The Intel Atom Thread

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,139
131
AnandTech said:
In addition to showing Baytrail running on a Windows 8.x platform, Intel showed us a “pre-beta” version of the platform running Android 4.2.2. I have to emphasize that the build they showed us definitely seemed pre-beta, as there was some instability, but overall the build was good enough to run some tests on and get a feel for. Intel made it clear that they do have a lot more work to do on their Android build before it’s considered close to final quality than the Windows equivalent.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7314/intel-baytrail-preview-intel-atom-z3770-tested/3

vs Tablets













vs PCs

Better CPU performance than 15W TDP AMD A4-5000, average power comsumption of 0.8-1.2W running CB11.5

AnandTech said:
The single threaded performance numbers are just barely ahead of AMD's Jaguar based Kabini SoC. The big difference however is power. I had Intel measure SoC power at the board level while running a single threaded Cinebench 11.5 run on the Atom Z3770 and saw a range of 800mW - 1.2W. AMD on the other hand lists the A4-5000's SoC/APU idle power as 770mW. I don't have equivalent data for AMD, but with the A4-5000 idling at 770mW, it's safe to say that SoC level power consumption is lower on Baytrail.








AnandTech said:
At its Silvermont disclosure, Intel promised performance better than any other ARM based core in the market today. Looking at our Android results, Intel appears to have delivered on that claim. Whether we’re talking about Cortex A15 in NVIDIA’s Shield or Qualcomm’s Krait 400, Silvermont is quicker. It seems safe to say that Intel will have the fastest CPU performance out of any Android tablet platform once Bay Trail ships later this year.

The power consumption, at least on the CPU side, also looks very good. From our SoC measurements it looks like Bay Trail’s power consumption under heavy CPU load ranges from 1W - 2.5W, putting it on par with other mobile SoCs that we’ve done power measurements on.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Hans de Vries

Jaydip

Diamond Member
Mar 29, 2010
3,691
21
81
The cpu is undeniably very fast, but it seems gpu is Intel's Achilles heel again :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Grazick

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,139
131
The cpu is undeniably very fast, but it seems gpu is Intel's Achilles heel again :)
It may not be a Tegra 4/S800 killer on the GPU side but 14.5K on Ice Storm is a very respectable score, I was expecting something like 11.8-12K. And those CPU performance numbers are incredible.
 

SiliconWars

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2012
2,346
0
0
Yeah the CPU numbers are downright incredible for that power. Remember that Jaguar has PCI-E etc so power draw was always going to be much better on Silvermont, but the performance is something else.
 
Last edited:

Khato

Golden Member
Jul 15, 2001
1,044
30
91
Awesome.

Granted there are still a few remaining questions that are touched on in the conclusion - how Baytrail does in video decode efficiency and what idle power is like - but the rest is certainly delivering what Intel promised. GPU performance is its only 'weak' point right now, and even there it's going to be more than adequate for its intended markets. (Recall that developers have to ensure that their games play smoothly on a wide range of devices - if they target the top end only they severely limit their pool of potential buyers.)

Regardless, the CPU performance is simply awesome. It's outperforming the A4-5000 in multi-threaded tasks while using under 2.5W. Good luck to Qualcomm (much less AMD) on matching that any time soon.
 

MisterMac

Senior member
Sep 16, 2011
777
0
0
Crazy performance CPU wise @ that power envelope.


You know they will pour money into GPU R&D + solving any Dalvik inefficiences over time.

If that's the ARM lovers best argument - I'd also say Francois was right.



....now to see if Intel can manage to sway the ecosystem of the OEMs to join up as well ;)
(I have doubts they'll automaticly "run" into Intel's "ARM"'s :D)
 

MisterMac

Senior member
Sep 16, 2011
777
0
0
Hardly! It almost ties the Ipad 4.
Most people against Intel expect them to total dominate - or they're a failure ;)


Something i think given Intel's position we should perhaps almost demand..... we want intel to be a engineering company... not a marketing profit company ala samsung :p
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,139
131
First Bay Trail-T based devices announced:

AnandTech said:
ASUS CEO Jerry Shen just pre-announced the ASUS T100, a Bay Trail 2-in-1 tablet (dockable) with up to 11 hours of battery life. Think Transformer goes Intel. I believe we just saw the first Bay Trail design win.
AnandTech said:
Next up is Dell's 8-inch Venue Bay Trail tablet.
 

Jaydip

Diamond Member
Mar 29, 2010
3,691
21
81
It may not be a Tegra 4/S800 killer on the GPU side but 14.5K on Ice Storm is a very respectable score, I was expecting something like 11.8-12K. And those CPU performance numbers are incredible.
Yeah it is very fast but going forward I believe the tablet/smartphone space to be gpu dominated.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
135
106
No wonder everyone wants Bay Trail tablets ready for the holidays.

ARM really need to up their game if they want to stay in these segments. And Jaguar got humiliated.

Just a year later and 14nm Airmont hits.

Who said x86 couldnt compete with ARM again?
 
Last edited:

SiliconWars

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2012
2,346
0
0
No wonder everyone wants Bay Trail tablets ready for the holidays.

ARM really need to up their game if they want to stay in these segments. And Jaguar got humiliated.

Just a year later and 14nm Airmont hits.
:rolleyes:

Humiliated would be making your own tablets like Nvidia are forced into doing. Being a bit-player would be having a tablet chip that can't get in an iPad, Nexus or Galaxy. Guess what Intel is?
 

monstercameron

Diamond Member
Feb 12, 2013
3,818
1
0
No wonder everyone wants Bay Trail tablets ready for the holidays.

ARM really need to up their game if they want to stay in these segments. And Jaguar got humiliated.

Just a year later and 14nm Airmont hits.

And I guess we are done with more of the "x86 cant compete with ARM" denials.
with those results i dont think amd or even arm has to worry. the tegra 4/s800 beat it and the a4-5000 beats it. It performs on the level of the s600[with higher cpu perf].
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
135
106
:rolleyes:

Humiliated would be making your own tablets like Nvidia are forced into doing. Being a bit-player would be having a tablet chip that can't get in an iPad, Nexus or Galaxy. Guess what Intel is?
Your anti-Intel bitterness really shines. o_O

Thread crapping will not be tolerated
-ViRGE
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,099
208
106
dont jump the gun, we havent seen any power numbers yet.
We haven't seen any FINAL power numbers but we do got an idea of the power numbers here for anand did some tests with his preview






During the cinebench singlethread test where the scores are
atom z3770 scored .40
amd a4-5000 scored .39
pentium 2020m scored 1.00 (this is a 35w part)
i7-3517u scored 1.24 (this is a 17w part)
The single threaded performance numbers are just barely ahead of AMD's Jaguar based Kabini SoC. The big difference however is power. I had Intel measure SoC power at the board level while running a single threaded Cinebench 11.5 run on the Atom Z3770 and saw a range of 800mW - 1.2W. AMD on the other hand lists the A4-5000's SoC/APU idle power as 770mW. I don't have equivalent data for AMD, but with the A4-5000 idling at 770mW, it's safe to say that SoC level power consumption is lower on Bay Trail. The A10-4600M/Trinity comparison is interesting as it really helps put Bay Trail's performance in perspective as well.
During the cinebench multithreaded test where the
atom z3770 scored 1.48
amd a4-5000 scored 1.50
pentium 2020m scored 1.96 (this is a 35w part)
i7-3517u scored 2.76 (this is a 17w part)
Once again, looking at SoC power however the Atom Z3770 pulls around 2.5W in this test. Looking at the increase in platform power for the A4-5000 here, I'm assuming that the equivalent data for AMD would put Kabini in the 6W range.
atom z3770 scored 5747
amd a4-5000 scored 4509
pentium 2020m scored 5434 (this is a 35w part)
i5-3317u scored 6598 (this is a 17w part, note anand switched to the core i5 number for he didn't have test results for the i7 3517u precompiled)
For what its worth, Bay Trail SoC power during the multithreaded 7-Zip benchmark was between 1.9W - 2.5W. At this point there's no question in my mind that Silvermont and Bay Trail are truly tablet-class power consumers.
So in all three tests the soc power consumption was less than 3 watts. He didn't do any tests with power consumption while gaming. Nor did he do a platform power consumption (with the 2560x1440 tablet) so we can't venture into battery life numbers yet. That said those numbers are easily power consumption where it can fit in a tablet without a fan without overheating.
 

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
135
106
with those results i dont think amd or even arm has to worry. the tegra 4/s800 beat it and the a4-5000 beats it. It performs on the level of the s600[with higher cpu perf].
Every CPU advantage there might have been for AMD and ARM in those areas are completely gone.

So you are now saying, buy AMD or ARM for the GPU. Something as we see in the higher end quickly erodes.

And remember, this is prebeta software. Performance can easily improve, specially graphics.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Grazick

piesquared

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,651
473
136
So decent CPU performance in some tests as expected combined with embarrassing GPU performance. They probably needed to castrate GPU to get decent power numbers.
Am I missing something or is this SoC missing SATA and PCIe?
 

Sweepr

Diamond Member
May 12, 2006
5,148
1,139
131
The Tech Report said:
Intel's Atom Z3000 'Bay Trail' SoC revealed

A first look at its architecture and performance
Bay Trail die


Performance













720p offscreen Ice Storm


The Tech Report said:
As you can see, Bay Trail gets off to a very solid start, nearly cutting execution times in half compared to the prior-gen Clover Trail Atom Z2760. It outperforms all of the ARM-compatible SoCs we tested, including those based on alternative CPU architectures like Krait and Swift.

Also intriguing is the match-up between Bay Trail and the AMD "Kabini" A4-5000 SoC, which has four Jaguar cores clocked at 1.5GHz. The A4-5000 SoC alone has a TDP rating of 15W; we'd expect max power draw on an entire Bay Trail platform to be lower than that. Yet the Atom Z3770 prevails, with a slight performance edge over the Kabini-based laptop in both tests.
Power Consumption

The Tech Report said:
What we saw was very similar power consumption from one generation to the next. Both tablets tended to idle at about 2 W of power draw, and both used 3-4 W during video playback. Total system power draw is probably a bit higher during CPU- and GPU-intensive workloads, but we didn't get any full-platform power use numbers for such scenarios...

...I think the big takeaway here is that Bay Trail's power consumption habits should make it suitable for eight-hour-plus battery run times in tablets, much like Clover Trail before it. The big change is that you'll be getting substantially higher performance at the same time.
More here: http://techreport.com/review/25329/intel-atom-z3000-bay-trail-soc-revealed
 

USER8000

Golden Member
Jun 23, 2012
1,522
753
136
The Z3000 range have SATA and PCI-E not functional. I think the desktop ranges,which have a much higher rated TDP,do.
 

SiliconWars

Platinum Member
Dec 29, 2012
2,346
0
0
Your anti-Intel bitterness really shines. o_O
Really? Who was it that was talking about humiliation?

Where is the 60%-70% lead over S800 and Tegra 4? Even with a very friendly selection of browser and integer benchmarks it's far from that. Notice there is no geekbench on show?

Graphically it's middle ranked now with far stronger GPU's coming from the ARM players soon.

Sure it's very fast, and power looks competitive, but nobody was expecting anything else. I'd rather be Qualcomm with all the design wins frankly. :)
 

Imouto

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2011
1,241
2
81
Anandtech said the same about the previous ultra mobile chips from Intel and they all sucked.

Seriously, they told everyone about how good the Tegra 4 is and it is a major flop.

They would even give the Pontiac Aztec the most beautiful car of all time award.
 

Roland00Address

Platinum Member
Dec 17, 2008
2,099
208
106
So decent CPU performance in some tests as expected combined with embarrassing GPU performance. They probably needed to castrate GPU to get decent power numbers.
Am I missing something or is this SoC missing SATA and PCIe?
Yes this soc is missing sata and pci e. The tablet version will not have those two features for they destroy idle power consumption, the laptop and desktop versions will have sata and pci e.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY