Ars: AMD may be irrelevant

[NTMBK]

And with Atoms easy lead over those, I dont see why not.

And before you accuse me of cherry-picking, that was the only benchmark where the Intel phone won in the first place: http://www.anandtech.com/show/5770/lava-xolo-x900-review-the-first-intel-medfield-phone/4

 

[RampantAndroid]

NTMBK, stock browser. That's not an apples to apples comparison? Or am I missing something?

 

[ShintaiDK]

NTMBK, stock browser. That's not an apples to apples comparison? Or am I missing something?

Shhh...dont tell the obvious.

 

[NTMBK]

Shhh...dont tell the obvious.

It's notoriously hard to get accurate cross-platform benchmarks, and yes, Sunspider runs stock browser. But did you read my post? Sunspider was the only benchmark in the Intel phone's original review where it came out on top.

http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5770/45990.png[/im]

[img]http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5770/45975.png

And the single benchmark where it initially won:

And now, as you can see from my post above, that lead has been reclaimed by the iPhone 5.

If you're going to accuse me of being misleading or lying, please at least read my post properly next time.

 

[ShintaiDK]

You are still comparing apples to oranges. Even tho you refuse to acknowledge. Not to mention the huge price difference between different phones that also affects what components are used. Some got faster memory, some got slower. Some got more aggressive power savings than others, different OS, software and background tasks.

And your graphs basicly show Atom doing way above the ARM average. For a phone that is cheaper than the majority.

 

[NTMBK]

You are still comparing apples to oranges. Even tho you refuse to acknowledge. Not to mention the huge price difference between different phones that also affects what components are used. Some got faster memory, some got slower. Some got more aggressive power savings than others, different OS, software and background tasks.

And your graphs basicly show Atom doing way above the ARM average. For a phone that is cheaper than the majority.

The only truly "apples to oranges" comparison is Sunspider- which is also the only benchmark which had the Intel phone on top. Other than that, it gets consistently beaten by Krait- which is a same-generation chip, running the same operating system, in a mid-range phone.

This is the Intel flagship phone, their own reference platform. You'd hope that they have optimised it to best showcase their mobile processor.

As for "ARM average"- look what those phones listed actually are. That list includes phones like the Nexus One, which is almost 3 years old, and the iPhone 4.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The only truly "apples to oranges" comparison is Sunspider- which is also the only benchmark which had the Intel phone on top. Other than that, it gets consistently beaten by Krait- which is a same-generation chip, running the same operating system, in a mid-range phone.

This is the Intel flagship phone, their own reference platform. You'd hope that they have optimised it to best showcase their mobile processor.

As for "ARM average"- look what those phones listed actually are. That list includes phones like the Nexus One, which is almost 3 years old, and the iPhone 4.

Try look at laptop reviews, they can have quite large differences. Even for something you obviously would consider "same hardware".

The Xolo for example uses 400Mhz memory. Even tho the CPU supports 800.

 

[NTMBK]

Try look at laptop reviews, they can have quite large differences. Even for something you obviously would consider "same hardware".

*shrug* That's very much true. Sadly, whole phone benchmarks are all we have to go on- we can't use standard testbed systems like we do with PC chips. I suspect we'll be headed more towards this with tablet chip benchmarks, too.

However, as I said, given that this is the reference platform by Intel themselves, they would know what they were doing and optimise the phone thoroughly- this was meant to be the device to convince phone manufacturers that Atom was viable (which it succeeded at). If there's a memory bottleneck, something has gone very wrong!

EDIT: Ah, just saw your edit. Interesting about the memory speeds. I wonder what made them do that?

 

[Nemesis 1]

This is the Intel flagship phone, their own reference platform. You'd hope that they have optimised it to best showcase their mobile processor.

The hell it is. Its Intels enter level phone . Just because its intels only smart phone chip does not make it fflagship . Can't be Flag ship its the only chip they have for the phone flagship would be whats coming this month . Now next generation you will see more chips and the flagship chip won't be in smartphones

 

[Nemesis 1]

Here a razr review for what its worth.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/18/motorolas-razr-i-benchmarks-intel-2ghz-medfield/

 

[NTMBK]

The hell it is. Its Intels enter level phone . Just because its intels only smart phone chip does not make it fflagship . Can't be Flag ship its the only chip they have for the phone flagship would be whats coming this month .

It is their reference platform, built to show the world Intel's best capabilities. It was their flagship at launch, no two ways about it. That title has now been taken by the Razr M, as that is the first with their 2GHz silicon.

Now next generation you will see more chips and the flagship chip won't be in smartphones

If it's not in a smartphone, then it can't be their flagship phone...

Here a razr review for what its worth.

http://www.engadget.com/2012/09/18/m...2ghz-medfield/

So their new flagship was once again beaten by Krait, in all but the Sunspider benchmark (which as others have pointed out, is highly dependent on browser performance).

 

[ShintaiDK]

It is their reference platform, built to show the world Intel's best capabilities. It was their flagship at launch, no two ways about it. That title has now been taken by the Razr M, as that is the first with their 2GHz silicon.



If it's not in a smartphone, then it can't be their flagship phone...



So their new flagship was once again beaten by Krait, in all but the Sunspider benchmark (which as others have pointed out, is highly dependent on browser performance).

Just stop making things up and stop comparing apples to oranges... :thumbsdown:

Its not a flagship product, its an entry product and the price reflects it. iPhone 5 is 649$ for 16GB, S3 is 549$, Intels is 399$

Software wise you should compare it to another Android product if you must.

 

[NTMBK]

Just stop making things up... :thumbsdown:

Tell me what I have made up. Tell me.

EDIT: Okay, replying to your edited in second half of the post (that's a very confusing habit, by the way ): HTC One S is £269 off contract, Orange San Diego is £299 off contract. It's hardly an entry level price.

EDIT 2: ARGH, seriously, finish your post before you make it! I shall compare it to the HTC One S, in that case. The One S beat the Intel phone in all benchmarks other than the Sunspider benchmark. (Which is, as you helpfully pointed out, hardly a representative benchmark.)

EDIT 3: Hmm, actually, my quick Googling of prices on the San Diego was a bit shoddy. It appears the actual price from Orange themselves is £199. Still more midrange than entry level, but I see your point more.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Tell me what I have made up. Tell me.

EDIT: Okay, replying to your edited in second half of the post (that's a very confusing habit, by the way ): HTC One S is £269 off contract, Orange San Diego is £299 off contract. It's hardly an entry level price.

EDIT 2: ARGH, seriously, finish your post before you make it! I shall compare it to the HTC One S, in that case. The One S beat the Intel phone in all benchmarks other than the Sunspider benchmark. (Which is, as you helpfully pointed out, hardly a representative benchmark.)

EDIT 3: Hmm, actually, my quick Googling of prices on the San Diego was a bit shoddy. It appears the actual price from Orange themselves is £199. Still more midrange than entry level, but I see your point more.

HTC One series is quite different in the USA and rest of the world. Thats another little thing that messes up results and price. Same for the S3 as well. Sometimes its even as massive as dualcore vs quadcore.

Example, HTC One X in the US is a dualcore 1.5Ghz Snapdragon. HTC X in the rest of the world is a 1.5Ghz Tegra 3 quadcore.

 

[NTMBK]

HTC One series is quite different in the USA and rest of the world. Thats another little thing you forgot.

The One S in the UK uses the same Krait chip which is in the US version. I'm afraid you're thinking of the One X, which uses different chips due to LTE shenanigans.

 

[ShintaiDK]

The One S in the UK uses the same Krait chip which is in the US version. I'm afraid you're thinking of the One X, which uses different chips due to LTE shenanigans.

So there is for example no version of HTC One S with a 1.7Ghz Qualcomm Scorpion CPU instead of a 1.5Ghz Krait? And its not due to LTE, its due to shortages of the Krait CPU.

A good example might be the Samsung Galaxy S3. There are no less than 10 different models. And software wise they dont even run the same Android version either. Its distributed between 4.04 and 4.1. Some are dualcores, some quads. Some got 1GB memory, others 2GB.

The US experience of an S3 is far from the International one listed in Anandtech benches for example.

 

[NTMBK]

So there is for example no version of HTC One S with a 1.7Ghz Qualcomm Scorpion CPU instead of a 1.5Ghz Krait?

That is also on the shelves, yes, but that is not the phone I price checked against or the phone which Anand tested against the Intel phone.

 

[Dribble]

Why is this? Can intel bring down the price (and performance) to compete?

ARM dominate the market right now yet the company has a total revenue of a mere $750 million (approx). Intel on the other hand made $43.6 billion. So even if Intel completely took ARM's market they would barely notice this vs current revenue. Hence the whole current phone/tablet/embedded devices market that ARM controls can't really help Intel. That's if Intel could truly compete - ARM is clearly very efficient. It doesn't help that Intel is entrenched in x86 which is a somewhat dated architecture.

Now the problem is if people give up spending big $$$ on PC's with expensive Intel cpu's in and instead buy devices with these ARM soc's where the cpu maker gets $1 (such as most apple mobile devices). What does Intel do?

The closest analogy I can think of is SGI in the 90's. They dominated computer graphics selling big boxes for $200,000 then nvidia/3dfx/Ati arrived. Suddenly SGI found that they were competing with $200 cards in $1000 PC's. While not as fast as a $200,000 SGI box you could replace the PC every year for 1/20th of the maintenance cost of the SGI and the rate of progress meant after a couple of years the SGI wasn't quicker then that little PC. SGI died.

 

[ShintaiDK]

ARM dominate the market right now yet the company has a total revenue of a mere $750 million (approx). Intel on the other hand made $43.6 billion. So even if Intel completely took ARM's market they would barely notice this vs current revenue. Hence the whole current phone/tablet/embedded devices market that ARM controls can't really help Intel. That's if Intel could truly compete - ARM is clearly very efficient. It doesn't help that Intel is entrenched in x86 which is a somewhat dated architecture.

Now the problem is if people give up spending big $$$ on PC's with expensive Intel cpu's in and instead buy devices with these ARM soc's where the cpu maker gets $1 (such as most apple mobile devices). What does Intel do?

The closest analogy I can think of is SGI in the 90's. They dominated computer graphics selling big boxes for $200,000 then nvidia/3dfx/Ati arrived. Suddenly SGI found that they were competing with $200 cards in $1000 PC's. While not as fast as a $200,000 SGI box you could replace the PC every year for 1/20th of the maintenance cost of the SGI and the rate of progress meant after a couple of years the SGI wasn't quicker then that little PC. SGI died.

Few corrections. Intels revenue is in the 50 billion ballpark. They had a 20.7% growth from 2010 to 2011.
ARM holding doesnt sell CPUs, they sell designs and IP. So to compare ARM holding with Intel you also need to add the different ARM parts from other companies like Samsung, Qualcomm etc.

However, the huge fragmentation of ARM manufactors doesnt benefit them price wise or size wise. Not to mention, most of the ARM using companies got no real interest in ARM. They will use whatever suits their final product the best.

Also the CPU cost of a smartphone is relatively tiny. For example for all the iPhones its below 10% of the BOM. Also showing how unimportant revenue wise the CPU actually is for the phone manufactors.

x86 already showed how easily it can compete with ARM. Single core with hyperthreading matching the latest ARM quadcores on all levels. Not to mention the x86 chip is cheaper to produce due to smaller diesize.

 

[NTMBK]

x86 already showed how easily it can compete with ARM. Single core with hyperthreading matching the latest ARM quadcores on all levels. Not to mention the x86 chip is cheaper to produce due to smaller diesize.

No, single core with hyperthreading being beaten on all truly comparable levels by an ARM dual core.

 

[Nemesis 1]

It is their reference platform, built to show the world Intel's best capabilities. It was their flagship at launch, no two ways about it. That title has now been taken by the Razr M, as that is the first with their 2GHz silicon.

NO friend haswell will show intels capabilities . Medfield is nothing more than proof of concept and its not bad its not great but it better than anyone elses fffirst smartphone

 

[NTMBK]

NO friend haswell will show intels capabilities . Medfield is nothing more than proof of concept and its not bad its not great but it better than anyone elses fffirst smartphone

I only meant Intel's capabilities in the smartphone space- obviously, they have world-beating chips in PC and server already, no need to prove anything there!

 

[Nemesis 1]

No, single core with hyperthreading being beaten on all truly comparable levels by an ARM dual core.

You bend over backwards for others . If you read the article its clear they have to optimize for razr1 razrM beat it in 1 bench . Clearly shows the pre release wasn't ready for prime time . But than I look at it against the 4 core apple 5 it looks pretty good in spider i real core against 4 apple arm cores. on silvermount we can expect a min. of 3x graphics power of the medfield which isn't bad at all . 545 running @ 533 . 200 is were its specs. so that a 2x- increase not 3x excuse me . but medfield didn't use a 545 so i looking at 3x improvement and possiably more than 3x-4x on the cpu with the OoO silverrmont

 

[Nemesis 1]

ARM dominate the market right now yet the company has a total revenue of a mere $750 million (approx). Intel on the other hand made $43.6 billion. So even if Intel completely took ARM's market they would barely notice this vs current revenue. Hence the whole current phone/tablet/embedded devices market that ARM controls can't really help Intel. That's if Intel could truly compete - ARM is clearly very efficient. It doesn't help that Intel is entrenched in x86 which is a somewhat dated architecture.

Now the problem is if people give up spending big $$$ on PC's with expensive Intel cpu's in and instead buy devices with these ARM soc's where the cpu maker gets $1 (such as most apple mobile devices). What does Intel do?

The closest analogy I can think of is SGI in the 90's. They dominated computer graphics selling big boxes for $200,000 then nvidia/3dfx/Ati arrived. Suddenly SGI found that they were competing with $200 cards in $1000 PC's. While not as fast as a $200,000 SGI box you could replace the PC every year for 1/20th of the maintenance cost of the SGI and the rate of progress meant after a couple of years the SGI wasn't quicker then that little PC. SGI died.

I see what lead you to believe this . You think about that . ARM is a design house nothing more. If intel had arms market share It wouldd produce 5 billion in profits for intel yearly . Intell is The only commplete design house with fabs that is in this space . I would put samsung in there but it uses Arm .

 

[Nemesis 1]

It is their reference platform, built to show the world Intel's best capabilities. It was their flagship at launch, no two ways about it. That title has now been taken by the Razr M, as that is the first with their 2GHz silicon.

Are you sure, I didn't go look but I thought it was the razr1 that got the 2ghz chip .