Intel's Medfield Phone Beats Galaxy Nexus in Benchmarks

Status
Not open for further replies.

panders4

Distinguished
Oct 17, 2011
47
0
18,530
0
It's just as well. Galaxy Nexus is using pretty old graphics hardware, and that looks like the biggest difference.
 

erunion

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
192
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]Power consumption? I don't like phones that need to be hooked up to the wall constantly...[/citation]

Hoping for a flaw so you can ignore this known strength. Yawn.
 

hunter315

Champion
Moderator
Looks like they did it by boosting its rendering capabilities and its javascript speed but they took a big hit in user experience so im not sure that makes it better, just better in that set of benchmarks. Its not about whether they win or lose, its how they pulled it off, and it looks like the screwed the user experience part to get better JS performance so they could win.
 

amk-aka-Phantom

Distinguished
Mar 10, 2011
3,004
0
20,860
31
Now all they need is to re-brand these CPUs. I know I sound silly, but wouldn't be proud of having an Atom CPU in my phone. They're associated with cheap quality, slow-ass CPUs for me... call it "Core i1" or something respectable.
 
[citation][nom]erunion[/nom]Hoping for a flaw so you can ignore this known strength. Yawn.[/citation]
More like we are interested in an important piece of info. If it also has great batter life, then it's awesome. If it has average battery life, it's still very good, but if it is terrible, then people won't be happy.
 

erunion

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
192
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]More like we are interested in an important piece of info. If it also has great batter life, then it's awesome. If it has average battery life, it's still very good, but if it is terrible, then people won't be happy.[/citation]

Yet anandtech did a write up on power months ago. So what do we call claims that an medfield phone will need to be plugged into a wall? I vote trolling.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365/intels-medfield-atom-z2460-arrive-for-smartphones%29
 
[citation][nom]erunion[/nom]Yet anandtech did a write up on power months ago. So what do we call claims that an medfield phone will need to be plugged into a wall? I vote trolling.http://www.anandtech.com/show/5365 [...] tphones%29[/citation]
Thanks for the link, but no, you are expecting WAY too much. Very few people are likely to have read that article. This isn't even the same site as that review, how can you just expect everyone to have read it?

You sounded more like the troll, but this link definitely helps put things in to perspective.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom]Thanks for the link, but no, you are expecting WAY too much. Very few people are likely to have read that article. This isn't even the same site as that review, how can you just expect everyone to have read it?You sounded more like the troll, but this link definitely helps put things in to perspective.[/citation]

Well its Anandtech for one, one of the other big sites and according to that it will get close to the same battery life as a Galaxy S II which I don't find that hard to believe.

There is also a tablet thats supposed to have 9+ hours of usage with a 30 day standby.

Then we have the 22nm Atom to look forward to which will probably allow for more cores/higher clock speed whil reducing the power usage.

Not sure why people have a hard time believing that Intel can do it when they have DT CPUs running at 17w.
 

erunion

Distinguished
Apr 14, 2011
192
0
18,690
1
[citation][nom]bystander[/nom] Very few people are likely to have read that article. This isn't even the same site as that review, how can you just expect everyone to have read it?[/citation]

I didn't. I ridiculed him for ignoring the article in favor of baseless speculation(and wishful thinking). I only brought up the power facts when you made a non-trolling response.
 
[citation][nom]jimmysmitty[/nom]Well its Anandtech for one, one of the other big sites and according to that it will get close to the same battery life as a Galaxy S II which I don't find that hard to believe. There is also a tablet thats supposed to have 9+ hours of usage with a 30 day standby.Then we have the 22nm Atom to look forward to which will probably allow for more cores/higher clock speed whil reducing the power usage.Not sure why people have a hard time believing that Intel can do it when they have DT CPUs running at 17w.[/citation]
I don't read all the articles here, and I don't go to every major site. Do you feel that anyone who reads one site is expected to have read every article on every other site?

Anyways, it apparently has very good power efficiency, except for video playback. That's good news. The end result will also be dependent on other hardware installed on the device and how much power they draw as well as the battery used in it, but it has promise.
 

rantoc

Distinguished
Dec 17, 2009
1,859
0
19,780
0
Yeah Anandtech did a nice writeup on the power consumption on this cpu and it was indeed performing with great efficiency and well within the smart phone power budget. Intel will gain a foothold in the mobile space with this and if Arm and co won't release their new updated versions before Intel move down to the next die shrink and 3d gate they will gain more than a foothold.

With Arm's Ceo latest comments about not to fearing Intel its actually amusing in a way - He awoke the giant much like Amd did back in the days when they had a superior product, look how far that got them!
 

bloc97

Distinguished
Sep 12, 2010
1,030
0
19,460
83
Intel is trying to catch up in the Mobile Market segment. They fear that AMD's Fusion APUs take control of it.
But since when Google is involved in this?
 

BT

Distinguished
Apr 3, 2004
74
0
18,630
0
Why are they not using the 22nm process? Seems like that could save them on the power consumption and shrink the cpu? Is too expensive, and there fore cannot make money?
 
G

Guest

Guest
bloc97, AMD doesn't have a Mobile Market segment. That is why they fired their last CEO. He did not make a mobile plan and AMD was pissed that Intel came out with one. AMD is actually by far the furthest behind. Even VIA is further along than AMD in that segment. These are SOC decigns with super low power. It is a whole new animal. Where Intel is behind is in the baseband. They need to integrate all of that into their SOC and they won't have that until 2013 or perhaps 2014. Right now, they will put dual core 2 GHz ATOMS out for 2013 to compete with the 4 core ARM CPUs. In late 2013 early 2014, they will put out phones with the 22nm designs and that is when things get interesting. By 2014-2015, ARM will put out 64-bit chips and enter the enterprise server market and high end desktop market and Intel will be building 14nm Desktop and Workstation CPUs and 14nm phones. Consumers will be rich with choices and all will be good. Hopefully, AMD puts out competitive products by then or maybe VIA.
 

jimmysmitty

Champion
Moderator
[citation][nom]bloc97[/nom]Intel is trying to catch up in the Mobile Market segment. They fear that AMD's Fusion APUs take control of it.But since when Google is involved in this?[/citation]

AMD only mobile market is laptops and netbooks. This is smartphones and tablet territory where AMD has nothing yet.
 
Wait.... I just did the Vellamo benchmark on my MT4GS and I got a score above the Asus Transformer Prime... I'm running Ice Cream Sandwich... But to my understanding, my phone is only equivalent to the SGN...
 

dealcorn

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2008
73
0
18,630
0
I just have trouble with these results because it seems Intel should require the efficiency benefits of 22 nm to field something competitive against ARM. After all, ARM has had more than ample time to get its act fully together. How can Intel do this at 32 nm (unless they are simply lots smarter).
 

dealcorn

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2008
73
0
18,630
0
I just have trouble with these results because it seems Intel should require the efficiency benefits of 22 nm to field something competitive against ARM. After all, ARM has had more than ample time to get its act fully together. How can Intel do this at 32 nm (unless they are simply lots smarter).
 

dealcorn

Distinguished
Jun 12, 2008
73
0
18,630
0
I just have trouble with these results because it seems Intel should require the efficiency benefits of 22 nm to field something competitive against ARM. After all, ARM has had more than ample time to get its act fully together. How can Intel do this at 32 nm (unless they are simply lots smarter).
 

fidgewinkle

Distinguished
Feb 27, 2007
162
0
18,680
0
Intel is producing Atom at just 32nm, because they have not gone after this market aggressively in the past. They probably viewed it more as an inexpensive chip market rather than a performance market and found out that they were wrong.

ARM is going to have a harder time competing with Intel as processors get more powerful, because they don't have the datapath management experience that Intel does. This is a large part of why AMD hasn't been competitive with Intel for quite a while. Their memory structure isn't so good and it becomes harder and harder to feed the beast as it gets bigger and faster. ARM will have to go through the same growing pains, while Intel will just tweak what they've already developed and focus on new ways to produce a better processor.

Intel's much larger design staff is now focused on energy efficiency for all processors. When they finally bring their full process advantage to bear in this market, it is going to get ugly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS