motorola Razr I Vs Samsung Galaxy S3: Multi Tasking Comparison

[Piledriver]

your post are always so misleading , it is not even funny, you had to choose the most expensive Clovrtrail, and compare it with a system that have half the RAM and few other details, same song as acehardware 10 years ago. then, look at the battery life of the chrome book, and the one of clovertrail, it is almost double in the favor of clovertrail ...

then, comparing 2 totally different software stack (Android vs. Windows 8), and get to a definitive answer ... you are funny ...

you ll never change, what ever it takes to impose your opinion, even making honest people look like they are doing fishy things. you simply forget to say that everything is open source or part of consortium, like the Sysmark stuff you posted before, forgetting to say that AMD voted for 80% of the decision in sysmark. Since then, AMD changed their position on Sysmark, you should go and ask them , and let me know. Let me know if they decline agreeing with 80% of the decision there, or saying it is not a good benchmark, I would be VERY interested if they do so.

and yes, the little green men were in Roswell ... lol

With all due respect, you may want to join those consortiums , instead of always pretending that we are controlling every thing, like you did in the past, and see what is really happening.
(and you really think guys like AMD, NV and others join those benchmarks consortiums, and let us control every thing? they are smarter than this)

I have my hands clean, come and see, instead of repeating the same BS again and again for ages ...

You avoided the point made and decided to go off-topic and personal. Apparently now performance doesn't matter only battery life. What's stopping ARM from reducing performance and raise battery life? The headroom is there.

[Manicdan]

So from <$300 Atom based netbooks we are now going to $800 Atom based systems
We'll see how this all ends...

Hans

couldnt have said it better. the netbook market was about having cheap hardware that used little power and got oodles of battery life. slim down the frame a little and it becomes 3x the price. wtf people.

[Lokinhow]

couldnt have said it better. the netbook market was about having cheap hardware that used little power and got oodles of battery life. slim down the frame a little and it becomes 3x the price. wtf people.

lets not forget that those netbooks had TN screens with very, very poor quality. Higher priced tablets usually have high quality IPS or PLS screens with high pixel density. I'm not saying it justify all the price difference, but this alone is already a reason for a significant price incrase.

[kl0012]

The ARM Chromebook is twice as fast in Browsermark as this Clovertrail based system.

217,031 Chrome, dual core 1.7GHz A15 Exynos
101,644 MS IE10, dual core 1,8GHz Atom, Clovertrail

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/s...s-cortex-a15/6
http://hothardware.com/Reviews/Intel...review/?page=3

They simply don't intent to compete against the $250 Chromebook considering
the $800 which is asked here for a (20% slower) version using a 1.5GHz Clovertrail.
Or a similar Clovertrail system from Dell for $829...

So from <$300 Atom based netbooks we are now going to $800 Atom based systems
We'll see how this all ends...

Hans

Why would one compare netbook price to tablet price (espetially when tablet has different (princely) OS and includes additional features such as Wacom digitizer, much better screen and better battery life)? The proper comparison would be Windows RT tablet prices vs. Windows 8 (Clovertrail) prices. And it seems they are not that different:
MS Surface RT (Tegra3) - $499
Asus VivoTab Smart (Clovertrail) - $499

[BrowncoatGR]

Why would one compare netbook price to tablet price (espetially when tablet has different (princely) OS and includes additional features such as Wacom digitizer, much better screen and better battery life)? The proper comparison would be Windows RT tablet prices vs. Windows 8 (Clovertrail) prices. And it seems they are not that different:
MS Surface RT (Tegra3) - $499
Asus VivoTab Smart (Clovertrail) - $499

Well the Nexus 10 tablet costs less($399), has a much higher density screen and a Exynos A15 based dualcore that is bleeding edge. As for the OS, all tablets compete with each other and it's part of the feature set, so i don't see why tablets with different OSes shouldn't be compared to each other.

[kl0012]

Well the Nexus 10 tablet costs less($399), has a much higher density screen and a Exynos A15 based dualcore that is bleeding edge. As for the OS, all tablets compete with each other and it's part of the feature set, so i don't see why tablets with different OSes shouldn't be compared to each other.

I didn't say that tablets should not be compared to each other. I said that tablets should not be compared to netbooks (especially by price only).
As for Exynos A15 - it doesn't show its "bleeding edge" (not in performance, nor in battery life). But it might be that android is not optimized yet.

[villa1n]

I didn't say that tablets should not be compared to each other. I said that tablets should not be compared to netbooks (especially by price only).
As for Exynos A15 - it doesn't show its "bleeding edge" (not in performance, nor in battery life). But it might be that android is not optimized yet.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6425/g...exus-10-review Some new a15 benchmarks... x86 is still looking good against these numbers, aside the ghetto gfx performance, which has always been intels problem across all platforms.