- Status
[citation][nom]Emperus[/nom]I mean their UI for the iphone itself is the best compared to any platform released till now be it android, blackberry or any other platform.. [/citation]
ORLY? I can't even consider a platform that doesn't allow me to get my own non-DRMed stuff that I've uploaded to the device, back from it.
Oh, and the fact that not a single freaking review mentions this "little" problem. Conspiracy...
ORLY? I can't even consider a platform that doesn't allow me to get my own non-DRMed stuff that I've uploaded to the device, back from it.
Oh, and the fact that not a single freaking review mentions this "little" problem. Conspiracy...
kronos_cornelius
Distinguished
- Nov 4, 2009
- 365
- 1
- 18,780
Very nice for Intel, but a more honest comparison would be performance and power use measurements and ratio. The problem with x86 has been power consumption, based on articles from the web and tom's.
[citation][nom]Euphoria_MK[/nom]Yep, battery life of moorestown @1.3GHz = 3hours so bring your portable generator with you[/citation]
Man have you read the original moorestown article? Otherwise read it first b4 posting something stupid. Everyone knew that intel processors were far faster compared to the ARM ones. But power consumption and battery life are the regions where they sucked. But Intel has fixed that with moorestown. Its quite incredible that it has the same power envelope but offers more than twice the performance. It's incredible that x86 can go this efficient even with the added complex decode burden. Kudos to the intel engineers. This actually makes things quite interesting. And this comparison ran on older gen MENLOW. Which was not a SoC.
This has the potential to become a game changer if you ask me. ANADTECH even said "This is quite possibly one of the biggest introductions we've seen in the past couple of years.". And this market does look good for even AMD. If intel can successfully bring down the power requirements of x86 chips there is no reason why amd can't. And with fusion looming large in the horizon there is a chance that AMD might even do it better(in terms graphics) for their vastly better graphics division.(Intel does not use their own gpu- instead they have shrunk the powerVr and runs it at twice the clock speed). So where everyone thought that x86 could never scale down enough to meet the need of the ever increasingly mobile world,all of a sudden that very notion has been turned upside down. The next gen from intel looks even more promising with MEDFIELD(read more integration, die shrink,>2x faster, lower power requirements ,SINGLE CHIP etc.).
You were completely wrong about the battery life of moorestown. Just read the articles and you'll know.
Man have you read the original moorestown article? Otherwise read it first b4 posting something stupid. Everyone knew that intel processors were far faster compared to the ARM ones. But power consumption and battery life are the regions where they sucked. But Intel has fixed that with moorestown. Its quite incredible that it has the same power envelope but offers more than twice the performance. It's incredible that x86 can go this efficient even with the added complex decode burden. Kudos to the intel engineers. This actually makes things quite interesting. And this comparison ran on older gen MENLOW. Which was not a SoC.
This has the potential to become a game changer if you ask me. ANADTECH even said "This is quite possibly one of the biggest introductions we've seen in the past couple of years.". And this market does look good for even AMD. If intel can successfully bring down the power requirements of x86 chips there is no reason why amd can't. And with fusion looming large in the horizon there is a chance that AMD might even do it better(in terms graphics) for their vastly better graphics division.(Intel does not use their own gpu- instead they have shrunk the powerVr and runs it at twice the clock speed). So where everyone thought that x86 could never scale down enough to meet the need of the ever increasingly mobile world,all of a sudden that very notion has been turned upside down. The next gen from intel looks even more promising with MEDFIELD(read more integration, die shrink,>2x faster, lower power requirements ,SINGLE CHIP etc.).
You were completely wrong about the battery life of moorestown. Just read the articles and you'll know.
I lol'd so bad at this.
First, you crank up the Atom CPU 30% higher clock frequency than the ARM, and drop your jaws over the fact that it performs faster (and yes I know clock frequency isn't everything) on .
Then, you make this awesome statement, summed up: THE SIMULATION LEADS US TO BELIEVE THAT 200MHZ MORE WILL BE EVEN FASTER!!!
First, you crank up the Atom CPU 30% higher clock frequency than the ARM, and drop your jaws over the fact that it performs faster (and yes I know clock frequency isn't everything) on .
Then, you make this awesome statement, summed up: THE SIMULATION LEADS US TO BELIEVE THAT 200MHZ MORE WILL BE EVEN FASTER!!!
[citation][nom]anonymous boy[/nom]I lol'd so bad at this.First, you crank up the Atom CPU 30% higher clock frequency than the ARM, and drop your jaws over the fact that it performs faster (and yes I know clock frequency isn't everything) on .Then, you make this awesome statement, summed up: THE SIMULATION LEADS US TO BELIEVE THAT 200MHZ MORE WILL BE EVEN FASTER!!![/citation]
That's because the moorrestown SKUs will run at those clock speeds. One sku will even be clocked at 1.9 ghz(with something like turbo boost) while still requiring dramatically less power than the menlow model that is in this review. At this market performance /watt is everything. The clock speeds may vary from architecture to architecture because of difference pipelining. So it doesn't matter if the Atom's clock is 30% higher because it's within the power budget while over-clocking the ARM will need more power. This may be due to Intel's superiority in process nodes and that the atom is on a optimized 45nm node designed to reduce leakage. But it's an advantage that will remain with Intel in the foreseeable future. So it's not like they are jacking up the clock speed of the test processor for a skewed test. It's the clock speed that will be even surpassed by the moorestown SKU's while staying at the same power budget.
That's because the moorrestown SKUs will run at those clock speeds. One sku will even be clocked at 1.9 ghz(with something like turbo boost) while still requiring dramatically less power than the menlow model that is in this review. At this market performance /watt is everything. The clock speeds may vary from architecture to architecture because of difference pipelining. So it doesn't matter if the Atom's clock is 30% higher because it's within the power budget while over-clocking the ARM will need more power. This may be due to Intel's superiority in process nodes and that the atom is on a optimized 45nm node designed to reduce leakage. But it's an advantage that will remain with Intel in the foreseeable future. So it's not like they are jacking up the clock speed of the test processor for a skewed test. It's the clock speed that will be even surpassed by the moorestown SKU's while staying at the same power budget.
I mean who is surprised by this? Did anyone but Apple fans think they were getting much from Apple for $500? The iPad is all Flash! Pardon the pun.
This test mean nothing. The iPad is fast enough for it's market. The iPad is well designed for it's market, content consumers and gamers. It's not for everyone and it isn't a substitute for a computer. When I went to the Apple store I saw a 3 year using an iPad on one side, and elderly person in a well chair on the other (with no manuals). When you have a demographic that large you are going to be successful. My mom likes to play online poker, she would love the iPad. The bottom line is does it work? The iPad works very well for what it does. Plus it get excellent battery life (12 hours).
If you looking for a computer substitute tablet, they are available, they just aren't very good (yet).
If you looking for a computer substitute tablet, they are available, they just aren't very good (yet).
[citation][nom]spoofedpacket[/nom]"The simulation leads us to believe that the Moorestown running at a 1.5GHz speed would be even faster."So you are telling me by increasing the clock on a CPU, it runs faster? Interesting, very interesting.[/citation]
Come on, give em a break. There is a certain limit in which the CPU speed would have little effect on web page loading speed.
Come on, give em a break. There is a certain limit in which the CPU speed would have little effect on web page loading speed.
simple_inhibition
Distinguished
- Jun 7, 2008
- 65
- 0
- 18,630
[citation][nom]otacon72[/nom]Lets see the iPad run MacOS.[/citation]
Hell, lets see the iPad run flash.....oh wait....
Hell, lets see the iPad run flash.....oh wait....
blader15sk8
Distinguished
- Feb 6, 2006
- 232
- 1
- 18,715
[citation][nom]vant[/nom]Lets see it on Windows 7. Oh right, Atoms can't handle that[/citation]
My N270 runs Win7 without a hitch.
My N270 runs Win7 without a hitch.
wow, what a scientific test! using a different Browser in a different OS! but sure! its the processor thats the main difference! (for example, the iphoneOS is the most bloated POS I have ever seen and I wouldn't be surprised if full XP was faster...).
so whats the conclusion? Intel make a processor thats faster than the fastest ARM? yeah, they've been doing that for a while, its called an i7... was there any info given on ENERGY EFFICIENCY as that is all that really matters in the mobile space. not to mention that the A8 isn't the fastest processor that ARM make anyway...
and look, I hate Apple more than anyone, but stop thinking this is Intel vs Apple and voting down anyone who suggests that Intel isn't awesome, its Intel vs ARM, and ARM has been doing this A LOT longer than intel! and if intel do muscle their way in on this, they will force everyone to use their bloated x86 instruction sets, and then we as developers will have to worry about compatibility between two competing instruction sets.
so whats the conclusion? Intel make a processor thats faster than the fastest ARM? yeah, they've been doing that for a while, its called an i7... was there any info given on ENERGY EFFICIENCY as that is all that really matters in the mobile space. not to mention that the A8 isn't the fastest processor that ARM make anyway...
and look, I hate Apple more than anyone, but stop thinking this is Intel vs Apple and voting down anyone who suggests that Intel isn't awesome, its Intel vs ARM, and ARM has been doing this A LOT longer than intel! and if intel do muscle their way in on this, they will force everyone to use their bloated x86 instruction sets, and then we as developers will have to worry about compatibility between two competing instruction sets.
- Jul 16, 2009
- 4,821
- 0
- 22,780
Ask any Apple fanboy
They will say that anything Microsoft or Adobe is slower than anything Mac
So I am going to agree for the purpose of this comparison
Safari is faster than Internet Explorer
iPad OS is lighter than Windows XP
Flash is bloatier than HTML5
So if the Moorestown chip ran Flash, in IE, on XP
But did it faster than the A4 running HTML5, on Safari, on the iPad OS
Isn't that even more impressive that it won under more difficult conditions?
One of 2 things needs to be recognised here
Either the Moorestown is faster than the Apple A4
or
All the claims against Windows and IE and Flash are scurrilous
You can't have it both ways, it's one or the other
They will say that anything Microsoft or Adobe is slower than anything Mac
So I am going to agree for the purpose of this comparison
Safari is faster than Internet Explorer
iPad OS is lighter than Windows XP
Flash is bloatier than HTML5
So if the Moorestown chip ran Flash, in IE, on XP
But did it faster than the A4 running HTML5, on Safari, on the iPad OS
Isn't that even more impressive that it won under more difficult conditions?
One of 2 things needs to be recognised here
Either the Moorestown is faster than the Apple A4
or
All the claims against Windows and IE and Flash are scurrilous
You can't have it both ways, it's one or the other
first of all, in my opinion, Intel's Moorestown and Apple's A4 both SoC hardware so i believe graphic performance matters.
Fyi, Intel GMA 500 n PowerVR SGX ( GPU on A4) are the same with different names.
Please try to understand that u are comparing iPad with an Atom tablet. you are comparing Apple A4 and Intel Moorestown. Atleast thats what you are suppose to do.
I personally think iPad is a useless device bcz its hardly mobile and have very low or no use as a home or office device. Its jst an iPod touch with bigger screen and a better processor with no use.
I think where we can really test the performance of Apple A4 is on the new iPhone 4. A good benchmark is their new iMovie app which allows you to edit and render 720p HD videos on ur iPhone.
Go watch the iPhone 4 release video. Cz that is a device worth paying for. I always said, iPhone is not good as a mobile device by functionality. It was always a vanity item. It was another jewelery you wear when you go out. But iPhone 4 is something. I would pay for that.
Anyways, dont compare mobile processors on desktop OSes. They arent meant to be able to use Desktop OSes. Intel's aim with Moorestown is to own mobile processor industry. More specifically high-end smart phones. supporting only Android and a couple more OSes wont help. iOS 4 is very user friendly. So if Moorestown need to gain the rein of the market, they have to support more mobile OSes like Maemo to perform even better.
Basically, get an iPhone 4 and an Android or maemo phone with Mooresdown chip, and then compare.
Fyi, Intel GMA 500 n PowerVR SGX ( GPU on A4) are the same with different names.
Please try to understand that u are comparing iPad with an Atom tablet. you are comparing Apple A4 and Intel Moorestown. Atleast thats what you are suppose to do.
I personally think iPad is a useless device bcz its hardly mobile and have very low or no use as a home or office device. Its jst an iPod touch with bigger screen and a better processor with no use.
I think where we can really test the performance of Apple A4 is on the new iPhone 4. A good benchmark is their new iMovie app which allows you to edit and render 720p HD videos on ur iPhone.
Go watch the iPhone 4 release video. Cz that is a device worth paying for. I always said, iPhone is not good as a mobile device by functionality. It was always a vanity item. It was another jewelery you wear when you go out. But iPhone 4 is something. I would pay for that.
Anyways, dont compare mobile processors on desktop OSes. They arent meant to be able to use Desktop OSes. Intel's aim with Moorestown is to own mobile processor industry. More specifically high-end smart phones. supporting only Android and a couple more OSes wont help. iOS 4 is very user friendly. So if Moorestown need to gain the rein of the market, they have to support more mobile OSes like Maemo to perform even better.
Basically, get an iPhone 4 and an Android or maemo phone with Mooresdown chip, and then compare.
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
News US sanctions transform China into legacy chip production juggernaut — production jumped 40% in Q1 2024- Started by Admin
- Replies: 33
-
-
-
Question New pc build r9 7900x3d rtx 4080 super no post only ram rgb turns on- Started by Harvey Durward
- Replies: 5
-
RTX 4070 vs RX 7900 GRE faceoff: Which mainstream graphics card is better?
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 72
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram