And Intel tries to enter the low-end...

[jhu]

...with Medfield

 

[gevorg]

mobile =! low-end

 

[georgec84]

Saw this news also. They say it can play "blu-ray quality" but don't specify the resolution.

Looks interesting but it's way too early to predict how well this will perform. My guess is that the performance will be fine but battery life will be atrocious.

 

[dma0991]

Better late than never but I would imagine that Intel wouldn't fare too well in this market as I do believe that consumers would buy based on the OS and UI. The processor would be a blackbox.

 

[ncalipari]

very poor, expensive and power hungry chip.

They still forgot the most power-hungry feat: radio.

 

[jhu]

Better late than never but I would imagine that Intel wouldn't fare too well in this market as I do believe that consumers would buy based on the OS and UI. The processor would be a blackbox.

I don't see why they wouldn't do well if they can manage decent battery life. All three of the major smartphone OSes are CPU agnostic.

 

[ncalipari]

All three of the major smartphone OSes are CPU agnostic.

Not true. Dalvik runs much slower without NEON, and iOS contains a shitload of assembler.

Giving how fast microsoft is with wp7, they would take only 14 years to have an equivalent for x86

 

[jhu]

very poor, expensive and power hungry chip.

They still forgot the most power-hungry feat: radio.

Where were you when Top500 was dominated by Alpha, MIPS, POWER, and SPARC? Never underestimate Intel.

 

[ncalipari]

Where were you when Top500 was dominated by Alpha, MIPS, POWER, and SPARC? Never underestimate Intel.

well, by 2013 they are pushing out a product that is not competitive with the 2010 offering of Texas Instruments.

It's not their fault. It's x86 that is not cut out for smartphone. When people will stop to try to put an elephant on a bicycle, I'll fell better.

 

[jhu]

Not true. Dalvik runs much slower without NEON, and iOS contains a shitload of assembler.

Giving how fast microsoft is with wp7, they would take only 14 years to have an equivalent for x86

My HTC Aria with an M7227 works just fine without NEON. Also, Apple has a knack for switching processors without a hitch. I would not be surprised of they had an internal x86 build of iOS just in case.

 

[dma0991]

I don't see why they wouldn't do well if they can manage decent battery life. All three of the major smartphone OSes are CPU agnostic.

The article states that Medfield wants to challenge iPhone and iPad, so it is unlikely that Intel would be going in the iOS direction and I can't see Apple doing the same. If Intel gets into the smartphone market with Android, they would just be getting the Android piece of the pie and will be competing against similar ARM based Android smartphones and iOS at the same time.

I can't see Medfield being a huge success unless Medfield has merits that surpasses Apple's expectations with their A series chip and it is somehow integrated into the future iOS devices.

 

[ncalipari]

My HTC Aria with an M7227 works just fine without NEON.

but you miss the latest iteration of android.

I'm sure you can call and send SMS just fine, but you're missing most of the fun, and you have a poorer battery life, compared to NEON cpus.

Also, Apple has a knack for switching processors without a hitch. I would not be surprised of they had an internal x86 build of iOS just in case.

Having an internal build, and having a product that meet the maniacal standard of apple are two very different things.

They did develop an internal ARM cpu for a reason.

 

[podspi]

Yea, I'm skeptical they would switch to x86 either, but if Intel can bring the performance/watt/$$, I'm sure Apple would switch. And they might.

Edit: To be clear, I'm skeptical because I doubt Intel will be able to beat in-house arm in performance/watt/$.

Edit2: RTFA, and dang, that looks like a nice looking piece of hardware. Maybe Intel should get into the consumer electronics business

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

This is an area that I have waiting for us to move into if for no other reason then I love to watch the development of new technology. What is the future going to hold?

 

[jhu]

Yea, I'm skeptical they would switch to x86 either, but if Intel can bring the performance/watt/$$, I'm sure Apple would switch. And they might.

Edit: To be clear, I'm skeptical because I doubt Intel will be able to beat in-house arm in performance/watt/$.

Edit2: RTFA, and dang, that looks like a nice looking piece of hardware. Maybe Intel should get into the consumer electronics business

I want one as long as battery life is at least comparable. Otherwise I'm getting a Galaxy S II next year.

 

[ncalipari]

I want one as long as battery life is at least comparable. Otherwise I'm getting a Galaxy S II next year.

if battery is your concern, then intel medfield is not a viable choice.


Most of the battery is used by radio: GSM/UMTS, WiFi and GPS.

Having them integrated in the CPU does not cancel their power consumption, but helps A LOT.

 

[ThatsABigOne]

I want that phone. I really like the elegant looks.

 

[Phynaz]

Having an internal build, and having a product that meet the maniacal standard of apple are two very different things.

They did develop an internal ARM cpu for a reason.

Did you know that Apple was running OSX on both Power and x86 for 5 years before they announced the switch from Power?

There's no doubt that Apple has iOS running fine on many platforms.

 

[ncalipari]

Did you know that Apple was running OSX on both Power and x86 for 5 years before they announced the switch from Power?

yes, that's what they did.

There's no doubt that Apple has iOS running fine on many platforms.

and .... ?

 

[jhu]

if battery is your concern, then intel medfield is not a viable choice.


Most of the battery is used by radio: GSM/UMTS, WiFi and GPS.

Having them integrated in the CPU does not cancel their power consumption, but helps A LOT.

Intel shoved Medfield into a smartphone so they must be confident about its battery life. We'll see when (if?) a real product ships.

 

[ncalipari]

Intel shoved Medfield into a smartphone so they must be confident about its battery life. We'll see when (if?) a real product ships.

according to their spec, expect AT LEAST 25% less of battery life. 25% is a best case scenario where intel drops 100 millions of $ in optimizing dalvik, and another 100 millions of $ for legal defense against oracle, along with a CPU that goes BEYOND their expectations.

It's a simple question of physics: put the radio chip outside of the CPU, and you will ocnsume a lot more of battery.

 

[tommo123]

why cant intel bite the bullet and when they have 14nm going, do the whole SOC on that process? any battery life issues should be knocked on the head by the extra space you'd have to shove a bigger battery into.

intel is fecking huge and i have faith they'll do something to impress

 

[sm625]

After experiencing the "joy" of iCrap, I cannot blame intel for sitting out the tablet market. Those devices are so frustrating to use that I feel like a sucker since in most cases the poor performance is more of an inconvenience than holding a bulky notebook. I may have to hold a notebook with two hands, or set it down, but at least I know it will load a youtube video, and I can download it for offline viewing with the push of a button. In fact most things I do on win7 can be done faster than on ios, thanks to the ability to write my own win32 and ahk scripts. All I want is something like an iconia W500, but not for frickin $500. I just dont get why the price has not come down one red cent in over a year.

 

[ncalipari]

why cant intel bite the bullet and when they have 14nm going, do the whole SOC on that process?

they don't have the know-how, patents, production facilities, ....

any battery life issues should be knocked on the head by the extra space you'd have to shove a bigger battery into.

Reducing the cpu production process doesn't increase available space

intel is fecking huge and i have faith they'll do something to impress

just like AMD with BD

 

[Khato]

It's a simple question of physics: put the radio chip outside of the CPU, and you will ocnsume a lot more of battery.

While it is true that having the cellular modem integrated into the chip will consume less power, the savings hardly equate to 'a lot'. It's more a question of integration and costs than battery life. If it was a marked difference, then Qualcomm wouldn't be the only one doing it.

If you want proof as to the margin-of-error difference between having the modem integrated and not then just compare the Qualcomm APQ8060 to their MSM8260 or MSM8660.